League of Women's Voters to discuss recent SCOTUS decision on Social Media Censorship
CHICAGO - Does the First Amendment allow U.S. government officials to intervene and prevent the spread of misinformation and disinformation on social media?
Jill Wine-Banks, a distinguished attorney and MSNBC Legal Analyst known for her prominence in political and legal discourse, is scheduled to speak about the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent action on social media censorship. This virtual event will take place on Tuesday, August 20, at 7 p.m. via Zoom. The program is free and is presented by the League of Women Voters of Illinois’ Mis/Disinformation Task Force.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently had an opportunity to rule on this question. Instead, they declined to issue decisions in two cases, punting them back to officials in Texas and Florida.
Among her many accomplishments, Wine-Banks was named General Counsel of the U.S. Army by President Carter, where she supervised what was, in essence, the world's largest law firm.
She started her legal career as the first woman to serve as an organized crime prosecutor at the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. Four years later, she was selected to be one of the three Assistant Watergate Special Prosecutors in the obstruction of justice trial against President Nixon's top aides. Nixon was named an unindicted co-conspirator in that case, but the evidence presented led to Nixon’s resignation.
In 2014, she was named by the Secretary of Defense to the Judicial Proceedings Panel’s Subcommittee on Sexual Assault in the military, where she served until 2017. She was also the first woman to serve as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the American Bar Association.
Those who wish to join the online talk can register for the event here.
To tackle the concerning increase in misinformation and disinformation, particularly its impact on our elections, the League of Women Voters of Illinois established the Mis/Disinformation Task Force in January 2024. The goal of the task force is to educate the public about misinformation and disinformation. For more information, please visit lwvil.org/misdis-info.
Five Illinois professors named University Scholars
CHAMPAIGN - Five University of Illinois professors at the Urbana-Champaign campus have been named University Scholars in recognition of their excellence in teaching, scholarship and service.
The recipients include Zeynep Madak-Erdogan, who is actively involved in the Cancer Center at Illinois. A professor in the study of food and nutrition, she served as a health innovation professor at the Carle Illinois College of Medicine and is an active member of the Center for Genomic Diagnostics at Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology.
Renowned history professor Robert Morrissey has gained widespread recognition nationally and internationally, positioning him as a prominent figure among eminent scholars in the fiercely competitive realm of early American history. In 2020, he played a pivotal role in the initiation of a groundbreaking collaborative initiative focused on art history and practice within Illinois-descended tribal communities.
Award-winning chemistry professor Joaquín Rodríguez-López, an outstanding research advisor mentoring 30 graduate students and 10 postdocs, created “The Electrochemistry Bootcamp,” which combines laboratory and classroom instruction on the basics of electrochemistry for a three-day immersive experience for young scientists from all over the world. He has been recognized five times as an outstanding teacher by his students and has also received the 2023 School of Chemical Sciences Teaching Award.
Jacob Sherkow has authored or co-authored more than 60 articles and essays, two books on COVID-19 innovation policy, four book chapters and many op-eds. The main body of his work focuses on intellectual property and medical therapies, agency regulation and the legal and ethical issues attendant to advanced biotechnologies. A law professor, he holds faculty appointments at the Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology, the Carle Illinois College of Medicine and the European Union Center. He has also advised major scientific organizations on bioethical issues, including the Adaptive Immune Receptor Repertoire Community and the New York Genome Center.
Hanghang Tong, has published more than 200 refereed papers and four books. A professor of computer science, he conducts highly influential research focused on large-scale data mining and machine learning, especially for graph and multimedia data. His work has theoretic and applicable impact, solving real-world problems from high-impact application domains where graph mining often plays a fundamental role, such as social networks, bioinformatics, security and e-commerce.
“When you consider the diversity of scholarship across all three of our universities and the standards of academic excellence that we nurture and grow through our recruitment of esteemed educators and researchers, all of our University Scholar recipients should be deservedly proud of the honor,” Nicholas Jones, the University of Illinois System’s executive vice president and vice president for academic affairs, said in today's statement.
The scholars program recognizes faculty excellence and provides $15,000 to each scholar for three years to enhance their academic careers. The money may be used for travel, equipment, research assistants, books, or other purposes.The scholars program recognizes faculty excellence and provides $15,000 to each scholar for three years to enhance their academic careers. The money may be used for travel, equipment, research assistants, books, or other purposes.
“The University Scholars program celebrates the remarkable achievements of the named individuals,” Jones added. “Our faculty represent the strong foundation of the world-class academic experience that contributes to the betterment of society and draws students and researchers to the U. of I. System universities from across the globe. The University Scholars are exemplars of that faculty excellence.
Commentary | Be careful walking after dark, the police may be scary
by Glenn Mollette, Guest Commentator
Recently, I was taking a late night walk in Owenton, Kentucky. Owenton is a little town of maybe six hundred people in rural north central Kentucky. I had just finished watching the sad Biden-Trump debate and decided that a walk and some ice cream sounded good.
I walked to our local convenience store which is about a half mile from where I was staying in Owenton. It was a beautiful summer night and I only saw two cars on the road in route to the store. I bought an ice cream bar and had it eaten within twenty steps of the store when the only car I saw on the way home pulled up beside me and someone asked, “Sir, are you alright?”
It was the local city police. I responded, “Yes sir, I’m doing fine.”
He asked, “Would you like a ride home?” To which I replied, “No sir, I’m just out for a walk.”
He then asked, “Have you been drinking?”
