Blog Archives

The Nurse In Utah, Blood Draws, The 4th Amendment, SCOTUS Decisions And More

Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Here is a disclaimer that might be necessary because of people who want to pick at every word I write to falsely accuse me of practicing law or trying to be a lawyer.  What follows regarding the constitution and state rights are things that I learned in my senior year of high school.  My freshman year college political science class and junior college class in business law also play significant roles in what I learned and retained about courts and the law. So there!

Alex Wubbels

When I heard about Alex Wubbels, the nurse in Utah who was taken into custody for refusing to allow a blood draw on an unconscious patient, it was as if I was taken back into time.  Not only was I taken back in time to remember those political science, social studies and business law classes, but also because I thought the controversy over blood draws and hospitals had been resolved years ago.

When reading the opinions of some others,  I wonder if the books assigned to classes or even the teachers or professors fully addressed that the issue in America’s Civil War was over the rights of the states? That war was to decide whether the federal government had political power to regulate or abolish slavery within individual states.  The federal government did abolish slavery in the land, and also gave states the right to legislate their own laws as long as those laws do not violate the U.S. Constitution.

When the Supreme Court of the United States decides to hear cases involving state laws, they decide them based on the U.S. Constitution.  Read the rest of this entry

Jury Finds City of Rockford Liable For Cops Reckless Conduct

Mark Anthony BarmoreThrough the years, some of you might have read when I’ve reported on the 2009 death of Mark Anthony Barmore in Rockford, IL.

It’s not often that I write editorials or opinion pieces.   About this matter, this time is different because this case happened in the city where I live.  Although Illinois has agreed to allow the media in courtrooms, we only get a 3 to 5 second snippet of trials in local television news.

When Mark was killed in 2009, I learned first-hand that things I had heard about Rockford were true.  I had heard that those raised in Rockford do not like “outsiders.” When Oda Poole and Stan North killed Mark, sections of the community demonstrated and people came from elsewhere in their support.  The Rev. Jesse Jackson was one such person.  An employee of the county personally stated to me that she did not know why “outsiders” had to come to Rockford.  Well, because “insiders” showed no concern. Mark was reported to be the fourth unarmed Black man killed by Oda Poole.  It was business as usual.

Rev. Jackson saw Mark’s body — at least two bullet holes in his back.  There were no wounds in the front of Mark’s body.  This indicated that Mark was shot in the back. Winnebago County Coroner Sue Fiduccia remarked to the Rev. Jackson’s observation that he is not a physician.  The insult to intelligence spoke volumes, and she continued being reelected because she ran for office unopposed.

The final investigation into the killing of Mark Anthony Barmore resulted in a finding that the police officers were wrong to enter the premises with their guns drawn.

There have been lawsuits. The Estate of Mark Anthony Barmore filed suit. Five years after Mark was killed, the City of Rockford settled that lawsuit for $1.1 million. Read the rest of this entry

%d bloggers like this: