Miranda Rights are the rights that every United States Citizen has when they interact with authorities. These are constutional rights through the 5th Amendment. They are called Miranda Rights because they were established by the United States Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona. Wherein, the Court examined four different cases where the rights of U.S. citizens were violated. In that case, the rights were judicially established as an interpretation of case law, the common law.

Vega v. Tekoh (2022)

Today, the most recent Miranda Rights case to be interpreted was Vega v. Tekoh. Wherein, a U.S. Citizens Miranda rights were violated. Subsequently, plaintiff in the matter attempted to sue civilly for the conduct of the authorities, including the prosecutor. The question presented was, Whether a plaintiff may sue a police officer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on the improper admission of an “un-Mirandized” statement in a criminal prosecution. In other words, the police prosecutor used a statement made by the defendant in a trial when the defendant should have been read his Miranda Rights first. This case is acutally a prime example of how the system establishes liability to police officers while prosecutorial conduct goes blatantly ignored.

Disagreeable analysis

The Court held that to extend a right to sue civilly would extend a cumbersome burden on the court system. The correct remedy would be for the trial court to make the correct determination and not allow the statements in the trial. In hindsight, this may seem like what should happen but, I think it places too much deference in low level trial courts that may not fully understand Miranda.

The Future

Three justices dissented in this case. I have a tendency to agree with Kagan, Breyer (retired now) and Sotomayor. Fortunately, the dissent, historically has a way of later becoming the law. The dissent points out that as in the facts of Vega v. Tekoh, a trial court may not suppress the constitutionally violating statements. Then what happens if statements that were the source of coercion, or unconstitutional police or prosecutor action results in a wrongful conviction and a U.S. Citizen ends up spending time in prison. For, what is constituionally a protected right. Most will not comprehend this or will be dissociativly indifferent practicing cognitive dissonance and so forth. What remedy do the wrongfully convicted have for the extreme harm they have suffered? §1983 should cover this.

Miranda Rights Attorney

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accidents. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a YoutubeInstagramFacebookTwitterLinkedInTumblr,  BloggerRedditYelp,  Avvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

What is Discvoery? Discovery is essentially the evidence. Discovery is the process of gathering the evidence and information that can later be used at trial. Often, at the end of discovery, the case will settle. This is because at the end of discovery we know what the evidence will likely show and what a verdict will most likely look like.

Criminal Proceeding:

In criminal cases, depending on your state, the discovery process may be different. For example, in some states criminal defendants are permitted to depose the arresting officers and witnesses. In other states they are not permitted to depose the witnesses or it is typically not allowed.

Civil Proceeding:

Civil discovery is usually large amounts of information gathering. For example, in a car accident case the insurance companies defense attorney’s usually request all sorts of information in order to get an amount they are willing to offer in settlement. This can be positive or negative for the case, it just all depends on the facts.

Discovery Motions:

In criminal cases in Virginia, there are discovery motions. Some are to compel the government to provide to the defense what the government intends on using at trial. Some localities use a form of “open” discovery. However, a lawyer will likely want to get a discovery order anyway soo that the government cannot spring anything on them at the last minute. For example, the any evidence that may be used in a criminal case, a criminal defendant will likely want to use a private investigator or expert witness to review the evidence and inquire into the credibility of the evidence.

In civil cases, discovery motions are usually motions to compel discovery, motion to protect certain kinds of discovery and motions for extensions of time to respond to discovery. These are the most common kinds of discovery motions.

I have experience with both civil and criminal discovery motions. You should call me for a free consultation (434) 660-9701

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accidents. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a YoutubeInstagramFacebookTwitterLinkedInTumblrBlogger, RedditYelpAvvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

What is a Deposition? A deposition is typically when a lawyer asks a witness a series of questions prior to or out of court, wherein a court reporter is present and recording the entire statement. This is for the purpose of later being used at trial or in a court hearing. If you have an upcoming Deposition, you should call me for a free consultation (434) 660-9701 Depending on your state, a deposition can either be in a Criminal or Civil proceeding.

Civil:

In Civil Law, a party is usually permitted to take depositions of other parties and witnesses. The transcripts or sometimes even video recorded depositions are later be played to a jury. This Often, depositions in Civil proceedings are used for the purposes of settlement. Civil proceedings are usually primarily about money damages. Sometimes they can be about more then money damages like, injunctions.

Criminal:

Virginia does not typically have criminal proceeding depositions. Florida does though. In Florida, your criminal defense attorney is permitted to depose the police officer prior to trial. In Virginia this is not allowed. Virginia does however, have preliminary hearing wherein the arresting officer is usually called to testify, in which case this can be recorded or transcribed by a court reporter.

Deposition Attorney:

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accidents. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a YoutubeInstagramFacebookTwitterLinkedInTumblr, BloggerReddit, Yelp, Avvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

What is Bail? Chapter 9 of the Code of Virginia deals with Bail and Recognizances. Accordingly, "Bail" means the pretrial release of a person from custody upon those terms and conditions specified by order of an appropriate judicial officer. Also, "Bond" means the posting by a person or his surety of a written promise to pay a specific sum, secured or unsecured, ordered by an appropriate judicial officer as a condition of bail to assure performance of the terms and conditions contained in the recognizance. Consequently, if you been arrested, you should call me I am Criminal Justice system Attorney.

Bail/Bond Hearings:

There are many factors that go into representing someone for a bail or bond hearing. Often, the court will consider:

  1. The Place of Birth.
  2. The ties to the community, including the length of time he or she has lived at the current and former addresses, current contact information, family relationships, immigration status (if applicable), employment record and history, date of birth, and social security number.
  3. The physical and mental health, educational and armed services records.
  4. The immediate medical needs, including chemical dependency treatment.
  5. The past criminal record, if any, including adult criminal convictions and juvenile adjudications and prior record of court appearances or failure to appear in court, counsel should also determine whether the accused has any pending charges, whether they are on probation or parole and past or present performance under supervision.
  6. Current immigration status and immigration history.
  7. The ability of the client to meet any financial conditions of release.
  8. The names of individuals or other sources that counsel can contact to verify the client’s provided information (counsel should consult with the client before contacting these individuals).
  9. Other such information necessary to determine potential exposure under the sentencing guidelines.
  10. Any necessary information waivers or releases that will assist the client’s defense.

Court Hearing:

The factors above must be properly argued to the court in order for the court to consider whether it will allow pretrial release from custody. These factors are not independent, often the court will consider all of them. In sum, they are interdependent, each relating to the other to form an assurance to the court that an accused will return when called and address the accusations against them. Subsequently, where a detained citizen may not have a favorable factor for one argument they may have a good argument regarding another factor.

Presumption in favor of Pretrial Release:

The presumption in Virginia is in favor of pretrial release. The Virginia Legislature repealed Va Code 19.2-120 (B) -Rebuttable Presumption Against Bail. Therefore, there is a presumption in favor of pretrial release. This is because if you find yourself in custody your employment and other life obligations will likely be destroyed. The Government must be required to prove their case before taking from citizens. This is a basic due process right that is afforded every United States Citizen.

There are horror stories of U.S. Citizens being detained by the government for years prior to trial and later being exonerated of the reason for the arrest in the first place. The truth is that any amount of detention is likely to destroy a citizen’s life. This is something that must not be allowed without real proper cause. In reality, an authority figure can easily engage in their own narssasitic maculation without actual cause to arrest a citizen. This is a crime against humanity and does happen more often than those in power would like to admit.

