CHAPTER TWO
INTRODUCTION TO
PSYCHOPATHS:
MEGA-LAW-MANIA
Traits Of A Psychopath:
Boldness = Low fear including stress-tolerance, tolerance of unfamiliarity and danger, high self-confidence and social assertiveness.
Disinhibition = Poor impulse control including problems with planning and foresight, lacking affect and urge control, demand for immediate gratification, poor behavioral restraints.
Meanness = Lacking empathy and close attachments with others, disdain of close attachments, use of cruelty to gain empowerment, exploitative tendencies, defiance of authority, destructive excitement seeking
4. If you are arrested in California, the deck is stacked against you. For decades, the cops, prosecutors, judges, and politicians in power have eviscerated your constitutional rights to make their jobs easier to perform.
Their livelihoods rely on law enforcement winning, and those in their path losing. You are collateral damage along their career path. Collusion at the highest levels tilts the tables against you, and towards the “police powerists” who use convictions as stepping stones and power chits. These powerful jobs attract people who desire power: psychopaths. Government j obs with uniforms, authority, guns, and badges are an attractive lure.
4 Patrick, C.; Fowles, D.; Krueger, R. (August 2009). Triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy: Developmental origins of
disinhibition, boldness, and meanness. Development and Psychopathology. Cambridge University Press. 21 (3): 913-938.
doU O. IOI 7/S0954579409000<!92. PMID 19583890.
Studies have shown a number of careers that appeal to those with psychopathic tendencies. Jobs with overt power and authority are overlyrepresented on those lists. Law enforcement jobs are available to a broad spectrum of characters: From school yard bullies to Ivy League “Mean Girls.” There is a position of authority over others for every socio-economic level of abuser.
By controlling the entire legal process: investigation, arrest, evidence, prosecution, sentencing, and even writing new laws, the psychopaths in power are sure to win. But, winning is not enough for a psychopath. Their opponent must also lose. They must be made an example of. A psychopath does not think the way you and I do.
Players in California’s judicial system, from law enforcement to politicians, have colluded against our liberty, rights, and way of life for their gain. Their megalomania is our loss.
‘Psychopath’ is not a medical term. It is used as a catch-all for a number of conditions and diagnoses that involve anti-social behavior. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, ( DSM) does have descriptions for antisocial, narcissistic, and other personality disorders. However, it is common for these and some of their variations to be lumped under the term ‘psychopath:
A psychopath does not need to be a raving mad lunatic-far from it. They are usually functioning members of society in positions of responsibility. Some examples of a stereotypical psychopath as depicted in modern books and movies are Norman Bates, from the aptly named, Psycho; Dr. Hannibal Lecter, the cannibalistic psychiatrist from the JOSEPH TULLY “Silence of the Lambs” movie and book series; Dexter Morgan from the Dexter books and Showtime series, who worked in law enforcement; and Francis Underwood, US Representative who rose in power to President of the United States in Netflix’ House of Cards.
These cool-headed, highly functioning, guileful criminals charm you whilst plotting your demise. These cold-blooded killers, who are defined by their inability for and complete lack of human compassion, are good representations of an archetypal psychopath, rather than the drooling, wild-eyed crazy person that the term ‘psychopath’ may initially conjure.
Psychopathic personality is a disorder that can be generally described as characterized by detached emotions, reduced inhibition, high stress tolerance, Machiavellianism, lacking empathy, lacking guilt, egocentricity, charm, manipulation, impulsivity, and a reckless disregard for others. However, it is these very same traits that define the psychopath, that can propel a person (in certain careers) to a position of authority.
Dr. Kevin Dutton is a research fellow at the Department of Experimental Psychology at Oxford University. In his book, The Wisdom of Psychopaths5, Dr. Dutton lists the top careers that attract psychopaths. Many of these jobs
require coolness, charm, and risk-taking, in order to be effective. Some of these career choices also give perfect cover to those with antisocial aspects to their personality.
The Top 10 Careers With The Most Psychopaths
1. CEO
2. Lawyer
3. Media (Television/Radio)
4. Salesperson
5. Surgeon
6. Journalist
7. Police Officer
8. Clergy
9. Chef
10. Politician
5 Dutton. K. (2012). The wisdom of psychopaths: Lessons in life from Saints, spies and serial killers. London: William Heinemann
These careers attract and require big egos, confidence, charm, stress endurance, and a strong will. Chillingly, because these j obs put people in the limelight, they thereby also put one in a position requiring interaction with and, at least on the surface, accountability to many people.