I replied, “No sir, just been eating a Snicker’s Ice Cream Bar.”
He continued, “Are you sure?”
“Yes sir, I’m sure.”
He then asked, “Where are you going?” I told him the street which was only about five more minutes of walking time.
I thought all was well as he and another policeman drove off but they made a U-turn and pulled right back up in front of me. The cop got out of the car and told me he wanted to do a breathalyzer test.
I’ve never had one in my life. I agreed to it. He was right in the middle of the street. I walked out to meet him and he told me to
blow into the straw. I complied. He shook his head because, of course, the test was negative.
The officer told me his name and I responded by telling him mine and we shook hands. He told me to be safe walking home. He then wanted to know exactly where I lived and I gave him the street name and house number.
As I walked up the street and neared home, I looked up. Once again, he and the other officer passed by. I suppose they were checking to see if I went where I said I was going.
This was really dramatic and over the top. I was simply taking a walk.
I wasn’t falling into the street or staggering from one side to the other. I was walking. He had no cause to stop and embarrass me but called me out into the middle of the street for a breathalyzer. Fortunately, not one car drove by while he was doing that. It’s a small town and no one was out at 11:10 at night.
Almost no one gets out and walks in this town. If anybody has to go to the local convenience store, they drive their car even it’s just a block or two. Thus, maybe the police thought if someone was out walking then surely the person had to be up to no good or intoxicated.
I’m, very supportive of the police. I’m appreciative of all who work to keep us safe. We need good police officers protecting us. However, this was ridiculous.
Don’t harass people just because you are bored and have nothing else to do.
I feel sorry for the many people in this nation who have been racially profiled for years. They are often pulled over because they are Black or a different nationality. Sometimes people are pulled over if they are driving a red sports car or if they are someone who is an “outsider.”
Often small towns can be very cliquish. If they don’t know who you are or if you are not “one” of the community residents then you are immediately profiled as an outsider and outsiders are often disliked, shunned or just treated badly.
Freedom to move about the country is a wonderful privilege. Let us be appreciative of our freedom this fourth of July week.
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
He is the author of 13 books including Uncommom Sense, the Spiritual Chocolate series, Grandpa's Store, Minister's Guidebook insights from a fellow minister. His column is published weekly in over 600 publications in all 50 states. The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group or organization. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.
Commentary |
State-Level marijuana legalization has been a stunning success
Contrary to some critics’ claims, legalization states have not experienced any spike in either psychosis or mental illnesses.
by Paul Armentano
It’s been over a decade since Colorado and Washington became the first two states to legalize marijuana for adults. With the benefit of hindsight, it’s fair to ask: Has this policy been successful?
Absolutely. A policy of legalization, regulation, and education is preferable to a policy of criminalization, stigmatization, and incarceration.
Let’s be clear. Legalization didn’t create or normalize the marijuana market in the United States. The market was already here.
Illustration by Gordon Johnson/Pixabay
By contrast, under regulation, cannabis products in many states are now available from licensed manufacturers at retail stores.
Cannabis is cultivated, and products are manufactured, in accordance with good manufacturing practices. Products are lab tested and labeled accordingly. And sales are taxed, with revenues being reinvested in the community. Since 2014, retail sales of adult-use cannabis products have generated more than $15 billion in tax revenue.
Most importantly, millions of Americans — many of them young adults — are no longer being arrested for possessing a substance that is objectively safer than either tobacco or alcohol.
According to data compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the annual number of marijuana-related arrests in the United States fell from 750,000 in 2012 to 227,000 in 2022, the last year for which data is available.
In short, these state-level policy changes have resulted in countless Americans being spared criminal records — and the lost opportunities that accompany them — in the past decade.
Teen use of cannabis has not grown with legalization. A CDC report says use has actually dropped among high school students.
Photo: Dimitri Bong/Unsplash
And contrary to opponents’ fears, cannabis use by teens has not risen in parallel with legalization.
According to data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the percentage of high schoolers who use marijuana actually fell 30 percent over the past decade. Compliance check data from California, Colorado, Nevada, and other legal marijuana states show that licensed marijuana retailers do not sell products to underage patrons.
Also contrary to some critics’ claims, legalization states have not experienced any spike in either psychosis or mental illnesses.
According to findings published last year in the Journal of the American Medical Association, rates of psychosis-related health care claims are no higher in jurisdictions where cannabis is legal than in those where it’s not. Stanford University researchers similarly reported last year that residents of states where cannabis is legal exhibit no higher levels of psychosis than those in non-legal states.
Legalization is also successfully disrupting the illicit marketplace. According to a 2023 survey, 52 percent of consumers residing in legal states said that they primarily sourced their cannabis products from brick-and-mortar establishments. By contrast, only 6 percent of respondents said that they primarily purchased cannabis from a “dealer.”
Many consumers in non-legal states also reported that they frequently traveled to neighboring legal states to purchase cannabis products rather than buying from illicit dealers in their own state.
Twelve years into states’ marijuana legalization experiment, public support for making marijuana legal nationwide has never been higher. To date, 24 states have legalized the adult-use market.
None of these states have ever repealed their legalization laws. That’s because these policies are working largely as voters and politicians intended — and because they’re preferable to cannabis criminalization.
After a century of failed policies and “canna-bigotry,” the verdict is in. Legalization is a success, and the end of cannabis prohibition can’t come soon enough.
Paul Armentano is the Deputy Director for NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. This op-ed was adapted from an earlier version published at The Hill and distributed for syndication by OtherWords.org.