Criminal Justice System Attorney

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accidents. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a Youtube InstagramFacebookTwitterLinkedInTumblr, BloggerReddit,  YelpAvvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

An indictment is a formal list of charges against an accused. An indictment is not any evidence of guilt. From the word of former cheif judge sol wachtler, "if a district attorney wanted to, a grand jury would indict a ham sandwhich." If you have been charged with a crime, you should call me, I am a Criminal Defense Lawyer (434) 660-9701.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accidents. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a Youtube InstagramFacebookTwitter, LinkedInTumblrBlogger, Reddit, Yelp, Avvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

Introduction

The use of law and diplomacy can resolve the Cyber Security conflicts between sovereign states, within countries and amongst private actors through the use of economic reasoning and Christian Values. The use of deterrents, countermeasures and defenses can alleviate the threat from private and state actors. Inter alia, the spread of Christian Values will assist in the effort to do good for the world instead of pursuing evil through the use of cyber channels. “So in everything, do unto others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the law and the prophets”[1]

With the world becoming increasingly connected through the internet and every person having a personal internet device, it is increasingly likely that Cyber Attacks will occur. Both between sovereign countries and among private actors. “Plus, China and Russia are trying to take out our internet every day. People really like the internet. They’re always checking it” -Steve Carell as General Mark R. Naird[2]

Facts and Legal Issues

  1. Cyber attacks

Cyber warfare presents an increasingly new threat on the world stage. Today, unlike 20 or 30 years ago, an attacker can act from a distance on the other side of the world without ever having to be subject to the laws or reach of the target nation.[3] Therefore, the implementation of international law on the matter is vital to peace and basic human dignity.

When addressing a Cyber-attack several considerations must be noted. “The effects of a cyber-attack can range from a simple inconvenience (such as a DDoS attack that disrupts web traffic temporarily), to physical destruction (such as changing the commands to an electrical power generator causing it to explode), and even to death (such as disrupting the emergency lines to first responders so that calls cannot be made to police or ambulance services). But treating all forms of cyber-attack as a use of force would require an implausibly broad reading of Article 2 (4) that includes non-physical damage.”[4] However, allowing the eroding of the moral fabric of society and the salacious perpetuations of a few will only serve to detriment the people. Though it may be implausible to read Article 2(4) in an expansive manner, to ignore some malfeasance is to invite the horrific.

Another source of cyber weakness in the system is the rise in “crypto-currency.” Crypto-currency is a type of internet or computer based money. Currently, there is a large amount of assets tied up in crypto currency. Crypto Currency has been linked to money laundering which does have an effect on where money gets invested.[5] Where money gets invested directly effects what agendas are affected or supported by world powers. The dangers with Crypto Currency is that in the blink of an eye, if a hacker is able, they can wipe out Billions in electronic assets. At least one of these crypto currencies has been hacked. Major Cyber security breaches have occurred in relation to these crypto currencies or block chain money. These security breaches have affected billions in assets. A major issue with crypto currency however, is that it is often used to launder money from ill gotten gains or activities that are otherwise illegal.

Another form of cyber attack is one that is perhaps more terrifying for a lot of people and that’s a cyber attack on an airplane in the sky while flying. Today, most passenger jets are what’s known as “fly by wire.” Fly by wire is when an autopilot or electronic devices control the controls of an airplane. Even small general aviation airplanes have rudimentary fly by wire devices. These systems become much more complex on the newer larger jet airliners. The more complex a system is the more potential points of attack it probably possesses. For example, today these large airliners are often connected via data uplink to a satellite or ground facility.

Though there have not been any confirmed cyber attacks on a large jet liner, there has been speculation. Iran has claimed that they U.S. brought down a passenger jet using hacking. There was significant speculation that the recent 747 Max crashes occurred because of hacking. The claim was that a hacker manipulated the control surfaces of the elevator to cause the crash, Boeing and the NTSB later dispelled this assertion claiming that the crashes happened because a system was not disengaged. They added a regiment of training to the type rating after these crashes. This is a scary notion that a person on the other side of the world could crash a jet liner using a computer. Most of the equipment used in aviation, at least in the U.S., is a high standard and quality. Any potential hacker of an airline would really have to know exactly what they were doing.

There have also been claims that certain motor vehicles have been hacked. That the driverless cars and autonomous vehicles have weaknesses that hackers could exploit. Several studies at major Universities have suggested that these vehicles can be accessed by bad actors. These studies showed that the vehicles autonomous modes could be manipulated to cause them to crash into objects potentially harming the occupants.

Perhaps one of the scariest things about these potential dubious acts is that a hacker could get away with it. It is not easy to trace someone and their computer, especially someone that knows how to hide what they are doing. Cyber Security is constantly changing with technology and what is done today may be totally different from what is done tomorrow. In order for bad actors to be brought to justice there needs to be experts that know how to find this sort of activity. Essentially, it needs to better for a bad actor’s life to do good instead of evil. Power has a way of inherently manipulating individual thought processes and Cyber Security is no different.

Finally, Cyber Security related to corporate espionage is also of concern. Corporations foreign international stealing each other’s ideas and hoping for the later to fail. China steals American corporate information constantly. They will gather information from a corporations systems then, a few short months later, you’ll see the same product on Chinese shelves but the product made by a different company. Corporate Cyber espionage has significant economic effects. That can severely affect a business. Fortunately, in the U.S. we do not allow violations of Intellectual property law so products made as a violation of cyber security are not supposed to be allowed on American shelves for sale. This is increasingly difficult to enforce though.

  1. International law applicable to cyber warfare

The International Law applicable to cyberwarfare is a nations right of self-defense under the United Nations Charter, by Article 51.[6] This acts as a deterrent to bad state and private actors internationally. Self-defense is a foundational principle in legal doctrine. The idea that a party should have to wait until a nefarious party act upon them before they may act. These leaves open quite a bit to question. With China and Russia constantly collecting information on American citizens, this seems like the cold war all over again only on a different level. Information has always been valuable, but today the amount of information and its detail are highly intrusive. The U.S. should not be required to wait until China or Russia engage in bad action when we know that they are preparing for bad action. This leaves the American Citizen vulnerable. And, that should not be the specter.

A limitation on the law of self-defense is “necessity” and “proportionality.” Through necessity a sovereign state is supposed to attempt peaceful negotiations first before reacting with a counterattack. Though this is what humanity should aspire to, we must take away the bad actors ability to inflict future attacks. Otherwise, we could just be seen as appeasing Hitler.[7] When a bad actor does something through cyber warfare, the ability of that actor to do said harm must be taken away. Necessity would suggest that we wait until a bad actor takes down the power gird until be blow up their computers. This is unwise because civilian deaths could quickly surmount in the U.S. if the power grid goes down. Just like all those elderly people that passed away in Florida nursing homes when a hurricane came through and knocked out the power. What should be done is what the U.S. probably does not do enough of, which is gaming the system. Conducting fake attacks on our own system in order to find where the wholes are and fix them.

Through proportionality, a state is supposed to limit the counterattack to defeat the ongoing attack. The current international law on proportionality does not fully address the issue of future attacks. If a future attack is emanate or there is nothing deterring a future attack then it would be proportionally appropriate to take the ability of any future attack away from a deviant state. Similar to taking Saddam Hussein’s ability to produce weapons of mass destruction away from him.[8] Whether they actually existed in the first place, appears to be debatable.[9]

Proportionality is up for deliberation on what is considered fair. Because fairness is the cornerstone of law, it must be weighed whenever the international community or individual state actors seek to effect proportionality. Without the foundational idea of fairness within the law, law itself would become unhinged, through the balance of fairness the law has created a civilized society. The problem with proportionality is that it leaves the bad actor able to fight again another day. Kind of like what the United States and the international community did with Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War. The United States only booted Saddam from his unlawful occupation of Kuwait and did not go all the way to Baghdad to remove him from power. Low and behold the U.S. had to go back to the gulf a short decade later to remove Saddam under the alleged WMD scandal.

