truesee's Blog

NM Family Sues Funeral Home Over Brain In Bag

Family Receives Mother's Brain In Bag Of Personal Effects

POSTED: 6:53 pm MST January 6, 2010
UPDATED: 11:58 am MST January 7, 2010

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. -- A New Mexico family is suing after making a gruesome discovery -- a bag of personal effects given to them after their mother's death contained her brain.

Funeral homes in New Mexico and Utah, where the woman died in a Sept. 28 car crash, are blaming each other for the mistake.

According to the complaint filed Monday in state District Court in Albuquerque, the woman's relatives "smelled a foul odor coming from the bag" they received from DeVargas Funeral Home and Crematory of the Espanola Valley.

Funeral home owner Johnny DeVargas denied any fault, telling The Albuquerque Journal that the Utah funeral home was responsible.

The lawsuit names DeVargas, Serenicare Funeral Home in Draper, Utah, and Inman Shipping Worldwide, an Ohio shipping company that transported the body to New Mexico.

A woman, who answered the telephone after hours at Inman's, said nobody from the company was available to comment.

Serenicare owner Dick Johnson denied that his funeral home combined the brain and personal items in a single bag.

The chief medical examiner in Utah told a TV station in Salt Lake City that the standard procedure post-autopsy is to "return all organs and tissues to the body."

If a body part can't be put back, it's place in a bright red bio hazard bag and placed with the body.

Albuquerque attorney Richard Valle is handling the family's suit.

"No loved-one's brain should be part of those belongings," Valle told the Albuquerque Journal.

The lawsuit sites 17 areas of concern including professional negligence, mishandling of a body and outrage.  Funeral homes in New Mexico and Utah, where the woman died in a Sept. 28 car crash, are blaming each other for the mistake.

According to the complaint filed Monday in state District Court in Albuquerque, the woman's relatives "smelled a foul odor coming from the bag" they received from DeVargas Funeral Home and Crematory of the Espanola Valley.

Funeral home owner Johnny DeVargas denied any fault, telling The Albuquerque Journal that the Utah funeral home was responsible.

The lawsuit names DeVargas, Serenicare Funeral Home in Draper, Utah, and Inman Shipping Worldwide, an Ohio shipping company that transported the body to New Mexico.

A woman, who answered the telephone after hours at Inman's, said nobody from the company was available to comment.

Serenicare owner Dick Johnson denied that his funeral home combined the brain and personal items in a single bag.

The chief medical examiner in Utah told a TV station in Salt Lake City that the standard procedure post-autopsy is to "return all organs and tissues to the body."

If a body part can't be put back, it's place in a bright red bio hazard bag and placed with the body.

Albuquerque attorney Richard Valle is handling the family's suit.

"No loved-one's brain should be part of those belongings," Valle told the Albuquerque Journal.

The lawsuit sites 17 areas of concern including professional negligence, mishandling of a body and outrage.

LINK TO VIDEO:

http://www.koat.com/news/22166869/detail.html

http://www.wbaltv.com/video/22170979/

The Obama Administration's Systemic Failure on Terrorism

George Pataki

Former Governor of New York State

Huffington Post

January 6, 2010 07:31 PM

Following the Christmas Day near-disaster on an international flight from Amsterdam to Detroit, President Obama referred to a "systemic failure" of our nation's intelligence sharing. He is right in referring to a systemic failure, but it is not just in intelligence sharing. From day one, the Obama Administration's anti-terror policies have amounted to a systemic failure that have placed our country's security in grave jeopardy. As one who has seen and experienced the consequences of prior failures up close, I am urging the Administration to drastically change its approach to defending America.

Virtually every decision this Administration has made has placed American security at greater risk, since refusing from the very beginning to even acknowledge the existence of a War on Terror, or to call enemy combatants terrorists.

It is time for the Administration to wake up and smell the explosives.

It is time for them to acknowledge their mistakes and change course. Let me outline five specific actions that the president should take:

First, the decision to return six terrorists to Yemen last month was a mistake that should not be repeated. The Pentagon reported this week that one in five terrorists released from Guantanamo are either suspected or confirmed to have returned to the battlefield in places like Afghanistan. The president should suspend his effort to shut Guantanamo until we are certain of a secure alternative facility to hold all detainees.