Commentary |
Cash bail is unfair and violates the right to due process
Photo: Sasun Bughdaryan/Unsplash
Election years are a scary time for people of color in the U.S. They are marked by race-based voter suppression efforts, a rise in racist political rhetoric, and even a surge in racist hate crimes.
by Sonali Kolhatkar
Many Americans haven’t heard of cash bail. But the idea is central to an election year battle over racism, policing, and mass incarceration.
When arrested on suspicion of committing a crime, everyone in the United States has the right to due process and to defend themselves in court. But in a cash bail system, when judges set bail amounts, those who cannot pay the full amount remain jailed indefinitely — a clear violation of their due process rights — while the rich can pay their way out of jail.
A 2022 report by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights examined the impact of cash bail and found that between 1970 and 2015, the number of people jailed before trial increased by a whopping 433 percent.
There are currently about half a million such people stuck in jails across the nation who haven’t been tried or convicted of any crimes. The report also found “stark disparities with regards to race,” with Black and brown men most often subject to higher bail amounts.
Thankfully, many states and cities are moving to reform this unfair practice.
But in this election year, Republicans are rolling back these efforts — most recently in Georgia.
The state recently passed a bill expanding cash bail for 30 new crimes, some of which appear to be aimed at protesters, such as unlawful assembly. Further, it criminalizes charitable bail funds — and even individuals — that bail out people who can’t afford to bail out themselves.
Marlon Kautz, who runs the Atlanta Solidarity Fund, called cash bail “a loophole” in the criminal justice system, allowing courts to indefinitely jail people without charges if they cannot pay exorbitant bail amounts.
“Police, prosecutors, and politicians want a bail system that allows them to punish their political enemies, poor people, and people of color without trial,” said Kautz, whose fund has bailed out people protesting a massive new police training facility opponents call “Cop City.” Kautz was one of three people affiliated with the fund to be arrested on apparently politicized charges last year.
Reversing progress on bail reform is a new flashpoint in the GOP’s culture wars. “It could be a sign that Republicans intend to bash their Democratic opponents as soft on crime,” the Associated Press reported. Alongside Georgia, Republicans in Indiana, Missouri, and Wisconsin have introduced numerous bills expanding the use of cash bail.
Expanding the racist criminal justice system is a cynical GOP election-era ploy, one that has little to do with public safety.
“It is exceedingly rare for someone who’s released pretrial to be arrested and accused of a new offense that involves violence against another person,” said Sharlyn Grace, an official at the Cook County Public Defender’s office in Illinois. “Fears about public safety are in many ways greatly overblown and misplaced.”
“National studies contradict” the claim, the AP adds, that people are any less likely to show up for a court date if they’re released without bail.
Election years are a scary time for people of color in the U.S. They are marked by race-based voter suppression efforts, a rise in racist political rhetoric, and even a surge in racist hate crimes. The expansion of cash bail laws is yet another attack on Black and brown communities — one that must be exposed and confronted.
We shouldn’t let reform efforts fall victim to election year politics.
Sonali Kolhatkar is the host of “Rising Up With Sonali,” a television and radio show on Free Speech TV and Pacifica stations. This commentary was produced by the Economy for All project at the Independent Media Institute and adapted for syndication by OtherWords.org.
Some things to keep in mind when you need a law firm
StatePoint Media - Let’s face it, no person or business gets a thrill out of hiring a law firm. Fortunately, peer-reviewed rankings have simplified the process.
Best Lawyers, which has been tracking trends and innovations in the legal industry for more than four decades, serves as a trusted resource for identifying what it takes to be a preeminent law firm in the United States. Their recently released 14th annual rankings of Best Law Firms, found at bestlawfirms.com, provides keen insight, not only into the most successful law firms, but also the key factors to keep an eye out for when going through the reliably trying task of retaining counsel.
Here is some of Best Lawyers’ advice:
1. Does the firm use the latest technology?
Right now, even the legal profession is abuzz about generative Artificial Intelligence (gen AI) tools. With its ability to parse information more quickly, gen AI offers the immediate potential to automate routine tasks such as research; summarizing long, complex content; and writing first drafts of simple documents such as NDAs. All of which can save both time and money.
And smart firms are closely watching regulations and any risks that this new technology may bring, all while using it for the benefit of the firm and its clients.
2. What do other legal experts think about the way they do business?
There are better options available than just word of mouth when choosing legal representation. After all, hiring a law firm isn’t like choosing which novel to download next. Through Best Laywers’ research process, a firm’s performance is assessed by its peers, ultimately helping consumers make better-informed decisions.
Why is this important? At its heart, a robust peer-review process like Best Lawyers’ asks legal professionals to answer this key question: “If you had a legal issue and could not represent yourself, what firm would you hire?” This peer-review method is critical, and offers a straightforward way to help identify the most trusted firms.
3. Does the law firm embrace diversity?
Today’s leading law firms know that to be successful, the makeup of their staff should represent the communities they serve. Inclusion is a necessary element of well-rounded representation because a team with different backgrounds and experiences will bring diverse points of view to solving clients’ unique and complex challenges.
Fortunately, in recent years there has been an uptick in law firm diversity. In 2023, 21.6% of attorneys were members of traditionally underrepresented ethnic groups, according to an American Lawyer survey. That’s up more than 20% from the same survey just three years prior.
As a consumer, consider asking a law firm about its diversity track record. In fact, the best law firms will not only expect the question but welcome it.