  1. The United States

The United States has identified Russia, China, Iran and North Korea as an ongoing threat to U.S. cybersecurity.[10] The foregoing nations have sought to affect critical infrastructure, sew discord among American Citizens and even directly interfere with the U.S.’s electoral process. These governments have a particular kind of agenda. For example, Facebook in order to operate in China, ran ads on their platform denying the genocide of an entire race of people in Asia.[11] Which is still ongoing.

In a speech by Nobel Peace Prize winning U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 2006 regarding Human Rights, “If we are serious about human deprivation, we must also demonstrate that we are serious about human dignity, and vice versa.”[12]  Though Annan was speaking on extreme poverty, This very much applies to those in our Federal, State and some local well-funded agency’s that act with impunity while violating the human right to privacy of the United States Citizen. Many large corporations are acting with similar impunity.[13] The United States government and many large corporations could quickly be brought before the International Criminal Court, if the U.N. started pursuing such injustice and if the United States agreed to the Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. Basically, what the United States Government is saying to the rest of the world is that they would seek to pursue evil rather than good. That even though there is a high level of influence the U.S. has within the U.N. (i.e. Permanent Member of the Security Council, U.N. Headquarters in the U.S., and general world dominance) it is better to forgo jurisdiction of the ICC and adhering to the Human Right to Privacy through cybersecurity then to do evil upon its own citizens. “With great power, comes great responsibility.”-Uncle Ben[14]

The U.S. Federal Government, and in which case has a trickledown effect to state and local governments won’t even adhere to the Geneva Convention on Torture.[15] John Hutson, Judge Advocate General for the United States Navy from 1997-2000, “Adherence to the Geneva Convention is more important to us (The U.S.) than to any other nation.” This applies to all Human Rights in the United Nations Charter. “...Justice has often bolstered lasting peace, by de-legitimizing and driving underground those individuals who pose the gravest threat to it. That is why there should never be amnesty for…. massive violations of human rights.”[16] Without holding those in the United States government accountable for their actions, it will only create an environment for them to utilize their power in pursuance of Bollea v. Gawker type of deviance.[17]

  1. The effects of a cyber attack on an individual level

Online psychological manipulation on an individual level can subject a countries citizens to a distortion of reality.[18] The general publics denial or lack of understanding of which will most likely lead to the ideocracy of civilization and foundational malevolence. Human’s quite often believe what is shown to them, not because of objective truth, but because of incessant truth. What is in their “feed,” they see on the internet, and the media reports. In other words, a truth that is not really a truth it is merely repeated repeatedly and therefore becomes accepted as truth for only that reason. This has exploited the inability of a significant number of individuals in conjunction with the collective, to think for themselves. A manipulation that has been perpetuated since the invention of the written word.

A similar form of cyber malfeasance among private actors in the United States, is isolation of  smart phones of individuals or utilizing geolocation technology to determine particular jurors. Then manipulating what they see on their phones to appear in a way to tortiously sway a jury. This is in every essence, jury tampering.[19]

Furthermore, and perhaps an even sinister cyber attack on an individual is spousal, partner or former partner abuse.[20] Essentially, a the cellphone is a constant listening device and those that do not seek to do the right thing are harassing others and most certainly breaking United States federal law. Even if a state has not passed legislation on a particular matter, federal law quite often applies. For example, the sweeping but far to often unenforced Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) applies to those whom seek to use computers, including your smart phone or other electronic device for purposes other then intended, abuse or deviance.[21]

On an international level, the Chinese based “TikTok” smart phone application has come under significant scrutiny lately. The application is immensely popular. The addictive nature of the application is uncanny. It fills the heads of its user with dopamine inducing short video clip after short video clip. TikTok is the result of a group of computer engineers getting together and attempting to make the most addicting application. It is very easy to get lost down a rabbit whole of TikTok videos. However, recent review of what the application tracks and the data it collects has resulted critical review of the application. The application basically keeps track of every single button you push on your cellphone and sends it to Chinese intelligence agencies. Similar to crack cocaine, we cannot allow the American people to destroy themselves and the country by doing this.

  1. Human Rights Law

On the international level, we see significant United Nations Resolutions occurring regarding the Human Right to Privacy.[22] Though there will always be rouge states, organizations, agencies and individuals. United Nations Resolution 68/167 The right to Privacy in the Digital Age, provides in part:

            “Reaffirming the human right to privacy, according to which no one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, and the right to protection of the law against such interference, and recognizing that the exercise of the right to privacy is important for the realization of the right to freedom of expression and to hold opinions without interference, and is one of the foundations of a democratic society, Stressing the importance of the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information, including the fundamental importance of access to information and democratic participation”[23]

Through resolutions of this nature and the worlds superpowers recognition and actual implementations will we as a world society see a better tomorrow. Through undercover and clandestine FISA courts will we see a fundamental downfall of civilization as we know it. FISA courts are essentially the government’s way of being a “peeping tom” and getting away with it. Anyone else being a “peeping tom” gets a sex offenders charge.

Current International Law regulating Cyber Security centers around International Human Rights Law. The misuse of information by various conflicting groups has created a disinformation humanitarian crisis, through avenues such as hate speech, population manipulation and radicalization.[24] There have even been reports that bad actors can use the internet, usually through social media, to influence who interacts with who. In other words, a bad actor could use social media to determine a person stance on various issues use that to create a meeting with another person who has completely opposite views. Wherein theses two parties would usually not interact with each other or generally come into contact, they could be manipulated to be at the same place, at the same time and under other conditions that could lead to disastrous effects. They can utilize the knowledge of people’s patterns to and activities. Most people are in a routine set or pattern of movement throughout the day. This is probably what the mass collection of personal data China is engaging in is really doing. These sorts of interactions can be used to sway the course of peoples lives. Or, in a bad state actors hope of increasing the likely hood of a negative interaction that may sway an election.

In counties worldwide, the right to privacy varies greatly. For example, in China there is zero right to privacy. They have implemented a facial recognition system that is extreme. If you walk across the street in China when you do not have a green light to do so you get a ticket in the mail. This is starting to show itself in the United States with redlight camera’s. These redlight cameras are probably not constitutional but that has not been fully determined and most localities do not like them for that reason. I am very thankful I am not a Chinese citizen or a person living in China or Russia. At least in the U.S. if the authorities cross a particular line of indecency, I have a right to ask a random group of people whether the government owes me money or a remedy. Its certainly not easy to get to a civil jury but that relief is there. Even if it costs years of your life.

On the other side of privacy is Greece, it ranks top in the world on privacy which is interesting when we think about the birthplace of democracy. The Greeks value their privacy and do not want the local authorities impeding on that basic human right. Maybe after a few millennia of being a democracy, like Greece, the U.S. will come to its senses. Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life.”[25]

How Law and Diplomacy can be used as a resolution

  1. Diplomacy in Cyber Security

In 2015 leaders of the G20 met to assert a charter on Cyber security. This charter not only applies to state but also non-state actors in the cyber world. In 2018, the United Nations through an open-ended working group adopted several resolutions to address international law concerning cyber security.[26]

Through international diplomacy the world community can achieve proactive cyber security resolutions. Diplomacy can help distinguish what is important to different countries. In some countries in Europe, there are what is called “right to be forgotten” laws. These laws restrict companies like google from keeping certain embarrassing information about particular people on the internet indefinitely. If information can be left up indefinitely, this can affect future employment and so forth.

