Hawaii Personal Injury Blog - crime

Court ordered to preserve Pennsylvania youth offenders' records.

Wayne Parsons — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:04:43 GMT

The AP (7/27) reported, "A federal judge was asked Monday to preserve thousands of juvenile court records in a Pennsylvania judicial scandal -- evidence of wrongdoing that the state Supreme Court has declared should be destroyed. The high court's plan to delete more than 6,000 records will prevent youths in northeastern Pennsylvania from pursuing federal civil rights claims against a corrupt judge and keep secret the extent of the judge's misconduct, lawyers for some of the children asserted in federal court." A previous court order "failed to cover youths who aren't part of the litigation, but who may be entitled to damages if the case is certified a class action." The New York Times (7/28, A10, Urbina) also covered the story.

Sources say bribery case only the "tip of the iceberg." In a 2000-word article, the Legal Intelligencer (7/27, Grezlak, Strupczewski) reported, "While the federal government's case against former Judges bcenters on their roles in taking money from attorney Robert Powell, the co-owner, and Robert Mericle, the builder, of a juvenile detention facility and the judges' alleged abuse of the rights of juveniles sentenced to the facility, sources close to the investigation and inside Luzerne County say the scam some in the media have labeled 'kids for cash' was just the tip of the iceberg and only the most blatant example of the corruption overseen by the two judges." The two judges "ran the courthouse like a mafia family, according to several sources. And while The Legal has previously reported Conahan's ties to admitted felons, including reputed mob boss William 'Billy' D'Elia, multiple sources have said that Conahan's links to organized crime go back decades."

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

Is A Social Networking Website Like MySpace Responsible For a Rape That Occurs Between Users? A California Court Says "No"!

Wayne Parsons — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 02:57:29 GMT

The San Francisco Chronicle (7/2, B3, Egelko) reports, "Girls who were sexually assaulted by men they first contacted on MySpace cannot seek damages from the social-networking Web site, which is protected from liability by federal law, a state appeals court has ruled. The decision by the Second District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles rejected claims by the parents of four girls who were 13 to 15 years old when they posted their profiles on MySpace." The parents "argued that the girls could have been protected if MySpace had used age-verification software or had taken other steps to shield their accounts from sexual predators. But the court said Tuesday that the 1996 federal Communications Decency Act prohibits suits against any interactive computer site that merely posts messages written by others."

Section 230 of The 1996 federal Communications Decency Act provides:

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996) is a landmark piece of Internet legislation in the United States, codified at 47 U.S.C. § 230. Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an "interactive computer service" who publish information provided by others:

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

In analyzing the availability of the immunity offered by this provision, courts generally apply a three-prong test. A defendant must satisfy each of the three prongs to gain the benefit of the immunity:

The defendant must be a "provider or user" of an "interactive computer service."

The cause of action asserted by the plaintiff must "treat" the defendant "as the publisher or speaker" of the harmful information at issue.

The information must be "provided by another information content provider," i.e., the defendant must not be the "information content provider" of the harmful information at issue.

Is this right? Do you agree or do you think that the social media companies share responsibility for bringing evil and vulnerable together? If it was club in your town that brought young women into contact with potential rapists would you say that is okay? My example looks a lot like many singles bars that are perfectly acceptable in our society.

One final note. The purpose of the Act is listed at the beginning:

To promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices and higher quality services for American telecommunications consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies.

It seems that the purpose was to make more money for the social technology companies. This ruling will help accomplish that goal.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

Financial Misconduct Alert No. 1: Illegal Loan Modification Schemes

Wayne Parsons — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 10:22:00 GMT

As Foreclosures rise desperate homeowners are being victimized by illegal or misleading offers of help from a myriad of companies. The companies often charge up front fees and lull frightened homeowners into thinking that they can get relief from their mortgage when it is highly unlikely any help will be forthcoming. In a time of city riots or natural disasters they call this "looting". In 2009 it is called financial misconduct.

As reported in Boston.com last week:

The Obama administration announced a multi-agency effort yesterday to combat loan modification scams, which government officials said are preying on distressed homeowners searching for help.

Financial crooks are attempting to trick homeowners looking for help from the Obama administration's foreclosure prevention plan entitled Making Home Affordable. That plan calls for lenders to receive a federal subsidy in return for lowering a homeowner's monthly payments to affordable levels. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner directed the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network to help lenders spot loan modification scams and streamline and coordinate law enforcement efforts. A housing nonprofit group, NeighborWorks, will administer a $6 million program to warn and educate homeowners about the scams.

Watch out for scams that use names that make them appear to be legitimate groups offering help. Be wary of any company with the word "hope" in their title, similar to Hope Now, an alliance of mortgage lenders, and Hope for Homeowners, a foreclosure prevention program run by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), according to federal officials. Hope Now and Hope For Homeowners are legitimate but others may be scams. One tip is to note that the services provided by Hope Now and many nonprofits are free, said Faith Schwartz, the head of the nonprofit group.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons

Hawaii Financial Misconduct Alert #1: Tips To Avoid Loan Refinance Scams

Wayne Parsons — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 03:10:14 GMT

As reported in Boston.com last week:

The Obama administration announced a multi-agency effort yesterday to combat loan modification scams, which government officials said are preying on distressed homeowners searching for help.

Financial crooks are attempting to trick homeowners looking for help from the Obama administration's foreclosure prevention plan entitled Making Home Affordable. That plan calls for lenders to receive a federal subsidy in return for lowering a homeowner's monthly payments to affordable levels. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner directed the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network to help lenders spot loan modification scams and streamline and coordinate law enforcement efforts. A housing nonprofit group, NeighborWorks, will administer a $6 million program to warn and educate homeowners about the scams.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Wayne Parsons