Best Lawyers, which has been tracking trends and innovations in the legal industry for more than four decades, serves as a trusted resource for identifying what it takes to be a preeminent law firm in the United States. Their recently released 14th annual rankings of Best Law Firms, found at bestlawfirms.com, provides keen insight, not only into the most successful law firms, but also the key factors to keep an eye out for when going through the reliably trying task of retaining counsel.
Here is some of Best Lawyers’ advice:
1. Does the firm use the latest technology?
Right now, even the legal profession is abuzz about generative Artificial Intelligence (gen AI) tools. With its ability to parse information more quickly, gen AI offers the immediate potential to automate routine tasks such as research; summarizing long, complex content; and writing first drafts of simple documents such as NDAs. All of which can save both time and money.
And smart firms are closely watching regulations and any risks that this new technology may bring, all while using it for the benefit of the firm and its clients.
2. What do other legal experts think about the way they do business?
There are better options available than just word of mouth when choosing legal representation. After all, hiring a law firm isn’t like choosing which novel to download next. Through Best Laywers’ research process, a firm’s performance is assessed by its peers, ultimately helping consumers make better-informed decisions.
Why is this important? At its heart, a robust peer-review process like Best Lawyers’ asks legal professionals to answer this key question: “If you had a legal issue and could not represent yourself, what firm would you hire?” This peer-review method is critical, and offers a straightforward way to help identify the most trusted firms.
3. Does the law firm embrace diversity?
Today’s leading law firms know that to be successful, the makeup of their staff should represent the communities they serve. Inclusion is a necessary element of well-rounded representation because a team with different backgrounds and experiences will bring diverse points of view to solving clients’ unique and complex challenges.
Fortunately, in recent years there has been an uptick in law firm diversity. In 2023, 21.6% of attorneys were members of traditionally underrepresented ethnic groups, according to an American Lawyer survey. That’s up more than 20% from the same survey just three years prior.
As a consumer, consider asking a law firm about its diversity track record. In fact, the best law firms will not only expect the question but welcome it.
Last month's abortion pill ruling was a 'Political Stunt'
Planned Parenthood strongly believes the electorate will ultimately decide the issue
by Mark Richardson
Illinois News Connection
Illinois News Connection
Illinois - Women's health groups in Illinois and across the country are angered by a pair of federal court rulings last month on the abortion drug mifepristone.
A Texas judge's ruling rolled back the federal Food and Drug Administration's approval, effectively banning the drug.
The same day, a Washington State judge ruled the FDA must keep medication abortion drugs available in over a dozen Democratic-led states, including Illinois.
Everything is currently on hold while an appeals court sorts it out. Cristina Villarreal, chief of external affairs at Planned Parenthood of Illinois, said the Texas ruling was the result of "judge shopping" by anti-abortion groups.
"With the Texas case," said Villarreal, "it's kind of ridiculous that a judge in Texas can make decisions for people who can become pregnant in Illinois, where we have clearly said we support the right to choose."
Mifepristone was approved in 2000 by the FDA. The drug has been used by over 5 million patients.
However, in his ruling, Federal Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk suggests the FDA had not properly tested the drug and has ordered it off the market.
The U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year, essentially giving the power to states to regulate abortion access.
Since then, most "red" states have put restrictions on the procedure, while others have made abortions generally available.
Villarreal said Planned Parenthood strongly believes the electorate will ultimately decide the issue.
"In the ballot box, we've seen that voters are - again and again - trying to protect the right to choose," said Villarreal. "We know that the American public supports access to abortion care."
In the meantime, Villarreal said Planned Parenthood of Illinois will continue to offer all abortion-care options available.
Guest Commentary | America needs their police, we need good people wearing the badge
by Glenn Mollette, Guest Commentator
American citizens need police officers. Our state police, county sheriff’s department and city police all deserve our help, respect and decent pay. None of us like being recipients of speeding or other motor vehicle violations. However, often a warning or a ticket may be what it takes to get our attention and might even save our lives. When someone is threatening us we want the police. We expect them to come and help us. These are the men and women who often risk their lives to protect us. So, praise the good ones because they are deserving of honor. The defund the police movement has been fueled by horrific incidents such as when Minneapolis police murdered George Floyd on May 25, 2020. This cruel and disturbing murder has been replayed over and over on national television. Most recently the horrific killing of Tyre Nichols in Memphis, Tennessee has fanned the flames of police hatred. These and other police brutality events continue to severely damage the image of America’s police forces. The behavior of five Memphis police officers toward Mr. Nichols was beyond criminal. This does not justify defunding the police. Such behavior reinforces the need that all those in law enforcement must have routine mental health tests. Only qualified people who have been thoroughly examined and trained should ever be allowed to wear a badge. Training and mental health evaluations must be ongoing. The Five former Memphis police officers were charged with murder over the death of Tyre Nichols but pled not guilty in their first court appearance. The arrest of Mr. Nichols on January 7 has been reported throughout the national media. They were fired after an internal investigation by the Memphis Police Department. "Memphis and the whole world need to see that what's right is done in this case, and it needs to happen sooner rather than later," lead prosecutor Paul Hagerman told reporters. The officers were arrested and taken into custody on January 26, after the Memphis police reviewed bodycam footage of the violent arrest. In the footage, 29-year-old Mr. Nichols can be heard calling for his mother as he is beaten by police after being pulled over for alleged reckless driving. He was pepper-sprayed, kicked and punched by the officers and died in hospital three days later. Memphis Police Chief Cerelyn Davis said the incident was "not just a professional failing", but "a failing of basic humanity toward another individual". (Source BBC news) I believe that 99 percent of the men and women wearing badges are good people who are looking out for our welfare and safety. The actions of a few should not discredit all law enforcement. Whether it’s politics, medical doctors, attorneys, business persons and more there are always a few bad apples that make others look bad. Police officers have the upper hand. They have a badge and a gun. We should give them respect and they should respect all citizens. Having a badge never gives any law enforcement officer the right to pour out their frustrations, racial hatreds or their own personal demons on another citizen. No one is ever in a position to put up a defense as sadly shown by Tyre Nichols, George Floyd and too many others.
