Credit: Facebook

Washington, DC

The First Amendment reads as such: “The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances”
A federal court in Pennsylvania now wants to rule that filming our public officials, with regards to the police in the following two cases, is not protected by the constitution. I cry BS.
In two separate events, involving two completely separated and unrelated parties, two individuals were arrested. Their crime? Filming the police. Not in an act of terrorism, not even in an act of anger. The first was Richard Fields, a student at Temple University, stopped to capture a large group of police outside a house party. He decided to commemorate the incident with a photo. In the second instance, Amanda Geraci, who is a legal observer with CopWatch Berkeley, was at a large protest against fracking when she was arrested for filming another protester being arrested.

Credit: Facebook

It matters not if a person is physically speaking in praise or challenging the police, as the 1st amendment protects silent gathering of information to be used in the future for publication.
In the end, it matters not if the ruling is overturned, though it should be as the police generally tape anyone they pull over, but it should serve to remind us that our free hearts and minds are no longer so. Our cost of liberty is eternal vigilance. We need to stay strong and let our congress and senate create our path to liberation. It is at this point, more than ever before, that we stand up for those ideals which we feel are right and just. Our communities need to band together and organize active cop and politician-watching campaigns. They need to be held accountable remain transparent. As a people, we also need to remain strong and keep or morals, principles, and ethics intact. If we remain strong in these two cases, we are telling the world of judges just what should be banned as unconstitutional. We should not allow anyone or anything to take away the freedoms that we have fought so hard to get

The post Arrested for Filming the Police appeared first on NIR News / National Investigative Report.

Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio recently talked in front of the public to ask for a financial assistance with regard to his increasing legal fees. While his legal fees are now going up and up and the trial has become more personal, he decided to face the public and asked people to support him financially and he also wishes that there will be another judge to be appointed for the legal system.

Gage Skidmore/flickr

He wrote a letter, telling his supporters that he is not financially capable as of now, that he does not have the cash that he will use to pay the attorneys who are handling his case as of now. He does not have enough cash to support the monetary needs of his case. He also added that he feels that the immigrant rights groups are targeting him by filing a case against him. Their purpose for that is to put an end to what they call “racist policies” that target Latinos.

In the email that he wrote last Thursday, he said that he has to personally the attorneys so they will represent him in such cases. He also said that he does not have anything to shoulder all the expenses associated with these cases, losing his power to defend himself.
Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio made a plea whilst he is awaiting a choice by the District Judge of the US, G. Murray Snow if he really broke and violated the law as he failed to carry out the 2011 court order that aims to abstain from bias against the minorities

Last Friday, the Arizona Sheriff requested the District Judge to take him off the case and he came up with a reason for that. He said that the judge is individually involved in the lawsuit for the reason that the former attorney of Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio authorized a confidential investigation against the wife of Snow.

Caravan4Peace

He also said that there is no any reasonable person who has the knowledge about the facts can refuse that the District Judge is currently investigating and presiding on the issues in which his loved one is involved. It is what Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio said in his filing. These two people actually met one-day last month of April and the Sheriff had hit a rarely conciliatory tone along with the District Judge. It happened when the 83 years old sheriff responded his first 2 questions in his actions after he was obliged to discontinue racial profiling through his department.

Snow ruled in the year 2013 that the office of Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio had methodically racially profiled the Latinos in the regular traffic & immigration patrols of it. Arpaio wants to apologize to the District Judge and it was his statement last month. Legally, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio faces the greatest challenge in his life against another national judge in the name of David Campbell, who ordered an urgent stop to the enforcement of the identity theft laws in the state which penalize those immigrants within the nation that are illegally seeking for a job opportunity.

Snow and Arpaio will meet once again in June and it is expected to be significantly affected by his filing.

The post Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio Asks for Financial Help from the Public appeared first on NIR News / National Investigative Report.

When what you need is ‘Straight Talk’ and not legal jargon that you will never be able to understand without full and detailed explanations every step of the way, where do you turn? Do you open up the phone book and throw a dart? Do you simply go off of the word of mouth from friends and relatives? Honestly, neither of these are good options. A legal representative that worked well for someone else may not work for you and your situation. Research is going to be your best option when it comes to a legal representative that will be able to represent you. This is especially true when it comes to family law, business law, and real estate disputes.

Here are some helpful items to look for in a Law Group:

* Free consultation: A firm that offers a 30 to 60-minute free consultation is obviously
vested in their clients. This gives the legal representative time to hear your point of view,
possibly review documentation and governing laws, and discuss with you what exactly the
options would be. From this free consultation, you will be able to make an educated
decision on whether or not the firm is a good fit for you and vice versa.

* Encourage Electronic Usage: There are plenty of firms that encourage correspondence
through forms of electronic measures instead of coming to the office every other day to
discuss something in person that could have been sent in an email. This saves money and
in turn shows you that the potential legal representative is concerned with your financial
health as well.

* Mediation versus Litigation: Not every case needs to go to court. This is not a new
realization for most legal representatives. Entertain the idea of meeting with legal
representatives that use mediation and collaborative law in your financial favor. They are
doing it to keep you out of court, keep your financial burdens low, and assist in closing the
case sooner rather than later. This is especially true if the outcome will be the same
regardless of going to court or not.

The post Three Points To Consider When Choosing A Law Group appeared first on NIR News / National Investigative Report.