Discussion recently with colleagues and contemporaries became somewhat heated over the attempted terrorist takeover and attack on the U.S. Capitol last week on Wednesday, January 6th. There was unanimous accord that the “breaking and entering” of the congressional building and the seat of the United States government was wrong. Others questioned the 4th amendment right to privacy in the on-going use of Federal and state investigators using facial recognition systems & technology in their pursuit of the suspects involved and responsible for the destruction and deaths. There was argument over the use of the technology when it came to the acquisition of this data from the social networks such as Twitter, Facebook, Tic-Tok, et al. in their investigations.
The question of precedence arose from the matter involving subpoenaed potential evidence from businesses, who have surveillance systems and specifically social media who for a greater part of the digital images and video that are sent from consumers to their networks.
This contention over privacy in the context of the U.S. Constitution and the 4th Amendment will invariably be filed by the defendants in their defense whose content and data clearly incriminates them.
There are also questions regarding the compliance of the businesses who own, by virtue of their required compliant TOS (Terms of Service) the data held and stored, and of those who use these online businesses; up to and including businesses that are not online entities.
The attack on the capitol was clearly a criminal terrorist attack and there is no question of this from the current publicized television/cable broadcasted images and footage of this terrible event in U.S. history. However, the question begs to what degree and to what legal remedy can this be used in the prosecution of those who participated in the attack and with violent intent.
There are those who argue that the subsequent precedence in the use of the technology will and shall result in dire consequences to ‘freedom’ and privacy rights. And there are those who declare that precedence has already been established in the digital forensic investigations, prosecutions and imprisonment of defendants in the past. Not to mention potential and admitted into evidence data held by witnesses, and other private individuals on their own devices.
The attack on the Capitol will once again test Article IV (and perhaps others) in the Bill of Rights however it’s common knowledge and a natural fact that those may see this as a last ditch aegis to spare them from imprisonment may be moot. As moot as their reason to try to ‘protest’ in wanton deadly defiance of the certified and legal election of President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris, and predicated on a lies, deceit and propaganda from the last general election loser, Donald J. Trump.
And an online #GoFundMe page or even a pre-pardon _ [*insert canned laughter] _ by Trump may not be sufficient in their legal defense.
Some time back this film was a recommend to watch by a friend whose father had passed away. For years the DVD Remember it sat unseen on a shelf until was asked if I’d seen it. It is a dark and solemnly tale of a man in search of those who had murdered his family during World War II in the Nazi concentration camp in Auschwitz, Poland.
Christopher Plummer of The Sound of Music (1965) fame, Jürgen Prochnow of Dune (1984) and Martin Landau of the Mission Impossible television series of the 60’s made this somewhat a film with an all-star billing and in retrospect a very interesting flick with several twists and turns that kept the imagination piqued.
The most intriguing scene in the movie was when “Zev” arrives at the home of one of the Nazi SS officers he was targeting. He then learns that “Rudy Kurlander” had since passed away from his son who invites him into the home and where Zev finds many startling things about the past in Kurlander. Yet, as he found by the son to be Jew things turn violent and in getting the upper-hand Zev was able to continue with his quest to find this elusive Kurlander.
As the tale unfolds Zev finds himself traveling across country and crossing the border into Canada which upon arrival was quite interesting if not somewhat incredulous, especially when as it was not portrayed how he got back into the country. Another were the numerous phone calls between he and “Max” played by Landau had him continuing on this quest, and how their relationship prior and all throughout continued to be as one where the ‘blind was leading the blind.’
The acting in this movie was above par and given the performance of the cast it gave a surreal glimpse of what the experience of deceit, determination, revenge, and aging entails. The nuance of the script and screenplay was one that earned an above average reception in review. And the memory of this film is one to be “remembered,” with no pun intended – given the times we now live.
At any rate the ending should come as an unexpected, yet tragic surprise.
Attorney for Jake Angeli, aka “QAnon Shaman” wants a pardon from Donald Trump . .
On CNN’s “Cuomo Prime Time” Chris Cuomo began his interview with the “Shaman’s” attorney. After a number of audio issues the interview turned to one by phone . .
His attorney, Albert Watkins said, “Trump needs to stand up and own these people. He owes them an obligation .. “
Isn’t accepting a ‘pardon’ an admission of guilt?