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
American citizens need police officers. Our state police, county sheriff’s department and city police all deserve our help, respect and decent pay. None of us like being recipients of speeding or other motor vehicle violations. However, often a warning or a ticket may be what it takes to get our attention and might even save our lives. When someone is threatening us we want the police. We expect them to come and help us. These are the men and women who often risk their lives to protect us. So, praise the good ones because they are deserving of honor. The defund the police movement has been fueled by horrific incidents such as when Minneapolis police murdered George Floyd on May 25, 2020. This cruel and disturbing murder has been replayed over and over on national television. Most recently the horrific killing of Tyre Nichols in Memphis, Tennessee has fanned the flames of police hatred. These and other police brutality events continue to severely damage the image of America’s police forces. The behavior of five Memphis police officers toward Mr. Nichols was beyond criminal. This does not justify defunding the police. Such behavior reinforces the need that all those in law enforcement must have routine mental health tests. Only qualified people who have been thoroughly examined and trained should ever be allowed to wear a badge. Training and mental health evaluations must be ongoing. The Five former Memphis police officers were charged with murder over the death of Tyre Nichols but pled not guilty in their first court appearance. The arrest of Mr. Nichols on January 7 has been reported throughout the national media. They were fired after an internal investigation by the Memphis Police Department. "Memphis and the whole world need to see that what's right is done in this case, and it needs to happen sooner rather than later," lead prosecutor Paul Hagerman told reporters. The officers were arrested and taken into custody on January 26, after the Memphis police reviewed bodycam footage of the violent arrest. In the footage, 29-year-old Mr. Nichols can be heard calling for his mother as he is beaten by police after being pulled over for alleged reckless driving. He was pepper-sprayed, kicked and punched by the officers and died in hospital three days later. Memphis Police Chief Cerelyn Davis said the incident was "not just a professional failing", but "a failing of basic humanity toward another individual". (Source BBC news) I believe that 99 percent of the men and women wearing badges are good people who are looking out for our welfare and safety. The actions of a few should not discredit all law enforcement. Whether it’s politics, medical doctors, attorneys, business persons and more there are always a few bad apples that make others look bad. Police officers have the upper hand. They have a badge and a gun. We should give them respect and they should respect all citizens. Having a badge never gives any law enforcement officer the right to pour out their frustrations, racial hatreds or their own personal demons on another citizen. No one is ever in a position to put up a defense as sadly shown by Tyre Nichols, George Floyd and too many others.
Dr. Glenn Mollette is a syndicated American columnist and author of Grandpa's Store, American Issues, and ten other books. He is read in all 50 states. The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group or organization.
This article is the sole opinions of the author and does not necessarily reflect the views of The Sentinel. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.
The person who investigates suspicious deaths in your town may not even be a doctor
by Samantha Young
Kaiser Health News
Kaiser Health News
When a group of physicians gathered in Washington state for an annual meeting, one made a startling revelation: If you ever want to know when, how — and where — to kill someone, I can tell you, and you'll get away with it. No problem.
That's because the expertise and availability of coroners, who determine cause of death in criminal and unexplained cases, vary widely across Washington, as they do in many other parts of the country.
Photo: Gerd Altmann/Pixabay
"A coroner doesn't have to ever have taken a science class in their life," said Nancy Belcher, chief executive officer of the King County Medical Society, the group that met that day.
Her colleague's startling comment launched her on a four-year journey to improve the state's archaic death investigation system, she said. "These are the people that go in, look at a homicide scene or death, and say whether there needs to be an autopsy. They're the ultimate decision-maker," Belcher added.
Each state has its own laws governing the investigation of violent and unexplained deaths, and most delegate the task to cities, counties, and regional districts. The job can be held by an elected coroner as young as 18 or a highly trained physician appointed as medical examiner. Some death investigators work for elected sheriffs who try to avoid controversy or owe political favors. Others own funeral homes and direct bodies to their private businesses.
The various titles used by death investigators don't distinguish the discrepancies in their credentials.
Overall, it's a disjointed and chronically underfunded system — with more than 2,000 offices across the country that determine the cause of death in about 600,000 cases a year.
"There are some really egregious conflicts of interest that can arise with coroners," said Justin Feldman, a visiting professor at Harvard University's FXB Center for Health and Human Rights.
Belcher's crusade succeeded in changing some aspects of Washington's coroner system when state lawmakers approved a new law last year, but efforts to reform death investigations in California, Georgia, and Illinois have recently failed.
Rulings on causes of death are often not cut-and-dried and can be controversial, especially in police-involved deaths such as the 2020 killing of George Floyd. In that case, Minnesota's Hennepin County medical examiner ruled Floyd's death a homicide but indicated a heart condition and the presence of fentanyl in his system may have been factors. Pathologists hired by Floyd's family said he died from lack of oxygen when a police officer kneeled on his neck and back.