Second, end the wrong-headed investigation of our own CIA officials. Against the strong recommendation of CIA Director Leon Panetta, the Obama Administration has begun an investigation into CIA agents who interrogated terrorists, even though this action was rejected time and again by prior Justice Department officials. The September 11th attacks were largely the result of a weak intelligence apparatus, and this Christmas Day near-disaster again was again a failure to appropriately share intelligence. The decision to investigate those devoting their lives to protecting us is an example of left-leaning political correctness run amok and greatly hurts morale at that agency at a time when we need a strong CIA more than ever.

Third, treat our military with respect and honor, not as criminals. Yes, we need our military to be professional, respectful and honorable, and they are. But to court-martial Navy Seals -- among the bravest of the brave, who are willing and prepared to die for our country -- because a barbaric terrorist complains of a bruised lip is absurd and unconscionable. What's next? Assault charges against the brave passenger who foiled the Christmas Day bomber? We count on our military professionals to protect us. They should be able to count on their government to support and stand with them against America's enemies.

Fourth, reverse the decision to treat Khalid Sheik Mohammad as a criminal defendant instead of a terrorist. He was captured while continuing to fight a war against us that he acknowledges, even if the Obama Administration refuses to acknowledge the same. As the mastermind of the September 11th attacks, he does not belong in our civilian court system and should be prosecuted under the military tribunal system created for this purpose. To give this butcher and his followers a global media forum to act like victims and spew their hate defies logic. It will inflame anti-American actions across the globe. To show the world such a weak, politically correct response to terrorists makes America and Americans less safe. This is an unprecedented, dangerous mistake and I implore President Obama to reverse this horrible decision before it is too late.

Finally, fire Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and replace her with a competent professional. I have met Secretary Napolitano and found her to be a perfectly nice, reasonable person. But on homeland security, she like the rest of the Obama Administration has been consistently wrong. From confidently asserting "the system worked" in the wake of the Christmas Day near-disaster, to her previous assertion that returning American servicemen and women were prone to right-wing terrorism and presented possible threats to our safety, she has consistently proven that she does not get it and is not up to the challenge of protecting Americans from terror threats.

I could go on. Failure to let Army officials know of the potential dangers prior to the Fort Hood massacre; calling the Christmas day bomber an "isolated extremist" although he was associated with the same radical Yemeni Islamist cleric who instructed the murderer at Fort Hood; issuing a hard timeline for troop withdrawal from Afghanistan at the same time as we are implementing a limited surge... The point is clear. Every week adds more to the growing list of missteps and mistakes made by the Obama Administration that greatly weaken American security and undermine our ability to identify threats and prevent terrorist attacks.

By taking the five steps outlined above, the president would demonstrate to the American people and the world that he understands the threats to our security and is willing to do what it takes to defend and protect our country.

Target dealing with bold shoplifter

Four times since June, a brazen shoplifter has struck the same Target on  Jonesboro Road in McDonough. Each time, he grabs valuable merchandise and walks out without paying.

The one time he was confronted, he didn't back down. He pulled a baton and threatened the store's loss prevention officer.

"Most shoplifters, when confronted, will drop the stolen items and try to get away as quickly as possible," Henry County Police Capt. Jason Bolton said.

The latest theft came Dec. 29, when the suspect wheeled out two vacuum cleaners worth $549 apiece. He drove away in a small red or maroon vehicle. In the other  cases, the suspect drove away in a blue Ford Freestar van.

On June 12, police say, he stole two Blue-Ray disc players worth $600. On Aug. 21, he stole GPS devices worth $640.

On Sept. 30, he was leaving with stolen merchandise when an employee approached him.

"When this suspect was confronted by loss prevention, he pulled out an ASP baton and threatened the employee with it, and then took the stolen items by force," Bolton said. "By doing that he changed it from a simple case of shoplifting to an armed robbery."

Police believe he's also responsible for other Target thefts in the Atlanta area.

LINK TO  PHOTO 

 http://www.ajc.com/news/henry/target-dealing-with-bold-268683.html?cxtype=rss_news_81963

Woman bank manager 'stole $1,000,000  by regularly walking out with wads of $25,000 in cash after locking up'

Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 1:47 AM on 07th January 2010

A crooked bank manager stole almost $1million in a ‘sustained, sophisticated and calculated course of deception’, the Old Bailey heard yesterday.

