Quantcast
Channel: Bikers Of America, Know Your Rights!
Viewing all 6498 articles
Browse latest View live

LOOK TWICE, SAVE I LIFE


“THE BIKERS OF AMERICA, THE PHIL and BILL SHOW”

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE

Listen to my new episode THE BIKERS OF AMERICA, THE PHIL & BILL SHOW at http://tobtr.com/s/4375147. #BlogTalkRadio


JOIN US FOR THE  SHOW..

 “ THE BIKERS OF AMERICA, THE PHIL and BILL SHOW ”
GO`S Live! at 6 pm PAC, 9:00 pm EST every Tuesday & Thursday  on BlogTalk Radio.
 Check us out!
The next “THE BIKERS OF AMERICA (THE PHIL and BILL SHOW)”
will be on Tuesday, MAY /14/ 2013 at 6pm Pacific and 9pm Eastern. 
as Well As Thursday MAY /16/ 2012 night`s 6pm Pacific and 9pm Eastern.

Hits Like a bored and stroked big V-twin is the hardcore biker right’s talk show that will shift the thoughts and minds of all! Screwdriver is a member of Bikers of Lesser Tolerance, which is a "No Compromise" philosophy that rights cannot ever be negotiated and the west coast Representative of B.A.D (Bikers Against Discrimination) & Bill Kennedy of Kennedy’s Custom Cycles !!! Join us each week as we give you straight talk on what is happening to Bikers on the Left Coast along with what YOU can do to join the cause! Tune in and check us out..!!!!





AND REMEMBER, IF YOU CAN’T TUNE INTO THE “LIVE” SHOW YOU CAN LISTEN TO OR DOWNLOAD THE SHOW AT YOU CONVENIENCE.
 ANY DAY/TIME FREE OF CHARGE FOR UP TO 90 DAYS
 SINCE SHOWS ARE ARCHIVED FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE! 

And do not forget, if you want to call in live and speak with the host, be sure to dial (347)826-7753.
You will be placed into the caller queue, where you will still be able to hear the show while you are on hold.
If you miss this above event you can listen to the archive anytime by clicking on the same link below.
Enjoy the show, We invite you to participate by clicking the web address,
www.blogtalkradio.com/bikersofamerica.
Two ways to listen on Tuesday`s & Thursday`s
1. Call in: (347) 826-7753 ... Listen live right from your phone..
2. Stream us live on your computer:
Link: http://tobtr.com/s/4178939
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bikersofamerica.

The next “THE BIKERS OF AMERICA (THE PHIL and BILL SHOW)”
will be on Tuesday, MAY /14/ 2013 at 6pm Pacific and 9pm Eastern. 
as Well As Thursday MAY /16/ 2012 night`s 6pm Pacific and 9pm Eastern.
SO PLEASE TUNE IN AND SUPPORT US, Because were here to support you...
THANK YOU,
Screwdriver &  Bill
"IF YOU VIOLATE OUR BIKER RIGHTS...
YOU BETTER WATCH OUT FOR OUR BIKER LEFTS!"

Screwdriver and Bill are hosting Daily Information Blog, & the Blog can be reached at,
 “THE BIKERS OF AMERICA, KNOW YOUR RIGHTS”
bikersofamerica.blogspot.com
Screwdriver at Countermeasures Division (strokerz383@gmail.com).
Please note that this e-mail address is being protected from spambots so you will need JavaScript enabled to view it.

We will be featuring different topics Guests from around the World.
Bikers Rights, News off the wire and B.O.L.T updates from across the country.

Other potential topics – 
• How Bill and I have been involved, in The Biker Community,
  Supporting different cause`s the years.
• The unconstitutional roadside checkpoints.
• The motorcycle only checkpoints.
• The Helmet Law’s Unconstitutional Enforcement.
• Legislation and Politics.
• The Veterans Groups,  The V.A. Hospitals,
&  Helping Our Brothers and Sisters when asked.

Participation Options: Our show is flexible so we can either control the topic or we will be happy to turn the  podium over to you. Should you wish to hold the podium, please email me, Screwdriver  at Countermeasures Division (strokerz383@gmail.com).
Please note that this e-mail address is being protected from spam bots,
 so you will need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Let’s Not Forget, To support are Good Friend, Hermis..

Hermis LIVE, Wednesdays at 9 pm Est or 6 pm Pac, http://www.%20hermislive.com./
For broader communication, since these shows are open to the public, please pass this email along to your family and/or friends, who you know are interested in Motorcyclist Rights. Remember the bottom-line; we all have a sincere involvement with knowing, sharing, and/or enhancing our understanding about our rights as members of the biker community so I am asking for you, family, and friends to support the above two (3) shows.
Thank you, in advance, for your anticipated support and participation in these important discussions.
Philip (aka Screwdriver)
BOLT of California
(760) 207-2965 or strokerz383@gmail.com
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
For more information about Bikers Of A Lesser Tolerance, please visit http://boltusa.org/  or for California Rights information see http://www.boltofca.com/

50 U.S. lawmakers oppose motorcycle-only checkpoints!

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE
From Cycle Source Magazine  
Added by Kerri Some 50 U.S. House members have signed onto a bill that would bar the U.S. transportation secretary from providing funds for motorcycle-only checkpoints, the American Motorcyclist Association reports.
 
The measure, H.R. 904 authored by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), would prohibit the transportation secretary from providing grants or any funds to a state, county, town, township, Indian tribe, municipality or other local government for use by any program to check safety equipment use or create arbitrary checkpoints for motorcycle riders or passengers.

"The AMA thanks these members of Congress for protecting the motorcycle lifestyle, and encourages motorcyclists in these representatives' districts to thank them for their support," said Wayne Allard, AMA vice president for government relations.
At the same time, Sensenbrenner and Rep. Tom Petri (R-Wis.), along with 29 other members of Congress, have sent a letter to the leadership of the House-Senate Surface Transportation Reauthorization Conference Committee requesting the inclusion of language in the conference report that would prohibit the transportation secretary from providing funds for motorcycle-only checkpoints.

Responding to a nationwide appeal issued by the AMA on May 29, AMA members and concerned motorcyclists contacted their elected representatives and urged them to sign on to the Sensenbrenner-Petri letter. As a result, a bipartisan group of legislators now seeks to overturn a controversial federal program that unfairly discriminates against motorcyclists.

The AMA began tracking motorcycle-only checkpoints when they first appeared in New York in 2007. In 2011, using funds provided by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the state of Georgia conducted roadside motorcycle-only checkpoints as thousands of motorcyclists rode through the state on their way to Daytona Beach, Fla., for Bike Week, March 4-13. Another motorcycle-only checkpoint was conducted in northern Virginia during one of the nation's most visible motorcycle rallies -- Rolling Thunder -- over the 2011 Memorial Day weekend. Motorcycle-only checkpoints were also conducted in Utah when thousands of riders attended a world-class roadracing event.

Three states have since outlawed the practice -- Virginia, North Carolina, New Hampshire -- and legislation to prohibit them has been introduced in Illinois, California, Missouri and New Jersey.
The letter stated: "MOCs [motorcycle-only checkpoints] are a controversial and unproven method of addressing motorcyclist safety and have not been an efficient use of limited federal dollars. The very existence of this program essentially profiles a group of citizens -- the motorcycling community -- for operating a legal mode of transportation."

The letter added: "The DOT should focus on programs to instruct motorcyclists on the importance of proper licensing, rider education, and motorcycle awareness campaigns."
Police_Motorcycle_checkpoint

http://cyclesource.com/newsblog/2012/06/21/50-u-s-lawmakers-oppose-motorcycle-only-checkpoints#comment-8268

If that pisses you off check out this site.
http://www.fairwarning.org/2012/06/despite-death-toll-motorcycle-groups-strive-to-muzzle-u-s-regulators/
It is up to every motorcyclist to contact their legislator and let them know how they feel about the issues that affect us.
Some of the organizations say they speak for us But Obvioulsy Something Is being Lost In transulation.

This and other issues are all over the media.
Here is one from a Linkedin site I go to.
David Bergland • From an article in Stars and Stripes-that came from the Washington Post
Motorcyclists be warned: Many parts don’t meet safety standards
http://bangordailynews.com/2012/05/27/living/motorcyclists-be-warned-many-parts-dont-meet-safety-standards/
Quote from Article;
Many motorcyclists add that individual riders must be allowed to make their own decisions, regardless of what the standards say. In the biker culture, freedom reigns, with many riders bucking interference from Washington.
While some riders advocate helmet use, protective gear and sound testing, others continue to resist mandatory helmet laws and noise ordinances, saying loud pipes on exhaust systems give fair warning to drivers and pedestrians.
The industry over all has political muscle, with motorcycle associations spending roughly $2 million on lobbying in 2010 and 2011, including support of a 14-year-old law banning NHTSA from initiating discussions with lawmakers about helmet use and other issues. ” [end quote]
Yes, 14 years ago a lot of Motorcyclist put a lot of effort to curb NHTSA from “Blackmailing” states and cutting off Hi-way funding for not having “MANDATORY” helmet laws. It took them years of effort, not just that one year.
Bikers gave up plenty of their life to shorten the leash on NHTSA and still have had to yank on it every year. We (my part is very small) do it from Alaska to Florida and back to Hawaii on so many issues. If we were to stop, it would not be long before you would not have a choice of what motorcycle to ride, what choice of clothing or leathers, excreta.
It seems we as Americans have been losing touch with what it takes to be an American and fight for our Freedoms. Dennis Prager in a Q & A At University of Denver has a good say on this subject at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNUc8nuo7HI
and recommend you take the time to watch it.
So my answer to;
do you think motorcycle helmet should be enforced or should it be by choice?
has to be “by choice”.

Red Snapper Day xxx

$
0
0
Description:                          Description:                          cid:part10.07000103.05060709@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part11.04070406.06070500@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part12.04000801.07040504@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part13.09030501.03040402@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part14.00090400.05050403@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part15.06000406.02030206@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part16.00010103.06060900@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part17.02070605.02060708@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part18.03000309.05090505@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part19.09090607.08060208@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part20.04090508.02090106@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part21.05030300.02080702@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part22.06020407.02030503@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part23.07020308.03030603@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part24.02050306.04080207@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part25.04080508.03050603@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part26.03030206.08030100@safeathome.us
Happy Snapper Day, Buddy!
Ashes to ashes Dust to dust
If Rock Hudson ate pussy
He'd still be with us.....
 Description:                          Description:                          cid:part27.03080303.06040202@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part28.00020408.08060805@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part29.06040604.02070108@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part30.02060106.07010904@safeathome.usDescription:                          Description:                          cid:part31.09010508.08080701@safeathome.us

9TH ANNUAL ROSARITO BEACH HARLEY RUN

Submit, Photo`s & Bio, for Babe of the Week or Day.......Good Luck...

$
0
0

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO BABE OF THE WEEK, DAY.......
Submit 8 - 10 photos, any type of photo`s ,  topless, bikini or you  on a  Scooter photo`s 
email to  strokerz383@gmail.com
If you want your pictures posted please a Short Bio, Include Your Name, City & State.
All winners will be posted on this website & notified via email.
The Blog can be reached at  bikersofamerica.blogspot.com
Thank you,
Philip
aka
Screwdriver

Babe`s of the DAY..... This is 18 and older. Rest assured I will offend you and rest assured I don't give a fuck! If you don't like crude hum or and think you will report me don't like my page. For those with the ability to laugh and take a joke welcome.

USA - POLICE PROFILING PATCHES

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE

If you ride a motorcycle and you are a member of a club, wear club support clothing or have club support stickers on your helmet or bike you probably have been pulled over by some dirty cop who has it in for anyone wearing club stuff. And during that traffic stop your rights were violated, you were treated as a criminal, had the officer make-up charges against you, lie about what happened or what you said, handcuffed for no reason, abused, degraded and spoken to with profanity, threaten, and treated with disrespect.
What the site is all about; the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which guarantees the right to be safe from unreasonable search and seizure without probable cause and the Fourteenth Amendment which requires that all citizens be treated equally under the law.

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
What we are fighting:
Profiling, according to the Washington State Legislature’s current policies, occurs when law enforcement targets an individual exhibiting characteristics of a class that an officer believes more likely than others to commit a crime. The practice of targeting an individual because they are riding a motorcycle or wearing motorcycle paraphernalia is a perfect example of profiling. (Definition of profiling in SB 5852 passed in 2002.) From Motorcycle Profiling in Washington State, we are fighting the fight here. It’s time to stand up and be heard.
This is the place for you to vent, share your story or ask a question.

USA - Know Your Rights: A Primer

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE
Live and let live – it’s an adage that, if put into practice, would help eliminate the need for these precautions. But right now some folks are putting faith into a badge idea – arbitrary authority. Fortunately, ideas have consequences.

Interacting with police employees

Always document exchanges you have with police or those that you witness, preferably via video, if possible. Even better, stream the interaction in real-time to the Internet using a free smartphone application (see: http://copblock.org/apps). This prevents it from being erased or tampered with should your equipment be stolen by police. In addition, it can increase the speed with which word can get out should you need outside support.
Filming your interactions has several advantages. Most importantly, it will help to safeguard you at that moment, as it very-likely will deter potential aggression, and it will act as an indisputable, objective, transparent record of the incident. The deck is usually stacked against you in cases which come down to just your word against theirs.
Ask “Am I being detained?”
This question is important for several reasons. One is that certain rules regarding evidence that can be collected are dependent on whether you have been officially detained and whether the person stopping you has sufficient cause to detain you in the first place. Getting them on record regarding these issues can aid you greatly in the future if contesting such evidence becomes necessary.
Another reason to ask this is that it will serve as an indicator to the police employee you are interacting with that you are aware of your rights. While this doesn’t always make a difference, letting them know that you understand those rights and are willing to assert them will sometimes make them less likely to disregard them.

If you’re told “No”, then you can leave the scene. Sometimes, discretion is the better part of valor.
If you’re told “Yes”, stay calm, cool, and collected. You can choose to remain silent or you can choose to engage.
Police employees default to being on the offensive. Strive to be calm, cool and collected, while confident – knowing that you’ve not acted in the wrong and in fact it is they who acting with hostile. Ask yourself: what is reasonable.
Always strive to deescalate situations, and thus increase the likelihood you’ll leave under your own volition rather than under the control of a stranger. It will also allow those who may later view video of the interaction to easily and clearly see just who is the aggressor. A video recording means that facts can be shared immediately with a large number of people; you can move more-quickly to the next stage, thus making it more-likely they’ll support you if needed and be more-likely to speak out against injustice themselves.
Police employees can and do lie – something that courts have ruled is perfectly acceptable – in an attempt to solicit information from you or to get you to admit to engaging in an action they believe gives them the right to kidnap and cage you (even though said action may not cause a victim). Be aware of this and act accordingly.
In fact, police employees are actually trained in methods of deception designed to trick people into giving up their rights and/or cooperating against themselves and or their friends. They are taught to act friendly as if they want to help you in order to gather information, which eventually could be used against you or others. In addition, they are instructed to phrase questions in a way that they sound like statements (I’m going to _____, okay?) in order to trick you into giving consent.
If you do engage, answer questions with questions. Ask, “Where is the victim?”, “Why do you believe you have the right to prevent my freedom of movement?” etc. Treat the police employee no differently than you would someone not wearing the same costume who approached and questioned you.

If you get arrested

Police employees often make arrests they know to be without merit, simply as a way to harass those who question their authority. Several vague “go-to” charges are often used for such purposes including, but not limited to, disturbing the peace, trespassing, obstruction, interfering with an officer/investigation, failure to follow lawful orders, etc. In cases involving police brutality, charges of resisting arrest and/or assaulting an officer can often be used to justify the police employees own use of force (having the unbiased and unimpeachable witness that video represents is especially crucial in this instance).
They know there is usually very little chance they will be held accountable for such tactics. In most cases, the charges are later dismissed, but that doesn’t eliminate the time and indignities suffered by their victims during even a brief period within one of their cages. Pushing back against this culture of abuse is important both to protect your own rights and deter its future use against others.
Don’t panic. The world won’t end. Now is the time to engage in damage control and move-forward to mitigate any further harassment and to seek accountability for the real aggressors.
Write down a detailed summary of what unfolded. Create an objective overview that will bring someone totally unfamiliar with the incident up-to-speed.
You may have an inclination to put this off until later, but it’s actually very important to do so while the incident is fresh. Details that are now clear will become forgotten with the passage of time. Plus, you’ll see just how useful making time to tackle this really is when you realize that it’s actually a time-saver. Instead of repeating the same story multiple times to different people, you can just point them to your write-up.
Where did the interaction happen? What was going on immediately prior to the interaction? What was the date and time? Who were the parties involved? What were their badge numbers, employers, contact information? What was given as rationale for stopping you? What was said during the exchange?
Share your overview at http://copblock.org/submit

Document, Document, Document

Obtain as much related information as possible. The more comprehensive you are, the less-likely it is that frivolous charges will be levied against you and the more-likely it is that charges will be dropped.
Submit a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (note that this is known by different names depending on the area). Inquire of the police department if they have a form for this – they usually do not. Don’t fret. Just write and submit your own. Include a sentence or two overview of who you are, the information sought, and your contact information.
You can use the text below as a template:
“To Whom It May Concern:
“This document is to serve as a Freedom of Information Act request. Please provide to me any and all content, including but not limited to dashcam video and related audio, dispatcher logs, police reports, internal memos, related departmental policies, from the incident that occurred on DATE at LOCATION involving YOUR NAME & CASE NUMBER/CHARGES IF KNOWN. Also, please include any and all information related to the number, date, and outcome of complaints made against POLICE EMPLOYEE NAME/BADGE NUMBER.
“YOUR NAME PRINTED
YOUR PHONE NUMBER
YOUR MAILING ADDRESS”
Or utilize this much-more thorough FOIA request template shared by Virginia Cop Block
When submitting the FOIA request film the exchange. Or better yet, have a friend accompany you who can film. The more transparency the better.