The U.S. and other superpowers are primarily concerned with matters like holding hospital information hostage or attacks on critical infrastructure. Over the past decade there has been several attacks on hospitals and major healthcare providers. What a bad actor will do is access a providers servers or data centers and make it so the usual doctor or nurse cannot access it until a ransom is paid. This can have catastrophic effects on the trust most of society places on medical providers surrounding  doctor-patient confidentiality.

In any event, diplomacy can help solve these issues if everyone in the international community could get on the same page. Through diplomatic intercourse, the world could come to an international community understanding that certain matters are in congruent with Christian values and some things are not. This would “take the wind out of the sails” of those who would seek to hack servers and systems for wrongdoing. Because quite a few of these ransom ware circumstance originate from countries on the other side of the world where domestic law cannot reach. Not without international agreement.

  1. The United States in relation to the rest of the world

The United States has significant work to do as its Constitution and legislation does not adhere to the standard set on the international stage regarding the human right to privacy.[27] Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from 1948 provides for a Human Right to Privacy.[28] With an absolute disrespect to the human rights of its own citizens in the cyber security realm, the United States is most certainly lacking. “We [the U.S. government] like the fact that it is a Wild West because it lets us do more attack and exploitation."Jason Healey[29] That is a derelict approach to a human right.

When contemplating this particular kind of Human Rights violation, one is reminded of “Cold War-ear U.S. policymakers such as George Kennan and Henry Kissinger, whom insist that certain rules can and should be broken when it is in a state’s interest to do so.”[30] This notion finds little logic when dealing with a state’s own citizens pertaining to the Human Right to Privacy or in most circumstances absent a battlefield situation. And, for the most part seems akin to what the British were doing to the American Colonist immediately before the declaration of independence. Two hundred years ago they had eyes and ears in all of the colonists’ homes by forcing the colonist to quarter British soldiers, today there’s a microphone and camera in every home. Essentially, tyranny just got more efficient. “We are condemned to repeat our mistakes if we have not learned the lessons of the past.”[31]

The idea that the American people now have to worry about undressing in front of an electronic device for fear that Uncle Sam or Deputy Rosco is eating a donut watching and getting a taxpayer paycheck to do is pathetic and undignified. This is similar to the harassment undertaken by the FBI labeling Martin Luther King, Jr. a threat to national security. The same thing was done to another human rights activist, Cesar Chavez. Even Susan B. Anthony was harassed by authorities when she sought to point out the injustice of their hypocrisy. If an individual does not believe those in power are doing the right thing, law enforcement will look for a way they can break U.S. Constitutional rights of that person and attempt to maintain the status quo. This is most unfortunate, because what those in power are asserting is that positive change should be stifled. “On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.”[32]

In recent history, the Obama administration extended INTERPOL protections under the privileges and immunities act.[33] This is quite disturbing as it allows an international law enforcement agency to operate on U.S. soil without being subject to U.S. courts jurisdiction. Essentially, INTERPOL can conduct law enforcement operations with no oversight. INTERPOL’s record keeping and operators are immune from any wrong doing. In The U.S., though severely under enforced, Law Enforcement agencies are at a minimum subject to the U.S. Constitution. But, that will not be the case for INTERPOL.

  1. Systemic Implications of Cyber Security

Utilizing the United Nations as an avenue for diplomatic negotiations will be the most productive route to a successful resolution. The economic impact of continuing a continuous cyber war will likely produce $9 to $22 trillion dollars of waste by 2022.[34] This is an astronomical number and more then quite a few small countries gross domestic product. Crypto Currency cyber hacking has been said to cost upwards of 2.8 billion.

There is essentially a balance of what is wasteful. Similar to the way the U.S. transportation system operates. How much is the damage worth compared to the cost of preventing it. Quite often, our roadways do not become safer like have certain signs placed or guard rails installed on streets until someone is hurt. And, it’s because it costs money to prevent the damage or injury in the first place. This is highly analogues to most things that humanity does, and Cybersecurity is not different. Basically, those that can fix or prevent cyber breaches most likely will not do so until the time comes that the cost of ignoring a problem area becomes more expensive than not ignoring it.

For example, Facebook has come under significant scrutiny in recent history. The founder of Facebook was hauled before Congress to provide information. After the hearing, Facebook was directed to better protect its users information. Facebook was fully well and content with allowing user information to go willy nilly to anyone who could infringe on an individuals account. Only until congress chastised its CEO did the company begin to protect its users and even now, it still has a long way to go.

Current International Negotiations

  1. Currently

International law surrounding Cyber Security is still developing. The specifics of what the international community finds acceptable and unacceptable is highly ambiguous. The United States implementation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act should be used as a basis for the International law moving forward. Though the CFAA would most likely find a dilution if the International Community ever took it into consideration.

The CFAA is a direct application of what should be the international norm. Though it is not even enforced in the U.S. mainly because that would cause a significant use of resources to enforce and those that would be enforcing it would also probably be held liable to it for breaking the law for their own actions. This is because that the CFAA essentially says you cannot use an electronic device in a way that was not intended. This is super expansive and can quickly be tailored to whatever political power is in place at the time of enforcement.

When a law can be subjectively applied and not objectively enforced, it erodes its authority in general. Where someone might say that it is ok to use the computer to look up inappropriate photos, the producer of the computer would most likely say that it was not an intended use for the electronic device. This could leave a significant number of people open to liability for violating the CFAA. What should be the goal is for people seek Christian Values. Few if any producers of electronic devices intended from their devices to be used for abuse, harassment or warfare.

The Chinese are certainly an exception to that this rule. The Chinese company Huawei was surreptitiously creating an access point for the Chinese military to impede the civil liberties of the American Citizen. Huawei is a cell phone and computer manufacture in China. Their products are or were highly popular in America. Huawei was building their cellphones and electronic devices with a “backdoor” in their programing or hardware so that Chinese officials could access the phones remotely, whenever they wanted to.

This is equivalent to secretly bugging ever electronic device they produced, which was millions of units. Huawei did this and then shipped their products across the ocean for the American consumer to unwittingly have in their home. This is most certain an act in preparation for war. Spying is spying anyway you look at it. The Chinese have shown time and time again that they are collecting massive amounts of data on every American citizen. The only purpose of this is to implement control. There really is not any other reason other then they are preparing for some sort of bad action.

The Russians are essentially doing the same thing just in a different way. During the Obama administration, President Obama labeled several Russian foreigners “persona non grata,” and gave them a short amount of time to leave the country. These Russian nationals who were in the United States for what they presented as diplomatic purposes, they were actually in the U.S. for devious purposes. They were here to affect cyber security in the United States or insecurity we should say. The Obama Administration must be commended along with the State Department for swiftly discharging these individuals from the country. The security of the United States infrastructure, sovereignty and daily life of its citizens must not be infringed upon.

The Russians that Obama discharged “persona non grata” influenced, through the use of social media and the internet, the United States 2016 electoral process. This is a scary assertion. That a foreign power would seek to sway the minds of American Citizens electing leaders. Who the American people elect often has a direct effect on when the U.S. goes to war. What international financial deals are made and just about everything in our daily life. If a foreign power is seeking to influences elections through the use of cyber war, this can have systemic effects on the development of a country.

The United Nations is attempting to address extraterritorial surveillance and internet defamation.[35] The United Nations attempts to address the issue have fallen short of the action needed. The largest problem is a few select bad state actors exploiting wholes in the system that are not apparent until they are exploited. The U.N. condemn extraterritorial surveillance, essentially what China and Russia are doing constantly. Numerous resolutions have been passed but it only changes the guise of these countries’ activities not the aim.