Ania Wadsworth, 28, was a trusted boss at a branch of Lloyds TSB for five years but was repeatedly helping herself to $25,000 bundles of notes ready for cash machines.

She manipulated in-house bank accounts to hide her deceit from bosses and auditors, it was said.

Wadsworth, who started out as a team leader but was swiftly promoted to a branch operations manager, is accused of stealing $921,716 between 2002 and 2007.

When the scam was uncovered in March 2007 Wadsworth admitted taking the majority of the money.

However, she said she did it because her boyfriend Keith Preddie, 30, who was ‘from the wrong side of the tracks’, threat- ened and intimidated her to help pay off his spiraling drug debts.

He is accused of banking more than $145,000 of the stolen cash between 2003 and 2005.

Wadsworth was promoted rapidly at the Lloyds TSB branch in Golders Green, north London, above

Prosecutor Mark Paltenghi said the case did not involve a complicated paper trail and electronic transfers but the ‘taking of physical cash and removing it from the premises’.

Wadsworth and Preddie began their relationship 12 years ago, while she was still a 16-year-old schoolgirl and he was 18.

She came from a normal background but unemployed Preddie struggled with drug addiction and debt and was living in a crack house, spending $500 a day on his habit. 

They split after eight years together, during which time Preddie had served a prison sentence.

Wadsworth started work at the Golders Green branch in North London in 2000 and within a year was appointed operations manager, with responsibilities for loading cash machines.

Mr Paltenghi said: ‘By all accounts, she was a highly respected member of staff. She was a woman who was trusted by everybody with whom she worked. Sadly, that trust was misplaced.’

She started stealing small amounts, but over time it ‘increased considerably’. Mr Paltenghi said the money for cashpoints would be in bundles of $25,000.

‘She was usually the last person to leave the bank and during the day she would simply leave aside a bundle of cash and take it away with her when she locked up,’ he added.

'She said she had done this a number of times.’

Wadsworth was to tell police she took the cash home to Preddie, who created a constant fear that ‘he was able to kill her’.

The prosecutor added: ‘On several occasions she took more than one bundle with her for him.

‘She would cover up what she had done by debiting foreign accounts.

‘When she was in control of the cashpoints she was the person to load it and it was her responsibility to raise any discrepancies.’

Mr Paltenghi added: ‘How was Miss Wadsworth able to get away with it for so long? Trust, opportunity and a sophisticated cover-up.’

He said expert witnesses would later explain how the cover-up worked. Jurors were told that Wadsworth admitted stealing around $870,000 but claimed Preddie had forced her into doing it.

She also said she gave him her wages, which ranged between $1,000 and $1,800 a month, and was forced to take out three loans.

Wadsworth claimed ‘she was scared he would come after her and her family and she lived a life of fear’, said the prosecutor.

‘She said she wanted to get out of the relationship but couldn’t.’

But Mr Paltenghi said there was evidence Wadsworth had benefited from the scam, keeping her personal account overdrawn to prevent unwanted attention.

Wadsworth, of Archway, North London, denies theft.

Preddie, of Romford, Essex, denies money laundering. He denies that he forced Wadsworth to steal or that he knew the money was stolen.

The trial continues.

LINK TO PHOTO OF WADSWORTH

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1241059/Bank-manager-stole-1m-years-walking-wads-cash-locking-up.html#ixzz0btaPyROT

Bride who stole $470,000 from her employer to pay for dream wedding jailed for 2 years

Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 5:45 PM on 06th January 2010

A bride who stole nearly half a million pounds to fund her dream wedding has been jailed for two years.

Joanne Kent, 26, hired every room in a cliff-top hotel, laid on a fireworks display, splashed on flowers and even bought Armani bracelets for guests.

The mother-of-two spent the money on the lavish ceremony in Newquay, Cornwall, in September 2007 while tying the knot to fiance David.

Enlarge   Wag-style wedding: Joanne Kent on her big day... paid for with money she stole from her employer

Kent pilfered $470,000 from her former employers Wilson UK Ltd, a Walsall subsidiary of an American company supplying the oil industry, before leaving the firm two months before her wedding.