Ask for a receipt, or a signed/stamped copy of your FOIA request.
Inquire to learn the legislated time-limit the police department has to respond to your request (often five-ten days). Due to the inefficiency of the bureaucratic, centralized police department, you may be contacted during that time-frame to inform you that an extension is needed.
Note that you can be charged for copying fees of documents, video and other content. Be sure to state when you submit the FOIA request that you want to have the ability to review everything before it’s taken/paid for. That way, if dozens of pages of unrelated material are included, you won’t be on the hook.
Add the information gotten from the FOIA request to your post about the incident as an update. If you have access to a scanner, scan the documentation and save it to http://scribd.com. You can create a free account there if you don’t already have one.
Win in the Court of Public Opinion
If you’ve done nothing wrong don’t be afraid. Instead, voice as loudly and clearly as you can, the rights-violations you suffered and continue to face due to the actions of the police employee and prosecutor.
Demand a jury trial, even for something as trivial as a speeding ticket. Currently about 95% of cases are plead out before that stage. That does nothing to disincentivize the same or a greater level of police statism. If we each stood-up for what we knew was right, it’d frankly be impossible for this level to continue, and in fact it would lessen until it reached the point where no one claimed extra rights based on their attire.

Related resources:

Work to get your situation on the radar of others. Create an event for a Call Flood.
Share pertinent information so others can easily get on the same page. Cultivate media contacts and share them as well. Encourage others, who have a grasp on your situation thanks to your write-up, and inclusion of relevant pictures and/or video, to call on your behalf and demand justice.
It’s not uncommon for court dates to be pushed back or for the “prosecutor” to stack threats against you. While court employees might hope such tactics will wear you down, point to such tactics as examples of their inability to make right by dismissing the charges levied at you and calling-out the real aggressors.
Court is called “legal land” for a reason. It’s an environment void of logic and common sense. Where public officials who purport to be acting to obtain justice in reality act to safeguard themselves and their colleagues. Don’t be surprised at or let yourself get worn down by their actions. Stand on your conscience and know that, at the end of the day, you did no harm. Not only will this resonate with you but it will embolden others to speak out and do what they know is right, until one day, the harassment meted out by those with badges, and the double-standards others afford them, are no more.
———–
Connect with others who know that badges don’t grant extra rights http://copblock.org/groupsHaving support on the ground in these situations can be critical.

Check out all documents in the “Know Your Rights” Collection housed at http://scribd.com/copblock
Educate yourself: http://copblock.org/knowledge

At the end of the day, if you did nothing wrong then you should not be afraid to speak the truth. As we each stand-up we’ll empower others to do the same, and together, we’ll get there.


Lane Splitting Guidelines

$
0
0
Lane Splitting Guidelines

Lane splitting in a safe and prudent manner is not illegal in the
state of California. The term lane splitting, sometimes known as lane
sharing, filtering or white-lining, refers to the process of a
motorcyclist riding between lanes of stopped or slower moving traffic
or moving between lanes to the front of traffic stopped at a traffic
light.

    Lane Splitting Guidelines - Quick Guide
    Lane Splitting General Guidelines - Expanded Version

In all cases, the CHP urges extreme caution when splitting lanes.

Lane Splitting - Getting home safely is everyone's responsibility.

The CHP presents Thrill or Buzz Kill?, a motorcycle safety video reminding
motorcyclists about the added responsibility and attention the road demands.

California Motorcyclist Safety Program (CMSP) - The CHP is statutorily
responsible for California's official motorcycle safety training
program. Pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 2930-2935, the
CHP administers the program through a primary contractor, currently
the Motorcycle Safety Foundation. As of March 2012, over 800,000
motorcycle riders have received training at one of the CMSP's 134
training sites since the program began in July 1987.
The program consists of a 15-hour classroom and on-cycle Basic
RiderCourse (BRC). The BRC is mandatory for those under the age of 21
but is also recommended to those 21 and older who are seeking to
obtain a motorcycle endorsement on their California driver license.
The CMSP also offers the Premier Program which is an extended BRC
consisting of 7.5 hours of classroom and 13.5 hours of on-cycle time.
While not part of the CMSP, the CHP and its partners encourage all
riders to be life long learners. Riders can refresh or enhance skills
at a Basic RiderCourse2. A website, www.ca-msp.org, serves as the
training course referral service. Find out more about the California
Motorcyclist Safety Program.
[A beginning motorcycle rider receives instruction from an instructor]

Data received from the California Office of Traffic Safety shows:
Motorcycle fatalities in California increased 175% in ten years, from
204 in 1998 to 560 in 2008. These increases in motorcyclist deaths
occurred at a time when significant gains were achieved in other areas
of traffic safety. Although we did experience reductions in motorcycle
fatalities in 2009 and 2010, preliminary 2011 data indicates a
possible increase and motorcyclists are over represented in overall
numbers of traffic deaths.
[Beginning motorcycle riders in a training class]       [A line of
beginning motorcycle riders in a training class]
A class of beginning motorcycle riders receive instruction.

California Motorcycle-Involved Statistics - Between 1986 and 1999,
California enjoyed a 13-year decline in motorcycle-involved fatal and
severe injury collisions. However, starting in 1999, these numbers
steadily increased over a 10-year period peaking in 2008. It is
important to note, however, that according to 2009 and 2010 data,
motorcycle-involved fatal and injury collisions are down
significantly.

Despite the strides in reducing motorcyclist fatality and injury
collisions over the past couple of years, statistics on motorcyclists
show a disproportionate rate of collisions compared to numbers of
riders and to other traffic. A National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration report shows that for the same per-mile exposure,
motorcyclists are roughly 28 times more likely to die than occupants
of other vehicles.

Another conspicuous trend involves the number of motorcyclist
fatalities and age. Several groups of riders are over represented,
compared to their presence within the motorcycle riding population.
For example, a small percentage of the motorcycle operators are riders
aged 15-19 (4 percent) and 20-24 (6 percent), yet represent nearly
twice that percentage of fatalities (11-13 percent). A second group of
riders over represented according to their presence in the population
is riders aged 25-54. It should also be noted that 90 percent of the
fatal victims are male.

The primary cause for 59 percent of the motorcycle collisions were
attributed to three factors: unsafe speed, improper turning, and
driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs.

Lastly, 65 percent of the fatal and 56 percent of the injury
motorcycle-involved collisions were the fault of the motorcyclist.

View Sections 7H - 7L (Motorcycle Data) of the Statewide Integrated
Traffic Records System

Motorcycle Helmets - Repeated attempts to repeal California's
motorcycle helmet law and substitute it with a lesser version
requiring those under 18 to wear a United States Department of
Transportation compliant helmet have failed in the state legislature.
Statistical information continue to support the helmet law, but some
adult riders have been advocating its repeal from the moment the law
went into effect on January 1, 1992. Advocates of repeal contend it is
a matter of individual choice whether to wear a helmet or not, and a
personal right to decide whether to take the risk. The idea that
motorcyclists over 21 should be exempt from the requirement for
helmets completely ignores some other facts that prompted passage of
the helmet law. In 1987, before the law was passed, 77 percent of
motorcyclist fatalities involved victims over the age of 21, with 69
percent of those injured over the age of 21.

Motorcycle Safety Grants: The California Highway Patrol (CHP) will
implement a 12-month traffic safety grant to reduce
motorcycle-involved collisions on popular roadways and mountain range
areas throughout California. To maximize enforcement efforts, each CHP
Division will identify and concentrate on problematic locations on
routes within their respective Areas, where motorcycle-involved
collisions are the highest. Grant activities will include enhanced
enforcement, a public awareness and educational campaign, and paid
media campaign will be launched to show a "share the road" Public
Service Announcement. The project ends September 30, 2012 . The grant
will be disseminated throughout CHP field Divisions between October 1,
2011, and September 30, 2012.

Strategic Highway Safety Plan, Challenge Area 12, Improve Motorcycle
Safety - The MSP Unit is responsible for co-leading and participating
on this dedicated challenge area. A most recent accomplishment was the
internal development and distribution of a 12-minute DVD, 700 Gs, It's
a Killer, which provides education about proper and legal motorcycle
safety helmets. The MSP Unit is in the process of developing
additional action items in collaboration with its partners including
the Department of Motor Vehicles, California Department of
Transportation, and Office of Traffic Safety. Action items are
expected to commence in October 2011 with a target date of completion
for most items to be October 2013.
 

From Bikernet 4/4/2013 Post

 ALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL POSTS RULES FOR LEGAL LANE-SPLITTING-- This is ridiculous. Now we have Greg Covel, executive director of ABATE of California telling us "They are very reasonable" Who does he work for the CHP, he's suppose to be supporting us. Well there is another group not to belong to.


--Joseph Guarino
iamguarino@yahoo.com
Tombstone, AZ


From Bikernet 4/4/2013 Post

FYI - Some police departments keep names of those arrested secret

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE
This is the shit that keeps my blood pressure high.
Subject: FYI - Some police departments keep names of those arrested secret




 
Some police departments keep names of thosearrested secret
 
|  Written by  Shereen Skola 
 
WAUSAU— Some police agencies in the state are withholding the names and other information about people they arrest, looking to a little-known Illinois court case with potentially far-reachingimplications for Wisconsin residents.
The change in policy stems from a privacy case in which a federal court ruled that police violated a man’s privacy when they wrote information obtained through the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles on a parking ticket left on the man’s vehicle. The case, Senne v. Village of Palatine (Ill.), is the root of what Bill Lueders, president of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, calls an “emerging crisis” in Wisconsin.
“This overzealous interpretation of a federal court ruling creates a huge problem with the ideal of an open society,” Lueders said. “We now find ourselves with the potential for secret arrests. The police could now deprive you of your liberty, and not even say who it is they’ve arrested. The court couldn’t possibly have intended this.”
So far, the Marathon County Sheriff’s Department and Wausau Police Department are among 16 municipalities statewide that are redacting personal information on police reports; the Rothschild Police Department and Everest Metro Police Department have not yet followed suit.
The new rules, which went into effect earlier thismonth in Wausau and Marathon County, prohibit the release of any personal information obtained from a driver’s license, but not from a state-issued identification card. “Personal information” includes names, addresses, phone numbers, photographs, and medical or disability information.
“So, if two people are arrested and one has a driver’s license and one has a state ID card, police can give you the arrest information for one person but not the other,” Lueders said. “That’s crazy.”
So far, Wisconsin appears to be the only state using the Illinois ruling as a reason to keep arrest information secret. Under the new rules, if you’re involved in a crash, you can’t even find out who hit you. And the lawsuits are just beginning.
 
Erring on the side of secrecy
Marathon County Corporation Counsel Scott Corbett said municipalities are acting on the recommendation of insurance companies thathave advised them to “err on the side of caution” and comply with the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, or DPPA. The 1994 legislation, passed largely to prevent stalkers and would-be murderers from accessing public driving records, prohibits the disclosure of personal information without the express written permission of the driver.
Corbett said the new redaction policy is derived from the idea that the DPPA supersedes Wisconsin’s open records law, which requires all governmental agencies in the state to conduct their business with transparency.
“I am very much aware of the policy and tradition in this state with regard to open records, but insurers are indicating that this is the nature of the law,” Corbett said. “Of course, it doesn’t help that the case this is based on came out of Illinois, where they don’t have the same privacy laws we do in Wisconsin.”
Where does that leave the public? In the dark, Lueders said.
For example, the city of Wausau on April 13 arrested a man accused of playing bumper-cars down North Third Street in a pickup truck, bouncing off at least three vehicles parked on the side of the road. The driver, who was suspected of being drunk, was detained by witnesses until police arrived and took him away.
His name still has not been released to the public, prompting speculation that police are covering up the name of a prominent local official caught driving drunk — though police say that is not the case.
Lueders, who is sharply critical of the new rules,called such policies a “dangerous position to take” in light of the state’s open records law.
“Insurers advising departments to err on the side of secrecy? In a judgment call, you err on the side of openness,” Corbett said.
A not-so-simple parking ticket
The court case that spawned the policy changes wasfiled in August 2010 after a police officer in Palatine, a suburb of Chicago, wrote a simple parking ticket and left it on Jason Senne’s windshield. Senne sued the village for about $80 million. The lawsuit alleged that by leaving the ticket, which included Senne’s name and other personal information, the village violated Senne’s rights under the DPPA.
 
Originally, Senne’s case was dismissed in federal court; that decision was reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th District in a 7-4 decision. Jurisdiction for the appeals court extends to Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. The village has petitioned the case to theU.S. Supreme Court, but it’s unclear whether the justices will review the case.
Despite Wisconsin’s strong history of transparency in government, it appears to be the only state using the case to restrict information, Lueders said.
“It appears Wisconsin is alone in this,” Lueders said. “Even in Illinois, where the case originated, they aren’t redacting.”
The legal debate
A 2008 opinion by Wisconsin Attorney General J.B Van Hollen is the basis for at least one lawsuit that challenges the redacting;that case is making its way through the Wisconsin court system. Van Hollen’s nine-page opinion cites dozens of cases to support its opinion that the DPPA was not intended to restrict public access to information under the state’s open records law.
“From at least the time of the Magna Carta and the formalization of the writ of habeas corpus, the concealment of the reason for arrest has been as odious as the concealment of the arrest itself. It is fundamental to a free society that the fact of arrest and the reason for arrest be available to the public,” Van Hollen wrote.
Robert Dreps, an attorney with Madison-based law firm Godfrey and Kahn, represents a newspaper at the center of the legal battle. In a lawsuit filed March 13 in St. Croix County, the New Richmond News allegesthat the city of New Richmond violated open records laws when the city’s police department began redacting personal information earlier this year.
“Under the Open Records Law ... it is the declared policy of this state that every citizen is entitled to the greatest possible information regarding the affairs of government,” the complaint reads.
Van Hollen has declined to weigh in further on theissue, Corbett said, until additional court cases are decided.
 
Next steps
One thing is clear — the fight isn’t over yet. Corbett said he and other attendees at a May 2 statewide corporation counsel meeting will discuss the matter with insurance representatives.
“This issue is not settled,” Corbett said. “For now, we’re balancing the best we can.”
A call Friday to Wausau City Attorney Anne Jacobson seeking comment was not returned.
The changes affect more than media requests for information. Drivers involved in crashes, for example, will no longer be able to obtain information on other drivers involved when they request police reports after a crash, Wausau Police Capt. Bryan Hilts said.
“It’s a major administrative problem for us, too,” Hilts said. “Every time someone comes in and asks for a police report or an accident report, someone has to spend the time blacking out all that information. The time adds up pretty quickly.”
Lueders said members of his organization are hopeful the courts will rule soon and “put an end to this nonsense.”
“We’re hoping the New Richmond case will bring sanity back to Wisconsin,” Lueders said. “We hope the courts act promptly.”

Illustration of 4th Amendment....& 5th Amendment........

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE
CHECK OUT THE VIDEO...
http://youtu.be/UfpRVlHDkQU
To search or remove any of your items an officer must have a search warrant. If you consent you have given up your rights. Problem today, is most don't know their rights. Most are willing to give up their rights. Most complain about losing their rights without doing a darn thing about it. Americans are getting harder and harder to find.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

2. 5th Amendment..
Tim illustrates 5th Amendment.avi
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQqQF7bWlFw

3. Now Let's See what happens to those Uppity Bikers when they demand their Constitutional Rights!
   Fools who stand up for their Constitutional Rights
  
Fools who stand up for their Constitutional Rights. If you don't let me violate your rights, I will place you under arrest! Vacaville PD Officer Aaron Love.
So....the officer takes a picture of the front and the side of the helmet...but fails to take a picture of the one thing that makes that helmet "legal" - the DOT sticker.
VC 27802 (a) The regulations shall include, but are not limited to, the requirements imposed by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 218 (49 C.F.R. Sec. 571.218) and may include compliance with that federal standard by incorporation of its requirements by reference.

