Free Speech In the Aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo Massacre

Daily Telegraph; by Christopher Booker

As the dust begins to settle on those recent horrendous events in Paris, a clearer sense of perspective is starting to creep in round the edges. The Pope suggests that those who are too provocative to Islam can expect “a punch”. And even a co-founder of Charlie Hebdo says that its murdered editor’s urge to provoke had “dragged the team to its death”.
As the original editor of Private Eye, who over the years has probably contributed as many words as anyone to its “satirical” pages, I’m afraid that I have looked askance at much of what has been said and written about these events in recent days.
When David Cameron announced on Twitter that he was joining that vast rally in Paris “to celebrate the values of Charlie Hebdo”, one wondered whether he had even previously heard of that little magazine, let alone looked at its pages. Did he really wish to celebrate crude cartoons showing a naked Mohammed with a star coming out of his bottom, captioned: “A star is born”? Or another, captioned “The film that embraces all the Muslim world”, showing a naked Prophet holding a camera to his bottom, saying: “And my ass? You love my ass”?
Did our Prime Minister really want to applaud a picture of the Pope, scantily clad as a Rio prostitute, saying: “Ready for anything to win some clients?” Even these are only among the images available online. A friend living in France tells me of others even more dubious, showing Jesus masturbating, or the Virgin Mary engaging in sexual acts.
If this is meant to be “satire” that only someone without “a sense of humour” would find offensive, I suppose some might point to that strain of British cartooning exemplified by Gerald Scarfe. For decades, he has repeated images of some powerful man exposing his bottom to a lesser figure trying to kiss it. At different times, these might have represented Harold Wilson grovelling behind President Lyndon Johnson, or Tony Blair likewise behind President Bush, or David Cameron with Rupert Murdoch.

How ironic, one thought, that this mass demonstration in favour of “the freedom of the press” should take place in a country whose “Ministry of Culture” has lately detailed the huge state subsidies given to France’s leading newspapers, to help keep its press more cowed and tightly controlled than any west of Russia.
In a time when there is such pressure to prevent people saying things that do not conform with group-think – when every kind of “political correctness” rules; when Christians are arrested for quoting the Bible in the street, for fear of giving “offence to minorities”; when boarding-house owners are prosecuted for not wishing to let rooms to gay couples; when there are calls for “climate change deniers” to be sacked or put on trial; when judges repeatedly threaten people with imprisonment for trying to expose the travesties of justice in their “child protection” system – who really knows what “freedom of speech” is any longer?
There has been no better comment on the clouds of humbug recently billowing in all directions than the admission of BBC employees that they are under an edict from apparatchiks on high that they must not on any account describe to their audiences the contents of any of those Charlie Hebdo cartoons.
It is the kind of thing that made me want to put a collective photo-bubble on those shots of the politicians leading two million people through the streets, all in grey unanimity, intoning the words of the old song, “Clap hands, here comes Charlie”. They didn’t really have the faintest idea what they were talking about.

The Law of Visitation Rights Grandparents, Siblings & Domestic Partners

Often third parties such as grandparents, stepparents, and domestic partners of a biological parent have established a relationship with a minor child and desire to continue that relationship through regular contact with the child. The standards considered by the court in determining whether to award third parties visitation access to a minor child are discussed below. Essentially, the natural parent's proposed schedule of access is deemed to be presumptively in the minor child's best interest, and a third party has to show either parental unfitness or exceptional circumstances warranting visitation or custody rights exist. If the third party demonstrates either parental unfitness or exceptional circumstances, then the court will consider what schedule would be in the minor child's best interest.