Guests were treated to a night at the Hotel Victoria funded by the bride, unaware that the champagne they were quaffing had been funded by the firm.

Kent, originally from Cannock, Staffordhsire, who now lives in Fraddon, Cornwall, even blew more than $50,000 on cars, paying for an Audi A4 and a $38,000 Mazda.

The court heard she transferred cash to her bank accounts after disguising the money as payments to other firms.

Joanne Kent hides her face arrives at Wolverhampton Crown Court

The scam was only discovered when Kent used the wrong currency for one transfer, making a supposed payment to an American company in sterling instead of dollars.

But today at Wolverhampton Crown Court she was finally punished for conning her employers out of so much money.

Prosecutor Mark Phillips said she worked the scam by paying money out of the firm to existing clients, but changing the bank details so it went to her.

He said: 'Mrs Kent accepts that she spent $50,000 on her wedding, the hotel bill alone was over $37,000, without the flowers, cards, or fireworks on the beach.

'She also admits bracelets were given as gifts to guests. With the money she also bought a Mazda worth $38,000 and an Audi A4. Some of the cash was also spent on mortgages on properties.

'Using dormant companies she would put in her own bank details so the records showed existing creditors as paid when it was her and nothing would be thought of it.

'The financial manager acted after she saw a discrepancy in a $22,000 payment. It was to a U.S. company who should have been paid in dollars and not in pounds sterling.

'But for this discrepancy it is very unlikely that Mrs Kent would ever been caught.'

Kent had pleaded guilty to one count of theft of $296,047 from her employers between July 5, 2005, and April 11, 2007.

She also admitted fraudulently obtaining $177,845 from the firm during the period of April 12 to June 21 the same year.

Dressed in black, Kent starred at the ground for the whole hearing but sobbed as the judge spoke to her.

Louise Howard, defending, said her client's family would suffer because of her crimes.

She said: 'There is no way to justify how Mrs Kent spent the money, however a significant amount was spent on other people.

'She will have to live with the fact that her husband and her children will be living in a desperate situation because of her actions.'

Judge Michael Challinor appeared to take pity on the mum-of-two as he jailed her.He said: 'This was a relatively sophisticated fraud. Only a mistake in the type of currency used gave away what you were doing.

'Most of the money you stole was squandered on an extravagant lifestyle for yourself or in order to show off to your friends.

'Although the company had a turnover of over $10million the amount of money stolen was very significant.

'Because you have an eight-week old baby and it suffers from hip problems I will attempt to sway the prison service to allow you to attend a mother and child unit.

'I sentence you to two years and eight months imprisonment, reduced to two years due to the fact you have two small children.'

A separate hearing into whether the money taken can and will be repaid will take place later this month.

LINK TO PHOTO OF BRIDE AT WEDDING

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1240832/Bride-jailed-stealing-470-000-pay-dream-wedding.html

Mouse nest found on policeman's filthy desk

Exterminators called in to deal with an infestation at a police station found a mouse nest on a messy desk.

Daily Telegraph 

Published: 9:21AM GMT 05 Jan 2010

Mice made a home on one policeman's messy desk Photo: GETTY

Pest controllers were called to an office in Kennington, south London, used by weapons and technology experts at the Metropolitan Police after reports of 'mice everywhere'.

According to internal police reports, a family of mice even set up home in one police worker's desk - burying themselves in his paperwork.

The report reminds workers of 'the Met's clear desk policy' - meaning everything on your desk must be filed away by the end of each day so cleaners can do their jobs.

It states: "Employees came across a number of mice at a police building.

"Action was taken to remove the mice from the premises and there have not been any sighting of mice since."

A spokeswoman for the Met said that the 'paperwork home' set up on one desk by mice consisted of 'paperwork that did not relate to operational police matters'.

"Some of the desks were so messy it was a wonder anyone could find anything," said one officer.

"It got to the stage where mice droppings were found on desks and that's when everyone thought 'it's time to do something about our desks'.

"That's when one guy found a mouse nest in his paperwork. It's fair to say he was a little embarrassed."

Lambeth cops spend more than $25,000 on vermin exterminators last year, including $4,299 to get rid of 'unwanted birds' and $12,018 on 'rodent or mammal extermination'.