In a recent California case, the Sacramento County coroner's office ruled that Lori McClintock, the wife of congressman Tom McClintock, died from dehydration and gastroenteritis in December 2021 after ingesting white mulberry leaf, a plant not considered toxic to humans. The ruling triggered questions by scientists, doctors, and pathologists about the decision to link the plant to her cause of death. When asked to explain how he made the connection, Dr. Jason Tovar, the chief forensic pathologist who reports to the coroner, said he reviewed literature about the plant online using WebMD and Verywell Health.
The various titles used by death investigators don't distinguish the discrepancies in their credentials. Some communities rely on coroners, who may be elected or appointed to their offices, and may — or may not — have medical training. Medical examiners, on the other hand, are typically doctors who have completed residencies in forensic pathology.
In 2009, the National Research Council recommended that states replace coroners with medical examiners, describing a system "in need of significant improvement."
Massachusetts was the first state to replace coroners with medical examiners statewide in 1877. As of 2019, 22 states and the District of Columbia had only medical examiners, 14 states had only coroners, and 14 had a mix, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The movement to convert the rest of the country's death investigators from coroners to medical examiners is waning, a casualty of coroners' political might in their communities and the additional costs needed to pay for medical examiners' expertise.
The push is now to better train coroners and give them greater independence from other government agencies.
"When you try to remove them, you run into a political wall," said Dr. Jeffrey Jentzen, a former medical examiner for the city of Milwaukee and the author of "Death Investigation in America: Coroners, Medical Examiners, and the Pursuit of Medical Certainty."
Lawmakers "didn't want their names behind something that will get the sheriffs against them," Collins said.
"You can't kill them, so you have to help train them," he added.
There wouldn't be enough medical examiners to meet demand anyway, in part because of the time and expense it takes to become trained after medical school, said Dr. Kathryn Pinneri, president of the National Association of Medical Examiners. She estimates there are about 750 full-time pathologists nationwide and about 80 job openings. About 40 forensic pathologists are certified in an average year, she said.
"There's a huge shortage," Pinneri said. "People talk about abolishing the coroner system, but it's really not feasible. I think we need to train coroners. That's what will improve the system."
Her association has called for coroners and medical examiners to function independently, without ties to other government or law enforcement agencies. A 2011 survey by the group found that 82% of the forensic pathologists who responded had faced pressure from politicians or the deceased person's relatives to change the reported cause or manner of death in a case.
Dr. Bennet Omalu, a former chief forensic pathologist in California, resigned five years ago over what he described as interference by the San Joaquin County sheriff to protect law enforcement officers.
"California has the most backward system in death investigation, is the most backward in forensic science and in forensic medicine," Omalu testified before the state Senate Governance and Finance Committee in 2018.
San Joaquin County has since separated its coroner duties from the sheriff's office.
The Golden State is one of three states that allow sheriffs to also serve as coroners, and all but 10 of California's 58 counties combine the offices. Legislative efforts to separate them have failed at least twice, most recently this year.
AB 1608, spearheaded by state Assembly member Mike Gipson (D-Carson), cleared that chamber but failed to get enough votes in the Senate.
"We thought we had a modest proposal. That it was a first step," said Robert Collins, who advocated for the bill and whose 30-year-old stepson, Angelo Quinto, died after being restrained by Antioch police in December 2020.
The Contra Costa County coroner's office, part of the sheriff's department, blamed Quinto's death on "excited delirium," a controversial finding sometimes used to explain deaths in police custody. The finding has been rejected by the American Medical Association and the World Health Organization.
When something like this affects rural areas, if they push back a little bit, we just stop.
Lawmakers "didn't want their names behind something that will get the sheriffs against them," Collins said. "Just having that opposition is enough to scare a lot of politicians."
The influential California State Sheriffs' Association and the California State Coroners Association opposed the bill, describing the "massive costs" to set up stand-alone coroner offices.
Many Illinois counties also said they would shoulder a financial burden under similar legislation introduced last year by state Rep. Maurice West, a Democrat. His more sweeping bill would have replaced coroners with medical examiners.
Rural counties, in particular, complained about their tight budgets and killed his bill before it got a committee hearing, he said.
"When something like this affects rural areas, if they push back a little bit, we just stop," West said.
Proponents of overhauling the system in Washington state — where in small, rural counties, the local prosecutor doubles as the coroner — faced similar hurdles.
The King County Medical Society, which wrote the legislation to divorce the two, said the system created a conflict of interest. But small counties worried they didn't have the money to hire a coroner.
So, lawmakers struck a deal with the counties to allow them to pool their resources and hire shared contract coroners in exchange for ending the dual role for prosecutors by 2025. The bill, HB 1326, signed last year by Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee, also requires more rigorous training for coroners and medical examiners.
"We had some hostile people that we talked to that really just felt that we were gunning for them, and we absolutely were not," Belcher said. "We were just trying to figure out a system that I think anybody would agree needed to be overhauled."
This story was produced by KHN, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.
KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.
Northern Ireland agency could be a model for US juvenile-justice system
by Jonah Chester, Illinois News Connection
As lawmakers in Illinois and across the nation consider reforms to the nation's juvenile-justice system, one country across the Atlantic could serve as a model.
Northern Ireland's Youth Justice Agency places an emphasis on early diversion, community involvement and restorative justice.
Kelvin Doherty, assistant director of the Agency, said the goal is to keep kids out of police custody and prevent them from building a criminal record.
"Let's address these concerns and these issues before the police are called, and before they get into a court setting," Doherty urged.