NO SNITCHIN` NO SNOOPIN` NO RATTIN`

$
0
0


Cover
Contents
Title Page
Copyright
Acknowledgements

This book is for you if ...
What exactly is a snitch?
What makes snitches so dangerous?

PART ONE: Recognizing and Avoiding Snitches

FIRST RULE: Learn and practice good security consciousness
Recognizing a snitch
What makes snitches so persuasive?
"Mere" snitching vs active entrapment
Dangerous myths about snitches and undercover agents
What to do if you believe a snitch is personally targeting you

PART TWO: A Snitch Uncovered

If you believe there's a snitch in your group
HISTORICAL ways of dealing with known snitches
How do YOU treat an exposed snitch?
Repairing the damage snitches do
Beware of accusing someone who might not be a snitch

PART THREE: WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU GET BUSTED?

You may be pressured to become a snitch
Do NOT talk to cops. Period.
The police officer is NOT your friend
The Prisoner's Dilemma
Mindset: The common territory between snitches and victims
What happens if you refuse to snitch?
What happens if you become a snitch — and regret it?
What happens to you if you snitch and your friends find out?
The rest of your life if you do snitch

Appendix 1: The Reid Interrogation TechniqueTM
Appendix 2: Some Commonsense OpSec
Appendix 3: Line up a lawyer
Appendix 4: Other helpful resources




Rats! Your guide to protecting yourself against snitches, informers, informants, agents provocateurs, narcs, finks, and similar vermin is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commerical-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
That mouthful means that it is okay to copy and distribute this booklet for non-commercial purposes as long as you attribute it to the original source. Feel free. Go for it. Have at it. Spread the word.
On the other hand, you may not alter or add to the text in any way.
And you may not reproduce or distribute any part of this work for commercial purposes, period. Do not do either of those things.


Acknowledgements

I intended to acknowledge the dozens of people who contributed to this book. Given its touchy subject matter, I figured I'd use only their online nyms, not real names. But, sadly, almost everyone I asked responded, "Don't mention me!"
Such is the nature of the police state.
So the only contributors credited anywhere in the book are those who wrote items especially for this project or whose comments on my blog, Living Freedom I reprinted here. Their nyms appear with their contributions.
Despite the lack of credits, this book was truly a collaborative project. Contributors included lawyers, former cops, security specialists, political activists, members of the drug culture, business executives in "sensitive" fields, outlaw bikers, and in a couple of cases people whose identities are so deeply secret that I couldn't credit them even if I wanted to. (To guard against the possibility of any snitch sympathizer planting misleading information, outlaws, former snitch victims, and lawyers checked the text after more "official" folk had their say. I'm relieved to state that, while many people added valuable information as the book grew, nobody in this very experienced crowd spotted anything false or suspiciously "coppish.")
Contributors came from all walks of life — from the ultra-respectable to the underground. All shared the same goal of helping non-violent people save themselves from snitches and — hopefully, someday — ending the corrupt and evil "snitch culture." Once I pulled the book together with all that help, an anonymous proofreader and a friendly layout artist took it from there. There are two people I am allowed to credit: cover designer Keith Perkins and illustrator Travis Halverson, whose "no rattin'" drawing you'll find at the end of the book.
Each and every contributor was a volunteer. This book couldn't have happened without them.


This book is for you if ...

You are a non-violent person engaged in any activity that may be controversial, illegal, or merely "sensitive" or unconventional. These days, anything out of the ordinary can make you a target.
Some people who could use this book:
  • Anti-war or environmental activists
  • Recreational drug users
  • Participants in the underground economy or anybody who does business in cash
  • Critics of local or national powers-that-be
  • Anyone whose profession involves "sensitive" information or activities
  • Gun owners or dealers
  • Third-party or "fringe" political activists
  • Hobbyists who work with dangerous materials
  • Photographers/videographers
  • Religious dissidents
  • People with offshore or unconventional investments (including perfectly legitimate ones)
It doesn't matter where you fall in the political spectrum or even if you're apolitical. If police might target you or your activities, you need to understand how snitches could mess up your life.

This book is NOT for you if ...

You aim to commit violence against innocent people. In that case, reporting on you isn't snitching, it's self defense.


What exactly is a snitch?

There are a lot of different types of snitches. We could write an encyclopedia defining them. But we're going to keep this simple.
For purposes of the book, a snitch is anybody who inserts him- or herself into your non-violent activities on behalf of government. "Government" may mean local cops. It could also mean the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, or a host of other state or federal agencies. It's absolutely mind-boggling how many seemingly innocuous agencies these days have arrest powers, armed enforcers — and snitches employed in sneaky sting operations. And thousands of them use snitches.
There are two common categories of snitch you need to look out for:
The infiltrator/agent provocateur. This is someone (often a professional) who is inserted into a group for an active purpose, such as disrupting the group, or worst, talking formerly innocent (or at least formerly non-violent) people into committing crimes in order to bust them. Agents provocateurs may, among other things, try to turn non-violent protest into violent action, thus discrediting movements, giving excuses for crackdowns, and giving more publicity and power to government agencies.
The informer/informant. This snitch is often a legitimate member of a group or social circle who continues to be active while giving information to the police. This person may be acting under duress (to save his own skin after being arrested, for instance). This person may be hoping the cops will pay with money, drugs, or ongoing criminal immunity for her dubious "services." While this person isn't necessarily a professional agent provocateur, he may nevertheless try to talk friends into committing crimes so he can get more credibility or rewards from his police handlers.
These aren't the only types of snitches. For example, there's also what we'll call the "accidental snitch"— though idiot snitch might be more appropriate. This is the person who simply can't keep her mouth shut about illegal or controversial activities. Cops love these guys! They don't even have to threaten them, pay them, hire them, train them, or gain any leverage over them. They just sit back and listen to them reveal secrets.
Then there's the type of snitch the British call a grass and old American gangsters might have called a stool pigeon. This is a person who blabs to cops or other government agents after you (and probably he) have already been arrested. This person isn't going to interfere with your activities; that's already been done. He's "only" going to give sworn affidavits and courtroom testimony against you, justifying it as a means of saving his own skin. There's not much you can do about this person. By the time you learn one of your former friends is a "stoolie," it's too late.
There are vengeance snitches— people who turn on friends and associates after having a falling out or not getting their way. There are jailhouse snitches— either deliberately planted in your cell after you've been arrested or just opportunists who happen to be there and are willing to share whatever you say (or make up lies about things you said).
Each and every one of these people is a betrayer of friendship and trust. All of them are just plain rats— and they're as welcome in the company of good people as rats are in a pantry.
To keep things simple we're going to call them all snitches — though we'll differentiate when we need to help you look out for specific problems.


What makes snitches so dangerous?

Snitches are everywhere and their use is growing. In many cases, genuine police investigations into actual crimes are almost a thing of the past. Government agents just round up some snitches, get them to lie or arm-twist them into spying and — voila!— an instant and easy case against virtually anyone they want to target. Sometimes they get everything they need from some anonymous person who makes false accusations via a tips hotline.
Snitches (and cops) lie all the time and get away with it. So do prosecutors and virtually all government investigators. Good luck "proving your innocence" if some liar says you were part of a drug deal, laundered money, plotted to blow up a bridge, or asked him to help you murder somebody. Never mind that, in our legal system, the government is supposed to have to prove your guilt; that's become a quaint notion.
Snitches damage individuals, organizations, and movements even before they actually rat on anybody. The mere fear of them destroys trust, friendship, and cohesiveness. Some are deliberately inserted into groups to cause exactly that sort of chaos and dissension.
They tarnish otherwise legitimate political movements. When the media reports that members of Group X or Movement Y have been caught running drugs or guns or plotting to dump toxic chemicals in a reservoir, guess what sticks in the public's mind — your legitimate goals or the "fact" that you're a bunch of terrorist whackos? Later, when it comes out that the entire plot was a fiction created by an agent provocateur who got a few marginal members to go along with a scheme the government itself cooked up, hardly anyone notices. All they think is, "Oh, Group X; yeah, they're a bunch of violent loonies. Thank God the FBI saved us from them."
A fact to remember
This book could help you avoid becoming the victim of a snitch. It could even help you avoid being pressured into becoming a snitch yourself.
But there are NO guarantees. Snitches are effective precisely because they're so hard to detect.
Snitches prey on the naive and unsuspecting and on misplaced friendship. No book is a substitute for common sense and healthy skepticism. You have a brain: USE IT.
You have a gut. When it tells you you're in danger, BELIEVE IT.
They send people to prison. Sometimes innocent people. Often the victims of snitches have committed "crimes" that are much less serious than those of the snitch himself. A snitch is often either a real scumbag who's in the pay of police or a formerly decent person trying to save herself (or family members or friends) from a long prison sentence by getting others to commit crimes.
They may literally cost you your life, your fortune, and your sacred honor. Not to mention your family, your freedom, your friends, your job, your savings, and your reputation. And don't imagine that "mere" innocence will protect you. The more innocent you are, the more you're likely to be blindsided and hurt by one of these betrayers — because innocent, naive people make easy targets.
They corrupt entire cultures. Think of East Germany under the STASI or the old Soviet Union. Literally husbands couldn't trust their wives. Parents couldn't trust their children. Brothers couldn't trust brothers because so many were reporting to the state. Now, some countries that knew the horror of snitch culture forbid or limit the use of snitches. At the same time, formerly free nations are relying on snitches for everything and encouraging every moron in the land to "see something and say something."


PART ONE

Recognizing and Avoiding Snitches



FIRST RULE:

Learn and practice
good security consciousness

The military calls this OpSec — Operational Security. It means conducting yourself in such a way as not to give away secrets or walk stupidly into avoidable dangers.
  • Don't talk about secret or illegal activities outside your group.
  • Within your group, talk about them only to people who have a need to know.
  • Keep groups small. Maybe even as small as a "cell of one."
  • Attorney safety tip:
    A lawyer who consulted on this book says:
    "When dealing with police, prosecutors or their agents, do NOT base your theory-of-the-game on TV, movies, or other sources. Or on constitutional theory you may have learned in school. The other side is playing for keeps and to them rules are irrelevant inconveniences. Ask Bradley Manning."
  • If you use email, encrypt it. Not only that, but encrypt all email you possibly can, not just email containing sensitive material. Encrypt your cute cat jokes and your discussions of last night's favorite TV show (that way you don't call special attention to your most confidential exchanges).
  • Do not post sensitive material on social media (a no-brainer, but apparently some still do it).
  • Do not post sensitive material on social media even when your privacy settings allow only "friends" to see it. A 2012 court ruling said it's perfectly okay for those "friends" to turn around and show your allegedly private info to government agents.
  • Do not talk to cops or indeed any government agents — about anything. Ever. The most innocent remarks can be used against you. The "nicest" cop is still not your friend. (We'll have more on this in Part Three and in the appendixes. This is extremely important!)
  • Know the laws, potential sentences, and likely prosecutorial practices against any crimes you're committing. Do not be caught unprepared.
  • Tip from experience:
    This comes from a friend of mine who spent "the worst two weeks" of his life in jail, courtesy of a snitch: "Don't hang with people who are dishonest or lie, even in small, unimportant things. They have no honor to lose and everything they say and do is based on profit or benefit to them."
  • If you're a political activist, keep your nose clean in other ways. For instance, if you're an anti-drug-war activist, don't sell drugs on the side. Don't make yourself an easy target for spurious (or worse, real) criminal charges.
  • Unless you actually want to be arrested to become a test case (a dangerous but sometimes useful tactic), then do everything you can to avoid giving anyone ammunition to tarnish you or your cause.
  • Do your best to make sure your associates also follow good security practices.
  • Get yourself away from associates who are blabbermouths, boasters, loose-lipped drunks, or "friends" who insist on posting their (and your) every activity on the Internet.
  • We repeat: GET YOURSELVES AWAY from anybody who can't keep his mouth shut!


Recognizing a snitch

While some clumsy snitches are obvious, many more are nearly impossible to recognize. What follows are only guidelines. Use them as an aid to your own brain and your own gut, but understand that when you organize with others to do controversial things, you very probably will have at least one snitch in your midst. There is simply no group that cannot be infiltrated. The longer you continue and/or the more controversial your activities, the more likely you are to attract one or more rats.
Some typical things snitches and/or agents provocateurs do:
  • A stranger or casual acquaintance tries to get you to do or advise on illegal activities.
  • A friend suddenly starts pushing you to do or advise on illegal things.
  • A person joins your group and statements he/she makes about his/her background just don't add up.
  • A person joins your group and starts stirring up trouble and creating divisions.
  • A person joins your group and is overly eager to be useful, to pay for the group's activities, to initiate activities, supply equipment, to escalate dangerous activities, etc.
  • Someone goes out of his way to gain your trust, to be really buddy-buddy with you. Then, when you resist getting into dubious activities, he drops all interest in you (he's looking for an easier mark).
  • Advice from the underground
    This ultra-basic piece of advice goes back at least to the agitators of the 1960s. Yet people still get entrapped by ignoring it: "You can always tell the FBI agent. He's the one who's trying to get you to bomb something."
  • You're asked to do illegal or dubious business with a "friend of a friend." This is a big one. It's amazing how many "friends of friends" (where controversial activities are involved) are actually undercover cops.
  • Someone asks you to do something illegal or dangerous that he could just as easily do himself or have done elsewhere.
  • Someone starts agitating to have your group do something outside the group's purposes. ("Hey, we just run a little of this 'stuff' across the border and it'll make us a lot of money that we can use to do good.")
  • An older, "more experienced" person joins your group or circle and soon becomes a counselor of sorts to the youngest, most edgy, most insecure, most angry, or most naive members. He "cuts them out of the herd" in order to pull them into illegal plots. (This is a classic tactic of the agent provocateur.)
  • Anyone in your group starts agitating for violent action. People who agitate for illegal activities may be snitches; or they may be genuine fools who will attract snitches.
These are not the only ways snitches get you in trouble. But they're among the most common ones.
On the other hand, appearances can be deceiving.
An online commentator who goes by the handle Bulucanagria recalls:
Some years ago I was returning from a job interview. I was changing buses in downtown Cincinnati when I saw that there was a hemp rally about to begin. Naturally I stayed on to enjoy the festivities.
Coming from a job interview I was dressed casually, but rather nicely; slacks, button down shirt, decent shoes. Also, I'm a fairly large white guy with short hair, my preference because when my hair grows out I look like a used Q-tip.
So, I'm standing at the back of the crowd when a band comes on to warm up the crowd. The singer intros the song by saying, "This is dedicated to all the undercover cops out there today ..." and about a dozen people turn and look at me with knowing expressions. I had to laugh out loud!
The first speaker comes out (Gatewood Galbraith RIP), and soon some naif sparks up a joint ... and is immediately arrested by the tie-dyed, long-hair, bearded hippie! Again I couldn't help myself and laughed out loud. I've smoked my share of The Devil's Lettuce but sometimes potheads just ain't too bright.
My point is that another potential sign of a plant is somebody who seems to match all the stereotypes of the group you're in. The agent involved may be smart and subtle enough to provide a nuanced portrayal of a "fellow traveler," or he may be an ignorant jackwagon who believes all the hype put out by his overlords and thinks of his quarry as cartoon characters. It's true that stereotypes become so by generally being true, but it's doubtful that any one individual would embrace them all.
Again, this seems like something a savvy person would already understand but, since we're trying to explain these things to ignorant fools (i.e. me 30 years ago), I thought I'd share.


What makes snitches so persuasive?

Snitches, especially professional agents provocateurs, can be master manipulators. Many otherwise-smart people have been drawn into their traps because they failed to recognize not only the specific techniques listed in the last section but because they failed to understand the psychology of snitchery and entrapment.
Case in point: Steve Haug
Haug is one of the agents provocateurs the FBI planted with the Hutaree Militia — a group that basically did not do much while its members spouted unpleasant political rhetoric. Haug inserted himself so persuasively into the group that he became the best man at the leader's wedding.
And all the while he was recording hundreds of hours of conversations and aggressively trying to get the group to cook up a "bomb plot." A judge eventually threw out all the major charges, but not until some Hutaree members had spent two years in jail awaiting trial.
* * *
It's also worth noting: One of the other snitches who helped bring down the Hutaree was a mouthy radio-show host called Hal Turner. Turner used another infamous tactic of snitches; he constantly urged, and even threatened, violence against public officials. All the while he was on the air, rousing dimwits into a frenzy, he was also a paid FBI informant, reporting on the very people he was inciting. And that's not at all unusual or surprising.
  • Snitches play on your trust and/or your desire to go along with others.
  • They may appeal to your loyalty or your fear or some other emotion ("You won't do it? Wow, and here I thought you were one of us." "C'mon, if you had any guts you'd do this." "How are we ever going to change things if we don't take radical action?")
  • They may literally "cut from the herd" the most naive, trusting, foolish, or discontent of your associates, isolate them, and psychologically manipulate them into committing crimes.
  • They may pretend to be your friend. — especially a friend in need. ("I know you don't usually deal, but couldn't you just sell me a little from your stash?" "Look, just help me get this money out of the country; it's no big deal." "Hey, I know you have a machine shop in your garage; how about helping me cut down the barrel on this shotgun? I'll pay you.")
  • They may actually be your friend — but a friend who has gotten into legal trouble and has turned to snitching to save themselves from a long prison sentence. (Same sorts of urgings as in the last bullet point, but this time coming from somebody for whom that wouldn't be characteristic behavior.)
  • They may make it easy to commit crimes by not only pushing the idea, but actually supplying the funding, the equipment, the transportation, and the planning for the crime. They may come across as natural leaders ("Trust me, I know how to do this!")
  • They may make hyper-strong appeals to your cause — then use the leverage they gain to make equally strong appeals for committing crimes.
  • They often play upon a normal human desire to want to DO something - which is likely why, if you're a political person, you're a member of the group in the first place.
  • And finally — let's never forget — some snitches play on that most basic instinct of all — S.E.X. Spy agencies have known this as long as there have been spy agencies. The KGB used to call it "the sparrow trick"; get a red-blooded heterosexual male up close with an attentive, manipulative female and said male will eventually whisper all manner of secrets into her ear. These days, it probably works the other way around, too. And no doubt homosexual attraction can blind eyes and loosen lips just as effectively.
Another point to remember about snitches
This comes from "just waiting," who also contributed the excellent primer on interrogation that you'll find in the appendices. He notes: "While all snitches are cowards, not all snitches are wimps or sissies. Just because we talk about them as lesser beings doesn't mean some of them aren't tough as nails — fighters and brawlers.
"If nothing else, snitches show a very developed sense of self-preservation and a willingness to do anything to save their own ass. Being a rat doesn't diminish their ability to fight, it just changed their tactics and focus temporarily."
So beware: Another way snitches can be dangerous is to physically hurt you if you get in their way.


"Mere" snitching vs active entrapment

Back in the late sixties or thereabouts, there was a federal case in which Treasury agents latched on to a printer who was willing to fantasize about doing some counterfeiting. Undercover Treasury agents encouraged him to really do it. Despite being a printer, he didn't have the special plates required to print money. So the Treasury agents provided them. Then he didn't have the special paper required to print money. So the Treasury agents provided it. And so on.
Times have changed...not for the better
In a Playboy article, James Bovard wrote: "Up until the early Seventies, defendants often successfully challenged entrapment as a violation of due process. But in 1973, the Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, gutted most defenses against government entrapment by focusing almost solely on the 'subjective disposition' of the entrapped person. If prosecutors can find any inkling of a defendant's disposition to the crime, went Rehnquist's logic, then the person is guilty, no matter how outrageous or abusive the government agents' behavior. Justice William Brennan dissented, warning that the decision could empower law enforcement agents to 'round up and jail all 'predisposed' individuals.'"
A judge tossed the case. And rightly so. There would never have been a crime, had the federal agents not provided the means and a big chunk of the motivation. That's entrapment.
Today, that dumb sap of a printer would be in prison for a long, long, time. As Bovard says, standards have changed. Although a jury will occasionally decide that some act of entrapment is so outlandish they'll refuse to convict (do an Internet search on "FCPA Africa Sting" for a great example), victims of entrapment have ended up serving decades in prison for going along with plots cooked up entirely by government agents. Even those eventually found not guilty may lose everything in the effort to save themselves.
With courts allowing more and more acts that would once have been considered illegal entrapment, more and more "mere" snitches are using their wiles to talk people into illegal deeds and are even providing the means and money to carry those deeds out. The lines between "mere" snitches and agents provocateurs are blurring.
Beware of anybody who not only wants you to commit illegal acts but goes out of his way to "help" you do so!


Dangerous myths about
snitches and undercover agents

There are two huge myths about snitches, narcs, undercover agents and other cop-associated rats that you'll hear all the time. The people spouting this BS always sound as if they know it for a fact. But the only fact is that they're misinformed — and are dangerously misinforming you.
Here are the two myths:
Myth #1: If you ask if someone is a narc, they have to tell you.
NO they don't. The myth holds that if you say, "Are you a narc?" or "Are you a cop?" and the person replies, "No," then they can never, ever bust you. Baloney! Every variety of snitch can look you straight in the eye and say, "I'm not a snitch" — then turn right around and land you in jail. Court cases around the nation - a search engine is your friend, here - have affirmed the "right" of government agents to lie to their targets. Which brings us to:
Myth #2: Cops are never allowed to lie to you.
OMFG, cops — and all kinds of other government agents — lie and they lie and they lie. And in nearly every case the courts allow them to get away with it.
But that brings up a related subject. Increasingly, you can get in trouble for lying to them. Even an innocent and harmless misstatement can be twisted into a prison sentence for you (search on "Martha Stewart prison" for an example).
There are a few sorts of lies that are so egregious that if a police officer tells them the case against you may be thrown out of court (attorney Jamie Spencer gives an example here). But only after you've been busted, scared out of your wits, deprived of your property, and perhaps driven into bankruptcy.
Attorney safety tip:
A day or two spent in jail because of a frustrated government agent beats a lifetime spent there because of a verbal misstep.
So just remember: Cops and other government agents are the most evil liars in the world — because they have power to hurt you, they'll use it ruthlessly, and they know they can get away with almost anything. If you know, or even have good reason to suspect that someone is a cop or any sort of government agent, DO NOT TALK TO THEM. About anything. Don't try to outwit them. Do not try to turn the tables on them. Don't even talk about the weather around them. The only things you ever want to say to a cop are things like, "Am I free to go?," "I do not consent to a search," or "I will not speak to you without an attorney present."


What to do if you believe a
snitch is personally targeting you

Let's assume that you suspect — but aren't sure — that someone in your circle is a snitch. And worse, you think the person is, or even might be, targeting you. What do you do?
  • Again, get away from the person
  • Do not try to outsmart the person
  • Do not feed the person false information (because if that person is an undercover agent this could be a crime in and of itself)
  • Do not commit violence against the person
  • Just get away — even if it means leaving a group
  • If you think you've already said or done something compromising with this person, see a good lawyer and read the section of this booklet on how to conduct yourself if you get arrested.
  • Another tip from this book's helpful attorney: "Consider making your OWN complaint to the authorities about this 'nutball' [the person you suspect of being a snitch]. This a) puts you on the record as NOT being in bed with the snitch, b) alerts the snitch and his handlers that you're aware of him and are thus less likely to be an 'easy target,' c) creates an appearance that you're not one of the bad guys - since you're not hiding anything, and d) maybe - with a little luck - the snitch ends up in jail himself for some time. I would not consider this 'do not try to outsmart' described above (which I agree with)." Of course, if he turns out not to be a snitch, you may have harmed an innocent person by calling the cops on him. It's a risk. But if the person really is an agent of the government, this can be a pretty good act of self-protection. Oh, and one of my friends who speaks from experience, points out that if you're going to report a snitch to the cops, it's best to do it through a lawyer. Otherwise you're talking to cops, which is a no-no.
It's an old joke, but...
SterlingStrings writes:
Back in Soviet Russia, twin brothers were born. They slept in the same crib. As they grew older, they went to the same schools, and entered the same military duty side by side. After the military, they started work next to each other in the same factory. They were married on the same day, and raised their families next door to each other in the same apartment building.
The years go by, and the brothers find themselves as old men, sitting on a park bench, sharing a bottle of vodka.
"What do you think of these new reforms they keep talking about?" asks one brother.
"Nyet" Says the other, "One of us might be KGB!"
As I said, old joke, but an element of truth. The sad reality is, everyone has their version of the "thirty pieces of silver." Pressure on a family member, fear of jail time, exposure of a dark secret ... anybody can be turned. The trick is in riding the fine line between necessary trust and over extending yourself and putting yourself at risk. Personally, I'm in favor of compartmentalizing information. Discuss "X" with one person/group, share "Y" with another group, and keep your yap shut about "Z".
Also, remember that the Internet is the greatest snitch out there. Every click, every search, every action CAN be recorded. I have no evidence that it's being done successfully, but it can be done. That's enough for me to never use a single point of entry to the WWW. Visit the public library for some, your local coffee shop for more, do some lightweight stuff at home, and don't surf and research at the same time. Find stuff, data dump it to a secure source, and read it later. If you find it irrelevant, trash it then.
Heads down, eyes up!


PART TWO

A Snitch Uncovered



If you believe there's
a snitch in your group

We've talked about how to recognize snitches and what you, as an individual, should do to protect yourself. Again, we have to stress that there are no magic bullets; you might be blindsided and severely damaged by a snitch despite your best instincts and best efforts at OpSec. The advice in this booklet can lessen the chance of that, but nobody can give you any guarantees.
Let's say, though, that you believe you've spotted a snitch and this snitch is not only in a position to harm you, but also a group you belong to — whether that be a bunch of dope-smoking friends, a group of hobbyists or gun owners, an activist political organization, or a religious group.
One interesting (though
dangerous) way to ID snitches
In his youth, Steve was a member of a number of groups that attracted the attention of cops and snitches. There were so many iffy hangers-on that the tiny core of solid people weren't sure who was a cop or who just smelled like one, or who was a snitch and who might just be a misfit or an idiot.
Then three people hit on a plan. Steve explains:
"Three of us who fairly trusted each other wondered how bad we were compromised and decided to try a test. We were a lot of loosely organized groups with a variety of hangers on. Each of us met with some of these people and called a 'secret' meeting. It was a cop's wet dream — with guns, drugs and heavy people promised. One of us went to each of these meetings and it was only some of the people told about it and a massive police presence at all of them. (The smart people stayed home.) It became unpleasant when the Feds, cops and such realized it was a trick.
"It left me with the depressing feeling that it was next to impossible to put a heavyweight group of more than one person together without a snitch."
The first thing to do, as we have said before and will say again, is to get away from that person and his or her influence. However, now you've got other people to worry about.
Some members of your group may be absolute innocents. Some may be blabbermouths or edgy types who are walking stupidly into the snitch's trap. Some may be friends with the snitch and hostile to anybody who expresses doubts about the person. Some may even be associates in the snitch's plan to bust you (it's not unusual for government agencies to plant multiple agents into one operation and the bitter old joke that, if not for the snitches, some meetings would be empty, isn't that far wrong).
What do you do?
  • Document your suspicions.
  • If possible, conduct some careful, subtle investigation to see if your suspected snitch's background and life matches her claims. Does she really live where she says? Has she been seen with police? Do her statements about her education or her friends hold up? If not, you may not have a snitch, but you have an untrustworthy person, for sure.
  • Share your specific reasons for suspicion with people in the group that you trust. Yes, we know that snitches destroy trust, so be very careful when choosing one or two others to confide in.
  • If you can do so without violating your state's law, quietly begin video or audiotaping all interactions with the suspected person. If state wiretapping laws forbid recording without the consent of all parties, then at least consider openly recording meetings to counteract any lies the snitch may tell his handlers.
  • Start a 'Facts, Acts, and Circumstantial file.' After each incident write details down. Facts are the time, date, occasion, incident, characteristics of the person(s). Acts are what they did. Circumstantial is the impressions and anything odd about the situation. Use the FAC file and keep notes from unsettling situations and see if a pattern emerges. (Note: This item also appears in Appendix 2, where you will find details on how to do this, along with many other commonsense OpSec tips.)
  • Do not make open accusations unless you have proof positive of snitchery or copness (as when New York Libertarian Party activists (see below) spotted a former "suspicious" member in the New York Times, helping the FBI with an arrest).
  • Discuss with your most trusted associates what to do.
  • Here's one way to spot a snitch!
    Online commenter BusyPoorDad writes:
    Years ago, when the New York Libertarian Party was starting up, a new member joined and became active. He said he was from a low-income neighborhood, worked a manual labor job, and did not know much about politics. He looked the part but things just did not add up.
    He knew how to set a table for a formal dinner, used the Robert's Rules very well, and fit in very well with the highly educated members. After about four months of working with us, he just stopped coming. This sort of thing happened a lot but there were no signs of discontent. He was always willing to do everything he was asked to help do (petition, run Nolan chart tables, etc.).
    About a year later he was spotted in the NY Times holding on to someone arrested by the FBI for something.
    His background just did not fit with him. We never saw him reading books, he talked about watching TV and working at a warehouse, but he was able to be cultured, had a good vocabulary, and really wanted to be part of everything.
  • Just as your first individual move is to keep away from the suspect individual, the best group action may be to simply shut the person out. Stop talking with them. Stop inviting them to meetings. Stop asking them to be involved in projects. Freeze them out of all activities and discussions.
  • In a serious case, you may end up having to shut down the entire group to foil a snitch or agent provocateur. If so, have a plausible excuse if you can.
  • Always, always make sure that you and the other "on the up and up" members of your group remain on record as NOT advocating illegal, and in particular violently illegal, activities. Got a blog, a Twitter account, a Facebook page? Make your opposition to certain activities clear and public.
  • Furthermore, make sure you stay on record as NOT advocating things that the snitch wants. Do not line up behind, or even pretend to agree with, that person's policy recommendations, strategies, or tactics. Remember, you may well be being recorded. You do not even want to appear to superficially agree with things an undercover operative is trying to talk you into.
  • Again, finally, you may have to recognize that you can neither help nor save those who do not wish to be helped or saved. It may be that your final act has to be turning your files over to some other trusted member of the group and leaving. You always have a chance of finding another group. You're not going to have a chance to find another you.


HISTORICAL ways of dealing
with known snitches

Since, as one wag observed, the first snitch arose shortly after the first secret, history offers us lots and lots of examples of how groups have handled the betrayers in their midst.
We do not recommend any of these methods! On the contrary, we advise in the strongest terms possible against them. This is just to note how seriously people have historically taken those who betray them. But, again, to be blunt - DO NOT DO ANY OF THIS! These examples are for historical, educational purposes only.
  • The IRA used to shoot betrayers in the kneecaps. It wouldn't kill them, but everyone who saw a former activist lurching down the street on destroyed knees knew what he was.
  • The Mafia would famously send stool pigeons to "sleep with the fishes."
  • Resistance groups, particularly during wartime, have been known to leave the bodies of betrayers in public squares with messages pinned to them — or even carved in them. While still saying it's a bad idea, it did have the effect of discouraging the general populace from working with the enemy. Today snitches and betrayers often see benefits and face nowhere near enough drawbacks for their dirty work.
  • In the 1980s and 1990s, the African National Congress punished perceived collaborators with the monstrous method called "necklacing." They'd shove a gasoline-filled tire over a miscreant's neck and arms and kill the person by setting the tire alight.
  • After World War II, many women who had slept with or otherwise collaborated with Nazis were humiliated by having their hair hacked off while mobs screamed, "Nazi whore!" This might not sound like much compared with beastly punishments like necklacing. But public humiliation, shunning, and the attack on their femininity was hugely degrading and psychologically damaging.


How do YOU treat an exposed snitch?