The sum also included $108 for 'getting rid of geese', although a police spokesman could not shed any further light on this particular expense.

 http://www.chicagotribune.com/videobeta/watch/?watch=4067a885-6aa1-4b76-8a55-7a7cae0f175a&src=front

Tuesday, 01.05.10

Florida Keys cops leave ransom note for pot, nab suspected grower

 

Steven Locascio, 48, and his wife, Christine Locascio, 50, were both charged with cultivation of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia and sale of marijuana.

CAMMY CLARK

Miami Herald

Kenosha woman found chained in filth; relatives charged

January 5, 2010 11:07 AM | UPDATED STORY

Chicago Tribune 

A former Chicago woman and her son have been charged after Kenosha police found the woman's 38-year-old daughter--who has the intellectual capacity of a child--at the family home disfigured from neglect, covered in her own excrement and chained to a weight bench.

Sally M. Adams, 56, and her son, Ernest Claiborne, 34, were arrested in their home in the 1300 block of 69th Street in Kenosha on Saturday. Police went there after the father of Adams' grandson complained to authorities that Adams had barred him from seeing his 2-year-old son since September and that Adams' own daughter might be neglected and chained to furniture in a filthy house, according to criminal complaints filed Monday.

Adams and Claiborne both face charges of  felony false imprisonment, abuse of a person at risk and reckless endangerment in connection to their alleged treatment of the woman who is Adams' daughter and Claiborne's sister. Claiborne also faces a misdemeanor child neglect charge related to his treatment of the 2-year-old.

According to criminal complaints, the defendants both told police that the allegedly abused woman has the mental capacity of a 5-year-old.

Adams and Claiborne were both being held in Kenosha County Jail in lieu of $10,000 bail, according to the Kenosha County Sheriff's Department.

A Kenosha police officer went to Adams' and Claiborne's home about 4:45 p.m. Saturday in response to the child-abuse complaint from the boy's father. A 13-year-old boy answered the door, and Claiborne allowed the officer to come in to check on the boy's well-being, according to the complaints.

Inside, the officer found a home in "complete disarray" with "an odor of urine and faces so strong he nearly vomited," according to the complaints.

The officer found the 2-year-old boy in a small, dark bedroom, strapped in a car seat on top of a mattress. There was no food in the house suitable for the boy, the complaints said.

In the dining room, the officer found Adams' 38-year-old daughter lying on the floor and chained by her left ankle to a weight bench. The woman, who was shivering and wearing only a T-shirt, was covered in urine and feces, lying next to a similarly rank blanket, police said.

The woman, who was unable to communicate with police, weighed between 60 and 70 pounds, according to the complaints. She could not straighten her legs, stand or walk.

Claiborne told officers he didn't know where the key to the chain on the woman's leg was, and said she had been chained to the weight bench because she otherwise would leave the house and get lost, police said.

The 13-year-old who answered the door told police he had known Adams and Claiborne about 3 years, and that she had chained that whole time. He said she was only unchained "once in a while" to be cleaned, the complaints state.

In a later police interview, Claiborne claimed he had been planning on taking a nap about 4 p.m. Saturday, and that his sister had been chained because his mother had gone shopping.

He said he had not taken her to the bathroom or fed her Saturday.

Claiborne explained he had put the 2-year-old in the car seat so the boy would not disturb him as he napped.

Kenosha Fire Rescue had to cut the chain to free the woman. When she was being taken to Kenosha Hospital, police found she had ligature marks on her ankle, as well as 10 to 15 marks on her back, according to the complaints.

In statements to police after she returned to her home and as she was taken to the police station, Adams denied knowing who had chained up her daughter, but echoed her son's statement that her daughter was intellectually disabled and would run off if not chained.

Adams told police her daughter could use the bathroom herself "if she remembers," and could feed herself and talk. But she said she gave her over-the-counter sleeping pills to keep her from leaving the house, the complaints state.

The father of the boy told police that between 1999 and 2006, when Adams and her daughter lived in Chicago, he frequently visited their home and saw the daughter walking and using the bathroom, the complaints state.

Adams had in the past locked the doors to keep her daughter from leaving home, but the father told police he had only heard second-hand before Saturday about the daughter being chained up.