Doherty pointed out the restorative-justice process can take one of several paths: including a simple apology, community service or mental-health treatment. According to data from the Youth Justice Agency, more than 97% of victims said they are satisfied with the restorative-justice process.
The Youth Justice Agency was established in 2002, and was born out of the Good Friday Agreement. Doherty explained the program was part of a multipronged effort to modernize Northern Ireland's justice system.
"And the modernization process said, well, for a new justice system in Northern Ireland, it has to be not just about children and reducing reoffending," Doherty explained. "But it also has to be for victims and for communities as well."
From April 2020 to April 2021, Northern Ireland's Justice Department saw a nearly 17% decline in cases where kids came into contact with the criminal-justice system.
Doherty noted early diversion and support programs, typically used when the child is between 10 and 12 years old, can help prevent kids from coming into contact with the criminal-justice system down the line.
"Problems can be resolved in the child's life before they get worse," Doherty asserted. "And it has a better outcome for agencies and service providers, because it often involves less effort and more success, the earlier you are intervening or diverting children within the justice system."
According to the Children's Defense Fund, nearly 2,000 children are arrested in America every day. While the organization noted the overall number of kids in the juvenile-justice system was halved from 2007 to 2020, severe racial disparities persist, as children of color are nearly two times more likely to be arrested than white children.
Halloween rules in some Illinois cities are no treat
by Dylan Sharkey, Illinois Policy
Put on a costume, grab a bag and get free treats? It’s not so simple in Illinois, where cities’ Halloween rules restrict the simple fun.
There are tricks to getting treats on Halloween in Illinois – some are old rules in cities trying to stop some long-forgotten issue, and others are recent from communities that won’t trust residents to make good choices about COVID-19.
Oak Brook, Elmhurst, Western Springs and La Grange are among towns that set hours for trick-or-treating, starting at 2 or 3 p.m. and ending no later than 8 p.m.
Darien and Downers Grove don’t set hours, but recommend no trick-or-treating when it’s dark outside. (Trick-or-treating after dark? The horrors!)
The village of Hinsdale is offering residents premade yard signs: One welcoming trick-or-treaters, one telling costumed kids to get off their lawn and one asking that they wear a mask. Masks from a costume don’t count.
"If your costume has a mask, it must prevent the spread of aerosols from your mouth and nose to qualify. Social distancing of at least 6 feet is recommended whenever possible. Wait for trick-or-treaters ahead of you to leave the home before proceeding for your treat," Hinsdale city leaders advised aerosol-emitting youngsters.
Forsyth, just outside Decatur, imposes a $750 fine for approaching a house with no porch lights on for free candy.
Belleville has an age restriction: nobody older than 12 can trick-or-treat. If caught committing "Halloween Solicitation," they can face a fine of up to $1,000.
Kids should make sure they research their local ordinances before hitting the streets on Halloween. Just allowing parents to set the rules is too scary for some places.
Photo: Jill Wellington/Pexels
How rape affects memory, and why police need to know about that brain science
By Sammy Caiola, Capital Public Radio
Annie Walker woke up one morning in 2019 with little recollection of the night before. She had bruises on her arms, legs, wrist and lower abdomen.
"But I literally had no idea what had happened," she said. "And, for days, I was trying to put the pieces together."
She knew she had gone to a Sacramento, California, bar and restaurant with a group of people, and she remembered drinking there and being left alone with the man she’d later identify as her rapist. But not much else.
Memories she couldn't summon that first morning gradually came into focus over days and weeks, she said. The emerging details included what the man had been wearing, and the way he shoved her against the bar. One week after the attack, she reported the crime to the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department.
Then, in the days after making the report, another wave of memories surfaced — she recalled, vividly, that the man had raped her and had a weapon.
"I knew that there was a gun at my neck, at my back," she said. "It was just clear."
The detectives gave her a hard time, she said, when she called to report that she had remembered that her attacker had a gun. The Sacramento detectives assigned to Walker's case didn’t seem to understand why she couldn’t remember all the details right away.
Walker’s alleged perpetrator was never arrested.
"I felt like I was just extremely cross-examined on the phone. Like, 'Why didn’t you remember a gun? That's, like, a really important thing.'"
Sexual assault survivors say interactions with law enforcement can be so intense, and so unsympathetic, that they add secondary trauma. Reporting a rape can be especially traumatic when officers cast doubt on victims’ stories.
But it doesn't have to be, say scientists and scholars of criminal justice. If police gain a deeper understanding of what’s going on in the brain during and after a rape, they can change the way they approach rape cases and avoid making survivors feel blamed or disbelieved.
Scientists who study trauma and memory say it's common for sexual assault survivors — as well as survivors of other serious traumas — to be unable to recall an attack fully. They might remember certain facts but not others, or struggle to recall events in the correct sequence.
When law enforcement officers aren't aware of the neuroscience of trauma, or have no training to deal with it, there’s a tendency to dismiss or disbelieve victims who experience memory gaps, according to scholars and advocates for sexual assault survivors.
"There’s a real danger when investigators are asking people for information that was never encoded or has been lost," said Harvard University psychologist Jim Hopper. "They can stress out the victim, leave them feeling misunderstood, incompetent, not wanting to further engage with the investigation."
Walker's alleged perpetrator was never arrested. And she's still frustrated with the way detectives put pressure on her to remember details during the investigation.
The Brain in Survival Mode
When confronted with a crisis, the brain often activates its "fight, flight or freeze" response. In these scenarios, the brain’s "defense circuitry" takes over, explained Hopper. The prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for logical decision-making, is no longer in control and, instead, the areas of the brain responsible for scanning for danger take charge.