  1. Looking forward

With the Russia-Ukrainian war raging onward, the aspect of cyberwarfare has come to the forefront of international discussion. Russia and the west are continually engaged in cyber warfare. The cost of which is tolling daily. With the increase in the cost of Cyber Security there comes a diversion of assets that could be used for more humanitarian agendas. Combating a cyber war like all war is expensive in both human life and monetary assets.

China is also a significant threat to the peace and security of the United States. The with the recent provocations and political posturing of the current politicians in power in the U.S. conflict appears to be closer then ever before. Recently, U.S. political leaders have been traveling to Taiwan, a disputed island in the South China Sea.

China has asserted before that as long as the rest of the world stays out of the issues Taiwan and China have, no conflict would ensue. However, that seems to have changed. Political leaders in the last few months have been making several trips to Taiwan Island in what appears to be an effort to “poke the bear.” China has responded with cyber-attacks. Chinese hackers were even hacking billboards in Taiwan spewing propaganda about the U.S. politicians visit. China certainly sees these visits as a threat to their security. But in all reality, if Kim Jung Un visited Cuba, the U.S. would not be excited about it.

Conclusion

International Law has a long way to go on the issue of Cyber Security. Bad actors continually exploit loopholes and governments dissociative indifference to their own citizens human rights must be addressed. If the international community could follow the lead of the Greeks on the human right to privacy and implement international agreements on state sponsored cyber attacks we would see a much better future. There will always be bad private actors, that is just part of humanity, there will always be outliers of ridiculousness. Criminals will only go away when we are able to lead them off at the pass or stop them before they even get started. Ransome ware is something that will be extremely difficult to fully destroy.

However, bad state actors are something that we can alleviate through diplomacy. The precedent has already been set, through example international agreements like the nuclear non-proliferation agreement. If everyone could get on the same page and stop the cycle of attributing assets to an endless cyber war then assets could be designated elsewhere, like space-x.

Humanity’s assertion of Christian Values and international diplomacy will see a future that is not so ripe with economic waste and deprivation of human dignity related to cyber security. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”[36] “The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the founders fought.”[37] -U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts

[1] Matthew 7:12 (King James)

[2] Karen Guttieri, Accelerate Change or Lose The Information War, 1 J. Stra. Air. Space 92 (2022)

[3] Joseph N. Madubuike-Ekwe, J. N. (2021) Cyberattack and the Use of Force in International Law. Beijing Law Review, 12, 631-649.

[4] Id. at 637

[5] Michael P. Scharf & Paul R. Williams, The Law of International Organizations 1120 (2013

[6] Id. at 635

[7] Norrin M. Ripsman and Jack S. Levy, Wishful Thinking or Buying Time?, International Security Vol. 33, No. 2 (Fall, 2008) pp. 148-181

[8] Ronald Higgins, Weapons of Mass Destruction: Rhetoric and Realities, Connections Vol. 2, No. 1 (March 2003) pp. 59-68

[9] Gregg Zoroya, Whatever happened to Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction? Ask USA Today, February 14, 2019

[10] Id. at 97

[11] Id.

[12] Michael P. Scharf & Paul R. Williams, The Law of International Organizations 334 (2013)

[13] Heidi Boghosian, The Business of Surveillance, Human Rights Vol. 39, No. 3, PRIVACY Who Is Watching? (March 2013), pp. 2-5, 23 (5 pages)

[14] Stan Lee, Spider-Man (2002)

[15] Supra note 8 at 314

[16] Supra note 8 at 335

[17] Bollea v. Gawker Media, LLC, Case No. 8:12-cv-02348-T-27TBM (M.D. Fla. Nov. 13, 2012)

[18] Id. at 96

[19] Hon. Amy J. St. Eve & Michael A. Zuckerman, Ensuring An Impartial Jury, 11 Duke L. Tech R. 12 (2012)

[20] William Turton, Abusive partners are now tracking their spouses with apps made to watch their kids, Vice News, September 16, 2018, https://www.vice.com/en/article/ev7n44/abusive-partners-are-now-tracking-their-spouses-with-apps-made-to-watch-their-kids

[21] Molly Eichten, Survey of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act Cases, The Business Lawyer Vol. 67, No. 1 (November 2011)

[22] GANGULY, SUMIT. United Nations Resolution on the Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, Snowden Reader, Indiana University Press, 2015, pp. 313–16. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt16gh840.47. Accessed 13 Aug. 2022.

[23] Id. at 314

[24] Scott J. Shackelford, Inside the Drive for Cyber Peace: Unpacking Implications for Practitioners and Policymakers, 21 U.C. Davis Bus. L.J. 285, (Spring, 2021)

[25] Proverbs 4:23 (King James)

[26] Id. at 308

[27] Id. at 313

[28] Supra note 8, at 63

[29] Id. at 295

[30] Ngaire Woods, What the Mighty Miss, The Blind Spots of Power, (July/August 2022) https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/2022-06-21/what-mighty-miss

[31] Supra Note 11 at 947

[32] Matthew 7:22-23 (King James)

[33] Supra note 11 at 191

[34] Supra note 11, at 287.

[35] Anupam Chander & Molly Land, Introductory Note to United Nations General Assembly Resolution on the Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, Int. Legal. Materials, Vol. 53, No. 4 (2014) pp. 727-731

[36] Galatians 3:28 (King James)

[37] Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373, 134 S. Ct. 2473, 189 L. Ed. 2d 430, 2014

Human Rights Lawyer

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accident Lawyer. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a Youtube InstagramFacebookTwitterLinkedInTumblrBloggerRedditYelpAvvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

Tort Law and The Economics of Sovereign Immunity[1]

I hate and detest falsehood but I love your law.”[2] We need a return to the biblical law standard and the older common law approach to tort law. This is because the economic impact of fraudulent local prosecutors would be held in check. Where “there is a set standard of conduct, and the Court looks at the facts of the case, determines whether the facts of the case meet or fall short of the standard, and based upon that determination decides liability.”[3]

Tort law is implicated through the doctrine of sovereign immunity. When our nations prosecutors engage in frauds on the court, the should incure Tortious liability. It is a tort against the falsely accused, the innocent. The economic damages are insurmountable, but those in power deny that.

The current law and economic approach is instead focused upon setting a rule that will minimize incidents in the future.[4] At first glance this seems like a great idea, but upon implimentation, the authorities are prosecuting innocent people. Not just innocent, blantatly innocent, obviously independantly proven innocent. What it has resulted in is total unaccountability for state actors. Really, what we should be asking is what is the truth and pursuing that. That is not what is happening in our government today, it is a “might makes right” agenda and bulldoze people that we are just exercising a “we don’t like” analysis. The is the current state of federal, state and local justice departments. Personally, I think God is going to serve them with what they got coming soon enough. God only allows injustice to go forward for a limited time, and then the rubber band snaps back.

There Must Be Limits To Absolute Prosecutorial Immunity

“The current system of absolute prosecutorial immunity fails when prosecutors fail to “seek Justice before victory.”[5] For this reason the Court must reexamine the doctrine of absolute prosecutorial immunity.”[6] Arbitrary government decisions by those charged with fair enforcement of the law is a violation of the law. “To permit criminal prosecutions to be initiated on the basis of arbitrary or irrational factors would be to transform the prosecutorial function from, one protecting the public interest through impartial enforcement of the rule of law to one permitting the exercise of prosecutorial power based on personal or political bias."[7] Governments routinely charge based on arbitrary government decision making. In recent years this is certainly true. This is a foundational affront to the rule of law.