Adams and Claiborne were scheduled to appear for a preliminary hearing Jan. 12 in Kenosha County Circuit Court before Judge Carl Greco.

( Kenosha, Wis., Police Department photo / January 5, 2010 )

(Kenosha, Wis., Police Department photo / January 5, 2010) 

Defendant: Sally M. Adams ( Kenosha, Wis., Police Department photo / January 5, 2010 )

Defendant: Ernest Claiborne (Kenosha, Wis., Police Department photo / January 5, 2010)

Smacked children more successful later in life, study finds

Children who are smacked by their parents may grow up to be happier and more successful than those spared physical discipline, research suggests.

Murray Wardrop

Daily Telegraph
Published: 1:26PM GMT 03 Jan 2010

Research suggests children who are smacked when young are more successful later in life

A study found that youngsters smacked up to the age of six did better at school and were more optimistic about their lives than those never hit by their parents.

They were also more likely to undertake voluntary work and keener to attend university, experts discovered.  The research, conducted in the United States, is likely to anger children’s rights campaigners who have unsuccessfully fought to ban smacking in Britain.

Currently, parents are allowed by law to mete out "reasonable chastisement'' on their children, providing smacking does not leave a mark or bruise. These limits were clarified in the 2004 Children’s Act.

But children’s groups and MPs have argued that spanking is an outdated form of punishment that can cause long-term mental health problems.

Marjorie Gunnoe, professor of psychology at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan, said her study showed there was insufficient evidence to deny parents the freedom to determine how their children should be punished.

She said: “The claims made for not spanking children fail to hold up. They are not consistent with the data.

“I think of spanking as a dangerous tool, but there are times when there is a job big enough for a dangerous tool. You just don’t use it for all your jobs.”

The research questioned 179 teenagers about how often they were smacked as children and how old they were when they were last spanked.

Their answers were then compared with information they gave about their behaviour that could have been affected by smacking. This included negative effects such as anti-social behaviour, early sexual activity, violence and depression, as well as positives such as academic success and ambitions.

Those who had been smacked up to the age of six performed better in almost all the positive categories and no worse in the negatives than those never punished physically.

Teenagers who had been hit by their parents from age seven to 11 were also found to be more successful at school than those not smacked but fared less well on some negative measures, such as getting involved in more fights.

However, youngsters who claimed they were still being smacked scored worse than every other group across all the categories.

Prof Gunnoe found little difference in the results between sexes and different racial groups.

The findings were rejected by the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, which has fought to ban smacking.

A spokesman for the charity said: "The NSPCC believes that children should have the same legal protection from assault as adults do.

“Other research has shown that smacking young children affects their behaviour and mental development, and makes them more likely to be anti-social.”

However, Parents Outloud, the pressure group, welcomed the research, saying parents should not be criminalised for mild smacking.

Its spokeswoman, Margaret Morrissey, said: “It is very difficult to explain verbally to a young child why something they have done is wrong.

“A light tap is often the most effective way of teaching them not to do something that is dangerous or hurtful to other people – it is a preventive measure.

“While anything more than a light tap is definitely wrong, parents should be allowed the freedom to discipline their children without the fear that they will be reported to police.”

Aric Sigman, a psychologist and author of The Spoilt Generation: Why Restoring Authority will Make our Children and Society Happier, told the Sunday Times: “The idea that smacking and violence are on a continuum is a bizarre and fetishised view of what punishment or smacking is for most parents.

“If it’s done judiciously by a parent who is normally affectionate and sensitive to their child, our society should not be up in arms about that. Parents should be trusted to distinguish this from a punch in the face.”

Previous studies have suggested that smacking children can lead them to develop behavioural problems such as being more aggressive.

Sam Stein

Huffington Post Reporting 

US Spends Ten Times More On Afghanistan Than Airport Security

First Posted: 01- 4-10 04:44 PM   |   Updated: 01- 4-10 05:21 PM

The botched Christmas airliner attack, followed by a steady stream of alarming reports about the vulnerability of airports, has prompted questions about the budgetary priorities that underline U.S. national security.

First and foremost is a fairly straightforward query: why is the U.S. spending so heavily in Afghanistan and Iraq, when a terrorist who nearly blew up an aircraft over Detroit journeyed from Nigeria to London to Yemen, all the while apparently being managed by al Qaeda in Pakistan?

