Facebook
Home Criminal Page 29

Criminal

Robber’s Mother Guilty in Conspiring to Rob Armored Car

Robber’s Mother Guilty in Conspiring to Rob Armored Car


On October 16, 2012, the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland announced that Regina McCullom, also known as Regina Wilson, pleaded guilty to a gun charge and conspiring to rob an armored car when the car was transporting a large amount of cash.  


During a former guilty plea, McCullom admitted that she and her son, Erik Wilson, planned to rob an armored car at gunpoint.  Erik Wilson worked for Dunbar Armored and knew the robbery was going to occur on when the armored car was traveling throughout Washington D.C.  He acted surprised when the co-defendants robbed the armored car and made off with roughly $210,000.  


A second robbery occurred on April 29, 2009.  McCullom drove her son and David Howard to an apartment complex in Silver Spring, Maryland where they put on fake beards.  McCullom waited with the first vehicle as Howard and Erick Wilson left in another vehicle to rob a Dunbar truck.  The second robbery occurred on New Hampshire Avenue, and Wilson was able to steal $160,000 and the Dunbar guard’s handgun.  


The two men then traveled back to the apartment complex and met McCullom.  She left in a taxi with the money and handgun in a duffel bag.  She returned home and met her son and Howard at a hotel in Columbia.  They divided the cash in a room.  


Erick Wilson and David Marquise Howard pleaded guilty to the two armed car robberies.  They will be sentenced on November 20-21 of 2012.  


McCullom pled guilty to the first armored car robbery and was sentenced in 2009.  After pleading guilty to the second armored car robbery, she now faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for conspiracy and a minimum of five years for aiding and abetting with a firearm during a crime of violence.  She can receive life in prison for the firearm charge as well.  


Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation

Man Attempted to Assassinate Saudi Ambassador to US

Man Attempted to Assassinate Saudi Ambassador to US


On October 17, 2012, the Department of Justice announced that Manssor Arbabsiar plotted to assassinate the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the United States.  The Department of Justice states Arbabsiar worked with Iran and held both Iranian and U.S. passports.  


During his superseding indictment, he faces three counts.  The first count charges Arbabsiar with traveling for foreign commerce and planning murder-to-hire commission.  The second count charges Arbabsiar with conspiracy and the third count charges him with attempting to commit a crime against the United States.  He faces a maximum of 25 years in prison, and since he is already 58 years of age, he may spend the rest of his life in prison.  


During his guilty plea, Arbabsiar admitted that he discussed the crimes with ranking officials in Iran’s military during the fall of 2011.  He then traveled to Mexico several times in 2011 to meet a person he believed was part of a drug cartel and could hire to assassinate the ambassador.  The person was actually an undercover DEA agent.  He discussed plans to kill the ambassador at a restaurant in Washington, D.C., and he set up installments for a $100,000 down payment with the undercover DEA agent.  


Arbabsiar and the Iranian military planned to give the undercover agent a total of $1.5 million for the assassination.  In early August of 2011, Arbabsiar sent two different overseas wire transfers totaling $100,000 to the undercover agent’s account.  


Arbabsiar tried to fly into Mexico on September 28, 2011, but he was denied entry and forced to return to his last point of departure.  He was arrested by FBI agents at JFK International Airport on September 29, 2011.  


DEA Administrator Michele M. Leonhart stated, “The dangerous connection between drug trafficking and terrorism cannot be overstated, and this case is yet another example of DEA’s unique role in identifying potentially deadly networks that wish to harm innocent Americans and our allies worldwide.”  


Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation
 

Florida Man Arrested for Smuggling Dinosaur Fossils

Florida Man Arrested for Smuggling Dinosaur Fossils


On October 17, 2012, Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced that Eric Prokopi of Gainesville, Florida, was arrested for illegally importing multiple dinosaur fossils into the United States.  He was arrested by ICE Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agents.  