Since you are not a Mafioso, and since (so far) we are not in an outright shooting war with an enemy state, there is no justification for historical hardcore tactics. We'll say it again: your best bet is just to get away from the snitch and take protective measures as described above.
However, if you're very sure a person is a rat and you want to take further steps to render the snitch ineffective or miserable, here are some milder, but potentially effective, tactics. Again, we DO NOT NECESSARILY RECOMMEND any of these things. They may be good or bad ideas, depending on the people and the circumstances. They're just possibilities:
Spread the word. Use social networks both online and in the real world to notify others that the person is an informant. Be as factual and give as much evidence as possible. (There is even a website that contains a national database of known rats, but since it's a paid membership site, we're not recommending it here. Do a Startpage.com or DuckDuckGo.com search to find it if you're interested.) Post the snitch's photo, address, or other personal details online unless that violates a law in your area. This strategy is, however, a serious two edged sword - as those methods are ones that may be used by agents provocateurs in attempting to damage a group by further destroying trust. In fact, such tactics may well end up with YOU being labeled - no matter how unfairly or incorrectly - as the snitch! In fact, removing competent and trustworthy personnel from a group is high on a snitch's to-do list, and this can be a gift from on-high to a snitch.
Expel the person from the group. You can do this quietly — perhaps just by moving meetings and failing to inform the person of the new place. Or you can do it publicly, literally holding a purge or a type of trial where you present the evidence against the person.
Organize a shunning. Shunning has historically been a huge tactic in close communities. Shunning means shutting a person (and sometimes his family members) out of virtually all ordinary activity. A target of shunning isn't welcome into people's homes, can't get served at restaurants, doesn't have his greetings returned, can't get help from any of her former friends, and is generally unable to function within the community. Obviously in many ways this has become harder to do as we've become less reliant on our towns and neighborhoods. On the other hand, the Internet has made other, non-traditional forms of shunning possible.
Turn them in to the "legitimate" authorities. We mentioned this option before as a means of protecting yourself and your true friends. The same tactic may work to halt the snitch in its tracks or even put it in jail. Snitches are often serious criminals. They may well be up to nefarious deeds that their handlers in the police departments or government agencies don't know. Or a snitch who's working for the local PD may be unknown to the FBI, who might be interested to learn about other things he's up to. Again, we are very, very squeamish about the idea of turning any non-violent, non-thieving person into to any law-enforcement agency. But ... well, you'll need to judge for yourself what the snitch in your midst deserves. And of course, do this through a lawyer. Don't talk directly to government agents.
Fun and games. Again, this is a tactic we do not recommend. However, traditionally it's been used as a lovely bit of revenge and a way to keep snitches busy without letting them know you're already on to them. The idea is to keep the snitch running in circles with false leads. Set one snitch spying on another. Or give the snitch false evidence to focus on while you go about your real business unmolested. We consider this to be in the category of trying to "outsmart" the snitch — which is not wise. And you must be especially careful that you never put yourself in a position where you can be accused of "lying to law enforcement," since you can go to prison for that even when you're innocent in every other way. But such games can be fun while they last.
Rehabilitate and take the snitch back into your circle. There are people who believe that some snitches — especially young, inexperienced people who get in over their heads, get in legal trouble, and are intimidated into becoming snitches — should be forgiven, rehabilitated, and eventually brought back into the fold of trust. A very humane anarchist, Tom Knapp, took this position when young anti-drug-war activist Stacy Litz was arrested and pressured into becoming a drug informant. Not many people sympathized (and Litz made her own reputation worse with her online writings). But some very decent folks might want to open their arms to a "reformed" snitch. All we can say is, if you want to go that way, make damned sure the rat has actually reformed first — and can prove it through actions, not mere words.
A modern shunning
In the mid-1990s, Bob Black was a very well-known anarchist. Then, after a personal dispute with fellow writer Jim Hogshire and Hogshire's wife (a "he said-she said" encounter whose facts are known only to the three who were present), Black did the unthinkable.
And in this case the unthinkable was verifiable. On February 21, 1996, Black wrote a letter to the Narcotics Division of the Seattle Police Department, accusing Hogshire of a multitude of drug crimes, and implying that Hogshire was armed and dangerous.
Paramilitary police descended on the Hogshires' apartment. They confiscated perfectly legal items (including dried poppies and a mug warmer they mistook for a drug-weighing scale). Both Jim and Heidi Hogshire spent three days in jail. Even though a judge eventually dismissed the charges, Black's accusation made a hellacious mess of Hogshire's life, cost him tens of thousands of dollars, and contributed to the breakup of his marriage.
In the long run, however, it was Black who paid the bigger price. His publisher (who was also Hogshire's publisher) destroyed all remaining inventory of Black's books and published an article exposing Black's perfidy. Another publisher Black had worked with wrote an open letter in defense of Hogshire. Years later, archives all over the Internet still tell the story; you can easily find a copy of Black's snitch letter. Although as of this writing, Black has managed to keep his Wikipedia page scrubbed of the gory details, the evidence will be out there on other sites as long as he lives and few people will ever again give serious credence to an "anarchist" who reports people to the cops the moment he gets irritated with them.


Repairing the damage snitches do

Unfortunately, it's quite possible you'll never be able to repair the damage done by a snitch. You or someone you care about may end up in prison, broke, or otherwise badly hurt. A group or movement you belong to may collapse or members may split off in anger and distrust.
As one former government agent pointed out after reviewing a draft of this book, ruining activist groups is "at least one of the auxiliary functions of snitches."
But finding a snitch in your midst can also be a valuable learning experience.
It can teach you the importance of good security practices.
It can reveal who's trustworthy and who's not.
It can teach group members not only to be less gullible, but teach them what signs to look for when a snitch is targeting them.
Uncovering a snitch can help the remaining trustworthy members of a group to pull together.
If you're lucky and the activities of your snitch are particularly egregious, you might even get sympathy, donations, or renewed positive attention once good people realize what evil that person and her handlers tried to do to you.
In part, the long-term results of being targeted by a snitch depend on how you and your associates handle the problem. After the initial shock and recovery, look upon it as a chance to learn and teach others.


Beware of accusing someone
who might not be a snitch

It can be very, very difficult to detect a snitch — until it's too late. We sometimes face the evil choice of making a false accusation against an innocent person or keeping quiet about our suspicions and ending up with somebody (maybe even us) getting busted.
The damage a false accusation of snitching can do is horrifying. First, an innocent person suffers a grave wrong. He loses his reputation unjustly. She may be attacked by others. Second, your group of associates may break down in chaos. Your real work may suffer.
Then — this also happens — a wrongly accused person who gets expelled, shunned, or attacked may actually become a snitch in revenge.
It's also important to remember that a person who makes a false accusation of snitching is acting like a snitch himself. And in fact, one tactic a snitch might use to divert suspicion from herself is to point the finger at someone else.
So if you suspect someone of snitching but you have no solid reason for your suspicions, it's usually just best to detach yourself from the person while remaining watchful. Do not do anything in that person's presence or within that person's knowledge that you wouldn't do in front of your mother. Quietly encourage others to be watchful (it's just good OpSec, after all), but do not make public accusations without real reason.
Is there a danger in such a wait-and-see approach? You betcha. Around snitches, and in a "snitch culture" like ours, there is always danger in many forms.


PART THREE

WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU GET BUSTED?



You may be pressured to become a snitch

It happens all too often these days. You get busted and the next thing you know the cops are either threatening you or sweet-talking you into snitching on somebody else. They may promise to "help" you if you agree to become an informant. They may tell you that a friend arrested with you is already singing like a bird, and you should, too, if you want to save your ass (see "The Prisoner's Dilemma" later in this book). They may say they already "know everything," so you might as well tell "your side of the story" to make others look worse than you. If they think you're particularly dumb and harmless, they might even take you out and buy you donuts while talking you into being their pawn (yes, Philadelphia cops actually did that in their successful effort to turn anti-drug-war activist Stacy Litz into a drug-war informant).
You may imagine, sitting here reading this, that you'd never, ever, ever stoop to snitching on other people. But the fact is, until we've been tested, not one of us really knows what we might do under the right kind of pressure or persuasion.
The good news is that just a bit of advanced preparation can help any of us understand how police get us to work against our own interests and how they turn scared people into informants. Some pretty minimal knowledge can help us protect ourselves and our rights. Some of this knowledge can help us avoid being busted in the first place. Some of it can help us withstand the cynical manipulations of cops and prosecutors if we do get busted.
IMPORTANT
Please read the article on the Reid interrogation techniqueTM that appears toward the end of this booklet. The Reid technique is used by police to manipulate arrestees into cooperating — which may include everything from confessing to a crime you didn't (or did) commit to agreeing to rat out your friends.
The article was written by a man who, as a young outlaw, was twice subjected to Reid interrogations. He then grew up to study and employ the Reid Technique in his profession as an auditor/investigator.
Read and heed it. You're far less susceptible to manipulation once you understand how the manipulation works.


Do NOT talk to cops. Period.

And remember: Everything we say about not talking to cops also goes for every, single kind of government agent, local, state, national, or international.
If you are confronted by a law-enforcement officer under any circumstances — at your front door, during a traffic stop, because you've been fingered by a snitch, or for any reason whatsoever — DO NOT TALK. If you get arrested, DO NOT TALK.
TIP
Know a good lawyer, keep his or her card on you, and insist on talking to that lawyer if you ever get busted or even accosted by a cop who won't take no for an answer.
Avoid using public defenders if you can. Not all of them are bad, but many of them are overworked and/or just geared to processing cases as fast as they can. They often deal with petty criminals who expect nothing more than to be "processed." With rare and noble exceptions, they are probably not your best resource if you really hope to be represented as you wish.
The only things you should ever say to a police officer are things like these:
  • No, you may not search my vehicle.
  • No, you may not enter my home.
  • I do not consent to any search.
  • Am I free to go?
  • On the advice of my lawyer, I cannot talk to you.
  • I will not talk without my lawyer present.
You should never lie to a cop because that in itself may be a crime.
You should never imagine you can outsmart a cop with clever talk. They've heard it all.
You should resist the temptation to babble nervously (very difficult for some of us).
Do not try to explain yourself (also very difficult for some of us).
Do not try to talk your way out of a situation except where you can state a legal or constitutional principle that demonstrates your innocence. This is a technique that can be used by people who photograph or videotape cops at work, people who legally open-carry weapons, or people who are legally protesting. (Even then you may still get busted and/or beat up, but you'll be creating a case in your favor that might come in useful later.)
Attorney safety tip:
This video, mentioned again in the appendices, is possibly the best and most useful 49 minutes you will spend on this topic without paying an attorney first.
Oh yeah. And if you get tossed into jail, DON'T TALK TO YOUR CELLMATES OR THE JAILERS, EITHER. You can chitty-chat with your cellmates to pass the time and keep them from thinking you're a jerk; you can probably also learn quite a bit from them. But DO NOT TALK about anything to do with your case. Even if you don't think you're admitting anything incriminating, you're opening yourself up to every jailbird who might want to trade information, even false information about you, to the cops.
JUST SHUT UP!


The police officer is NOT your friend

Contrary to what you might have learned in kindergarten ... contrary to what you might hope ... and contrary to the image the officer might be trying to fake ... THE POLICE OFFICER IS NOT YOUR FRIEND. Let us say that again, just in case you didn't get it the first time: THE POLICE OFFICER IS NOT YOUR FRIEND.
Again remember: Everything we say about not talking to cops also goes for every, single kind of government agent, local, state, national, or international.
Unless you've been living in a cave most of your life, you've probably heard of the "bad cop/good cop" technique. When you've been arrested and are being interrogated, one cop will bully and intimidate you until you're just a little puddle of terror. Then another cop (who may be present at the same time or who may come in later) will pretend to sympathize with you and want to "help" you.
Don't ever believe it.
If you've done your proper work and just said no to interrogation or said you'd only speak with your lawyer present, you may avoid this particular form of manipulation. But wherever and whenever you meet a cop — or any federal agent or investigator, a jailer or a prosecutor — who acts like he's "on your side" or wants to "help" you or promises to get the system to "go lighter on you" — DON'T YOU BELIEVE IT!
Attorney safety tip:
[In the bad cop/good cop technique] Officer A will threaten you, your family, your friends, your pets, with severe harm going back nigh unto the 10th generation. Officer B will then call him off and suggest that "just a little cooperation" on your part will help avert all that.
Also be aware that sometimes they don't HAVE to lie to get what they want from you. Seriously, I've lost count of the number of defendants I've dealt with who were skaaaaaREWED by talking to the PD and who told me, "But the officer was so NIIIICE." Not every officer is going to be Officer McGruff - the "Officer Friendly" model can achieve amazing results.


The Prisoner's Dilemma

When "the authorities" have arrested you and want to turn you into a snitch, they have a powerful phenomenon on their side. It's particularly useful if you've been busted along with friends or associates, or even if the cops persuade you that they have busted or will soon be busting others in your circle. (And remember again, cops are among the biggest liars on the planet.)
In game theory, the phenomenon is called The Prisoner's Dilemma. It works something like this:
Two (or more) people are arrested but the police don't have enough information to convict either of you.
They separate the arrestees and offer each a similar deal; if you cooperate (testify against your friend, agree to become a snitch) and your friend remains silent, you'll go free. Your friend will be hit with the full legal penalty.
On the other hand, if you rat each other out, you may both get a lesser sentence.
On yet another hand, you realize that if you both remain silent, you both may go free — but you have absolutely no idea what your companion is doing — and the cops have given you both quite a lot of incentive to rat each other out.
In game theory, according to Wikipedia, "... the logical decision leads each to betray the other, even though their individual 'prize' would be greater if they cooperated." In reality, if you and your fellow arrestee were allowed to discuss your decisions, you'd probably both opt to clam up; it's part of the goodness of human beings that we'd rather cooperate than betray. However, the police are going to keep you apart through this process as best they can, which makes the temptation to betray seem the only logical, self-protective course of action.
Sitting here, safely reading this booklet, you might very well say to yourself, "I'm a good person. I would never rat out my friend." You imagine yourself thrusting out your chin and saying, "NO!" no matter what the personal cost to you.
And there are really some people who would do that. But they're in the minority.
In reality, you don't know how scared you'd be. You might be sitting there worrying about what your mother would think if you went to jail. You might be terrified of losing your job and being unable to pay your bills. You may have a pet or child at home you're desperate to get back to. The police will remind you that if you go to jail you'd be leaving your newborn baby or disabled spouse without protection. The police might badger you until you'll agree to anything just to have some peace.
Relationships between friends and associates complicate matters, too. Seeking self-justification, you might tell yourself you're just an innocent who got dragged into the whole situation by the other person. You might think, "Hm, well Bill's probably ratting me out right now," or "Well, there was that time when Mary didn't treat me fairly, so why should I sacrifice myself for her?" One snitch justified her betrayal of principle by telling herself that she'd be "more effective" as a political activist if she didn't go to jail; she told herself she would only snitch on certain people, ones she didn't know well or like very much.
So you never know.
If you're arrested and more than one person in your circle might join you, the only way to avoid The Prisoner's Dilemma is to decide in advance that you WILL NOT TALK and make sure all your associates are well schooled in their legal right to keep silent. Have them read this booklet!
But as always, there are no guarantees. We keep saying that. It's sadly true.


Mindset: The common territory
between snitches and victims

Another reason that it's often easy for cops to turn victims into snitches is that there's sometimes a common mindset between people who snitch and people who fall into the traps set by snitches.
Obviously, this isn't true of everybody who gets busted or otherwise becomes the target of a snitch. But both snitches and their easiest "marks" are frequently:
  • Overly naive and trusting
  • Unprepared for bad things happening to them
  • Cocky and overly confident
  • Loudmouthed or prone to blat information without thinking
  • Prone to believe that "nice" cops really do want to "help" them (yes, it's another form of being overly naive and trusting, but it bears repeating because if you get caught because you trusted a rat you're more likely to turn around and trust that rat's handlers)
  • Very good at rationalizing their own less-than-stellar behavior
  • (Or conversely) So idealistic and starry-eyed that reality, when it hits, knocks them for a loop.


What happens if you refuse to snitch?

If you refuse to snitch or otherwise cooperate with government, the prosecutor may pin more charges on you and may pursue them with more determination. Worse, prosecutors may threaten to bring charges against those you love.
Or that may not happen. Sometimes pressure to snitch is just a gambit and nothing terrible will happen to you for refusing.
If you do refuse to snitch and "the man" becomes more threatening, consider going public with your courageous refusal. This might offer you some protection and will very likely gain you friends and supporters. As soon as you're out on bail, tell your associates what happened to you. Blog about it. Put it out on social media. Explain the kind of pressures that were put on you. Describe what you felt and endured. Describe why and how you refused to become a tool of the police.
You'll be wise if you have a good lawyer on your side from the get-go. Our helpful attorney notes: "This is a good reason for 'lawyering up' in the first place. People make fun of lawyers, but there's a reason we exist. Of course, keep in mind that the prosecutor is a lawyer, too, so it's not necessarily all to the good."
What if your lawyer advises you to snitch?
Some lawyers in some circumstances will advise a client to go ahead and accept an offer to snitch in exchange for more lenient treatment. Sometimes there are practical reasons: you're guilty as hell, the cops have the evidence to prove it, and your lawyer thinks that cooperating would be the best way for you to avoid a long prison sentence. Sometimes, on the other hand, your lawyer's just a lazy SOB who doesn't give much of a damn and thinks turning snitch is the easiest resolution — for him.
If you are strongly opposed to snitches and snitching, tell your lawyer up front that, whatever else happens, you're not going to do that. Then if your lawyer pressures you to accept any agreement that involves snitching, get a new lawyer.
And remember, it'll probably help your case a lot if you AVOID TALKING TO THE POLICE. AT ALL.


What happens if you become
a snitch — and regret it?