Throughout this brief, I find it is extremely difficult to refer to Virginia prosecutors as “Commonwealth Attorneys” because that is not what they are. The basis of the proceedings against a number of accused citizens were not for the good Commonwealth of Virginia, but were based on personal bias and not a fair enforcement of the law. As we sit here in the United States, where Law enforcement and political agenda meet, there is dark underbelly of corruption.

The economic impact of false persecutions are so huge they cannot be over stated. The torts of defamation, malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress and false arrest. This conduct can have lifelong economic impact. The system has to change, the state actors must be held accountable for their own actions.

Arbitrary Government Decision Making

A prosecutor acting contrary to seeking justice and instead pursues arbitrary government decision making sees prosecutorial discretion that is “ill-served by granting [absolute immunity] it in cases when [a prosecutor] acts without colorable authority.”[8].  As it sits today, when applied to the conduct of Commonwealth Attorney’s offices, the doctrine of absolute prosecutorial immunity, does not serve the interests of justice. To the contrary, it only serves as permission for prosecutors to conduct themselves however they want. Acting without any regard to the law and foundationally contrary to the pursuit of justice, all while facing zero accountability for their actions.

There must be a civil remedy

Holding prosecutors civilly liable for their dishonorable, unethical and outright fraudulent conduct on this nations courts and citizens must not be permitted. When absolute prosecutorial immunity was established, fraud on the court was not in the minds of those creating the doctrine. Because it was unimaginable that those entrusted with fair enforcement of the law, and serving the community would conduct themselves in a manner in which this nations prosecutors do. Absolute Prosecutorial immunity never considered that prosecutors would exercise their extraordinary power without doing so judiciously, in the pursuit of justice.

Absolute prosecutorial immunity has evolved into a zero accountability systematic “get out of jail free card” to conduct a fraud on the U.S. Court system and deprive U.S. Citizens of their Constitutional, Biblical and International Human Rights. Absolute Immunity provides prosecutors with zero accountability for their conduct. Prosecutors have displayed numerous times throughout their proceedings that they do not conduct themselves objectively that instead they exercise a “I don’t like this person” analysis and therefore I should put them in prison based on utterly unfounded accusations. The number of people exonerated from death row because of irrefutable DNA evidence is an undeniable fact that prosecutors get it wrong.

When we speak about the economic impact of falsely imprisoning someone, we must consider the billions of dollars this is likely affecting. In the United States we live in a mass incarceration society. We imprison more people per capita then any other developed nation on this planet. Even if it’s a fraction of a percent of them that are innocent, that number would be in the thousands. This is also know as billions in economic impact.

Systemic Abuse and Change

Currently, there is a premium on winning as opposed to pursuing a just result. Prosecutors are evaluated, not based on their measure and good judgment in the pursuit of justice, but on “winning” (convictions). This is an affront to the foundation of jurisprudence and the Oath every attorney takes before being admitted to the bar. Prosecutors are permitted to not point to evidence in frauds on the court, they seek to foundationally undermine the law. This has often led to absurd circus's in the court system.

One in six reversed capital cases was the result of “prosecutorial suppression of evidence that the defendant is innocent.”[9] Read that last sentence again and then pray to God about what you “thought” you knew before you read this. Prosecutors seek to have exculpatory evidence of their own experts excluded from trial. Prosecutors lie right to Judge’s faces about evidence they have been shown in previous hearings, and ignore digital prima facie evidence that entire proceedings are a sham.

Endless U.S. Constitutional and Human Rights Violations.

A prosecutor’s job creates multiple moments of power and authority over a life-changing process, and with zero accountability and no incentive to pursue justice, the system has become rot with abuse of power. Prosecutors may even seek to delay a trial for the unjust purpose of their own personal bias or prejudice.[10] Prosecutors seek to delay trials for no other purpose then to submit pain and suffering of a continued persecution on their victims.

Where defendants seek to get the quickest trial date available, prosecutors force delay after delay after delay. Not for the purpose of just proceedings but for the sole purpose of infliction of emotional distress on the defendants and their families. The fact that they have no accountability whatsoever for Their actions and our elected officials dissociative indifference to the conduct of their subordinates will only see a deprecation to the good community. This is a human rights violation.[11]

Using Perjured Testimony

Prosecutors use absolute immunity to “knowingly use perjured testimony.”[12] Prosecutors blatantly ignore their own investigator testifying that false accusers commit perjury. Prosecutors will also make impermissible remarks or attempts to introduce improper evidence at trial.[13] Prosecutors purposefully and in an effort to undermine direct Court Orders by Judge’s not to refer to a previous hearings because of the improper prejudicial nature do so while cross-examining defendants in front of the Jury. This is a crime in and of itself.

Government Transparency

One thing is certain is that our government even the local government should be dismantled and carefully put back together. As it sits, a defendant can request that the whole trial be videotaped so that the public can know what an absolute fraud on the Court even Bethany Harrison of the Lynchburg City Prosecutors office will allow. But the judges can still deny that request. Fact is people in power want you to take the sodomy they dish out and if they are wrong they want no accountability for that. One of the few protections we have in this country is public hearings.

In Lynchburg City and all courts, you should be allowed to video tape a proceeding. Otherwise people that are false accusers will get away with their lies. Prosecutors can act insane with no accountability and when its time for a falsely accused to get their life back. Potential employment will no longer be available because whole thing was absolutely nonsense but there is no way to show it on video. In today's modern era, Court hearings must be recorded on video.

The economic impact of this knows no bounds. If the public does not know the particularities of everything surrounding what our local Lynchburg City Prosecutors office will do, they will destroy the well-built Law Firm of the falsely accused. Where before the authorities conducted their unwarranted sodomy a falsely accused had a productive law firm with economical viability, now its destroyed and no one cares.

Zero Accountability for Prosecutorial Misconduct

Alternative checks on a prosecutor’s power is almost never effective and certainly not a conduct changing deterrent. As it sits, internal office discipline is the only real redress a defendant can hope for. This is almost never effective as a deterrent to what really amounts to criminal conduct of a prosecutor themselves. If any other lawyer acted in a way that our country’s prosecutors do, and not been a prosecutor, they would have been brought before the Bar and at a minimum civilly sued.

Electoral Process

The only real check on prosecutors misconduct is the prospect of losing an election, however this provides little to no deterrent to a prosecutor determined to violate a defendants’ U.S. Constitutional, Biblical and International Human rights. Most of the time voters do not even know who the Constitutional violating prosecutors are as their conduct is often suppressed or not made abundantly aware to the public until years later. And, this is certainly so in a small professional community of personal relationships between attorneys in a smaller locality. This environment makes it less likely that misconduct and fraud on the Court will be reported by neutral parties.

“Forty-five of the fifty states elect their chief local prosecutors. But in these elections, most prosecutors run unopposed. When the incumbent prosecutor runs for reelection, he or she is often the only candidate in the election. According to one study, eighty-five percent of incumbent prosecutors run unopposed in general elections. And, when they are opposed, prosecutors win their elections in nearly seventy percent of those races.”[14] The errors of a prosecutor acting without good faith can have disastrous and extreme affects on a defendants future, family’s and communities with generally no accountability.

“Prosecutors can engage in unequivocal misconduct—misconduct that is labeled as such by a federal court judge—and face no professional or criminal comeuppance.”[15] “The prosecutrix further abused her power by using the very situation she had created against the defendant in closing argument.”[16] Prosecutors abuse their power and oath to seek justice. Elected prosecutor Bethany Harrison exercises arbitrary government decision making that is a selective enforcement of the law. Bethany Harrison’s Office subverts basic U.S. Constitutional, foundations of jurisprudence, Biblical and International Human Rights law.