The complaint against Prokopi states he conspired to import at Tyrannosaurus bataar skeleton from Mongolia, a Saurolophus angustirostris skeleton from Mongolia, and a Microraptor skeleton from China.  Prokopi is charged with one count of conspiring to smuggle illegal goods, one count of possessing stolen property, and one count of making false statements.  He faces a maximum sentence of 35 years in prison.  


According to court documents, Prokopi owns a business in Florida called “Everything Earth,” and he describes himself as a commercial paleontologist.  He trades partial skeletons, but he unlawfully transported fossils from foreign countries from 2010 to 2012.  The fossils from Mongolia are the only ones of their kind, and they lawfully belong to the Mongolian government.  


The Tyrannosaurus bataar fossil is about 70 million years old, and Prokopi misrepresented the contents of the package when he imported it into the United States.  The skeleton was later sold at an auction in New York City for over $1 million.  


Prokopi sold three other fossils from Mongolia as well.  He sold a Saurolophus angustirostris fossil to the I.M. Chait gallery in California, and he also sold two fossils of a Gallimimus and Oviraptor mongoliensis.  He imported fossils of a small flying dinosaur called a Microraptor from China.  


Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara stated, “As alleged, our recent seizure of the Tyrannosaurus bataar skeleton from Eric Prokopi was merely the tip of the iceberg—our investigation uncovered a one-man black market in prehistoric fossils.  In addition to our commitment to ensuring that these relics are returned to their countries of origin, we are equally committed to shutting down Prokopis illegal business and holding him to account for his alleged crimes.”


Source: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Albuquerque Man Robbed 4 Businesses, Violated Hobbs Act

Albuquerque Man Robbed 4 Businesses, Violated Hobbs Act


On October 16, 2012, the US Attorney’s Office for the District of New Mexico announced that Oscar Marquez was charged with four counts of violating the Hobbs Act and four counts of using a firearm to commit the crime of violence.  He violated the Hobbs Act by “interfering by robbery with a business involved in interstate commerce.”


According to the indictment, Marquez robbed a total of four businesses in Albuquerque between May 28, 2012 and June 9, 2012.  He used a firearm in all of the robberies, and he discharged the firearm in the last two robberies.  The co-defendant, Rebecca Aquilar, was involved in the last set of robberies.  


Marquez is charged with robbing Captain D’s restaurant on May 28, robbing Cricket Wireless Store on May 29, robbing King Wireless Store on June 7, and robbing another Cricket Wireless Store on June 9.  He used a firearm during all of the robberies, and he discharged the weapons during the robberies of the Cricket Wireless Stores.  


Marquez faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a fine up to $250,000 for each count of violating the Hobbs Act.  Using a firearm in furtherance of a crime has a mandatory sentence of 7 years in prison and a fine up to $250,000.  Discharging a firearm during a crime of violence has a mandatory sentence of 10 years in prison and a fine up to $250,000.  


Rebecca Aguilar was arraigned and released on the same day to a halfway house.  She is on supervision until her trial.  


The case was investigated by the FBI’s Violent Crimes and Major Offender Squad as well as the Albuquerque Police Department’s Armed Robbery Unit.  The two squads work under a program called that New Mexico Federal Gang Task Force which targets the most dangerous offenders.  


Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation

Two Texans Indicted for Making Animal Torture Videos

Two Texans Indicted for Making Animal Torture Videos


On November 28, 2012, Ashley Nicole Richards and Brent Justice of Houston were indicted for making what US Attorney Kenneth Magidson calls “animal crush videos.”  Both of the defendants have remained in state custody since August 15, 2012, but they are expected to go into federal custody and make an initial court appearance soon.  


An “animal crush video” is any “photograph, motion-picture film, video or digital recording, or electronic image that depicts actual conduct in which one or more living non-human mammals, birds, reptiles, or amphibians is intentionally crushed, burned, drowned, suffocated, impaled, or otherwise subjected to serious bodily injury, and is obscene” as defined under the Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act of 2010.  


According to the seven-count indictment, Justice and Richards created eight videos showing the torturing and killing of puppies and kittens.  The disturbing and obscene videos were created from February 2010 to August 2012 and then distributed.  Authorities have not noted if the heinous videos were distributed over the internet or by hand.  