"And that's what people are running on" when trauma happens, Hopper said.
Some people respond by mentally "dissociating," or disconnecting from their physical selves. That survival response affects the ability to absorb what’s happening around them, Hopper said.
Studies on memory and recall during a traumatic event describe two types of details: central and peripheral. Central details are those that capture our attention and evoke emotions in the moment, such as a location. Peripheral details are those that a survivor might not have been paying attention to during the crisis, such as something the perpetrator said or whether other people were present. Central details tend to be stored more reliably and for longer than peripheral details.
Every day in courtrooms around the country, [defense attorneys] attack and question the credibility of victims
Sometimes survivors are unable to answer what might seem like a simple question if it involves a peripheral detail like the color of the attacker’s shirt. And Hopper said that can make officers suspicious.
Hopper, who gives legal testimony in sexual assault cases, said victims are often held to unfair standards, even compared with other trauma survivors.
"Every day in courtrooms around the country, [defense attorneys] attack and question the credibility of victims of sexual assault for having the same kind of memories that soldiers have for their combat experiences," he said.
Victim advocates and criminal justice scholars say it’s important for detectives to be open to anything a survivor might say, whenever they say it — even if those details were not available in an initial report — because the information survivors provide later can be helpful for solving the crime.
Maintaining an Open Mind
Nicole Monroe, a police detective in Elk Grove, a suburb of Sacramento, said she and some of her colleagues have gotten additional education on brain science, and it has changed the way they approach sexual assault cases.
Monroe tells victims she works with that more memories will continue to surface in the days, weeks and even months to come.
"Smells will come back. Sights will come back. When you think of these things, give me a call and let me know, so that it can be added,” Monroe said. "Because little things like that are going to make a difference."
Traditionally, law enforcement officers are trained to conduct an interrogation that may involve drawing out specific details, usually in chronological order.
"The expectation is someone is supposed to come in, sit down, they’re supposed to be ready to talk, they’re supposed to know what to talk about," said Carrie Hull, a former detective with the Ashland Police Department in southern Oregon. "They're going to tell you what happened to them from the beginning, through the middle, and then the end. That is a very traditional understanding."
Hull is now a consultant for police departments, and part of her work involves advocating for the adoption of a technique known as Forensic Experiential Trauma Interviewing, or FETI. The training can help law enforcement learn how to ask questions differently: with empathy, patience and an informed understanding of how a traumatized brain makes memories and recalls them. Training in the technique is available through an online course, but it’s not a mandatory requirement for most police departments.
People who take Hull's course learn specific strategies for helping someone resurface a relevant memory that he or she may not have had access to when they first walked into the interview room. Hull said FETI discourages counterproductive practices such as paraphrasing, changing the victim’s words, interrupting or giving advice.
Hull said the overarching goal of trauma interviewing is to first "collect the dots, then connect the dots." In other words, simply interview the victim about what happened. The sharper, more aggressive investigative tactics can wait.
There isn’t research proving that law enforcement departments who take this training solve more rape cases. But victim advocates and scholars said it's a best practice that could make working with police a more positive experience for victims and, eventually, help bring more perpetrators to justice.
"If I had my way, every one of them would be doing this," said Dave Thomas, a program officer with the International Association of Chiefs of Police.
Annie Walker is still struggling to recover from her sexual assault, but it's complicated because she’s also healing from the way law enforcement handled her case. She said both police officers and survivors need more education on the way trauma affects memory.
She said if survivors knew what to expect in terms of memory issues, it wouldn’t be so frustrating. "They need to feel like the way that things are happening in their mind is normal. Normal for them."
This story is from a partnership that includes CapRadio, NPR and KHN.
KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.
A good reason to not leave your kids "Home Alone" in Illinois
by Joe Barnas, Writer
Illinois Policy
Could Illinois parents who leave their eighth grader at home alone, or allow them to be unsupervised at the local park, find themselves under investigation by the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, or even under arrest?
A vague and restrictive state law could mean the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services comes knocking if parents leave their 13-year-old home alone.
Joe Barnas is a writer at the Illinois Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research organization that promotes responsible government and free market principles. Originally published December 23, 2020.
ViewPoint | Illinois political priorities are a wreck
Dear Editor:
Governor Pritzker considers marijuana "essential". He must believe that being high is fundamental to survival. Whatever his reasoning, he has done a great injustice to Illinois families, especially in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.
COVID-19 is a greater threat to those with a weakened immune system or impaired lung function. There’s ample evidence that regular use of marijuana lowers immunity and damages the lungs.
"There is evidence that marijuana smoke is genotoxic, immunosuppressive, and can alter endocrine function… Prolonged exposures to marijuana smoke in animals and humans cause proliferative and inflammatory lesions in the lung," research from California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.
"Cellular immunity is impaired, pulmonary immunity is impaired, and the impaired ability to fight infection is now documented in humans," according to research from the The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.
A "multitude of toxic microorganisms, many of which are known causes of serious lung infections, including Cryptococcus, Mucor, and Aspergillus fungi and Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter baumannii bacteria" are found in so-called "medical" marijuana, according to UC at Davis. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, titled, "A microbiome assessment of medical marijuana."
There’s also the issue of increased risk of psychosis, increased risk of traffic fatalities, increased hospitalizations, increased use by children, and the consequences go on.
Illinois political priorities are a wreck.
Kathy Valente, Director of Operations
Illinois Family Institute
Illinois Family Institute
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)