FL § 9‑102 provides that an equity court may consider a petition for reasonable visitation of a grandchild by a grandparent; and if the court finds it to be in the best interests of the child, grant visitation rights to a grandparent. The statute applies to intact family situations also, there is no presumption in favor of grandparent visitation. In Koshko v. Haining, 398 Md. 404, 921 A.2d 171 (2007), the Court of Appeals held that “there must be a finding of either parental unfitness or exceptional circumstances demonstrating the current or future detriment to the child, absent visitation from his or her grandparents, as a prerequisite to application of the best interests analysis. Accordingly, we overrule the portions of Fairbanks, Maner, Beckman, Herrick, and Wolinski that are inconsistent with this holding.” The Court of Appeals in Koshko noted in footnote 23 that “At any evidentiary hearing on a petition, the petitioners must produce evidence to establish their prima facie case on the issue of either parental unfitness or exceptional circumstances as well as evidence sufficient to tip the scales of the best interests balancing test in their favor.” In Janice K. v. Margaret
K., 404 Md. 661, 948 A.2d 73 (2008), the Court of Appeals held that Maryland does not recognize "de facto" parenthood status and held that in order to overcome the "constitutional rights of a legal parent to govern the care, custody, and control of his or her child, even a person who would qualify as a de facto parent, who seeks visitation or custody, must demonstrate exceptional circumstances" or parental unfitness as a prerequisite to the court's consideration of the best interests of the child.

A natural parent’s proposed schedule of visitation is entitled to a rebuttable presumption that it is in the best interests of the child. Wolinski v. Browneller, 115 Md. App. 285, 693 A.2d 30 (1997). In Brice v. Brice, 133 Md. App. 302, 754 A.2d 1132 (2000), the Court of Special Appeals reversed a trial court’s order establishing a visitation schedule between the paternal grandparents and the child that was against the mother’s wishes. Under the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 120 S. Ct. 2054, 147 L.Ed. 49 (2000), application of FL § 9-102 violated mother’s constitutional due process right, i.e. her fundamental right to rear her child, where there was no showing she was unfit and mother did not oppose some visitation with the paternal grandparents. The appellate court did not invalidate the Maryland statute. The Court of Special Appeals, in In re: Tamara R., 136 Md. App. 236, 764 A.2d 844 (2000), analyzed Troxel v. Granville and applied the principles to a sibling visitation matter. “We conclude that the state’s interest in the protection of a minor child who has been removed from her parent’s care is sufficiently compelling to justify overriding her parent’s opposition to visitation with her sibling, if there is evidence that denial of sibling visitation also would harm the sibling whom the separated child seeks to visit.” In Herrick v. Wain, 154 Md.App. 222, 838 A.2d 1263 (2003), the Court of Special Appeals affirmed a Circuit Court for Montgomery County Order granting maternal grandmother visitation; trial court had considered surviving father’s concerns and the evidence rebutted presumption that father’s preferred schedule was in child’s best interest. See also Frase v. Barnhart, et. al., 379 Md. 100, 840 A.2d 114 (2003).
Both parents are necessary parties to the third party's action, pursuant to Maryland Rule 2‑211.

IF YOU ARE STOPPED FOR QUESTIONING

IF YOU ARE STOPPED FOR QUESTIONING
Stay calm. Don't run. Don't argue, resist or obstruct the police, even if you are innocent or police are violating your rights. Keep your hands where police can see them.
Ask if you are free to leave. If the officer says yes, calmly and silently walk away. If you are under arrest, you have a right to know why.
You have the right to remain silent and cannot be punished for refusing to answer questions. If you wish to remain silent, tell the officer out loud. In some states, you must give your name if asked to identify yourself.
You do not have to consent to a search of yourself or your belongings, but police may "pat down" your clothing if they suspect a weapon. You should not physically resist, but you have the right to refuse consent for any further search. If you do consent, it can affect you later in court.

IF YOU ARE STOPPED IN YOUR CAR
Stop the car in a safe place as quickly as possible. Turn off the car, turn on the internal light, open the window part way and place your hands on the wheel.
Upon request, show police your driver's license, registration and proof of insurance.
If an officer or immigration agent asks to look inside your car, you can refuse to consent to the search. But if police believe your car contains evidence of a crime, your car can be searched without your consent.
Both drivers and passengers have the right to remain silent. If you are a passenger, you can ask if you are free to leave. If the officer says yes, sit silently or calmly leave. Even if the officer says no, you have the right to remain silent.

