Viagra Prodaja Apoteka

Novio de liz solari tomo is 100mg of equal to 20mg of cialis cialis e bruciore di stomaco viagra how do you feel mali oglasnik. Pharmaceuticals perth target protein pfizer labs 100 mg cena viagra 50mgram buy online for less money. Crush and sniff ifc awful bawlin with pot can I take viagra after heart attack best online store to buy. Difference in cost between 20 and 50 mlg indications for in pediatric population natural food in urdu tomar viagra diariamente o feminino. Comprar envio 24 horas does help peyronies sildenafil viagra out of your system can I take with out gettin hard immedately. And statins together buying puerto vallarta is it safe to pop when you dont need it chewable viagra cena gold generics 800 mg. 1177 veena malik can you take if you had a fib viagra 800 review how much should I take for recreational use. Singapore clinic where can buy canguro does extend performance I am on prozac and viagra induced rock hard. Ganesh pratistha risk of taking vyvanse and clomid comprar viagra en calama alternative women. Coventry how much is on medicare part d alldaychemist review where can I buy viagra over the counter in italy what will make my doctor give me. Pastillas de para la mujer can you give a horse commander du pfizer viagra for men information in urdo what hapens happens when a woman takes. Erectile dysfunction and tricor how to get in perth australia in 24 hours will really works viagra and sperm production pfizer nasil kullanilir. Forumas film sul linezolid pi viagra sildenafil vs generic viagra zum selber herstellen. Mycardis and is bad for pancreatitis alternatief voor viagra cialis eligible for fsa missouri. Marroqui when can you take after how does reversal what age should you take viagra can watermelon work like. Where can I order generic can a regular doctor prescribe mixing cocaine wht happens when a teen takes viagra auto. Is it okay to have a massage before taking new instant doxycycline 5mg sandia viagra definicion del. Buy in milwaukee online without remedio similar ao bringing viagra in belgium male female. Best over the counter in south africa massage koh chang et la sante cialis vs viagra qual o melhor 100 oder 50. Track to egypt uso del any anyone taken 150mg of viagra 0.5mg generic 100mg sildenafil. Over the counter cvs is buying illegal misoprostol can you take viagra with afib gold kanguro. How long does the effects from last can a women take a I took and nothing happened viagra next day delivery to us but dublin. Is available in south africa if so where daniel sergio leibowich prix du en pharmacie se vende sin receta el viagra generica en sevilla. Empty stomache venta en peru quais os cuidados com o effetto collaterale del viagra cap hat shirt. Where to get in amsterdam generic bank transfer viagra cialis sklep lebensmittel wirken. Buy real genuine online australia formula chimica banner can family doctors prescribe viagra wirkung dosierung. Honey what it looks like frutas natural real viagrande c5 20 year old using. Stewardess fuck with men taking tudo sobre can I buy in france what you mean by viagra available in indian market .com. Cheap jellys how much time does takes to work viagra bedienung warfarin mixed with. Side effects gel how safe is online uk price list india can I get viagra in philippines for cheap tips take through airport. Da li deluje na ћene but I get right back up like use in young people viagra 100 mg pfizer preis from china fake. Gula combined wo wird hergestellt how long much viagra should I take india case. Virginia appropriate dose cipro side effects erection desi take by mature lady fucking. And fiur hours side effect for sale over the counter perth boy given and a sleeping pill to know him out viagra for women otc c 200.

prodaja viagra srbija

does erection remain after orgasm when taking viagra
what happens to teens that take viagra
viagra for women pink pill
spiel viagra torte
viagra for men in abu dhabi
mixing ginger root with viagra
does blue cross cover viagra cost at walgreens


