Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

It’s Gary Farber Pledge Period

Say what you like about sometime discourse.net commenter Gary Farber, but even when he's having medical issues and hard times, he's not doing the hard sell for his pledge drive:

Amygdala: IT'S GARY FARBER PLEDGE DRIVE WEEK!

I've been understandably asked at times why someone should help me. And, truth be told, I can't think of any particularly good reason. So I certainly don't expect help from anyone: if you've done it before, you've arguably done your part. If you've not, there's no good reason you should start, and not help someone more deserving instead.

Gary is applying for SSI, because he hasn't worked enough to be eligible for Social Security disability.

Why's he asking?

I, in panic-stricken fashion, semi-coherently explained my situation of lifelong recurring clinical depression, as well as other health issues, and that I'd finally decided to apply for Social Security disability, having rightly or wrongly put off that option for decades.

I, with utter shame, loathing, guilt, self-hatred, and a feast of other negative self-directed emotions — as is my wont — asked for people's help, and an amazing number of people did help, in many ways, including the most important way to help, which was with hard cash. At the time, I said I was afraid I'd need to ask for help again within three months.

Now it's almost a year later, and I've just paid the December rent of $500 and the phone bill ($35), and I'm now down to a total of $241.00 in my bank account, and $22 in my pocket.

(The horrible fear that has loomed larger every day and night in my consciousness, and in the pit it creates in my stomach, in the past year is that you won't, in sufficient numbers, again. My fear is that one can't go back to the well again. That I'll wind up with only a few donations, and a few links, and just a bit of response, and have no idea what to do to survive with my disabilities and inabilities and problems until such time as my disability claim is approved. Terror over this has been the dominant theme in my life in recent months, and all I can say is that I'm hoping you'll help it go away, at least for a while.)

OK, maybe not quite the soft sell.

Every year I'm torn — give to people or give to causes? Mostly I do causes on the theory that systemic changes will in the end help more people. But the people need help now.

Posted in Blogs | 1 Comment

Florida Quarantines the Radioactive Securities

Florida Moves to Guard Assets:

… the pool, whose assets were hit by mass withdrawals after reports it had about $2 billion of holdings tied to wobbly subprime mortgages, could be reopened on a restricted basis as early as Thursday.

… about 86 percent of the pool's assets would be placed in one fund. A second fund would be walled off and would contain worrisome assets, totaling about 14 percent of the total. The restructuring places limits on withdrawals.

Oh, and they found the first candidate for scapegoat:

Immediately before the vote, the board's executive director, Coleman Stipanovich, resigned after seven years in the post.

Earlier posts:

Posted in Econ & Money: Mortgage Mess | Comments Off on Florida Quarantines the Radioactive Securities

Bush as a Potted Plant

Kevin Hayden has it half right:

The American Street » Blog Archive » Let's assume Bush was telling the truth today: Even if we grant him the credibility that he was telling the truth about the NIE report (which was withheld from the public all year… by whom?) ask yourself if the world's most powerful leader is suggesting World War II may be possible, and if his team is failing to let him know what the NIE said till a week ago, and if he had a vague suggestion in August that the NIE contained different information that was notable, then:

1) This is December. Why did he wait three months for a followup?

2) If his staff is withholding such critical information for all year, doesn't it indicate someone's judgment is faulty?

No, it means the staff knows better than to interrupt the Bush brush clearing with pesky details. And Cheney and Addington make the decisions. Or at least made them until Gates teamed up with the CIA…

I'd really like to see someone asking the GOP candidates in a debate to grade the Bush presidency. How many would dare give it even a B-? But how many would dare go lower?

Posted in Iran | 2 Comments

Grand Jury Brooklyn: Due Process, from NYC to CIA

A Brooklyn grand jury has something to teach us about the rule of law — and about the CIA's secret prisons and Guantanamo too.

The author of the essay that follows, John Sifton, is an attorney and private investigator, and the director of One World Research, an investigation firm specializing in human rights and public interest cases. He posted the essay that follows to a mailing list I belong to. I liked it and asked him if I could link to it, but it turned out that it hasn't been published anywhere. John has graciously allowed me to publish it here for the first time.


Grand Jury Brooklyn: Due Process, from NYC to CIA

By John Sifton

A few months ago, in the waning days of summer, I experienced the privilege-and the banality-of serving on a criminal grand jury in Brooklyn.

For two weeks, sworn to secrecy, my fellow jurors and I heard indictments in a catalog of felony cases: murder, assault, sexual abuse, drug and weapon possession, robbery, larceny, and sundry other violations of the New York Penal Code. We listened to testimony from victims, witnesses, police officers, and alleged perpetrators and alibi-providers, and we deliberated on whether to issue indictments. It was an edifying ordeal.

My jury of 23 was a classic Brooklyn bevy: various ethnicities, ages, races, and backgrounds. Our group included subway train drivers, sanitation workers, teachers, and various others from across the socio-economic ladder (but gravitating toward the lower end). The core of the jury was comprised of women, 18 in total: eleven black, two white, two Hispanic (one old and one young), a Russian matriarch, a two young woman of East Asian and South Asian descent. The remaining five males included three black men (including the foreman), me (“the white guy”) and a very young Israeli with dual citizenship who had just finished military service guarding border posts on the West Bank. During the two weeks of service, some interesting and unexpected cliques formed.

How I came to sit on this jury was a matter of controversy to my friends and employers.

“You couldn't get out of it?” friends asked. Colleagues were also incredulous. I am a human rights lawyer and a private investigator and I work on a lot of cases involving detainees at Guantanamo Bay or secret CIA prisons-facilities in which grand juries are not used. Few believed that prosecutors allowed me to serve. Others were amazed that I didn't lie outright in order to avoid service, as others apparently have. (Various lies suggested: “I'm a Quaker, etc.” “I'm a vociferous racist; I just can't be impartial,” and “I typically have to urinate every five to ten minutes.”)

The truth is, it isn't easy to get out of grand jury service. Grand juries aren't like trial juries. Unlike trial juries, there is no adversarial process, no judges and no lawyers for the defendants; the only officials present are Assistant District Attorneys (ADAs), who run the process with a subtle but steely fist. The ADAs aren't as anxious about particular jurors as attorneys might be with trial juries. Unlike with a trial jury, votes are not as momentous, and a single juror is not as vital.

After all, grand juries do not decide guilt. Instead, they vote to indict people, and the voting need not be unanimous, nor do those who vote to indict need to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed a crime. All that is needed for an indictment is that a majority of the jury, 12 out of 23, believe that it is reasonably likely that the person accused of a crime actually committed it, based on the evidence presented. Twelve Angry Men, it's not. A single Henry Fonda character, or even a vacillating Hamlet, can't screw up an indictment.

So there was little chance of escape. In the initial excusal process, wardens excuse non-working parents with children under five, doctors, non-English speakers, certain small business owners, and people with serious health problems. Others postpone their service temporarily, as I did on three previous occasions. But there are few hopes beyond this. Once you-the hapless citizen of Brooklyn-receive your summons, you're snagged in a net from which extrication is impossible. If you're a citizen, have a pulse, and live in Brooklyn, you're going to be chosen. (And if you're not chosen-say, because the juries that day are filled-they'll call you back a few weeks later when they do need you.)

* * * * *


What happens on a Grand Jury? I am forbidden by law to write about the details, as jurors are sworn to secrecy about the cases presented. But to generalize permissibly, the process goes like this on any given day:

Continue reading

Posted in Guantanamo, Law: Criminal Law | 6 Comments

Another Two

Add Montana and Connecticut to the list of states with funds holding dubious mortgage-backed paper.

Posted in Econ & Money: Mortgage Mess | 1 Comment

Something New About Mitt and Mormonism

One of the few genuinely interesting and original things I've read in the torrent of words pouring out about Gov. Romney's promise to give a speech about the so-called Mormonism issue, is Nate Oman's Thoughts from the Anvil: Mitt, Mormonism, and American Religious Politics. Go read it.

Unlike Oman, I sure don't have anything interesting to say. Personally, the man's religion is not an issue for me. (The lying and apparent plasticity of principles on the other hand….) The timing seems very tactical, a response to dropping poll numbers. It's a speech I think Romney would rather not give, since many GOP primary voters don't believe in the separation of church and state at all — they want the state to enforce morality and subsidize their faith based activities and perhaps even their established churches. The general election voter, on the other hand, is a more diverse and discerning breed, and not so willing to have protectors of the faith, thought police, mullahs, or whatever, patrolling the virtual and actual streets. But you knew all that.

Posted in Politics: US: 2008 Elections | 4 Comments