The numbers indeed are sobering. In fiscal year 2009, the Transportation Security Administration was allocated $7.99 billion, $5.74 billion of which was earmarked for aviation security (Page 154). Only $128 million of that total was geared towards "enhancements at passenger checkpoints to improve the detection of prohibited items, especially weapons and explosives" which is roughly $100 million less than the tax break granted to Alaska fishermen in the stimulus package passed early this Congress.

Contrast those numbers with the dollars being poured into the two wars. A report released in September by the Congressional Research Service estimated that $94.8 billion was spent in Iraq in FY09. Another $55.2 billion is going to Afghanistan (more than ten times the amount spent on aviation security) with the number rising to $72.9 billion in 2010. That total, does not include the expected $30 billion that will be required to pay for additional troops.

For some national security experts, the imbalance is cause for concern. Not because one activity is being funded at the cost of another. But, rather, because homeland security requires attention and resources that more closely parallel overseas military operations.

"Yes, I think we are under-funding [airport security]," said Larry Korb, a defense analyst at the Center for American Progress. In late December, he and his organization released a report, which called on the Obama administration to pay for its escalation in Afghanistan through strategic cuts to the defense budget -- specifically to obsolete weapons programs. That money could also be used to fill in the appropriate holes when it comes to domestic security operations.

"Obviously we are putting far more of our resources into offensive action as opposed to defense or development," said Korb.

Not everyone is alarmed about the prospects that the United States is too bogged down in Afghanistan to handle the global threat of terrorism. In an interview with the Huffington Post last week, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen (D-M.D.) said that there was no disputing the notion that the failed airliner bombing had "transnational connections."  

"And yes," he added, "you cannot fight in just one place. But that doesn't mean you don't fight anywhere."

Nor, for that matter, does that mean U.S. forces can't fight in two or more places at once. And as Von Hollen pointed out, the Obama administration "has already been engaged both in Somalia and in Yemen working with the government to go after the al Qaeda cells there."

Former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.), likewise, took to the Obama administration's defense on Afghanistan, telling the cast of "Morning Joe" that he thought the country was better prepared to handle a terrorist attack today than in 2001.

"If you are concerned about [being distracted in Afghanistan], you've got to add Bosnia," Kerrey added. "Was that a distraction, going into Bosnia, to make an effort? Was it a distraction to try to make an effort to go into Somalia? Was Desert One a distraction?

Few in or out of government suspect that the botched airline attack will compel the administration to deviate from its plans for Afghanistan or Iraq. It is far more likely that a separate check will be written to cover the problems in airport security. But, for those who already argue that Afghanistan should not be the locus of America's counterterrorism efforts, the lapses in airport security serve as an affirmation of sorts.

"[I]f I said to you normally, 'Tell me what, what, what distinguishes the murderer at Fort Hood, the people we arrested in Denver and Detroit and New York, and the five people who were just picked up in Pakistan?' You could say, 'Well, they weren't Rotarians,'" former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said during a taping of "Meet the Press" on December 27. "But it would be politically incorrect to describe the one common characteristic they have, which is they all belong to an irreconcilable wing of Islam which wants to destroy our civilization. Now, until we can have an honest conversation and not be self-deceptive about our enemies, it's pretty hard to design a strategy. And that's why the Afghanistan argument is a subset. It's like debating Guadalcanal in World War II."

Tough Tiger Woods pictured shirtless on Leibovitz Vanity Fair cover

Tiger Woods appears shirtless and "pumping iron" in a photograph by the photographer Annie Leibovitz published for the first time by Vanity Fair magazine.

Tom Leonard in New York
9:45PM GMT 04 Jan 2010

Tiger Woods on the cover of Vanity Fair magazine.

The picture was taken in 2006, long before allegations of the golfer's serial philandering emerged.

The photo, one of several "raw" shots of Woods to be printed in the magazine's forthcoming February issue, is a far cry from the squeaky clean image that the golf star once enjoyed both on and off the green.

An accompanying article by the writer Buzz Bissinger seeks to discover why the sportsman was able to keep his "sex addict" nature hidden for so long.