If you are reasonably cautious in your real-world dealings and if you have prepared yourself NOT TO TALK TO GOVERNMENT AGENTS, the chances are good that nobody will successfully arm-twist or sweet-talk you into becoming a snitch. Even if you get busted, you'll handle yourself in a way that will make you less vulnerable to manipulation. (NOT TALKING may also help you in other ways, but here we're just talking about avoiding being pressured into snitching.)
But the simple fact is that anybody can break under the right kind of pressure — and government agents are trained in sophisticated terror and manipulation tactics. Once you fall into their clutches, you may simply be in over your head. So what if, under pressure, you agree to become a snitch — and regret it later? What if you agree to do it, then before you actually snitch on anybody, you realize you don't want to, can't, and won't betray other people?
If you become a snitch and don't regret it enough to stop, then to hell with you.
But having agreed to snitch, then changed your mind, you've got a tough dilemma and you could use some assistance getting out of it. You are going to have to be careful, brave, and more than a little bit lucky to handle the situation well.
First, you need a GOOD lawyer. You should have had one before you agreed to snitch, but definitely get one to advise you now.
Consider going public with your situation. Tell your associates what happened to you. Blog about it. Put your story out on social media. Explain the kind of pressures that were put on you. Describe what you felt and endured while being pushed into agreeing to snitch. Then state in the strongest terms why you realized you would not and could not do it.
Be prepared to lose some friends. You may gain friends and supporters by openly revealing how the cops treated you and how you ultimately resisted. But some people will distrust you; that's just reality.


What happens to you if you
snitch and your friends find out?

Chances are, if you're a non-violent political activist or small-time dealer of "college type" drugs who got busted and turned, your friends will hate you but won't beat you up or kill you if they learn you snitched on them.
However, your reputation will be ruined and good luck earning it back.
If you snitch and get caught, at the very least be ready to humbly accept whatever those you betrayed dish out to you; you only make things worse by making excuses.
If your snitching has gotten others into legal trouble, you should accept that, at the very least, you owe them restitution. This may be difficult to do, especially since you may be facing serious criminal charges and huge expenses yourself. But it's your responsibility and you'll have to do it if you ever expect to be taken seriously again.
If you are part of a violent group or you deal hard drugs, don't be surprised if you get killed. Or as our helpful attorney says (with a nod to Captain Mal Reynolds of Firefly), "Prepare to be surprised very briefly. Or perhaps not so briefly; torture may be involved first."


The rest of your life if you do snitch

If you agree to snitch on your friends or associates, know in advance that you're going to have a big price to pay.
At best, snitches have to spend the rest of their lives looking over their shoulders.
Your "friends" in the police department or any federal agency that you snitch for will turn out not to be your real friends. They will toss you aside like a piece of maggoty meat when you no longer serve their purposes. Those promises they made to protect your anonymity? Maybe they'll keep them, but they're just as likely to leak your name or "accidentally" put your name into a public document. They may even force you into life-threatening situations and not give one bit of a damn what happens to you. After all, you're just a snitch. Snitches are a dime a dozen — and even the cops know they're scum.
Want to see how much "love" cops give their snitches? Read this New Yorker article about young, naive — and now DEAD — snitches. ("The Throwaways").
Your snitching will probably not be important enough to earn you a spot in the Witness Protection Program, not even if you put your life in danger for your cop-handlers' sake.
You will be on your own and in peril.
You will have to live with yourself and if you have any self-awareness at all, every time you look in a mirror, a person you don't want to be will stare back at you.
If you snitch on friends or otherwise-harmless people, you should and (if you have any decency) you will feel an obligation to make things right by paying restitution or campaigning to get them out of prison. This obligation, which you might never be able to fulfill, could haunt you the rest of your life.
On the other hand, things could be resolved very easily. Your betrayed associates may kill you and you won't have to worry about any of this.


Appendix 1

The Reid Interrogation TechniqueTM

By "Just Waiting"

Okay, so you find yourself under arrest because of a snitch. Hopefully you've listened to the advice earlier in this booklet. You've cleaned up your act and your surroundings once you knew there was a snitch in your midst, and the only thing you were arrested for is information given by the snitch.
First thing to understand: Once you are arrested, ALL of the rights you had as a US citizen are gone except for two: the right to remain silent and the right to have an attorney present during questioning. USE THEM!!!
No one in law enforcement (LE) is your friend, and NO ONE wants to "help" you. They only want you to confess and do their will.
The police can and will lie to you. DO NOT LIE TO THEM!!! More on that later. They will tell you they have evidence/witnesses/tapes that don't exist. They'll poke, prod, and push every button they can to try to get you to respond. They'll tell you your friends are snitching on you in the other room. They'll tell you the only way to save yourself is to tell your side of the story. They'll threaten to call your boss. They'll tell you your kids are going to be taken away and raised by the state. They'll tell you how it will ruin your parents' reputation. They'll even tell you your dog is ugly. They'll make wild, baseless accusations — anything to get a response. Because once they get you to start talking, they're trained in how to keep you talking.
If you don't trust yourself to exercise your right to remain silent, exercise the second and ask for a lawyer. Remember, you can decide to remain silent or ask for a lawyer at any time during your questioning or interrogation.
You know the kinds of things you've been doing. If you are a high-value target, if you know or associate with high value targets, or if your activities rise to the level of interest that police want to question you, LE agencies employ an interrogation method known as the Reid Technique. It is a method of interview and interrogation (read: psychological manipulation) specifically designed to produce confessions.
That is one big reason you should heed the earlier advice and NOT TALK TO POLICE AT ALL. But I've interviewed/interrogated maybe 100 or more people and I've found, almost as a rule, that people have the hardest time keeping quiet. They want to defend themselves, to tell their story. I've yet to meet the person who can sit quiet for 10 minutes while someone else talks about them, even less when lies and untrue accusations start to fill the air. Even for someone who has regular, unfavorable contact with LE, even people like me who have been Reided, the hardest thing to do is to shut up. When someone makes a statement or allegation, its human nature to want to refute it.
So, if you find yourself being interrogated and you feel you must defend yourself, at least try to minimize the damage.
First: As I've said before, DO NOT LIE TO LE! You will get caught. Lies change with every telling, but the truth remains a constant. LE are trained in detecting the smallest, subtlest change in your story and ripping it wide open. Dante himself did not imagine a torture in hell like what you will experience from LE if you get caught lying to them. Plus, you are now subject to arrest for new charges, usually, Lying to LE or Obstruction, indictable crimes, and you've done so on tape. This is how some of LE's best snitches are made!
Second: If you can truthfully do so, DENY EVERYTHING. Do it simply and categorically. Don't ramble and make excuses. Just say, "I didn't do it," "I'm innocent," "That's false." As you'll see below, they'll do everything within their power to try to stop you from doing this. If you cannot honestly declare your innocence, then just say, "I want a lawyer."
Third: If you feel you have to answer an incriminating question, qualify your answer. "I don't think I was at...," "I don't recall seeing...," and "I may have met..." are all appropriate qualifiers to prevent telling an outright lie.
LE has studied the meaning of every move, every movement, every facial expression, every question, every answer. They identify and exploit weaknesses you didn't know you had. They watch and hear everything you do and say for meaning.
Repeat the question before answering? That answer is a lie.
Little or no direct eye contact? You're evasive.
Too much direct eye contact? You're cocky and/or confrontational.
Change from "is" to "was" or "a" to "the"? You're changing your story to hide something.
Sit up straight, slouch, fold your arms in your lap, fold them across your chest? You're scared, you're cocky, you're defensive. Every movement, posture and expression has a meaning to LE.
The surest way to know the Reid Technique is about to be used is the room they put you in after you're arrested. You'll know it when they open the door. And once they open that door, the ONLY WAY TO SAVE YOURSELF IS TO ASK FOR A LAWYER! Once the interrogation begins, LE won't stop until you ask for a lawyer or they've gotten what they want. Remember, you can ask for a lawyer at any time during the interrogation, do not be afraid to do so!
Interrogation rooms are specially designed to make you as uncomfortable and out of your element as possible. Your chair is the hard one, in the corner, furthest from the door, and behind some type of barrier, like a desk. Your interrogators will take positions clearly letting you know that they are in total control, that you are in their world, and the only way out of the room is through them. You can't get to the lights or thermostat. They'll turn the heat up (I once knew an interrogator who wore a sweater and complained of a chill in a 90+ degree room, talk about psychological manipulation), brighten or darken the room, etc. They'll create a physically intimidating presence without ever touching you. For maybe the first time in your life, your freedom is completely stripped away and you are confined. Control of every aspect of your physical condition has been stolen from you. When you are at your most vulnerable, the interrogators are ready to begin.
Reid is broken down into three parts, Factual Analysis, the Initial Behavioral Analysis Interview, and the Interrogation.
Factual Analysis is just what it says, an analysis of the facts in a case. Prior to talking to you, the LE tries to learn everything there is to know about the event leading to your arrest. They've gotten a story from a snitch. They know the date, time, how many people were there, some names, some physical descriptions, the drugs dealt or the damages caused.
Today, LE is on your Facebook page learning everything they can about you while developing their interrogation strategy. They'll try to know as much about you as your best friend, and use it to try to be your friend. Your favorite band? The LEO saw them last tour. Have a cat, dog, fish? The cop is so sad, he just had to put down his 16-year-old catdogfish yesterday. His wife went to the same school as you, different years. Wow, so much in common, you two could be pals. Have a pic of you and your mom? Jackpot, he'll use her later, in his interrogation.
The Initial Behavioral Analysis is supposed to weed out innocent suspects, but in reality this is where LE determines your susceptibility to further questioning and picks the strategy they will use against you. IBA starts the moment of your first contact with LE. The law-enforcement officer (LEO) asks simple, conversational, non-accusatory questions and listens to the way you frame your answers, watches your facial expressions, the way you stand. LEO has been trained in what every action and movement mean. Within the first 30 seconds, LEO knows whether you will be susceptible to questioning and if he'll be able to get you to talk. If LEO asks if you know the time, remember that that's a yes or no question. If you answer, "Yes, its 3:30," you've shown a willingness to please and to give more information than is asked. You're a perfect candidate for successful interrogation!
The official Reid Interrogation has nine steps, beginning with an accusation of guilt and ending with a confession. To LE, there are no other acceptable outcomes. If you were arrested as a result of a snitch, and took the advice of being arrested clean, LE has nothing more than the accusations the snitch has made. Remember, don't lie, but if you can't resist talking, at least DENY EVERYTHING! A good lawyer will rip a snitch apart and develop reasonable doubt in the eyes of a judge or jury. Snitching and witness credibility don't exactly go hand-in-hand.
LE will invariably offer you a chance to "tell your side." This is cop talk for "make a full confession." Cops brag at parties about how fast they have gotten suspects to do it.
If you don't start wailing and confess to everything, the next thing they'll try is shifting blame. They'll try to blame someone else and suggest that maybe you weren't involved but just got caught up in things. They'll give you scenarios in which to minimize your participation and guilt. They'll try to make it somehow socially acceptable, suggesting it was a crime of passion rather than a premeditated event. LE calls it "developing a theme," what they're really doing is presenting options for you to pick from to confess to. React to any one of their scenarios or agree to anything they suggest here, and you're not getting away until you sign a confession and give them the names and information they want.
All throughout, LE will do everything they can to keep you from denying your "guilt." They will disrupt you mid-word, tell you to shut up, tell you it's not your turn to talk, anything just to keep you from denying your guilt. They will try to talk over any claim of innocence so that denials are never clear on the recordings.
Why? Because opposing what LEO is saying builds self-confidence, something they're working hard to strip from you.
And secondly (and maybe more importantly), if you continue to deny, dispute, deny for the first 1, 2, 3, or 4 hours of the interrogation, then confess to something in hour 5, a good lawyer will demonstrate coercive interrogation tactics were used and hopefully have your confession thrown out.
So qualify if you have to lie. Remember those "iffy" statements ("I don't recall ..."), but deny being there, deny any knowledge of events, deny knowing people, deny everything you honestly can.
If you haven't asked for a lawyer and haven't been denying, the interrogation moves on to the next steps. This is where a new LEO might come in. He understands your situation, he's sympathetic, he's your buddy, he doesn't agree with the other LEO's interrogation tactics, either. He'll tell you he's been watching and that to him, you don't seem to be the kind of person who could do something like what you're accused of. He'll tell you he wants to help you. You've seen good cop/bad cop on TV, well, this is it in real life.
Good cop will appear to be sincerely caring about your predicament. He'll talk quietly. He'll lay out a bunch of different scenarios that minimize your guilt, all the while looking for the clue you give him that he's hit on a winning theme to follow. And that clue is so subtle you don't even know you've given it. But he does.
Good cop will give you acceptable justifications. He'll give you two options, you planned what happened or it was just a one-time thing. With either option, you're still making a confession. Good cop always leaves out option #3, you can DENY that you're guilty at all!
Good cop wants to see your tears; he knows he has you when you cry.
Once you have been broken down and are ready to admit to anything (search on "Central Park Jogger case" for false confessions) LEO will attempt to get you to tell your story to his associates or write down and sign your story. All of your protest and denial has been for nothing once you confess.
So remember these three key points: 1) The police are not your friends and do not want to help you; 2) If you don't trust yourself to remain silent, demand a lawyer (you can do so at any time); and 3) if you feel you just have to talk — don't lie, qualify and especially if you're innocent, deny, deny, deny.


Appendix 2

Some Commonsense OpSec

These commonsense OpSec (operational security) tips are for any group or any individual whose activities might draw the attention of the state. Some will protect you against snitches. Some will just protect you, period. The author is MJR, who works in security.

If you wish to have a private conversation, leave your home and your office and go outside and take a walk or go somewhere public and notice who is near you. Don't say anything you don't want to hear repeated when there is any possibility of being recorded.
Never leave a copy of a document or list behind (unless you want it found) and take a minute to duplicate an irreplaceable document and keep the duplicate in a safe place. Back up and store important computer disks off site. Sensitive data and membership list should be kept under lock and key.
Keep your mailing lists, donor lists and personal phone books away from light-fingered people. Always maintain a duplicate off site in a safe place.
Know your printer if you are about to publish, your mailing house and anyone you are trusting to work on any part of a project that is sensitive.
Don't hire a stranger as a messenger.
Checks for electronic surveillance are only effective for the time they are being done, and are only effective as they are being done if you are sure of the person(s) doing the sweep.
Don't use code on the phone. If you are being tapped and the transcript is used against you in court, the coded conversation can be alleged to be anything. Don't say anything on the phone you don't want to hear in open court.
Don't gossip on the phone. Smut is valuable to anyone listening; it makes everyone vulnerable.
If you are being followed, get the license number and description of the car and people in the car. Photograph the person(s) following you or have a friend do so.
If you are followed or feel vulnerable, call a friend; don't "tough it out" alone. They are trying to frighten you.
Start a 'Facts, Acts and Circumstantial file.' After each incident write details down: facts are the time, date, occasion, incident, characteristics of the person(s). Acts are what they did; Circumstantial is the impressions and anything odd about the situation. Use the FAC file and keep notes from unsettling situations and see if a pattern emerges.
Do freedom of information requests for your file under the FOIA and pursue the agencies until they give you all the documents filed under your name.
Brief your group on known or suspected surveillance.
Report thefts of materials from your office or home to the police as criminal acts.
Assess your undertaking from a security point of view; understand your vulnerabilities; assess your allies and your adversaries as objectively as you can; don't underestimate the opposition and don't take chances.
Recognize your organizational and personal strengths and weaknesses.
Discuss incidents with cohorts, family and your group.
Call the press if you have hard information about surveillance or harassment. Discussion makes the dirty work of the snitches overt.

Addendum on note-taking (Facts, Acts, and Circumstantial)

Although some might consider the following to be overkill, MJR also has experience facing opponents in court and offers this brief primer on taking the kind of notes that can guide you through a very tough grilling by police or prosecutors. He writes:

When preparing a "Facts, Acts, and, Circumstantial" list you are going to have to take notes about what is going on. The notes should be written in a clear and concise way. Use professional language and be prepared to substantiate what you record. One never knows, you could be wrong and get sued or if you do get arrested this could be the basis for a defense from entrapment.
The notebook that you use should be lined with a margin on the left. Each page should be numbered.
What to put in the notebook to make it legal
First you should start with the date. Then on the next line write the weather conditions. The reason for the record of what the weather was like is that the usual first question from a prosecutor or the other side's lawyer usually is about the weather. This is an attempt to discredit your memory.
When you make your first entry, write the time an event happened in the left margin. Next write down what happened or what you found and write down the location (address or approximate location). Then write down the actions taken by those involved and the names and addresses of any witnesses. If you make a mistake draw one line through the word and write your initials next to it. Oh and don't leave any lines blank. If more things happen during the day they all go under the same date. If the date changes you should start a new date with the weather. When you finish the last entry of the day sign your name. This makes it a legal document. Write the notes as soon as possible after an incident. Last, but never least... If you are going to use this book in court under no circumstances should you rip out any of the pages, this will only give the other side ammo to use against you. The questions you will face will revolve around you hiding something.
Here is an example of what the notebook should look like


Appendix 3

Line up a lawyer

I've adapted this from advice handed out by the helpful, anonymous lawyer whose tips have appeared throughout this booklet.