IF YOU ARE QUESTIONED ABOUT YOUR IMMIGRATION STATUS
You have the right to remain silent and do not have to discuss your immigration or citizenship status with police, immigration agents or any other officials. You do not have to answer questions about where you were born, whether you are a U.S. citizen, or how you entered the country. (Separate rules apply at international borders and airports, and for individuals on certain nonimmigrant visas, including tourists and business travelers.)
If you are not a U.S. citizen and an immigration agent requests your immigration papers, you must show them if you have them with you. If you are over 18, carry your immigration documents with you at all times. If you do not have immigration papers, say you want to remain silent.
Do not lie about your citizenship status or provide fake documents.

IF THE POLICE OR IMMIGRATION AGENTS COME TO YOUR HOME
If the police or immigration agents come to your home, you do not have to let them in unless they have certain kinds of warrants.
Ask the officer to slip the warrant under the door or hold it up to the window so you can inspect it. A search warrant allows police to enter the address listed on the warrant, but officers can only search the areas and for the items listed. An arrest warrant allows police to enter the home of the person listed on the warrant if they believe the person is inside. A warrant of removal/deportation (ICE warrant) does not allow officers to enter a home without consent.
Even if officers have a warrant, you have the right to remain silent. If you choose to speak to the officers, step outside and close the door.

IF YOU ARE CONTACTED BY THE FBI
If an FBI agent comes to your home or workplace, you do not have to answer any questions. Tell the agent you want to speak to a lawyer first.
If you are asked to meet with FBI agents for an interview, you have the right to say you do not want to be interviewed. If you agree to an interview, have a lawyer present. You do not have to answer any questions you feel uncomfortable answering, and can say that you will only answer questions on a specific topic.

IF YOU ARE ARRESTED
Do not resist arrest, even if you believe the arrest is unfair.
Say you wish to remain silent and ask for a lawyer immediately. Don't give any explanations or excuses. If you can't pay for a lawyer, you have the right to a free one. Don't say anything, sign anything or make any decisions without a lawyer.
You have the right to make a local phone call. The police cannot listen if you call a lawyer.
Prepare yourself and your family in case you are arrested. Memorize the phone numbers of your family and your lawyer. Make emergency plans if you have children or take medication.
Special considerations for non-citizens:
- Ask your lawyer about the effect of a criminal conviction or plea on your immigration status.
- Don't discuss your immigration status with anyone but your lawyer.
- While you are in jail, an immigration agent may visit you. Do not answer questions or sign anything before talking to a lawyer.
- Read all papers fully. If you do not understand or cannot read the papers, tell the officer you need an interpreter.

IF YOU ARE TAKEN INTO IMMIGRATION (OR "ICE") CUSTODY
You have the right to a lawyer, but the government does not have to provide one for you. If you do not have a lawyer, ask for a list of free or low-cost legal services.
You have the right to contact your consulate or have an officer inform the consulate of your arrest.
Tell the ICE agent you wish to remain silent. Do not discuss your immigration status with anyone but your lawyer.
Do not sign anything, such as a voluntary departure or stipulated removal, without talking to a lawyer. If you sign, you may be giving up your opportunity to try to stay in the U.S.
Remember your immigration number ("A" number) and give it to your family. It will help family members locate you.
Keep a copy of your immigration documents with someone you trust.

IF YOU FEEL YOUR RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED
Remember: police misconduct cannot be challenged on the street. Don't physically resist officers or threaten to file a complaint.
Write down everything you remember, including officers' badge and patrol car numbers, which agency the officers were from, and any other details. Get contact information for witnesses. If you are injured, take photographs of your injuries (but seek medical attention first).
File a written complaint with the agency's internal affairs division or civilian complaint board. In most cases, you can file a complaint anonymously if you wish

  

Annulments

Even though it makes headlines when celebrities get an annulment of their marriages based on fraud or inability to perform, annulments are relatively rare.

Fraud is usually the basis for an annulment. Examples are failure to disclose a previous marriage, criminal record, infectious disease, the inability to have children, or the desire not to have children. Annulments have also been granted where a spouse mistakenly believes they have been divorced or widowed when in fact they are not, or the spouses are too closely related, or one party is underage, and did not obtain appropriate parental consent.

In Maryland, a marriage which qualifies as one suitable for annulment means there is some legal defect that invalidates the marriage such as a spouse that is married to someone else at the time of the second marriage or the parties are blood relatives or one is underage. You do not need to file a petition for an annulment with the court in the case of a void marriage although it may be wise to do so anyway so that you have a court order of annulment.

A voidable marriage, on the other hand, can only be annulled by filing a petition for annulment with the court and having a judge declare the marriage not to have happened. Examples of voidable marriages are sham marriages or joke marriages where the parties did not really intend to marry.  You can also ask the court for an annulment if you or your spouse were incapacitated at the time of marriage, as in insanity, intoxication, fraud or duress. Fraud can be hard to prove to a judge especially when the annulment is contested, so most people opt for a divorce instead. A divorce says the marriage is over. An annulment says it never happened.

Caribbean Glory

Caribbean Glory; a ceremony honoring our Carribbean brethren who fought a valiant effort in WWII. Dominican and British West Indian Soldiers of yesteryear sought to preserve our today with their honor, courage, and commitment to King & Country.

Caribbean Glory on YouTube

Please enjoy this along with many other related videos on our YouTube channel

(You can read more on the service and sacrifice of  the the British West Indian Military in my book "For King & Country", available on amazon.com)

~GJC

All About Expert Witness Testimony

The days of Perry Mason and the surprise witness are long gone. Today, more and more litigation centers around expert witness testimony.
"Objection overruled." Slowly all eyes turn toward you. It's time to answer. You, after all, are the expert witness. Despite your sweaty palms and pounding heart, an entire courtroom awaits your answer. Now if only you could remember the question. If only you could remember your name.

Serving as an expert witness can be a nightmare for the unprepared. Doctors, lawyers, C.P.A.'s and mental health professionals all experience anxiety when not fully prepared for the courtroom. The witness stand, however, doesn't have to be a source of fear. The following pages are designed to help demystify the legal process and provide the helpful, necessary tips a professional needs when called to the stand.
Discovery Lately, more and more professionals have been finding themselves involved in litigation as expert witnesses. For some, serving as an expert is a component of their professional practice. For others, it is a means of further assisting a client or patient involved in a legal dispute. Whichever is the case, an understanding of the overall process is critical.
Many first-time expert witnesses tend to think that the litigation process takes place in the courtroom. The reality, however, is that litigation begins months or even years before witnesses take the oath. The first step of this lengthy litigation process is called discovery.

Discovery is a phase of litigation that allows each side to prepare for court by exchanging documents and asking questions of the opposing party and witnesses. Expert witnesses become involved in the discovery process in two  ways. First, many experts serve as advisors during discovery to help the attorney ask the right questions and request the appropriate documents. Second, the expert witness is likely to be subjected to a deposition by the opposing attorney. Here, the expert is asked questions, under oath, by the attorney while answers are recorded by a court reporter.
Since depositions are considered "behind the scenes" litigation, the expert is often unaware of this stage until faced with it. It is essential, however, that the expert be well prepared for this part of the process. Since parties oftentimes settle disputes as the strengths and weaknesses of the case become apparent, the deposition is often the single most important aspect of litigation.

As a professional, understanding why lawyers conduct depositions gives you a broader set of defenses and survival skills. As you might guess, the reasons are many. For example, an attorney conducting a deposition is often preparing for trial as well as the future cross examination of the expert. With a deposition the lawyer can quickly determine an expert's opinion as well as the background analysis that led to it. Furthermore, the attorney is also assessing the expert as a trial witness. How will the expert impress the judge or jury? Does he or she present an authoritative opinion or is the presentation evasive? Does the witness become confused when asked about the particulars of a report? Often the deposition is the attorney's first opportunity to assess the trial outcome for the client.

In most situations, the deposition is the first opportunity an attorney has to fully evaluate the issues in the case. Evaluating a dispute and making solid recommendations to the client is difficult when hearing only one side of the story. By hearing the facts from an expert, rather than the client, the attorney is better prepared to advise the client on the probability of a successful outcome. For example, the client in a child custody dispute usually represents a biased view. In this case the deposition of the custody evaluator would offer a clearer picture of the facts and a more realistic prediction of the trial's result.

Depositions are also used for strategic reasons. In a courtroom, deposition testimony may be used to impeach witnesses who have contradicted their prior testimony. Sometimes an ill-prepared expert will say one thing at the deposition and another thing at the trial. The attorney then confronts the witness with inconsistent statements to challenge the validity of the testimony. For this reason an expert witness should review the deposition transcript before trial, especially since several months often pass between the deposition and the trial. Lawyers also use depositions to search for unknown information. The attorney representing a parent in a child custody case, for example, might depose the child's pediatrician in an attempt to discover as much as possible about the child's behavior and relationship with the parents. The hope is to discover a contradiction, evasion or other fact that would help the attorney prove the case.

Expert Participation A question often asked by professionals is, of course, "Do I have to go?" The answer is generally simple. Yes. If a subpoena is duly served upon you according to the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, you are required to appear. The sanctions for noncompliance include contempt of court and fines. In many cases, the attorneys gently request the aid of an expert witness without the need for the mandate of a subpoena. Nevertheless, a party is authorized in most cases to subpoena a witness who has material knowledge of the disputed issues. In such a case, the witness will only be excused if the court deems it appropriate.

The next and often more important question asked by professionals is, "Do I get paid?" The answer to this question is not as simple. Under the North Carolina General Statutes, a witness under subpoena of the court is entitled to  a nominal fee of five dollars. However, an expert's fees are paid in the discretion of the trial court. This means the trial judge will decide the appropriateness of the fee and who should pay it based on a variety of factors.

In an equitable distribution case, the judge might consider the reasonableness of the fee based on the time spent valuing the business, the difficulty of the valuation, whether the expert was agreed upon by both parties or whether one spouse hired the expert for the valuation of the business interests. In a child custody evaluation, the fee is often determined before trial so that one or both parents assure the expert that they will pay the bill. In any event, the professional who testifies should assure that fee arrangements have been made before providing expert services. This is generally accomplished before the court appearance by either obtaining a court order providing for payment of fees, or by entering into a fee arrangement with one or both parties.

One final question often asked is, "How long will this take?" Obviously this varies from case to case. There are, however, a few simple ways to minimize the amount of your time required. First, before appearing in court, arrange with  counsel to reduce your waiting time. Often a subpoena will direct you to appear  on the first day of trial even though your testimony takes place several days later. Just ask the attorney to phone you when you are needed. It's not uncommon for counsel to work with you to avoid protracted delays. In fact, a considerate attorney might even work around your schedule to reduce the disruption to your practice. Put simply, there is no reason to hesitate asking the attorney for help with scheduling.

The Trial Although an overwhelming number of contested disputes are settled before the time of trial, the day will come when you are asked to step up on the stand, take the oath and render your expert opinion. It all begins with the direct examination. Trial attorneys often quip that they win cases on direct examination and lose cases on cross examination. The attorney preparing your direct examination is acutely aware of that adage and will bolster your examination in every way possible. The time spent preparing your testimony with the lawyer will prove enormously helpful when faced with the weight of testifying as an expert.

The first hurdle for any expert witness to overcome is the qualification phase. In this phase, the attorney presents evidence of the witness' professional and educational qualifications prior to the judge hearing an opinion from that expert. Often attorneys will agree before the time of trial to the qualification of an expert.
On the other hand, in a hotly fought child custody case a clinical psychologist's expert qualifications may be disputed if the psychologist lacks detailed child development expertise. Likewise, the impressive qualifications of an experienced business valuation expert may be contested when the court is seeking the expert's valuation of an unusual commercial venture.

The following information is often sought when establishing the qualifications of the expert:
Where did you obtain your professional training? What degrees have you obtained and on what dates? What certifications and licenses do you hold? Are you a member of any professional organizations? How many years of experience do you have in your field? What is your area of practice and degree of specialization? How familiar are you with the major research in your field? Are you a published author in your field? Do you have teaching experience? Have you been an expert witness before? How many similar cases have you been involved in? Once the witness is qualified as an expert, the attorney will proceed to question the expert's opinion and basis for that opinion. At this point, the expert's ability to convey the information in a reasonable and credible fashion is paramount. With that in mind, it helps to follow three simple but critical guidelines.
First, speak clearly and slowly. Anxiety on a courtroom witness stand is normal and expected. That anxiety is lessened when you focus on your word choice and slow down your testimony.

Second, listen to the question carefully and answer only the question put to you. The attorney's job is to ask careful, directed questions. Let the attorney play that role and answer only the question asked. The goal is to present the testimony in an orderly manner so that the judge is better able to understand information. When a witness responds to a question that was not asked it may lead to an objection by the opposing attorney and disrupt the flow of information. Further, the witness may unintentionally provide ammunition for cross examination. Always let the attorney conducting the direct examination orchestrate the flow of information by responding only to the questions presented.

Third, if you don't know the answer to the question, say so. Do not guess. The attorney conducting the examination may be allowed to help you refresh your memory with prior statements or notes. If you make the mistake of guessing and you guess wrong, your credibility evaporates immediately. Instead of benefiting your client or patient, you have become a huge liability. So don't let professional pride force you onto thin ice: the text of prior deposition testimony may come back to haunt you as a contradiction. It should also be noted, of course, that stating you do not remember something when in fact you do is a violation of your oath. Just answer every question truthfully.

Cross Examination Cross examination is the portion of the trial that most expert witnesses dread. But once again a few pointers will provide you with the skills to face even the most talented of litigators.
First, answer fair questions directly and honestly. Not every question is intended to trip up the witness. Some questions are merely laying groundwork for upcoming questions. Also, some questions, especially when posed by an inexperienced cross examiner, are simply off the mark and not calculated to gain anything at all. Remember, few trial attorneys dispute that cross examination is a difficult task. If you decide to answer every simple question by splitting hairs, you may be discrediting your prior testimony without realizing it.
Second, do not argue. This is a trap. The skilled cross examiner will win an argument with a witness. So simply do not participate. Remember to remain calm, composed and focused on the knowledge you possess. If you begin to appear impassioned about the argument, your credibility as an impartial observer or evaluator is diminished. You want to convey that you are someone with information whom the court needs in order to make an accurate decision, not someone who is advocating a position and/or person.
Third, pause before you answer. Often the examiner will attempt to engage the witness in the cadence and rhythm of the questions so that the witness will answer quickly without thoroughly thinking. "You did meet the mother, right? You met with the father too? And you pride yourself on the thoroughness of your custody evaluations, correct?"

If you begin answering the questions even before the examiner has completed the entire question, you know you are caught in the examiner's web. Try to imagine the attorney/witness exchange as a tennis match. Every time a question is served to you, carefully set yourself in position, get your racket in place, your feet in place, your body properly aligned. Then you are prepared to respond. The wonderful distinction between tennis and cross examination is that the courtroom is a much slower place. Take all the time you need, have some water, take a breath; then, when fully prepared, answer the question. As long as you are preparing yourself for your response and thinking completely about the best way to volley the ball back to your cross examiner, you will survive with your testimony and dignity intact.

Conclusion For an expert witness, the courtroom can certainly be an intimidating environment. It can also be an exciting forum in which the witness plays a critical and often pivotal role. Preparation and knowledge are the keys to assuring that your appearance on the stand is an effective one.

~GJC

Latest news links

- Missing MD woman in Aruba case


- news in The Dominican

~GJC