Richards and Justice remain innocent until proven guilty.  


If they are convicted, Richards and Justice face a maximum penalty of seven years in prison for each of the animal crush charges and up to five years for each obscenity charge.  Each count carries a maximum fine of $250,000 and three years of supervised release as well.  


The Houston Police Department initially investigated the case and began to work with the FBI’s Field Office in Houston.  Assistant U.S. Attorney Sherri L. Zack is in charge of prosecution.  


It’s a sad reality when innocent animals that could have otherwise had a happy and long life are subjected to such grotesque human acts.  


Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation
 

Cartels

CartelsCartels and Their Role in the Market



A cartel is an explicit or formal agreement among firms that are in competition with each other. By creating a cartel, it sets up a formal organization of manufacturers and produces that decide and agree on fixed prices, production, and marketing to increase the profits of the participants. This allows the participating producers to constrain other competing companies outside of the cartel and potentially create a monopoly of the product in the market.
Topics discussed on in a cartel agreement can include:
• Price Fixing
• Bid rigging
• Market Shares
• Total industry output
• Allocation of territories
• Allocation of customers
• Establishment of sales agencies
• Division of profits among participants.
Cartels can often be found in markets that have a smaller number of sellers and in turn, less competition. It also applies to a product that is relatively homogenous and has few variations between sellers. 
Because of antitrust laws (specifically the Sherman Antitrust Act which passed in 1890), cartels are no longer legal in the United States and creating one is considered a federal crime. However, many European countries do allow cartels to operate. These cartels influence the prices of imported goods that come into the United States. Drug cartels in other countries also affect the United States, as many illegal narcotics are smuggled into the United States.
Cartels can be classified as being either private or public.
• Public: The government is involved in order to regulate and enforce the cartel agreements made. The sovereignty of the government protects the cartels from any legal actions made against them.
• Private: These cartels can be legally liable under whatever antitrust laws are in placed in the country of question.
Most competition laws and antitrust laws forbid private cartel agreements. It is important to spot and break up these private cartels because of competition policy that are found in most countries, although it is rarely an easy task to prove the existence of a cartel agreement since many of the involved parties are extremely careful not to leave physical evidence of such a thing.
Many different legal decisions and economic studies of antitrust authorities have concluded that the median increase in price accomplished by these cartels was about 25% in the last 200 years. Private cartels with participants from two or more countries created an average increase of price of 28%, whereas private domestic cartels averaged 18%. Less than 10% of all cartels used in the sample did not raise the market price of their product.
One example of a cartel is the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC. This cartel is between the governments of The United Arab Emirates, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iraq, Libya, Kuwait, Iran, Angola, Ecuador, and Algeria.
OPEC represents countries that produce major sources of oil in the Middle East, South America, and Africa. While not as powerful as they once were, they have some control of gas prices and cannot be held accountable for being in a cartel due to public international law giving them doctrine of state immunity.

Prison Reentry

Prison Reentry

What do Prison Reentry Programs Do?
Prison reentry programs are designed to promote effective reintegration of prisoners and offenders back into their communities after being released from jail or prison. Many of these prison reentry programs require a very comprehensive approach to the case and works to help offenders in receiving the proper skills needed to become citizens that follow the law. By creating prison reentry programs, it helps reduce recidivism rates.
There are many different prison reentry programs, such as vocational training, work programs, and prerelease programs. One particular initiative is supported by the United States Department of Justice, and is known as the Prisoner Reentry Initiative. It is also supported by the Office of Justice Programs, as well as other federal programs such as the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Labor, and Housing and Urban Development.
This initiative is a complete effort that looks at both adult and juvenile groups of very high-risk offenders. It provides resources to create, set up, improve, and evaluate many reentry strategies used to ensure the safety of the community by reducing serious, violent crimes.
This is done through preparation of the selected offenders in order to successfully integrate them into their communities after having served a long period of secure confinement in an adult or juvenile correctional facility, a state training school, or other secure institution.
In these prison reentry initiatives, some goals include providing education, job training, mental health treatment, substance abuse treatment, mentoring, and risk assessment. The initiative then works to proper monitoring and training as well as other assessment to help transition the individual into society. 
Long term programs are also included to help provide various social services and community based groups to provide continuing services and mentor relationships if necessary. These programs are often implemented are often implemented the first year and a half after release from jail or prison.
Another approach to prison reentry is through reentry courts. These courts offer the chance for even more extensive treatment and management of offenders at the beginning of the sentencing phase. The goal is to promote accountability of the offender while giving services and treatment during the prison reentry phase.
These programs can be very helpful because annually, almost 650,000 individuals are released from federal and state prison doorsteps. Even more come out of local jails and have often been in and out of jail more than once. For example, The Bureau of Justice Statistics found that in a study consisting of 15 states, over 67% of the released state prisoners were rearrested, over half of them returning to prison within three years.

Verbal Abuse

Verbal Abuse

What Counts as Verbal Abuse?


Verbal abuse is best thought of as an emotional environment that is ongoing that is created by an abuser to the abused, most often for the point of maintaining control. One of the primary underlying factors in the dynamics of a relationship with verbal abuse is the fact that the abuser has low self-esteem or opinions for him or herself. Because of this, the abuser tries to put their victim in a lowered position to make them believe similar things through a warped projection.
Verbal abuse can include:
• accusing
• berating
• blaming
• blocking
• bullying
• countering
• defaming
• defining
• discounting
• diverting
• harassing
• insulting
• interrogating
• lying
• name-calling
• putting down
• raging
• taunting
• threatening
• trivializing
• withholding
• yelling
Some examples of verbal abuse include:
• Control by telling a victim how to feel and what to think while refusing to understand the victim’s perspective. The abuser may object verbally in a violent way to the victim’s desires or inions. 
• Withholding support, affection, information or money and denying it when the abuser is confronted.
• Isolating a victim by blocking outside relationships to family and friends. The abuser works tries to convince the victim that the only person who truly cares about the victim or likes the victim is the abuser. Occasionally, the verbal abuser may be willing to admit to this behavior, and agrees to end it, but the behavior tends to quickly restart.
 Verbal abuse can happen to any person of any race, gender, sexual orientation, culture, size or age. It is seen most often in is especially prevalent in marital relationships. Most often, the intensity of verbal abuse will increase over time and can even escalate to a point where it becomes physical abuse as well.
Often in a relationship with intense verbal abuse, the victim often suffers from very low self-esteem along with low self-worth. Because of the verbal abuse, a victim can easily fall into post-traumatic stress disorder or even clinical depression.
Despite verbal abuse being one of the more common forms of abuse, it is normally not considered to be as seriously as other forms of abuse, since no visible proof comes out of verbal abuse. However, verbal abuse can sometimes be more harmful to the individual’s well-being than physical abuse.
If verbal abuse starts at a young age, it can contribute greatly to borderline personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder, codependency, and many other psychological disorders that often continue on into adulthood.
Individuals who feel they are being verbally attacked by an abuser regularly should try to get professional counsel and get out of the hurtful environment as much as possible. Staying in an environment with a verbal abuser is extremely damaging for a person’s well-being.

Most Wanted

Most Wanted

Most Wanted in the United States


There are many different most wanted lists based on the level of government and the government or law enforcement agency involved. The most commonly known one in the United States is the Federal Bureau of Investigations most wanted list that started in the middle of the 20th century.
The Ten Most Wanted List is one of the most well know FBI list that have been in existence since March of 1950. The list was designed by the FBI with the country’s new media in order to publicize dangerous fugitives in order to receive more public assistance in tracking these fugitives. These names are chosen by the 56 field offices of the FBI who submit their candidates for the list to the Criminal Investigative Division. Selected candidates are approved by the Assistant director and then the FBI’s director.