How to hire the right lawyer

1. Every person engaging in or planning to engage in illegal or controversial activities needs to have an attorney already on line. After you've been busted and are standing around at the police station is NOT a good time to be leafing through the yellow pages. At least not if you're serious about avoiding a long stay in custody.
2. You should also expect to drop some money up front on a consultation with a potential defense attorney. Again, calling from a police station is NOT a good moment to find out that the attorney whose number you've been carrying in your pocket hates your cause, doesn't take cases like yours, or has a conflict of interest. (In theory, even an attorney who hates you and everything you do should be able to give you a good defense; but that varies and is definitely not worth the risk. Make sure you and the attorney are comfortable with and have some reasonable basis for trusting each other, because if you get in trouble you are going to have to be seriously ready to open up to your attorney if you want a chance of winning.)
3. Former DAs and former public defenders are a good first choice. But bear in mind that DAs often are of the "lock-em-all-up" frame of mind, while public defenders are frequently used to just pleading their clients out to get the best deal possible, without concern for actual guilt or innocence. This is another reason you want to have consulted with the attorney BEFORE you need one. And yes, this may well mean you go through a couple interviews and pay a couple of fees before you find the "right one."
4. By interview I mean "find out how much the lawyer charges for a half-hour of time on a consult then go in expecting to pay that." When you first interview an attorney, you don't have to lay out in detail what you're up to — perhaps just say that you're a free-speech advocate or a drug legalization advocate (or whatever the general truth is) and that you have been advised to have a good criminal defense attorney on tap because these days even innocent people are at peril from snitches and sloppy justice. Ask the attorney's thoughts on your general activities. His or her length of time working in criminal defense (generally longer is better, but not always). His or her experience with people who've been accused by snitches. His or her willingness to show up at 2:00 a.m. if that's when you get busted (not per se a deal killer, but be prepared to spend the night in jail otherwise).
5. If you already have an attorney you like and trust, but who doesn't do criminal law, you can ask who he or she would recommend. Again, you'd still want to do an advance consult/interview with your proposed attorney. Spending a few dollars on a consultation can save you a LOT of money and headaches down the road.
6. Never forget your right to remain silent, except for, "I'd like my attorney, please." Repeat as necessary.


Appendix 4

Other helpful resources

Dealing with snitches

Snitch— Transcript of a PBS/Frontline documentary on the whole dirty business of snitching.
Got the Hollow Tips for Snitches— How radical groups of the past have dealt with snitches and how contemporary groups can learn from the past.
How to Handle the Snitch at Trial— This guide, by lawyer Jeffrey W. Jensen, is written for defense attorneys. If you get in trouble because of a snitch, it might help your defense.

How cops deal with snitches

The Throwaways— A New Yorker article on young, naive snitches who were murdered because the cops they were pressured into working for didn't give a rat's butt about them.

Online advice on dealing with police

Flex Your Rights— This organization has online videos, DVDs, and tons of advice on how to handle yourself during police encounters. Topics include "Don't get tricked," "When do I have to show ID?," "How to refuse searches," "10 Rules for dealing with the police," and much more.
Don't Talk to the Police— A law-school professor (former defense attorney) and a cop explain why you should never, ever talk to police even (and perhaps especially) if you're innocent, even if you're telling the 100% truth. This explains, in graphic detail, with examples, about how police will twist your words and/or lie about you if you say anything at all to them.

An online guide to interrogation techniques

U Boat Archive— This site contains an extract from TM 30-210 Dept. Army Technical Manual "Interrogation Procedures." Although designed to teach interrogation, it can also help victims of interrogation recognize and thwart typical intimidation and questioning techniques.

Books

You & the Police! by Boston T. Party
Snitch Culture: How Citizens are Turned into the Eyes and Ears of the State by Jim Redden
Snitch: Informants, Cooperators, and the Corruption of Justice by Ethan Brown

Prospect

$
0
0
The prospect./probate
For a prospect its simple, Keep your mouth shut, never discuss club business with anyone, and the reality is a prospect is the bottom of the chain. To be really good, learn all members names, Easy, learn their occupations, hobbies, etc, A club is a brotherhood so be a brother, also make sure you are available for all events, all prospects are expected to do as they are told or instructed, that's a given.  IF a officer needs his back watched at a outing or a run, or a brother is broke down at 2 am, just be there. The more you do the easier it is to become a member.  You are being watched and it will be noticed, always remember as a prospect you have no rank or privileges, and upon introducing yourself  to any patch holder. You must only introduce yourself as a prospect of the ****** Motorcycle club, and keep all other conversation to a minimum, its time to start thinking of a road name. We will pick a name and it will be who you are when in club attire. The road name will be short and describe your personalityor something that happens to you ar that you do that the Patch Holders think would be an appropriate road name. If your probate time gets extended it means you have screwed up, and you should talk to your sponsor. Prospecting should not be looked at as a necessary evil, but a labour of love. All the horrific shit you,ve heard about initianation or rite of passage ritual from prospect to member is true. Good luck.
PS, Never leave a patch holder anyplace, never ever, especially out of town always stay to the end. Unless you have a extreme reason, like your family has a emergency.  Parents or children. ( Family ) remember all PH are brothers. Respect is the biggest lesson some guys have to learn..
Ringo.
Acquitted M/C
Canada

Hang Around

$
0
0
The hang around period is just a honeymoon. You are not a member or representative of the club and neither you or the club has a claim on each other. If something happens to you, the club is not expected to back you up. It is a time when you size up the club and ask yourself if they are what you want. It is also a time when they are sizing you up and asking themselves if you are what they want. It's a gentleman's agreement at this point. There is no dishonor for either of you if you back away from the deal. In making your decision, you should remember that as a prospect in that club, life will be a lot harder than it is in the hang around phase. Until you are patched, you will be sitting out Church meetings as an outsider and not permitted to enter until you get patched in.
While nothing is perfect, there is really only one rule if you decide to back away. There will be conditions on your doing it honorably. That could range from just asking to be let loose to a request that you meet with each patch holder individually and ask their blessing on your decision. Even in the case of an honorable decision, there can be some hard feelings. For instance, you can bet your bottom dollar that the patch holders in that club think it is the second best thing in life to butter and pussy, so a decision on your part to move on could result in some hurt feelings (especially if they thought you were going to make a good prospect). However, if you do it right, and move to another club, those feelings will usually subside with time.
If you do move on, you are OUT. That means that none of them are going to call you to go out for a beer or to hang around with them anymore. When you're in, you're in and when you're out, . . . you're OUT.
Motorcycle Clubs operate on the honor system and you "always dance with the one who brung ya". It is a huge act of dishonor to be doing a hang around with more than one club.
Underneath all of this, I am seeing something which I had to recognize in myself in the beginning of my movement towards a club. It is a common thing that happens to lots of people. In the beginning you feel the exhiliration of being around those guys, but at a certain point, your life begins to get very boxed in. You see their dedication to each other as brothers and realize that your world is about to go from one where you know many people, to one where there are only ten guys who you will spend the rest of your days with. That was for me a very scary moment and I spent a lot of nights questioning myself about what I was doing. Well, to make a long story short, I backed away from that club (got all the brother's permission, etc., ) but it wasn't long before I began to miss what I'd given up. Like the guy who gave up his wife and marriage just because he got laid one night by some bimbo and now is thinking "the grass is greener on the other side of the hill". Motorcycle clubs are a family thing. Your brothers become your brothers because you have all learned to love each other through thick and thin. You know each other's strengths and weaknesses and love each other even when you are fighting. I don't have any trouble telling one of my brothers "I love you", but you will never hear me say those words to my real life blood brothers, because all I share with them is some DNA blood plasma. Brotherhood is based upon a million little moments that run the gamut from life threatening situations, sitting on the side of the road at midnight broke down in the middle of noplace, and watching each other's kids grow up. Lots of joy and lots of tears make up the brotherhood.
It took me a long time to realize why MC chapters are so small. It is because when you get to 14 + guys in a chapter, it begins breaking down into clicks. So you see, while I am in very large club and have lots of brothers, I have only 10 or 15 who I am really tight with.
If you are contemplating not joining because you fear your world will get too small, please remember that what ever club you go to, it will be the same thing, and if you persevere, it will either get better or you will just wake up someday and realize you are not MC material.
Thank you for this insight Fish.  22

PIC OF THE DAY.. LEXA

LIFE IN THE FAST LANE..

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE
THANK YOU, JOHN
LIFE IN THE FAST LANE
A collection of lane-related information
 
                                             by John Del Santo
 
GENERAL
If our bike is equipped with working electric directional signals the law requires that we use them when changing lanes. (CVC 22110).  The State handbook also suggests that during times of heavy traffic, or poor visibility, that we also  use hand signals so that cars are better able to see what our intentions are.
 
SIGNAL LANE CHANGES             Before each lane change….Check your mirrors……Signal your intentions……Check your blind spot…..Make your move.
 
The CA Drivers Handbook suggests that at freeway speeds we signal for at least five seconds  before a lane change.
 
Traffic lanes are often referred to by number. The left, or “fast” lane is called the “Number 1 Lane”.  The lane to the right of the “number 1 lane” is called “The Number 2 Lane”  ,then the “Number 3 Lane” etc.  
 
If you are pulling a little camping trailer behind your motorcycle or car you now come under the same 3-axle category as a tractor trailer.  You are restricted to the two right lanes of the freeway,  restricted to 55 MPH,  and not allowed to use the HOV lane.  (P-35 CA Drivers Handbook)
 
FOLLOWING DISTANCE   California Vehicle Code 21704 (a)   States that ) “ The driver of any motor vehicle that is operated outside of a business or residence district, shall keep the vehicle he is driving at a distance of not less than 300 feet to the rear of any other motor vehicle”.  That’s a space that would fit about five tractor-trailers, or is almost a football field long.
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------
ON THE FREEWAY
Miles per Hour...Times 1 1/2 …Equals  Feet-Per-Second traveled. At 65 MPH  a vehicle is traveling  about 100 feet  Every Second.
 Many motorcyclists prefer traveling on the freeway in the Number 1 lane (far left).  This leaves the rider able to only worry about bad moves from the vehicle to the right,  and the vehicle behind.  Riding in the number 1 lane also leaves the shoulder on the left as an escape route to avoid dangerous moves from other drivers.
  Unlike many other states,  If you are traveling in the left lane….the number 1 lane…and you are maintaining the the posted speed limit….There is no legal reason for you to move out of that lane unless an emergency vehicle comes up behind you showing lights and/or siren.
The California Motorcycle Handbook (p-13)  tells us “There is no “best lane position” for riders in which to be seen and to maintain a space cushion around the motorcycle.  Position yourself in the lane that allows the most visibility and space around you”.
Generally speaking, I have been told by highway police that their attention is most drawn to vehicles that are jumping around from lane to lane, not to those that stay mostly in one lane.
 
the drivers handbook suggests that at freeway speeds we signal for at least five seconds  before a lane change.
 
GROUP RIDING
“If you ride with others, do it in a way that promotes safety and doesn’t interfere with the flow of traffic” If the group is more than four or five riders, divide it into two or more smaller groups.  Use a staggered formation and keep a  2-second following distance from the rider directly in front of you. (P-32  CA DMV motorcycle handbook).
When we are riding in a group on the freeway with five or ten other vehicles, WE ARE NOT AN EXCLUSIVE GROUP……..to the law and to the rest of the world, we are just ……five or ten individual vehicles.  If other vehicles want to, or need to, make a lane change into our lane,  they have every right to do so,  and we have no right to try to stop them from doing so. Even convoys of army trucks or funeral processions lose their right to exclusivity when they are on a freeway.
 
HOV  LANES  (HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE )(Carpool lane)
 
No vehicle may cross double yellow lines into or out of an HOV LANE .
  In some areas, such as near Los Angeles ,   the double-yellow lines are about 18 inches apart.   These are still  double-yellow lines which no one may cross into or out of an HOV lane……..Contrary to some popular belief,  these are NOT teeny little HOV lanes for motorcycles.
 
 ONE OR TWO PERSONS ON A MOTORCYCLE OR TRIKE (3-wheeled motorcycle)   ARE ALLOWED TO USE AN HOV LANE, unless otherwise posted. (P-34  CA Drivers Handbook).
 
No vehicle pulling a trailer may use an HOV Lane .
 
EMERGENCY VEHICLE STOPPED ON FREEWAY
CVC-21809.  (a) A person driving a vehicle on a freeway approaching a stationary authorized emergency vehicle that is displaying emergency lights, a stationary tow truck that is displaying flashing amber warning lights, or a stationary marked Department of Transportation vehicle that is displaying flashing amber warning lights,
 
shall approach with due caution and, before passing in a lane immediately adjacent to the authorized emergency vehicle, tow truck, or Department of Transportation vehicle, absent other direction by a peace officer, proceed to do one of the following:
(1) Make a lane change into an available lane not immediately adjacent to the authorized emergency vehicle, tow truck, or Department of Transportation vehicle, with due regard for safety and traffic conditions, if practicable and not prohibited by law.
 (2) If the maneuver described in paragraph (1) would be unsafe or impracticable, slow to a reasonable and prudent speed that is safe for existing weather, road, and vehicular or pedestrian traffic conditions.
 
OFF  THE FREEWAY
 
CENTER LEFT-TURN LANES  A set of yellow solid lines with dotted yellow lines just inside them.  These are to be use to start or complete left turns or to start u-turns.  We may not stay in them for more than 200 feet (three tractor trailer lengths). 
 
DOUBLE-DOUBLE YELLOWS    SETS OF double-double yellow lines are considered a barrier or island.  We may never cross those even to get into or out of our own driveway Or to make a u-turn.
 
NARROW STREETS   When riding in parts of town with small, narrow streets…..where there is not a centerline painted in the street,   A CA Driver Handbook suggests that we ride out near the middle  of the street, when no traffic is approaching us from the opposite direction.  This reduces the chances of someone in a parked car making a move that would surprise or endanger you.  Naturally, near an intersection we would be back towards the right side of the roadway.
 
TURNOUT AREAS AND LANES  Special “turnout” areas are sometimes marked on two-lane roads.  Drive into these areas to allow traffic behind you to pass.  If you are driving slowly, you are required to pull in if there are five or more vehicles behind you that want to go faster.  (p-35  CA Drivers Manual).
  SOMETIMES THESE TURNOUT AREAS ARE UNLIT AND UNPAVED, AND ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT, MOTORCYCLISTS WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SERIOUS CHOICES TO USE THEM OR NOT.  
 
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ZONE   A "safety zone" is the area or space lawfully set apart within a roadway for the exclusive use of pedestrians and which is protected, or which is marked or indicated by vertical signs, raised markers or raised buttons, in order to make such area or space plainly visible at all times while the same is set apart as a safety zone. CA Vehicle Code 540.
  
   CROSSING BICYCLE LANES    As long as there are no bicycles using the bicycle lane anywhere near enough  to you to be a hazard,  you may cross a bicycle lane to turn into or out of a driveway.  If there is a bicycle lane, and no bicycles are using it, and you plan on turning right at the next corner, you should check your mirror, signal,  check your blind spot,  and move into the bicycle lane  NO MORE THAN 200 feet from the corner (three tractor-trailer lengths)  to approach your right turn.    You may park in a bicycle lane, as long as there is no sign that proclaims “ Bike Lane  No Parking”.
Motorists Passing Bicyclists  Be patient when passing a bicyclist. Slow down and pass only when it is safe. Do not squeeze the bicyclist off the road. If road conditions and space permit, allow clearance of at least three feet when passing a bicyclist.
 
Would you like to check out any vehicle laws or rules ?  go to  http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/vc/vc.htm  Ca Vehicle Code    OR    http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/hdbk/driver_handbook_toc.htm  CA Driver Handbook.
 
 
THESE RULES AND LAWS MAY BE DIFFERENT WHEN LEAVING CALIFORNIA AND ENTERING OTHER STATES.
                    --------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER AND WARNING :This guide is to provide accurate and authoritative information on this subject. If expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought
   John Del Santo
At Intersections,  and
  In Your Blind Spots,
 "Check Twice for Motorcycles". 

P.S.
I was just reading my article "Life in the fast lane"  which is a collection of info regarding lane laws and rules....and I realized that I had not mentioned "Lane Sharing"  so I entered these  lines into the article    FYI     thanks  John

The California Vehicle Code does not allow “lane sharing, lane splitting, etc.
   

The Original One-Percenters,And Why You Do NOT Want To FUCK With Them

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE
By Rachelle Hruska
To contact the author of this post, email rachelle@guestofaguest.com
http://guestofaguest.com/instant-expert/the-original-one-percenter/
There's an undeniable camaraderie forming amongst the 99% and their supporters over a common joy of throwing the "one per-centers," (the upper 1% of Americans who control the majority of wealth), under the bus.  And, it's left me wondering, "How do the original 'One Percenters' feel about sharing their title with a bunch of rich assholes?"