The functioning psychopath CEO, chef, clergy, journalist, media personality, or salesperson must win our trust in order to succeed at their job. They often have to do so while seemingly in the public eye under public scrutiny. They can be polarizing figures, but they have fans and followers that will willfully follow them, as faithful to these psychopaths as they are to their favorite professional sports team, actress, or poison-laden ‘diet’ product.
However, a person can choose which athlete to cheer for or which chef to dine with. We have no say in which cop arrests us, which prosecutor tries to jail us and charge us with penalties that will stick with us for life, nor the judge who presides over this system infiltrated by bad apples with very little accountability. In fact, the bad apples in the system are often given peer-support by the other bad apples within the same system.
The careers that attract psychopaths do so because they are roles that have authority and power over the public. Remember, power corrupts but it also intoxicates. Indeed, power has been likened many times across the ages as an aphrodisiac and was most notably in modern times described as the “ultimate aphrodisiac” by Henry Kissinger as quoted by the New York Times in 1 973.
Psychopaths can flourish as police officers, prosecutors, judges, and politicians. They used to call these roles “civil servants;’ but the tables have certainly turned. We, the public, empower these roles under the color of authority to wield their power complete with badges, gavels, and other totems of authority. This also includes the shield of law that has been built up by this psychopathic class to protect themselves. They are shielded from
repercussions if they actually get caught doing something wrong.
It is not a coincidence that psychopaths end up in these jobs. As children, nascent criminal psychopaths often expressed a desire to work in law enforcement. A pair of researchers, Stanton E. Samenow Ph.D. and Dr. Yochelson, studied the criminal mind. They found a large percentage of career criminals they interviewed had aspired to become police when they were younger 6.
It is important to remember here that law enforcement not only includes police and sheriffs, but also prosecutors. It is also no secret that most judges are former prosecutors. Here is a lawyer joke that illustrates that point perfectly: “Question: Why does the judge sit at the bench? Answer: Because there’s not enough room at the prosecutor’s table.”
According to the researchers studying criminals, “TI1ey reported being attracted by the uniform, the badge, the gun, the fast police cruiser and, most of all, the thrill of pursuing and catching the ‘bad guys: It was the excitement and the ability to wield absolute power over other human beings that attracted them as well as the prospect of being cited as heroes for doing so:”
6 Samcnow, S. (20 13). Criminals \Who Become Cops. Psychology Today. Reviewed 26 December 2017, from https://www.
psychology today.com/blog/inside-the-criminal-mind/ 20 1 302/ crimim1ls-who-becomc-cops
One has to wonder if these criminals were the more physical type of kids rather than the intellectual children. I wonder if this same study was conducted specifically on white collar criminals, criminals who use their intellect to commit crimes rather than physically commit them, if their aspirations would have been to become prosecutors, judges, or politicians.
It is not fair to say that every cop, prosecutor, judge, or politician is a born psychopath. In fact, the moral cops, prosecutors, and judges who are good and just are some of the greatest people that I have met in my life. I don’t doubt that many cops, prosecutors, judges, and even politicians may have gone into their careers with glowing hearts full of good intentions.
While some members of law enforcement and the legal system are inherently good, some were sick people beforehand and were attracted to the role, whilst others were corrupted by an environment that enables psychopathic behavior. Indeed, prisons are full of criminal minds-on both sides of the bars.
It is widely acknowledged that people who are put into positions of authority often abuse their power. No doubt everyone has heard the expression, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely:’ This phrase comes to us from Lord Acton, who used it in a famous letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887. This means that good people will be corrupted into acting badly when given too much power and authority over others. It also means that bad people who are given too much power and authority will act even worse when the veil afforded by their position allows them to act with impunity.
Citizens, us, We the People, can often be subject to the whims of bullies and sadists with the power to destroy our lives. Innocent people can be subjected to a ‘power trip’ police encounter, arrested by a megalomaniacal cop, jailed by a sadist, prosecuted by a manipulative Machiavellian, and judged by an ego-tripping sociopath.
Maniacs with badges, guns, and gavels have undue power over our lives.