Different FBI Wanted Lists
The FBI has different lists based on the crimes.
• Ten Most Wanted
• Parental Kidnappings
• Most Wanted Terrorists
• Crime Alerts
• Crimes Against Children
In order to be on the list, an individual must have a long record of committing crimes or be a very dangerous menace to society. The case must also benefit from public awareness. The first person to be put on the list was Thomas James Holden, who had murdered his wife and two of her relatives. Since then 949 fugitives have been put on the list, while 464 of them have been located or apprehended.

Currently the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted Fugitives are:
• Jason Derek Brown
• Victor Manuel Gerena
• James J. Bulger
• Eduardo Ravelo
• Robert William Fisher
• Joe Luis Saenz
• Alexis Flores
Semion Mogilevich
• Glen Stewart Godwin
• Osama Bin Laden (who is now deceased)

Other Most Wanted Lists Kept by Government or Law Enforcement Agencies
• U.S. Marshal’s Most Wanted list consists of those with a history of many violent crimes who are possibly armed and dangerous.
• U.S. Postal Inspection Service has a list for those who have committed robbery, mail fraud, harming postal employees, and other crimes.
• Secret Service Most wanted Fugitives
• Interpol International Police Organization
• The Drug Enforcement Administration maintains their own lists of most wanted fugitives based on Field Division. They also keep a list of major international fugitives as well.
• The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and firearms has a wanted list.
• Environmental Protection Agency’s list of fugitives includes those who have broken the EPA’s rules.
Many states jurisdictions also have their own most wanted lists. For example, California’s most wanted list is kept by the Department of Justice, while New York’s list is kept by the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision. 

Execution

Execution

Execution in the United States


Lawful execution through the death penalty or capital punishment is the death sentence upon an individual through the judicial process as punishment for an offence by the individual. Crimes that can result in being sentenced to execution are considered capital offenses or capital crimes.
Capital is a term that originates from capitalis, a Latin word, that literally means “regarding the head”. The idea originated from the fact that originally, a capital crime was punishable by severing the body from the head.
Capital punishment has existed and been practiced by the majority of societies, while only 58 countries currently actively practice it. 95 countries have abolished execution while the countries remaining have not used it for over a decade or only have used in in extreme circumstances such as during wartime.
In the United States, capital punishment is practically applied to only aggravated murder, although occasionally it is applied to felony murder. Prior to the Declaration of Independence, executions were an enforced penalty for many felonies. After the American Revolution, execution was still maintained with the United States common law system.
Execution is a very controversial idea in many different states and countries and positions often rely on or are based off of a political or cultural ideology or a religious belief. In the United States, Capital punishment has constantly been a contentious social issue. Historically, the majority of the public favors it in murder cases, yet this support has changed over time.
The procedures of execution and the crimes that can warrant it vary by state by state and jurisdiction by jurisdiction and have done so throughout American history. Currently, 34 four jurisdictions have banned execution by law, while others have simply suspended its use. Meanwhile there are a few that are attempting to increase its applicability. In 2008 there were 37 executions in the United States and 46 executions in 2010, where all but two lethal injection.
In the 37 states as well as the federal government that have execution statutes, only five methods of execution are prescribed:
• Lethal Injection
• Lethal Gas
• Electrocution
Firing Squad
• Hanging. 
Most of the executions performed in the United States are by lethal injection. However, more than half the jurisdictions also provide for alternative methods. The choice of method can be based off of:
• The Inmate’s choice
• Date of sentence or execution
• Change of method being unconstitutional
Currently, Nebraska is the only state that does not have lethal injection as the main choice of execution. It also does not provide other options besides electrocution as the only method of execution. Currently, none of the states provide hanging, lethal gas, or a firing squad for the only method of execution.
Since the death penalty laws were reinstatement in 1976, New Jersey became the first state to repeal its laws in 2007. The Nebraska Supreme Court also repealed the laws in 2008 by saying the electric chair was not constitutional as a method of execution. Since there are no alternative methods, Nebraska in practice does not have a death penalty.
1...282930...38Page 29 of 38
Facebook

EVEN MORE NEWS

POPULAR CATEGORY

©

Attorneys, Get Listed

Let's Do It
X