Protest groups across the country have no problem banding together in solidarity to protest outside of these new "1%'ers" houses. Nor do they feel remorse after  tweeting witty slogans and slurs against these scumbags abundant and unfair wealth. This may fly in New York City, but, where I come from, the One-Percenters are the baddest of all the bad asses, and they are not the people you want to f*ck with....
I was taught in my DARE classes not to come in contact with anyone bearing a 1% tattoo on their body, and  have found that many of my East Coast friends have never even heard of this group. Well, here are some:
Quick facts on the Original One-Percenters: (be careful who you f*ck with):

The clubs origins: Members wear this diamond shape patch over the hear of their leather jackets, the inspiration traced to 1947 when members of the "Pissed Off Bastards" (ha) and the "Boozefighters" motorcycle clubs showed up in Hollister, CA for an annual race which then got out of hand.
The Life Magazine story that followed provoked the American Motorcyclists Association to denounce the boozed-up bikers. It assured worried citizens that 99% of its members were law-abiding citizens, thereby marginalizing the remaining "1%" as outlaws. [Read More HERE]
More Facts:
  • They are a member of an Outlaw Motorcycle Club that has actually killed someone. (Translated: earning the "One Percenter" tattoo ain't easy.)
  • The most feared and respected riders roaming the blacktop, one percenters are a breed apart from all others. These individuals bow to no one, test the boundaries of all and give their devotion to few. [via SalemNews]
  • Could include a member from: The Hells Angels, Outlaws, Banditos, Pagans, Warlocks, etc.
  • How do you become a One-Percenter? "If you have to ask the question, you won't understand the answer. Only another one percenter can truly understand what belonging takes. [via]
  • They are outlaws of culture. [via]
More info on the "One percenter" on Wiki:
    Some outlaw motorcycle clubs can be distinguished by a 1% patch worn on the colors. This is claimed to be a reference to a comment made by the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) in which they stated that 99% of motorcyclists were law-abiding citizens, implying that the last one percent were outlaws. The comment, supposedly a response to the Hollister riot in 1947,[24][25] is denied by the AMA—who claim to have no record of such a statement to the press, and that the story is a misquotation.[26] As a result, some outlaw motorcycle clubs used it to unite or express themselves and are commonly referred to as "one percenters". According to the ATF they are also known as Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs or OMGs.[27]
And some more reading for you:
[One Percenter, the outlaw biker]
[Understanding the 1%]
[Hell's Angels by Hunter S. Thompson]
[Motocycle Gangs, Missouri State]
[List of Bikers Clubs That Identify As "One Percenters"]
Now that you have all you have all the information you need on the Original "One Percenters," you may want to think twice before throwing out the insults this week.
To recap:
This "One Percenter" is okay to f*ck with:

This one isn't:

You can egg this guy's Park Ave townhouse...

...but stay away from throwing anything at these dudes:

Babes of the Day - This is 18 and older. Rest assured I will offend you and rest assured I don't give a fuck! If you don't like crude hum or and think you will report me don't like my page. For those with the ability to laugh and take a joke welcome.

A RICO Primer

$
0
0
OFF THE WIRE
agingrebel.com
A RICO Primer
Many readers, including defense attorneys, continue to seem confused by RICO. The usual response to a RICO charge is, “How can they do this?” The following passages, from the book Out Bad, might help clear up some confusion.
From Out Bad
RICO was the centerpiece of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970. The law was written by a Senatorial aide named G. Robert Blakey, who is now the William and Dorothy O’Neill Professor of Law at Notre Dame. And, it is named for the fictional character Rico “Little Caesar” Bandello who was inhabited on film by Edward G. Robinson.
Robinson’s Rico character, in turn, was a parody of a notorious entrepreneur named Alphonse Gabriel “Scarface” Capone. “Every time a boy falls off a tricycle,” Capone once lamented, “every time a black cat has gray kittens, every time someone stubs a toe, every time there’s a murder or a fire or the Marines land in Nicaragua, the police and the newspapers holler ‘get Capone.’”
Capone regretted his reputation as a criminal. Starting in 1926 he tried to diversify into legitimate businesses. Eventually he discovered milk. “Honest to God, we’ve been in the wrong racket right along,” Capone exclaimed when he discovered that the profit margins were higher in milk than in whiskey. In February 1932, three months before he went to prison, Capone invested $50,000 in a legitimate business named Meadowmoor Dairies. In the 1960s the descendants of Capone liked to invest in bowling alleys because they were a good way to explain where the money came from. The upshot of that was that the main supplier of automatic pin setting machines, the AMF company, became prosperous enough to buy, and almost ruin, the Harley-Davidson company.
The original intent of the RICO statute – at least by the Congressmen who voted for it – was to protect legitimate dairies, bowling alleys and other businesses, from investment by thugs like Al Capone. That did not work because the threat posed to the nation by the Italian-American Mafia was always overblown and because as years went by the very same acts the Mafia had always been condemned for doing began to be accepted as standard business practice. The Mafia used to sell sin. The gangsters profited from gambling, usury, prostitution, liquor, drugs and theft. Now states, the nation, Indian tribes, rural counties in Nevada, credit card brands, mortgage lenders, banks in general and asset confiscating police all profit from exactly the same sins.
This may or may not be a good thing. It is certainly not something new in the American pageant. Wyatt Earp enforced the law for big banks and mining companies. Before that he was “muscle.” Before that he was a pimp. Honore de Balzac said, “Behind every great fortune there is a crime.” Crime used to be understood as a kind of cheating for personal gain. Now a crime is anything. Racketeering is anything. The point is to find an excuse to make people suffer.
RICO, as it has evolved, is not intended to punish what most people consider to be crimes, which is to say actions like murder, robbery or what Roman Polanski did to that 13-year-old girl – crimes that lawyers call malum in se. RICO is designed to punish crimes lawyers call malum prohibitum which is Latin for actions that are illegal because they are illegal – like possessing illegal intoxicants or talking on the telephone about illegal intoxicants or smoking in a public place or having a loud and embarrassingly ugly argument with your wife on a Saturday night.
RICO prosecutions virtually ignore malum in se crimes, the actions you have always thought to be a “crime,” although at least a dozen of those did occur or emerge during the Mongols investigation. The predicate crimes that RICO exploits are often trivial and are always state crimes that until 1982 would have been prosecuted in state courts. For example, after the Labor Day Murders, none of the Hells Angels who were charged were ever found guilty of the murders. They confessed to talking about the murders. They confessed to hating Mongols.
Turkette
Then, almost five years later, on June 17, 1981 the law changed. Congress did not write a new law. The United States Supreme Court did. In a case called United States v Turkette, the Supreme Court changed the meaning of an existing law, called the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations law, or RICO. The decision wasn’t even close. Conservatives and liberals agreed.
Turkette opened a philosophical and legal Pandora’s Box that redefined the meaning of words like “crime” and “racket;” and redefined whatever separation or connection might once have existed or not existed between local, state and federal crimes. Today a federal prosecutor can federalize virtually any crime he wants federalized. Under federal law punching somebody in the nose can be a “predicate crime.” This evolution of federal law also created a special circumstance under which defendants can be denied a presumption of innocence.
The Turkette decision changed the meaning of “criminal enterprise” away from a legitimate bar, bowling alley or labor union that had been corrupted by “the mob.” The Scheidler decision a decade later decreed that the “criminal enterprise” no longer had to exist for the purpose of making money. After Turkette and Scheidler, a class reunion could be a criminal enterprise. A federal prosecutor only had to imagine it.
Scheidler
National Organization of Women, Inc. v Scheidler was a civil RICO case brought on behalf of abortion providers against a political organization called Operation Rescue. Joseph Scheidler, for whom the decision is named was one of the leaders of Operation Rescue. Members believed that first-term abortion was morally wrong and should be legally prohibited. They protested outside abortion clinics and harassed and intimidated the women who tried to enter. There was a national consensus that members of Operation Rescue were loutish, cruel and unreasonable. The National Organization of Women accused them of being a racket.
“’We cannot tolerate the use of threats and force by one group to impose its views on others,’” NOW’s lawyer. Fay Clayton explained.
A Federal District judge, dismissed the case on the grounds that RICO could only be applied to “enterprises” motivated by financial gain. The Supreme Court overruled him. A racket could then be any group who members were contemptuous of the law. It was a great victory for federal policemen and prosecutors.
Professor G. Robert Blakely, who wrote the RICO Act and gave it its ironic name, lamented that he had never meant for his law to be applied to political and fraternal groups. He said he was “concerned” that after Scheidler RICO might be used against labor unions and other fringe groups like gay rights activists. Since Scheidler, RICO has been most commonly used a basis for the prosecution of outlaw motorcycle clubs.
RICO Praxis
There are several obvious reasons for the federal prosecution of state crimes. First, RICO allows the investigation of these local crimes by vast police bureaucracies like the ATF. These bureaucracies are self perpetuating and have virtually unlimited resources. All they need to persist are crimes to investigate and RICO provides that. Secondly, RICO allows federal prosecutors a legal fiction that can be used to connect what are actually, in reality, unconnected crimes into a vast, imaginary, criminal conspiracy. Additionally, RICO prosecutors do not have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendants actually committed the “predicate crimes” of which they are accused. State prosecutors do but RICO allows federal prosecutors to prove crimes by the civil standard which is a “preponderance of the evidence.” Finally, RICO provides a nice, secure, recession proof way for many lawyers, policemen, and prison guards to make a good living.
Under RICO, if Barack Obama, Henry Louis Gates and Angelina Jolie all like to attend an annual seminar together, and if three people at the seminar have committed two or more criminal predicates, like making a false statement to a federal official or shoplifting, they may be collectively and individually charged with racketeering. They could all be convicted of “the affecting interstate commerce” clause in the RICO law if they sent each other Christmas cards. And the penalty for that racketeering is twenty years in a federal prison.
Many bright and cynical people who should know better still blindly assume that what police do is investigate and solve real crimes. The opposite is true in racketeering investigations. What the ATF, particularly in biker investigations, does is find a way to tie crimes to many related individuals and then create crimes that can be used to prosecute them all. This law enforcement approach is called the “Enterprise Theory of Investigation” and it has a long and twisted history.
A sociologist named Edwin Sutherland coined the term “white collar crime” in the 1930s and wrote a book on the subject in 1949. Sutherland in essence, believed that all businessmen were criminals. With all the best of intentions, after the heartbreak of the Great Depression, Sutherland thought unethical businessmen should be treated worse than murderers. He thought they should be punished for their economic crimes so he advocated that a “person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation” should be presumed guilty until proven innocent. Sutherland also attacked the legal concept of mens rea, or guilty mind, which states that a person cannot be guilty of a crime unless he intends to commit a crime. Sutherland’s theories became popular in two seemingly disparate communities – academia and the FBI.
A Sutherland protégé named Donald Cressey created the “enterprise” concept that quickly became the Enterprise Theory of Investigation. Cressey was particularly not talking about bands of anti-materialistic, socially alienated bikers. He intended to oppose what he saw as social injustice. “The people of the business world are probably more criminalistic than the people of the slums,” he wrote in a book he co-authored with Sutherland. The idea of factoring wealth and privilege into the criminal justice equation was attractive to intellectuals. The federal police liked the parts that made prosecutions easier. Of course, in the manner of police bureaucracies everywhere, lest the amateurs know what the professionals are talking about, the Enterprise Theory of Investigation has become simply the ETI.
“The ETI has become the standard investigative model that the FBI employs in conducting investigations against major criminal organizations,” an FBI author explains. “Unlike traditional investigative theory, which relies on law enforcement’s ability to react to a previously committed crime, the ETI encourages a proactive attack on the structure of the criminal enterprise. Rather than viewing criminal acts as isolated crimes, the ETI attempts to show that individuals commit crimes in furtherance of the criminal enterprise itself. In other words, individuals commit criminal acts solely to benefit their criminal enterprise.”
The current idea of the criminal enterprise is very close to what Hannah Arendt meant when she wrote, “Classical totalitarianism predicts possible crimes on the basis of one’s status as an ‘objective enemy.’”
By “criminal enterprise,” the FBI author means any group any Federal Prosecutor decides to prosecute. The Catholic Church and the Boy Scouts of America have not yet been prosecuted as rackets because to do so would create a terrible public backlash. But there is no backlash when the organization is an outlaw motorcycle club. The Scheidler decision completed the legal magic trick by making the “financial motive” disappear.
In motorcycle club cases, in general and against the Mongols in particular, the government uses RICO to enforce a de facto “Bill of Attainder.” Bills, sometimes the word is “writs,” of Attainder are specifically prohibited by Article One, Clause three of the Constitution. This prohibition appears so early in the principal American law because it was one of the “rights” for which the revolutionaries fought and died. Technically, in America it is not illegal to belong to Al Qaeda, the Nazi party, the Ku Klux Klan, La Cosa Nostra, the Communist party or even a motorcycle club. In a case named Uphaus v Wyman in 1959, the Supreme Court called guilt by association “a thoroughly discredited doctrine.”
But RICO allows prosecutors to turn that ruling on its head. It is the same when mass media leads the general public to believe that motorcycle clubs, right wing militias and “cults” are criminal.
Motorcycle clubs are particularly prone to prosecution under RICO because that are so blatantly “organizations” and because their members tend to believe, as Harley-Davidson’s ad agency put it, “in bucking the system that’s built to smash individuals like bugs on a windshield.” More than tribes, more than thugs, motorcycle clubs are an American ideology. And, also for better or worse, a national consensus seems to be building that America is better for renouncing this ideology.
Under RICO, state crimes punishable by months or a year in jail can be punished like murders. RICO also allows the seizure of assets like motorcycles because, the indictments always allege, no motorcycles no motorcycle gang. The enterprise theory also allows indicia searches, which are searches for proof that someone actually belongs to a motorcycle club. In effect, these searches are house wrecking parties. They are inevitably very terrible. Doors and windows are blown open with explosives. Threats like pets are eliminated. Men are beaten and sometimes executed. Wives and children are roughed up. Much glass is broken. Family photo albums, computers and mementos are confiscated.
The nature and practice of modern policing and particularly of racketeering law may help readers understand the trivial nature of many of the charges made in the indictment against the Mongols. The fact that the Mongols are a gossipy family also worked against them because the men who infiltrated the club wrote down all of the gossip. The “preponderance of evidence” rule in RICO cases made that gossip more damning than it would ever be in an ordinary criminal case. The fact that club members often disagreed about Doc Cavazos gave undercover investigators an excuse to get members talking. And, in the end RICO meant that prosecutors didn’t have to use any of the mountains of “evidence” they had collected. They only had to threaten defendants with it. Actually, in many cases they didn’t even show defendants the “evidence.” In many cases prosecutors only alluded to the “evidence” or spread their arms wide and told public defenders the evidence was in two boxes “this big.”
Summing Up
Most of the nonsense that is written about motorcycle outlaws, that they are “international crime empires” and all of that, is based on an amalgamation of sixty years of American history and on a conflation of what most people understand to be the definition of racketeering with the technical, legal definition of racketeering. Most people understand racketeering, a term coined in the 1920s, to refer to something like “protection rackets” or corrupt labor unions, fixed horse races, loan sharking or the Countrywide Home Loan racket. But the Scheidler decision four years before had made it possible to convict almost any fringe group of racketeering.
Depending on where you draw the lines, there were at least four Mongols racketeering cases although subsequent RICO cases against the Pagans and the Outlaws resulted from the same investigation. The main case which began in one Los Angeles courtroom and eventually spread to another Los Angeles courtroom and a courtroom in Orange County, was named United States versus Cavazos and Others. A much smaller case called US versus Maestas and Others was adjudicated in Denver. The smallest racketeering case, against a lone Mongol, is called US versus Christopher Ablett and years after the Mongols bust it is still being contested in Oakland. The fourth case, a civil case over the matter of whether any cop can simply seize what he believes to be “Mongols paraphernalia” when he sees it, was called Ramon Rivera versus Ronnie A. Carter, Acting Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF); John A. Torres, Special Agent in Charge, ATF Los Angeles Field Division; and Eric H. Holder, United States Attorney General.
The obvious clumsiness of even naming the main court cases hints at, but does not begin to explain, why so little was written about the Mongols after the raids in October 2008. None of the usual biker experts has written about the investigation. The prosecution has been, for all practical purposes, secret. But the case is still important enough that even people who detest the Mongols and “their ilk” should know about it because it is a bright marker on the road of flight from the old to the new and improved America.
The point of Operation Black Rain was to put every outlaw in America out bad – to seize his cut, his motorcycle and his memorabilia, to rough him up, wreck his home, scare him and tell him “don’t come around this club no more.” It was, simultaneously emotionally, financially and legally devastating for the men involved. The point of the “enforcement effort” described in this book was never to punish “criminals.” The point was to crush a set of seductive, romantic, dangerous, and maybe obsolete, ideas.

CONTINUE READING
agingrebel.com
Viewing all 6498 articles
Browse latest View live