One revealing insight into the "real" Woods, he writes, was provided by a taped interview the golfer gave to GQ magazine in 1997, when his image was not so tightly controlled by publicity advisors.

During the interview, Woods, then 21, told a series of dirty jokes about lesbian sex and the endowments of black sportsmen, some of them as he "flirted" with four women who were assisting him during a photo-shoot.

Joe Logan, a long-time golf writer, told Vanity Fair that Woods later "learned very well to talk forever and say nothing" at tournament press conferences.

Woods was equally detached with other players "though he was always affable, never antagonistic," said Mr Bissinger.

Michael Bamberger, a golf writer for Sports Illustrated magazine, said that Woods learned early on that to succeed in professional golf, particularly as a black man in a white man's game, he had to conform.

"What seems clear now is that he lived a very abnormal life all his life in a sport in which guys are very conventional," he said.

"And if you are not conventional, you get ostracised right away."

As sponsors have deserted Woods, 33, and his public approval ratings have plunged, Mr Bissinger speculated that the golfer might be damaged most by recent charges against Anthony Galea, a Canadian doctor accused of providing athletes with human growth hormone.

Dr Galea treated Woods for an injured knee. Although he conceded that there was no evidence that the golfer took performance enhancing drugs, Mr Bissinger said sports writers who covered Woods noticed as long ago as 2007 that "from the back he was beginning to look like Barry Bonds" - a reference to a baseball star embroiled in a recent steroids scandal.

Disgraced Miss. judge reports to federal prison

Holbrook Mohr

Associated Press Writer 

1/04/10

5:04 PM 

JACKSON, Miss. – Bobby DeLaughter, a former Mississippi prosecutor and judge whose legal conquests became the subject of books and a movie, reported to federal prison Monday for lying to the FBI in a judicial bribery investigation.

The next chapter of DeLaughter's life, as inmate No. 12930-042, marks a long fall from the height of his legal career in 1994 when he was a prosecutor who helped convict a civil rights-era assassin for the 30-year-old murder of NAACP leader Medgar Evers.

The 55-year-old DeLaughter (deh-LAW'-ter) reported to a federal prison camp in Pine Knot, Ky., before his 2 p.m. deadline, said Federal Bureau of Prisons spokeswoman Felicia Ponce.

The prison has a medium-security facility and minimum-security camp, though Ponce said she did not know how DeLaughter would be classified. All inmates in the federal system must work if they are physically able, with jobs ranging from cooks to groundskeepers, she said.

Prisoners make from 12 cents to 40 cents an hour depending on the job and their experience.

DeLaughter was sentenced to 18 months in November after pleading guilty to lying about secret conversations he had with a lawyer while presiding over a dispute between wealthy attorneys over legal fees. As part of a plea deal, prosecutors dropped conspiracy and mail fraud charges.

DeLaughter made a name for himself as an assistant district attorney when he helped put away Byron de la Beckwith for Evers' 1963 murder. The case was the basis for the 1996 movie "Ghosts of Mississippi," with Alec Baldwin playing DeLaughter.

DeLaughter also wrote a book about the prosecution, "Never Too Late: A Prosecutor's Story of Justice in the Medgar Evers Case."

That acclaim helped DeLaughter get appointed to a vacant seat on the bench in 2002. He was later elected to the position.

His storied career ended with the same bribery scandal that toppled Richard "Dickie" Scruggs, chief architect of the multibillion-dollar tobacco litigation of the 1990s — which was depicted in the movie "The Insider," starring Al Pacino and Russell Crowe.

DeLaughter was presiding over a lawsuit in which a lawyer sued Scruggs for a bigger cut of millions in legal fees from asbestos litigation. Prosecutors said DeLaughter ruled in Scruggs' favor in exchange for a promise that he'd be considered for a federal judgeship, with help from Scruggs' high-powered connections.

DeLaughter ruled in 2006 that Scruggs didn't owe the former partner anything more than a belated $1.5 million payment. The ruling was contrary to the findings of a special master appointed to weigh the evidence before trial.

DeLaughter pleaded guilty only to lying to the FBI about conversations he had with his old boss, former Hinds County District Attorney Ed Peters. Peters was accused of receiving $1 million to influence DeLaughter, but he cooperated in the investigation and was not charged.