The concept that power can be a corrupting influence was the motive behind our American Founding Fathers’ construction of a system of checks and balances. It is why James Madison, a grand political architect, sought to divide power rather than concentrate it when crafting the U.S. Constitution. Dividing power, making those who have it ‘checked’ by competing groups and having the whole system held accountable by the citizens, was Madison’s brilliant solution. This division of power-checks and balances and accountability in the U.S. Constitution-is mirrored in the Republic of California’s constitution.
Our California system was originally designed with the notion that you cannot trust government; that powerful government positions will be sought out by corrupt people, or in today’s terms, psychopaths.
We have lost our way.
In careers with power, there are complex hierarchies of authority. Police and sheriff deputies have ranks and officers; prosecutors have a District Attorney, senior attorneys, and politicians to account to. Judges have politicians and higher appellate courts to please, and government administrators themselves fall into a pecking order of authority. From dogcatcher to council member to Senator, in this system, ordinary people can slowly and unwittingly become destructive agents, especially if their peer group consists of a majority of corrupt individuals.
We’ve all heard of the ‘blue wall of silence’ where even a ‘good’ police officer won’t tell on a bad officer when he or she has done something wrong or illegal, and will actively cover it up. Even if the minions serving under
psychopaths eventually become aware of destructive ends, relatively few people have the resolve or integrity needed to resist authority.
There are two famous modern studies of the corrupting influence of power; the Milgram Experiment and the Stanford Prison Experiment. You may recognize these from the news, Psych 101 class, or from their depictions
in popular culture. The Milgram Experiment was conducted at Yale in 1961. It was a series of experiments dealing with obedience to authority figures conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram7•
The study measured the willingness of participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. An ad in the local Connecticut newspaper asked for subjects, inviting “500 New Haven men to help us complete a scientific study of memory and learning” and offering “Four dollars for one hour of your time:’
The Milgrarn Experiments involved random pairs of volunteers-a ‘teacher’ and a ‘learner’ who were supervised by an ‘experimenter’, who, for the purposes of looking like an authority figure, was dressed in a white lab coat. The cover of the experiment was that it was to test memory. Under the supervision of the staff experimenter, the teacher read a list and the learner-behind a blank wall-was expected to repeat it from memory, with the teacher encouraged by the Experimenter to administer painful electric shocks to the learner if the items were not properly repeated.
The electric shocks were ever increasing in nature and the levels were clearly labeled, “SLIGHT SHOCK;’ “MODERATE SHOCK;’ “STRONG SHOCK” and “VERY STRONG SHOCK” in black and “INTENSE SHOCK;’ “EXTREME INTENSITY SHOCK;’ “DANGER SEVERE SHOCK” and “XXX” in red. The teacher had a dial and a button and heard the painful reactions from the learner beyond the wall. The Experimenter encouraged the teacher to turn up the voltage to more and more painful levels as the test progressed, ostensibly as negative reinforcement to provoke better recall.
But here is the catch: there was no learner and there was no memory experiment. Milgram was testing how far a random person off the street would go in punishing a stranger when encouraged to do so by an authority figure. Again, the experimenter was in a lab coat. The learner was in on the experiment, and the reactions to the painful shocks were pre-recorded so that every teacher heard the exact same painful screams and pleadings of having a heart condition as they administered the electric shocks.
When instructed by an authority figure, most of the Milgram participants progressively tortured a stranger up to what they thought was a dangerous voltage. A surprising 65% of experiment participants were prepared to administer the potentially lethal highest level of shock ( 450volts! ) marked by big red capital letters as “XXX” to subjects who had done nothing wrong other than forget some words on a memory test.
These subjects, the teachers, were not psychopaths or sadists, they were just regular people drawn at random. But, under the instruction of an authority figure who clearly was exhibiting psychopathic behavior, they went along with committing torture. This shows how one bad apple in a position of authority in a police force, prison, or government bureau can poison others into doing bad things willingly. It’s also bad news for someone falsely accused of a crime where, most juries follow this rule-they convict. Despite the shocking exception once or twice a decade, exploited by the media, where a seemingly guilty person is acquitted by the jury, most juries convict. Juries convict because they have a predilection, a preprogrammed disposition, to convict.