Prosecutors undermine the system, violate obvious rules without sanction and abuse power with no repercussions. Prosecutorial immunity must be limited. “Absolute Immunity leaves the genuinely wronged defendant without civil redress even against an indisputably and identified malicious or dishonest action that deprives him of liberty, dignity and protection of law.”[17]

Absolute Prosecutorial Immunity as a policy is misguided.

“[T]he common law recognized a fundamental ‘distinction between unauthorized acts and discretionary acts,’” with resulting “‘strict liability for acting outside of the authority enumerated by the Constitution.’[18] The Court must reevaluate prosecutorial immunity. We must return to the Common Law that held prosecutors liable for actions that exceeded the authority of their office.

Christian Worldview

What we must consider when evaluating Absolute Prosecutorial Immunity is that there are few individuals in our society that have no accountability for their conduct. That has created a license to do whatever you want and disregard the rights of others. All while basing your conduct on personal bias. This has maculated into a “might makes right” system, while trampling the rights of the falsely accused. That is not the purpose of the Immunity Doctrine, but that is what it has evolved into.

Lynchburg, Virginia

Ultimately, Bethany Harrison’s office, is a human rights violating office. What we need is someone similar to Jim Durkin. “Ill never be accused of being soft on crime, but I’m more interested in seeking the truth than a conviction.”—Jim Durkin (Illinois House Minority Leader) [19] The truth should be sought before the government is allowed to just sodomize an accused finances, future, employment, and most importantly the sanity of their family. As it sits, if the accused is not of the radical alt-left mind virus that has infested the Downtown Lynchburg Virginia authorities, it must be justified.

Citations

[1]Anilao v. Spota, No. 22-539 (2022)(the following essay has been written with various points of law that the amicus brief from of law enforcement action partnership)

[2]Psalms 119:163 (King James)

[3]Chrisman, Law & Economics, 75 (2016)

[4]Id.

[5]Miller v. United States, 14 A.3d 1094, 1107 (D.C. 2011)

[6]Anilao v. Spota, No. 22-539 (2022)(Amicus Brief)

[7]United States v. Torquato, 602 F.2d 564, 568 (3d Cir. 1979)

[8]Snell v. Tunnell, 920 F.2d 673, 696 (10th Cir. 1990)

[9]David Keenan, Deborah Jane Cooper, David Lebowitz, & Tamar Lerer, The Myth of Prosecutorial Accountability After Connick v. Thompson: Why Existing Professional Responsibility Measures Cannot Protect Against Prosecutorial Misconduct, 121 YALE L. J. 203, 209–11 (2011)

[10]Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)

[11]Universal Declaration of Human Rights, December 10, 1948 ,United Nations General Assembly Resolution 217 A.

[12]Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U.S. 103, 112 (1935); Alcorta v. Texas, 355 U.S. 28, 31–32 (1957); Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959)

[13]Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609 (1965)

[14]National Study of Prosecutor Elections, The Prosecutors and Politics Project, U. N.C. (February 2020), at 4, available at: https://law.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/National-Study Prosecutor-Elections-2020.pdf; Ronald Wright, How Prosecutorial Elections Fail Us, 6 OHIO STATE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW 581, 593–94 (2009); Anilao v. Spota, No. 22-539 (2022)(Amicus Brief)

[15]Id.

[16]United States v. Golding, 168 F.3d 700, 703 (4th Cir. 1999)

[17]Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976); Anilao v. Spota, No. 22-539 (2022)(Amicus Brief)

[18]William Baude, Is Quasi-Judicial Immunity Qualified Immunity?, 74 STAN. L. REV. ONLINE 115, 123 (2022).

[19]Justin Brooks, “You May Go to Prison, Even Though You’re Innocent,” 83 (2023)

Criminal Justice Attorney

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accident Lawyer. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a Youtube InstagramFacebookTwitterLinkedIn, Tumblr, BloggerReddit, YelpAvvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

Human Rights Attorney

Human rights are different depending on who you ask. Behavior and Rights are interconnected. Because as Eleanor Roosevelt said “Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home – so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman and child seek equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerned citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world."[1] Thank you for reading my article, I am a Human Rights Attorney.

Sources of Law:

Consequently, the Human Right to Dignity, Due Process and Equal Protection of Laws is found in the Universal Declaration of Human rights and its Articles. Furthermore, the U.N.  Charter is considered the lynchpin of post WWII international law.[2] Also, the following sources are international law as well:

  1. International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination,
  2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
  3. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
  4. Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against women,
  5. Convention against Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,
  6. Convention on the rights of the child,
  7. International convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families,
  8. International convention for the protection of all persons from enforced disappearance and Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities.[3]

 

Human Rights however, go back further than those documents. The origins of modern human rights are from “moral nature.”[4] For example, Islam at its original inception was more humane then the previous practice in Arabic nations. When considering Islam’s predecessor (or what the Arab people previously practiced), Islam made significant steps forward with consideration to human rights.[5] However, it is still lacking the physical treatment of women amongst other matters.[6]

Community Culture:

Cultural relativism is an important consideration whenever we think about human rights because in parts of the world women are concerned with the effects of FGM while in others its freedom of speech. For example, in some parts of Africa women are having their human rights violated by being forced to be cut in the vagina at puberty.[7] While in other parts of the world, for example the U.S., we are concerned with privacy like the U.S. governments perverse malignant manipulation of Courts and judges that just rubber stamp whatever your local constitutional violating law enforcement officer wants.[8] Just because “a violation does not occur in public, it is not considered a human rights issue” is an absurd notion for all rights violations.[9]

In Contrast, the dichotomy is clear that some parts of the world’s struggles are not really fathomable by others. Some are concerned with bodily mutilation while others about being spied on while in the shower. Cultural relativism is “theory that there is infinite cultural diversity and that all cultural practices are equally valid.”[10] “the principles that we may use for judging behavior or anything else are relative to the culture in which we are raised.”[11]

“Universalism posits that all humans have the same fundamental rights and freedoms regardless of where they reside or what their cultural background is.”[12] For example, due process is a fundamental human right that the government is not supposed to take from you without a full fair and final hearing on a matter. The U.S. government currently violates human rights related to Due process left and right.

Christian Bible:

Finally, Due process, dignity and equal protection of the law are something that the U.S. government does not respect. Equal protection of the law should allow all who are charged with any crime privacy unless they are proven guilty in a Court of law. Subsequently, anything less is human rights violation. These rights are basic and universal. It is unbiblical, for“You shall not show partiality in judgement; you shall hear the small as well as the great you shall not be afraid in any man’s presence for the judgement is God’s.”[13] Biblical “Equality” means equality of opportunity for God’s justice for all, this is a universal principle. Thank you for reading my article, I am a Human Rights Attorney.

[1] Eleanor Roosevelt, Member of the Drafting Committee on the Bill of Human Rights, 1958

[2] David Weissbrodt, Jena Martin and Frank Newman, International Human Rights: Law, Policy and Process, 5th Ed. 117 (2021).

[3] Supra Note 2 at 105

[4] Supra Note 2 at 36 and 48.

[5] Supra Note 2 at 67

[6] Id.

[7] Supra Note 2 at 25

[8] Supra Note 2 at 51; Judiciary Committee Releases Key Material Related to FISA Abuse Investigation, The Senate Judiciary Committee 116th Cong. (April 16, 2020).