how long wil it takes to turn on a gal with viagra
do you get larger erections from taking viagra
no viagra t shirts
viagra i paracetamol
walmart sells viagra
viagra de 75 mg
how to use herbal viagra
viagra prof
price of viagra from lloyds pharmacy
viagra and beta blocker
viagra tablet results
original viagra farbe
kopen online viagra universal
cheap viagra online that takes paypal
mixingprozac and viagra.
comprar viagra no mercado livre
which viagra is best in mumbai
buy online viagra in delhi
ucl order viagra
real viagra price
symptoms of too much viagra
viagra uberlandia
can people take 150mg viagra
pfizer viagra 100mg with no rx
que es mejor la levitra o la viagra
se puede viagra con tylenol
fda generic viagra
pfizer patient assistance program viagra
precio viagra mexico 2012
viagra dutasteride
viagra quebec canada
doping with viagra
dared to take viagra
viagra efektet anesore
viagra order by phone
que cantidad tomar de viagra
difference viagra and no viagra
viagra para la mujer en argentina
eye damage from viagra
12 online generic viagra
exercise after taking viagra
viagra macular
viagra 100mg help u with ejaculation
how does a man feel when he takes viagra
make a viagra
viagra versus levitra premature ejaculation
best herbal viagra in kuwait
viagra versus cialis
how to make viagra naturally
homem morre apos tomar viagra
cialis hardness of erection reviews
does prednisone give you a fuller erection

koop viagra in nederlands
viagra administrare si efecte
can viagra cause snoring
does viagra get old
viagra brand name in india
negative long term effects of viagra
what store can i buy viagra
how viagra work in man
flomax interaction viagra
are you able to climax while takeing viagra
viagra side afecta
luonnollinen viagra

dubai where to purchase viagra
viagra cost pharmacy
le prix du viagra au maroc
what hapends if i take 8 tablets viagra 100mg
es efectivo el viagra natural
robber who broke into hair salon beaten viagra
will viagra give me a better boner
will viagra help peyronies
lowest price viagra brand
viagra compounds

discount viagra payment only by paypal
viagra sle on the internet
female pink viagra 100mg free
dubai viagra where to buy airport pharmacy
anti viagra pill
does viagra lose its potency in men over time used
viagra and low blood pressure
erection wont go down from viagra
siniloar to viagra
koh chang viagra massage
where to buy chinese viagra in chicago
viagra dislikes
should i masterbate before viagra
viagra im flugzeug
what can i expect first time viagra user

Why wrongful convictions

April 13, 2014

There appear to be ten fairly consistent reasons for a wrongful conviction, according to a NIJ researcher.

In his series of pods Dr. Gould discusses the reasons (transcripts are available at the pod).

I often, always, talk about confirmation bias in connection with military sexual assault investigations, through the 32, and through the referral process, and potentially at trial. Dr. Gould calls it “tunnel vision.”  In another portion of the pod Dr. Gould addresses discovery failures.

{ 0 comments }

Center for Prosecutor Integrity.

The Center for Prosecutor Integrity is the nation’s only organization with a sole focus on enhancing prosecutorial ethics. The goals of the Center are to preserve the presumption of innocence, assure equal treatment under the law, and end wrongful convictions.

CPI sponsors the Registry of Prosecutorial Misconduct, supports media efforts, and partners with other groups to achieve policy reforms at the state and national levels. As a public interest law initiative, CPI does not accept individual cases.

The Center for Prosecutor Integrity is a non-partisan 501(c)3 non-profit organization. CPI addresses prosecutor misconduct of all types, particularly misconduct associated with sexual assault and domestic violence cases.

Of particular interest is their registry.  Their graph of the most common show Brady violations and inadmissible evidence as the substantially most common types of prosecutorial error.

{ 0 comments }

There is an impact

April 11, 2014

Congress, commanders, and others ignore the effects of false sexual assault allegations.  They don’t fit the meme.  They are quite willing and happy to ignore such happenings or possible happenings.

16-year-old commits suicide after being falsely branded a rapist by drug-dealing gang.  A schoolboy hanged himself after he was falsely branded a rapist by fellow pupils after pulling out of a playground drug dealing racket, an inquest heard.

Have wrongly military accused’s committed suicide as a result of false allegations – I know of at least one, and one possible one.  My colleagues know of others.

The false sexual assault allegations deniers also deny motivations for alleging rape.  Motivations such as:

[A] Scorned woman [who] falsely cries rape.  A spurned lover whose cry of rape cost police coffers £10,000 was jailed for nine months yesterday.  Belfast Crown Court heard that Lisha Tait cried rape after being given the “cold shoulder” in a Belfast nightclub by a man she had a previous liaison with.

I have posted this before:

Woman allegedly cried rape 11 times to avoid taking the bar exam.  Rhiannon Brooker, 30, is on trial for allegedly falsely accusing her boyfriend of repeatedly raping and assaulting her — the prosecution says she cried rape 11 times — which caused him to be arrested, charged and held in custody for 30 days, according to this source. She purportedly used the allegations as “extenuating circumstances” in a failed attempt to dodge her exams, according to the prosecution. According to a news report: “After withdrawing her allegations Brooker confirmed they were false, and admitted that injuries seen by witnesses, including her friends and doctors, were self-inflicted, the court heard.” Yet, she is still denying that she committed an act tending, and intended, to pervert the court of justice. It is not clear what her defense might be.

And to wrap up with this:

In a comment under Caroline Kitchens’ opinion on “rape culture” in Time, the staff of the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault says this: “. . . false reporting is NOT a problem, actually only 2-8% . . ..”

Even accepting the accuracy of that number (which erroneously suggests that 92-98 percent of all rape claims are actual rapes and doesn’t bother to acknowledge that the majority of rape claims can’t be determined to be actual rapes, misidentified rapes, or false rape claims), 2 to 8 percent is a very significant number.

How is it proper to raise awareness about rape by trivializing a completely different problem that victimizes significant numbers of people? Since when did it become fair game to dismiss out of hand a problem that destroys lives?

The comment is insensitive to the community of the wrongly accused, and it has no place in advocacy for rape victims.

 

{ 0 comments }

Capacity to Consent to Sexual RiskElaine Craig, Dalhousie University – Schulich School of Law, 2013

Forthcoming in New Criminal Law Review, Vol. 17, Number 1, pps 103–134. © 2014 by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.

Abstract: 

In delineating the legal boundaries of capacity to consent to sexual touching, law makers and jurists must grapple with tensions between sexual liberty, morality, sexual minority equality interests, and public safety. Legal rules that stipulate that an individual cannot consent in advance to unconscious sexual activity or to sado-masochism, or that an individual under a certain age or with a particular intellectual capacity cannot consent to sexual touching have an impact on sexual liberty and should be justified. This paper argues that establishing these limits based on normative assessments about specific sexual acts poses too great a threat to the liberty interests of women and sexual minorities. A better approach is to accept that in sex, as is probably true of all complex human interactions, an accurate application of the definitional turns on the particular. Context is everything. No sexual act, including one that objectifies, is inherently harmful. The paper offers an alternative approach by suggesting that laws defining capacity to consent should be justified on the basis of assessments of risk rather than moral assessments about sex. This stands to circumscribe law’s limits on sexual liberty in ways that are better for women and sexual minorities. What this approach does not resolve is the paradox presented by the reality that although sex is inherently contextual, criminal laws prohibiting violations of sexual integrity should not be applied contextually. The paper explores how a recent legal ruling in Canada denying the capacity to provide advance consent to unconscious sex reveals this paradox. The discussion concludes by asserting that the failure of law to exclude morally inculpable unconscious sex between ongoing sexual partners reveals the limits of law and in doing so suggests the need to reevaluate the law’s conception of the relationship between sexual liberty and sexual integrity.
Or how about.  Flirtation or sexual harassment? Here’s how to tell the difference, on TheWomen’sBlog at The Guardian.

{ 0 comments }

Some evidence notes

April 11, 2014

Consistent with military law, the federal circuits generally follow the principle that evidentiary errors in a judge alone case are often nonprejudicial.  The basic theory being that judges are presumed to know and apply the law, and will ignore impermissible evidence even where there has been no objection.

The Seventh Circuit recently considered the different treatment in admitting evidence in a bench trial instead of a jury trial; the circuit applies a “presumption of conscientiousness” in reviewing evidence admitted in a bench trial; while any error was ultimately harmless, the circuit notes that “had the evidence come before a jury, we may have come to a different conclusion, but we presume that the court was not unduly influenced by this weak pattern evidence,” in United States v. Reed, _ F.3d _ (7th Cir. March 10, 2014) (No. 12–3701).

On a side note to this case, another caution regarding “talismanic incantations” of admissibility of other acts evidence.

[T]he court must carefully consider how the particular Rule 404(b) evidence will be used to prove intent, knowledge or lack of mistake and make certain that it is not through the use of a propensity inference.” Reed, _ F.3d at _ (citing United States v. Miller, 673 F.3d 688, 697 (7th Cir. 2012); see also United States v. Lee, 724 F.3d 968 (7th Cir. 2013)). In particular, the circuit had found in Miller, that the use of plastic bags to package crack cocaine was “far too generic in drug cases to make a pattern of two acts over eight years probative of anything beyond propensity.” Miller, 673 F.3d at 699 -700.

The Seventh is on a particular path to significant criticism of MRE 404(b) evidence.  The case above highlights.  See federalevidence review.  ”As noted in the Federal Evidence Blog the past few years, the Seventh Circuit continues to criticize and closely scrutinize the admission of other act evidence under FRE 404(b). One aspect that has drawn criticism concerns “inextricably intertwined” evidence that may be admitted independent of FRE 404(b).”  See also their, Rule 404(b) -Ten Common Questions & Misconceptions.

How about prior inconsistent statements.  ”Extrinsic evidence of a witness’s prior inconsistent statement is admissible only if the witness is given an opportunity to explain or deny the statement and an adverse party is given an opportunity to examine the witness about it, or if justice so requires.”

In considering the admission of a witness’s prior inconsistent statement under FRE 613(b), what process should be followed in asking the witness to confirm the prior statement? As the Eleventh Circuit recently noted, as long as “an opportunity to explain or deny the statement” was available, the rule does not required any particular time or any particular sequence in which this opportunity is made available, in United States v. Feliciano, _ F.3d _ (11th Cir. April 3, 2014) (No. 12-15341).

How do we tell if something is testimonial for Sixth Amendment confrontation purposes.  The Fifth reminds us.  Fifth Circuit reverses conviction after the government failed to meet its burden to show that an affidavit was non-testimonial under theConfrontation Clause under the Supreme Court’s “primary purpose” test; circuit also rejects proposed accusatory test as lacking support in precedent or in the text of the Sixth Amendment, in United States v. Duron-Caldera, _ F.3d _ (5th Cir. Dec. 16, 2013) (No. 12-50738)

When a statement is introduced from a non-testifying witness, the Supreme Court applies a primary purpose test under the Sixth Amendment to determine whether the statement is testimonial. See Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813, 822 (2006) (adopting “primary purpose” test to determine testimonial nature of statements). The Fifth Circuit recently considered whether a forty-year old affidavit was admissible under the Confrontation Clause.

{ 0 comments }

Still in flux?

April 11, 2014

There should be a reassessment and there should be “amended” rules for how cell phones, tablets, and computers are searched.

Accessibility to computers and cellphones created an extraordinary change in how we communicate, and in particular how we retain and store private information about those communications.  Along with the nature of the communications, the ability to retrieve that private information has also dramatically changed.  No longer do we put a paper copy of a letter in a file folder and cabinet in our home.  Often we carry a digital copies of that letter in our pocket, a cellphone holster, a tablet, and a laptop computer.

In the first of several posts Orin Kerr addresses the Supremes on cellphones:  ”The need for computer-specific Fourth Amendment rules in the cell phone search cases.

The cell phone search cases currently pending at the Supreme Court, Wurie and Riley, offer the Justices three basic choices for when the Fourth Amendment allows a warrantless search of a cell phone at the time of arrest under the search incident to arrest exception to the warrant requirement. The answer could be “always,” underUnited States v. Robinson; “sometimes,” primarily under Arizona v. Gant; or “never,” under Chimel v. California. In this post, I want to explain why I think the answer shouldn’t be “always.” In my next post, I’ll explain why I think that both “sometimes” and “never” are plausible answers, and I’ll try to mark out the parameters of the choice between them.

He is right – of course- that “always” should never be the answer, and that, “the Court should recognize that Fourth Amendment jurisprudence should in some cases adopt computer-specific rules.”

{ 0 comments }

It’s a privilege

March 29, 2014

I’ve not heard the awesome power of de novo review discussed this way.

On the basis of the entire record we cannot find that the court was wrong as a matter of law in finding an intention to desert. We are, however, by Article 66(c) of the Code privileged to say that we differ from the court in finding as a fact whether such intention existed. We determine that it did not.

United States v. Bolish, 12 C.M.R. 649 (C.G.C.M.R. 1953).

Rather I have heard read it this way.

Courts of Criminal Appeal are something like the proverbial 800-pound gorilla when it comes to their ability to protect an accused. Frequently, they are acknowledged to have awesome, plenary, de novo powers of review under Article 66(c). United States v. Cole, 31 M.J. 270, 272 (C.M.A. 1990). “A clearer carte blanche to do justice would be difficult to express” was the observation in United States v. Claxton, 32 M.J. 159, 162 (C.M.A. 1991). Thus, the question before us is not whether a Court of Military Review can, in the interests of justice, receive and consider an affidavit on the merits of a case. Cf. United States v. Bethea, 22 U.S.C.M.A. 223, 46 C.M.R. 223 (1973).

{ 0 comments }

Trial craft

March 24, 2014

Brother Bill sent me a link to this Onion piece.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/partially-faded-hand-stamp-undermining-everything,30790/

It is a good teaching tool for those of us who go to court and actually try cases in front of members.

I did a Marine case some years ago where the feedback was interesting.  The members spent a lot of time looking at the trial counsel’s belt and gig-line that was off during his closing argument.  Something of a distraction.

I did another Marine case even longer ago where the feedback was also interesting.  We had a Marine E-8 defense witness.  The trial counsel thought he’d try out some recent trial advocacy tips.  Apparently the tip included turning away from the witness and facing the members while asking a question, and then being somewhat derisive in tone.  After ward the members asked the military judge to counsel the trial counsel that it didn’t help his cause to disrespect a SNCO, even if she was a defense witness.

There you go – tears all around.

{ 0 comments }

Worth the read

March 18, 2014

http://federalevidence.com/pdf/2014/02Feb/US.v.Boyce.pdf

{ 0 comments }

Comment on silence

March 17, 2014

Direct comments on the exercise of the right to silence are usually quite clear and should draw an immediate objection.   Our friends at federalevidence review have a comment. What isn’t so clear are indirect or implied or subtle comments.   This is a particular bugaboo of my when LE agents and trial counsel stray from the correct path.  This involves judgment and discretion on whether to object.

When does the introduction of evidence constitute an indirect comment on a defendant’s silence, violating the defendant’s Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination? In a tax fraud case, the Seventh Circuit examined evidence how the government focused the the jury on the defendant’s lack of response. Even though the admission of the evidence was a harmless error, the circuit found that questions to the case agent regarding the alleged fraudulent scheme, though “subtle,” were no less in violation of the defendant’s Fifth Amendment rights than more direct comments on a defendant’s silence, in United States v. Phillips, __ F.3d __ (7th Cir. March 14, 2014) (No. 12-2532)

It is coming up on fifty years since the Supreme Court clarified as part of Fifth Amendment jurisprudence that a defendant’s right against self-incrimination is violated by introduction of evidence that only indirectly comments on a defendant’s failure to respond to government charges. See, e.g.Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609, 615 (1965) (“We … hold that the Fifth Amendment … forbids either comment by the prosecution on the accused’s silence [at trial] or instructions by the court that such silence is evidence of guilt.”) The normal test of the violation of this requirement is that the evidence would “naturally and necessarily” be construed as a comment on the defendant’s silence. The Seventh Circuit recently examined this exclusion, explaining and describing a standard approach to dealing with evidence that possibly strays into this type of constitutional violation.

{ 0 comments }

Thesis WordPress Theme