7 Milgram, S. ( 1 963). Behavioral Study of obedience. The Journal Of Abnormal And Social Psychology. 67(4), 371-378. http://dx.doi.
org/ 10. \037/h0040525
They do this, in accordance with Milgram, because persons in authority, the prosecutor in a suit along with a parade of officers in shiny uniforms and guns, and usually with the implied approval of the judge, ask them to. In fact,
this hun1an tendency is extremely hard to counter in court in a trial situation for a defendant. How do you effectively change human nature in 12 people, whom you’ve never met, who, whether or not they’re willing to admit it, are
either already biased against the accused for just being there? Also, they may not even care whether the person is guilty or not but may be sadistically just looking forward to inflicting pain on someone else in order to feel some sense of power.
Add to this the perpetual state of cynicism and outright fear that the ‘lamestream’ media seem to pulse out nonstop and you’ve got an uphill battle from start to finish. One of the things that I do in j ury trial, which has been very successful, is openly and honestly talking to potential jurors about the Milgram Experiment.
I can’t change their behavior or makeup but I can remind them that the courtroom demands them to be at their best, to put aside any feelings of hatred, pettiness, or negativity caused by an influence of power. I remind them that their conclusion on the case is what matters-not the opinion of the prosecutor or the law enforcement witnesses. I remind them that their j ob is to think critically, not be obedient to voices of those who are in positions of authority.
Milgram summarized the experiment in his 1 974 article8, “The Perils of Obedience;’ writing:
“The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the subjects’ [participants’] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects’ [participants’] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation:”
8 Milgram, S. ( 1 973). The perils of obedience J Harper’s Magazine. Retrieved 26 December 20 1 7, from hllps://h<irpcrs.org/
archive/ 1973/ 12/the-perils-of-obedience/
Experiments like Milgram’s have been used to explain “the banality of evil;’ a phrase coined by Hannah Arendt to describe Nazi soldiers blindly, stupidly following the orders of their leaders towards outright sadistic ends. In modern law enforcement, there are psychopaths holding rank that influence the behavior of peers and subordinates.
However, these authority figures in law enforcement may have climbed to a head position specifically due to their psychopathic behaviors and their talent and ability to impose their will on others. This leads to a culture of
corruption, collusion, and cover-ups where their subordinates, just like the Nazi soldiers, will likewise blindly follow the psychopathic orders of their department and unit heads and chiefs.
A decade after the first Milgram Experiment, a similar study used real people and real interactions in a physical setting to test the corrupting influence of authority. It has become known as, “TI1e Stanford Prison Experiment:’ Stanford psychology professor, Dr. Philip Zimbardo, conducted a study to investigate how readily people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role-playing exercise that simulated prison life.
Prison guards have a stereotypical reputation still today, as cruel or even sadistic. Zimbardo wanted to assess if it was their character or the environment that made men brutal against others. Participants were randomly divided into Inmates and Guards, and moved into a mock jail in a Stanford building basement. The participants adapted to their roles well beyond Zimbardo’s expectations, as the guards enforced authoritarian measures and ultimately subjected some of the prisoners to psychological torture. The results of the experiment have been argued to demonstrate “the impressionability and obedience of people when provided with a legitimizing ideology and social and institutional
support 9 .”
“How we went about testing these questions and what we found may astound you. Our planned two-week investigation into the psychology of prison life had to be ended after only six days because of what the situation was doing to the college students who participated. In only a few days, our guards became sadistic and our prisoners became depressed and showed signs of extreme stress:’ (Zimbardo, 201 3) 10
These experiments were done in a lab with random subjects, with no previous bias or racism against the other party. They blindly inflicted pain on others because they were instructed it was the right thing to do.
Imagine how personal bias, stress, adrenaline, fear, ego, racism, and a badge of authority could push the results to a further extreme. Especially in an organization that encouraged members to conform to a culture of power over subjects.
Law enforcement are not working in lab conditions. They do not have a professor to discuss their real-time actions with. They are given carte blanche to enforce laws as they see fit in the field.
A psychopathic person who craved that power, and sought it, would be ecstatic to find a green light to abuse others once given a badge.
9 How Zimbardo’s Prison Experiment Reveals Social Roles’ Effect O n People’s Behavior. (20 17). Psychologist world.com. Retrieved
26 December 2017, from https://www.psychologistworld.com/influence-personality/stanford-prison-experiment
10 Zimbardo, P. (201′.l) Stanford Prison Experiment. Retrieved 26 December 2017, from http://www.prisonexp.org/
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword by Norm Pattis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Why We Fight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Introduction to Psychopaths: Mega-Law-Mania . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 9
Traits Of A Psychopath: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 9
Th e Top 1 0 Careers With ‘foe Most Psychopaths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1
Cops Acting Badly: Psycho Cops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 2
Oakland PD Riders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 6
LAPD Rampart Scandal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 8
Gang Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1
War O n Drugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Prosecutors Acting Badly: Psycho Prosecutors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 2
Top Cops In The Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 0
The Prosecutor’s Deck Is Stacked . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 4
Power Begets More Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 5
Judges Acting Badly: Psycho Judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Politicians Acting Badly: Psycho Politicians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5
Tricky Dick . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7
Ronald Reagan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
The Torture Memos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 5
Orange County Snitch Scandal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 7
Before Dekraai – a Timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 8
The Death Penalty and Snitches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 9
Legal Informants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 1
County Jails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .1 07
Jail Versus Prison: A Blurring Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .1 07
The Evolution of Jail as Power. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 09
A Culture of Intimidation and Rights Violations Grows at the Local
Level. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 14
Inmate Phone Systems: A Rich Source of Income and Intel. . . . . . . . .1 20
The History of Cannabis Prohibition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .1 24
How Hemp Made Enemies and Fueled Racism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 27
Prohibition and the Rise of Wheelerism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 1 29
Cannabis Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 38
Caregivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 42
Voluntary ID Card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 43
Smoking Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 45
Guidelines . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 46
Recognizing Co-ops and Collectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . .1 49
The Law Of The Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 54
Adult Use And Regulation In California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 56
Last Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 59
The Weaponization of Bail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 60
Stand Your Ground: Self Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 74
The Infinite Variety of Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 88
Science and the Law . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 01
Blood Alcohol Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 03
Fingerprints (Subjective Error-Prone 19th Century Technology) . . . .2 07
Shaken Baby Syndrome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .2 09
DNA Evidence-Not Foolproof . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 12
Drug Lab Results-Lazy O r Corrupt Lab Work Can Ruin Credibility 213
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 13
Media Portrayal of Law Enforcement: Programming and ‘Mean World
Syndrome’ . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 16
Celebrities and Sports Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 34
Damage Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 35
Racism Past and Present – From Chinese Immigrant Taxes to Racial Profiling
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 53
Chronology of Early Racial Discrimination in California . . . . . . . . . .2 56
The Racism of Law Enforcement Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 62
Prisons: Systemic Racism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 66
Prison Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 66
Overcrowding – Cruel and Unusual Punishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 67
The Bill Comes Due . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 68
An Aging Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 69
Deplorable Health Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 70
Mental Health Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 72
Out-of-State Imprisonment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 74
Death Row . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 74
Proposition 57 – A Bit of Sensibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 75
Three Strikes are Still Out . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 77
Some Good News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 79
High Courts, High Treason . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 80
The Constitution and Criminal Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 85
Fourth Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 86
Fifth Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 90
Sixth Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 94
Bad California Rulings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 99
Treason? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 09
Time to Reveal the Psychopaths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 09
About Author Joseph Tully . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 11
ABOUT AUTHOR JOSEPH TULLY
Joseph Tully is one of California’s most controversial and successful criminal defense and civil rights lawyers. He helps people defend their liberty and reputation in an irreparably flawed and unjust legal system-the topic of this, his second book, California: State of Collusion.
Tully, labelled recently by author and legal icon Norm Pattis a “Gunslinger Among Paper Pushers:’ has a remarkable record for earning Not Guilty jury verdicts in major felony cases in a system where bullying prosecutors are accustomed to intimidating their way to early guilty pleas.
Lawyer Tully founded and leads the San Francisco Bay Area criminal and civil rights law firm Tully & Weiss. His work has included high-stakes felony cases ranging from capital murder, high profile drug trials, and scores of white collar defense charges to sex crimes, firearm offenses, and landmark cases of every sort including a leading California stand-your ground self defense victory.
Joseph is a go-to legal commentator for media outlets from the LA Times to the NY Post. His cases and clients have been featured on 60 Minutes and other in-depth outlets. He informs and engages audiences of every sort on the speaking circuit including a recent keynote at the annual Mensa conference.
Learn more about Joseph Tully at www.JosephTully.com Media queries or to book Joseph to speak at your event:
maggie@elitelawyermanagement.com