[9] Supra Note 2 at 51

[10] Supra Note 2 at 54

[11] Supra Note 2 at 54

[12] Supra Note 2 at 75

[13] Deuteronomy 1:17 (king James)

Human Rights Attorney:

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accident Lawyer. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a Youtube InstagramFacebookTwitterLinkedInTumblrBloggerRedditYelpAvvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

Introduction

Programs of restitution by offenders to their victims should be instituted on a wide scale as the primary means of dealing with non-violent criminal behavior. Charles Colson and Daniel Benson address the issue of how to treat convicted persons and their victims.[1] There are two primary rules or assertions that are addressed in their essay Restitution v. Imprisonment.[2] Basically, restitution is an act making the victim of a crime whole again. Often, this means a payment of monetary value to the victim for a crime that was done to them. In contrast, imprisonment is the warehousing of persons convicted of crimes. Frequently this means cages, concrete, and guards. If you have been charged with a crime, you should call me. I am a Criminal Justice Lawyer.

Imprisonment

Currently, there are over 2,000,000 people locked up in the United States of America’s mass incarceration system.[3] This is costing the U.S. taxpayer billions. Imprisonment represents a legitimate way to place violent persons away from society for the safety of society. Imprisonment has evolved into a systematic tool of oppression far from what should be permitted ethically. Violent offenders should be imprisoned, this would follow the Christian Worldview, “whoever kills any man shall surely be put to death.”[4] 

I am heavily persuaded that restitution is a more equitable avenue for non-violent criminal offenses. Placing the victims of non-violent crime in better position then what they had been in prior to the perpetration which had come upon them would serve society. Though, there must be a limit to that in the since of recidivism, which at a certain point should lead to imprisonment. The effects on the community however, of imprisoning individuals for non-violent crimes is not wholly justified.[5] Recidivism represents half of all prisoners.[6]

Restitution

Restitution is a far better choice for both perpetrators and victims of non-violent crime. Certainly, restitution would also be a better choice for the American taxpayer.[7] Paying back the victim of a crime would entail the need for a mechanism to deal with that sort of redesignation of the penal system. A way for the perpetrator to meaningfully pay back the victims. This follows the Christian Worldview, “if a man steals an ox or a sheep and slaughters it or sells is, he shall restore five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep.”[8]

A major issue with criminals who commit non-violent crimes like theft is that they would not have the money to pay back the victim of their crime. For example, Bernie Madoff whom stole vast sums of money from his victims spent a large amount of that money and now the money is gone, unable to be recompensed to the victims. Another example would be shoplifting, if someone stole from the grocery store, it is probably because they did not have the money to buy food in the first place. Therefore, as in both examples it would be difficult to obtain restitution from a perpetrator.

Conclusion

Charles Colson and Daniel Benson grapple with the conundrum of which is better for society and for the victims of crimes. The instillment of apprehension to commit crimes and the assured knowledge of confinement. Or, the focus of putting the victim in better position then they where in prior to the crime. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. For non-violent crimes, restitution is most likely the better option and, this is congruent with the Biblical Christian Worldview. If you have been charged with a crime you should call a criminal justice lawyer.

[1] Herbert W. Titus, God, Man, and Law: The Biblical Principles 279 (1994)

[2] Id.

[3] Wendy Sawyer and Peter Wagner, Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie 2022 (March 14, 2022) at https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2022.html

[4] Leviticus 24:17 (King James)

[5] Murray, Joseph, and David P. Farrington. The Effects of Parental Imprisonment on Children, Crime and Justice 37, no. 1 (2008): 133–206. https://doi.org/10.1086/520070.

[6] Benecchi, Liz, Recidivism Imprisons American Progress, (August 8, 2021) at https://harvardpolitics.com/recidivism-american-progress/

[7] Supra Note 1 at 280

[8] Exodus 22:1 (King James)

Criminal Justice Lawyer

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accident Lawyer. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a Youtube InstagramFacebookTwitterLinkedInTumblrBloggerRedditYelpAvvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

Integrative Legal Theory: Human Rights

In Professor Berman's Book Faith and Order, The Reconciliation of Law and Religion he details that natural law, legal positivism, and historical jurisprudence should be integrated. And, that this integration should guide the development of law. Also, It should be noted that this article is primarily from a class I took with Professor Lindevaldsen at Liberty University School of Law.

Integration of Legal Theory:

“All that needs to be subtracted from each of the three major schools of jurisprudence [Positivism, Naturalism, Historicism], in order to integrate them, is its assertion of its own supremacy,” essentially working together.[1]  Correspondingly, to say “that we are at the end of one era and at the beginning of another,” I believe is a correct assertion. [2] Unfortunately, those enforcing the law have always had their bad apples. What we are coming into today is an entirely different legal analysis. It is a deviation from the biblical standard and needs to be course corrected.

Today:

Accordingly, a Contemporary legal issue in the United States, is the decision to not be a part of the International Criminal Court or only selectively adopt parts of the United Nations laws.[3] Certainly, integrative Jurisprudence is primary to understanding this assertion and the cornerstone to it. Because as humanity evolves, a world order is bound to come to power, that has been our lineage.

Empires rise and fall and, each time a new millennium comes, the empires that rise to power are ever so much larger than in previous history. Though it is looking like the United Nations will be a dominate world order, a substantial world war could quickly change that, just like what happened to the League of Nations. Consequently, for this “world law” to work Positivism (making, interpreting, and applying law) must be considered with Naturalism (morality, justice) and those can only properly formulate our future through an understanding and application of Historicism (using the past to develop the future).[4]

Human Rights:

Historical experiences of the community must be taken into account when considering human rights covenants.[5] “The Golden Rule-which is the rule of equality, to treat all others with equal respect…” is really the basis of a lot of our laws and the legal system in general, it is at the basis of positivism, naturalism and what developed as historicism.[6] And, each of the schools of theory must be used, to dismiss one and only use the others would be a to enact a prejudice.

Biblical Standard:

These theory’s fall well within the Christian Biblical Worldview. The Golden Rule is almost verbatim repeated in scripture. For example, “And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.” Also, “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.” Furthermore, “Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.” My personal Favorite is “Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.”[7]

All of the foregoing pertains to the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice because, how can the United States(the most powerful country in the world) expect other nations to respect the United Nations yet exclude itself from its primary judiciary branch? The ethical standard for attorneys is also different under international law. The standard is higher then the current practice within the United States.

[1] Harold J. Berman, Faith and Order, The Reconciliation of Law and Religion p.310 (John Witte, Jr. 1993).

[2] Id. at 309

[3] Thomas W. McShane, THE UNITED STATES AND THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT, U. S. ARMY WAR COLLEGE GUIDE TO NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College, pp.245–64 (2012).

[4] Berman, supra note 1, at 283

[5] Id. at 282

[6] Id. at 285

[7] Luke 6:31 (King James); Matthew 7:12 (King James); Philippians 2:4 (King James); Ephesians 4:32 (King James).

Human Rights Attorney

Chris White Lawyer, LLC. is a Lynchburg, Virginia Law Firm. Available for consultations in person, via Facetime, Skype, Zoom or phone (434) 660-9701. Please also check out my practice areas in Criminal Defense Attorney and Car Accident Lawyer. At my Law Firm we focus on the best result for the client. To stay connected I have a Youtube , InstagramFacebookTwitter, LinkedInTumblr, BloggerRedditYelpAvvo and Justia.

Chris White lawyer, LLC

Cellphone: (434) 660-9701

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

700 12th St, Lynchburg, VA 24504

Available with appointment (434) 660-9701:

100 Tradewynd Dr. Lynchburg, VA 24502

linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram