Uncategorized

Easy Access to Area Crime Rates

Easy Access to Area Crime Rates

Statistics and other information on local crime rates can be accessed, most directly and with the assurance of Government verification, from the FBI-published Uniform Crime Reports. Compiled annually since 1929, the reports issued through the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program present the statistics related to crime rates throughout the U.S., including specific areas and jurisdictions where crimes are committed and the types of crimes which are committed in this area. 
 
 
Information and statistics concerning crime rates are generated through this system by the National Incident Based Reporting System and the Summary reporting system. Statistics of this nature are are secured from approximately 17,000 different law enforcement entities throughout the United States. 
 
 
Furthermore, several non-Government-affiliated services also present information as to local crime rates and statistics, such as through the source of NeighborhoodScout.com. Statistics on crime rates can indicate not just the frequency with which offenses are committed, but also the degree of success enjoyed by law enforcement. 
 

The 4 Security Levels in Prison

The 4 Security Levels in Prison

According to the United States Department of Corrections, there exist 4 primary levels of prison security levels; these levels are the following:
1.       Maximum Security: This prison security level is the highest and most stringent; only the most violent offenders are incarcerated within a maximum security prison. Within a maximum security unit, there exist sub-units such as solitary confinement, protective custody, and special housing units (SHU). In most cases, maximum security prisoners are confined to their cells for up to 23 hours a day and are under strict monitoring. 
2.       Close Security: This prison security level is akin to maximum security in its construct – consisting of single cells and close monitoring – yet close security prisoners are entitled extended outside of their cells.
3.       Medium Security: This prison security level most resembles a large residence hall which houses as many as 70 inmates in large, bunked sleeping quarters, as well as group toilet facilities. Although there is consistent monitoring, medium security prisoners are afforded various work assignments, which permits them to be out of their cells for longer periods of time.
4.       Minimum Security: Akin to the medium security prison, minimum security prisoners are housed in dormitories, but are considered to be the lowest risk to the public. As a result, these prisoners are afforded the opportunity to participate in groups, sessions, and rectification projects in order to reform themselves.

Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act

Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act

 
 
 
What is the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act?
 
 
The Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act of 1975 (Public Law 93-675) is legislation that regulates consumer warranties when offered on products.  This legislation does not force suppliers to give warranties to consumers, but merely ensures that the warranties are fair and easy to understand.  As result, warranties became an important component of buying a product and competitors may offer better warranties to induce the consumer to buy the product.  Warranties prior to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act were non-competitive and non-enforceable, giving the consumer little reason to factor warranty coverage into the buying decision.
 
 
The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act also sets up standards for companies to respond and be accountable for their warranties and creates an alternative dispute resolution infrastructure to resolve low-level disputes without the need to burden the judicial system.  This covers written guarantees, so oral proclamations and promises are non-enforceable and that at the discretion of the consumer.  The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act applies to consumers only and is not meant to regulate relations between suppliers that resale products.
 
 
Definitions of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
 
 
As the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act was the first federal legislation of its kind to protect consumers from deceptive warranties, it defined a number of terms for the purposes of clarification in the Act.
 
 
Consumer – one who buys a good for personal use only and not for resale.
 
o Consumer Product – an item sold for personal or household use
 
 
Supplier – one that directly or indirectly facilitates the transfer of a product to a consumer
 
o Warrantor – supplier that offers a warranty
 
 
Written Warranty – written promise that guarantees the workmanship and performance of the product in a stated time.  Written warranties do not disclaim the below implied warranties.  A written warranty is merely additional promises made by the supplier to the consumer.
 
 
Implied Warranty – this is a standard set by the jurisdiction that imposes expectations on the sale of products between supplier and consumer.  The provisions were determined by the Uniform Commercial Code of 1952.  Implied warranties also place certain expectations of performance on the product, including:
 
 
o Fitness for a particular purpose – the product must perform for the function as advertised.
 
o Merchantability – the product must have all defects noted by the merchant at the time of sale and will fulfill the purpose for which it was sold.
 
o Workmanlike quality- any item made or constructed for the consumer must be made to acceptable standards.
 
o Habitability – as the name implies, the home that the consumer purchases must be habitable, unless otherwise noted by the seller, with the full disclosure to the buyer.
 
o Warranty of title – the seller has not stolen the goods and has a legal right to sell to the consumer.
 
 
Service Contract – a promise from the supplier to provide maintenance and service over a set period of time.  The employer must meet this obligation to the employee and offer the service as many times as it needed.  Persistent defects entitle the consumer to a refund or replacement.
 
 
The Uniform Commercial Code is not a law per se but a set of recommendations for each state to adopt to govern commercial practices.  Slight modifications may be made by each state.  Implied warranties are no longer valid if the merchant claims the merchandise is “as is” or “with faults.”
 
 
What are the standards for warranty set by the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act?
 
 
The terms and conditions of the warranty must be in plain, simple language for the consumer to understand it.  The manufacturer cannot force the consumer to use the product in conjunction with other parts issued by the manufacturer as a condition of maintaining the warranty.  This is called a “tie-in provision” and is expressly forbidden.
 
 
Full warranties force a manufacturer to deal with product issues in a timely manner.  The manufacturer may not impose a limitation on the warranty for the product unless expressly noted on the product.  An example would be “void when label removed” warnings on electronics that warn the consumer that disassembling this product will void the warranty.  Long standing defects that are not remedied after a number of repair attempts will force the manufacturer to provide a refund or replacement.
 
 
What is the scope of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act?
 
 
This act, while not the final authority on consumer protection and warranty provides a number of recommendations and regulations for interactions between consumers and suppliers.  The Federal Trade Commission is the final authority on commerce and provides the infrastructure to achieve redress under the provisions of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.  A supplier that continuously fails to meet proper regulations may be subject to sanctions by the government that will require the supplier to take remedial measures, or go out of business.
 
 
Additionally, disputes over the provisions of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act can be taken to federal court for damages exceeding $25,000 or the number of plaintiffs exceeding a hundred persons.  In these suits, the plaintiff may recover the costs of the suit, including attorney fees, from the supplier.
 
 
What are the FTC rules related to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act?
 
 
The Rule on Disclosure of Written Consumer Product Warranty Terms and Conditions requires that a copy of the warranty be made available to the consumer.  This may include an electronic version of the warranty on an electronic medium or the device itself.
 
 
The Rule on Pre-Sale Availability of Written Warranty Terms requires that the consumer be aware of the warranty of the product before the sale of the product so that the consumer may make an informed buying decision.
 
 
The Rule on Informal Dispute Settlement Procedures requires the seller to abide by FTC rules on dispute resolution and engage in such activity when deemed necessary.
 
 

Differences between Male and Female Inmates

Differences between Male and Female Inmates

Though statistics indicate that men are more likely to commit offenses that result in prison sentences, there are many women who are convicted of crimes and required to spend time in jail. Co-ed incarceration is not ideal for the safety and well being of female inmates. Serious concerns, such as sexual assault by male inmates, has promoted the creation of female prisons. Women are contained within separate facilities, where they can complete their prison sentence without anxiety or fear regarding abuse at the hands of male inmates. Female prisons are very similar in structure and function to male prisons, however, there are some notable differences.
Studies show that violence is much less common in female prisons than in facilities that house male convicts. Violence is frequent and widespread in prisons that contain male inmates, and as a result, detailed hierarchical social structures are created. Male inmates often belong to prison gangs, in order to obtain protection and security. In most instance, female inmates do not create this type of social structure, or partake in gang related activity. 
Nevertheless, there are some very serious concerns that women in prison must address. For example, some of female inmates are pregnant upon entering into prison. In cases such as these, a woman may be required to give birth to her child while she is in prison. The child may be taken from her shortly after birth. Women who have produced a family prior to their prison sentence often experience a great deal of emotional and psychological distress, due to separation from their families. Though female inmates are generally more peaceful than male inmates, they do become angry and depressed, and commonly partake in self destructive behavior. 

A Tragedy: Apache Man Murdered 3-Year-Old Boy

A Tragedy: Apache Man Murdered 3-Year-Old Boy


On October 16, 2012, the US Attorney’s Office for the District of New Mexico announced that Jay Rutherford Paiz of Dulce, New Mexico, pleaded guilty to murder in the second degree of his son.  Paiz is a member of the Jicarilla Apache Nation.  


During the plea hearing, Paiz told the U.S. Attorney’s Office that he fatally injured his 3-year-old son on July 20, 2008 at his residence that is located on the Jicarilla Apache Indian Reservation.  He was arrested on July 22, 2008 after a criminal complaint was issued that he attempted to kill or commit manslaughter through child abuse.  


According to court documents, the Jicarilla Apache Tribal Police Department and the EMS arrived at Paiz’s residence after responding to a call.  When they got there, Paiz was walking toward the vehicles with his son in his arms.  His son was unresponsive.  The child was rushed to the hospital and bruises were found on his head, ears, back, legs, and pelvic area.  The bruises did not occur all at once.  


The son underwent emergency surgery to release pressure on the brain.  The child was admitted to intensive care, but his condition worsened on the next day.  The 3-year-old boy eventually died of his head injuries on July 3, 2008, and Paiz was immediately charged with first-degree murder.  


Paiz eventually pled guilty to second-degree murder.  During the guilty plea, Paiz stated that he repeatedly spanked and whipped his son with a belt because he didn’t listen.  On the day of the head injuries, Paiz admitted that he threw his son on the bed which resulted in the boy hitting his head against the wall.  Paiz stated he was intoxicated during the incident.  


The conditions of the plea agreement sentence Paiz to at least 15 years in prison and no more than 25 years in prison.  


Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation

New Interactive Website to Teach Safe Online Surfing

New Interactive Website to Teach Safe Online Surfing


On October 15, 2012, the Federal Bureau of Investigation announced the creation of a new interactive website to helps teachers educate students about safe online surfing and cyber safety.  The program is called the FBI-SOS (Safe Online Surfing) Internet Challenge, and the website was created with the assistance of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.  


The new website target six specific grades.  There is one island for grades third through eighth, and the websites allow kids to learn about cyber security by playing games, watching videos, and engaging in other activities.  


Each grade has its own exam as well.  Teachers can sign up their classes and give the exam once the students have completed all of the activities.  The grading is completed electronically by the FBI, and schools can appear on a leader board with three different categories.  The top scoring schools can received an FBI-SOS trophy, and they can even receive a visit from an FBI agent.  


Kids of all ages can visit the website.  The exam is only available for kids in third grade through eighth grade though, and teachers have to register their classes before the exams can be taken.  


The FBI stresses that they DO NOT collect information about the students like names, ages, or school information.  A student only receives a number, and the teacher can identify the number that matches each student.  Teachers need to provide their name, school, and school email address when signing up for the program.  


Scott McMillion, the head manger of the program under the FBI Criminal Investigative Division, states: “FBI-SOS is a fun, free, and effective way to teach kids how to use the internet safely and responsibly.  We encourage teachers to check out the site and sign up their classes during the school year.”


Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation
 

132 Domain Names Seized During Project Cyber Monday

132 Domain Names Seized During Project Cyber Monday


On November 26, 2012, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced that 132 domain names selling counterfeit merchandise were seized during this year’s “Project Cyber Monday 3” and “Project Transatlantic” operations.  The operations were led by ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the European Police Office (Europol), and law enforcement in Belgium, Denmark, France, Romania, and the United Kingdom.  


101 website domains were seized by operation Cyber Monday 3.  Project Transatlantic seized 31 domain names including domains like .eu, .be, .dk, .fr, .ro, and .uk.  The websites were specifically targeted by the IPR Center.  


ICE Director John Morton stated: “This operation is a great example of the tremendous cooperation between ICE and our international partners at the IPR Center.  Our partnerships enable us to go after criminals who are duping unsuspecting shoppers all over the world.  This is not an American problem, it is a global one and it is a fight we must win.”  


The seized domain names are currently in the government’s custody.  If visitors enter the domain names in their browser, they will see a banner that notifies them of the seizure and explains the federal crime of willful copyright infringement.  In addition to the domain names, $175,000 paid through PayPal accounts is being targeted by the government as well.  


1,529 domain names have previously been seized by the United States since 2010.  684 of the seized domain names are now property of the U.S. government.  The seizure banner has been viewed over 110 million times.  


Tod Cohen, the vice president and deputy general counsel of Government Relations for eBay Inc., stated: “PayPal and eBay Inc. pride ourselves in going above and beyond in the fight against the illegal online trafficking of counterfeit goods by partnering with law enforcement and rights owners globally, and we hope that this is fair warning to criminals that the Internet is not a safe place to try and sell fake goods.”  


U.S. Attorney’s Offices in Maryland, Colorado, New Jersey, California, New York, and Texas helped serve warrants.  Assistance was provided by the Justice Department’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section.  


Source: Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Shipment of Lead-Contaminated Toys Seized

Shipment of Lead-Contaminated Toys Seized


On November 26, 2012, officers with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced they seized products on multiple ships that entered a Jacksonville, Florida port on November 14.  The federal officers found almost 24,000 toys with lead levels above federal standards.  Some of the toys also contained safety violations, and several shipments of counterfeit toys were found as well.  


The value of the shipments was estimated around $220,000.  


Allen Gina, CBP’s assistant commissioner for international trade, stated: “The concerted targeting efforts of the Commercial Analysis and Targeting Center and the vigilance of CBP officers at our ports of entry ensures that toys are safe for children and their families and add to the joy of the holiday season as intended.”  


The CBP and CPSC work together to check ships that potentially contain unsafe imported toys.  The CPSC has permanent employees that work at the Commercial Analysis and Targeting Center (CTAC) in order to stop unsafe products from reaching the hands of consumers.  CTAC combines resources from multiple government agencies, encourages communication between companies and government bodies, and routinely engages in inspections.


Carol Cave, the CPSC Director of Import Surveillance, expressed optimism over the efforts of the CPSC and cooperating government agencies: “We actively target hazardous children’s products throughout the year.  Cutting edge joint programs, now in place with CBP, can give U.S. consumers more confidence that products on our shelves are safe.”  


The CBP operates under the Department of Homeland Security.  Apart from keeping terrorists and foreign weapons outside of the United States, the CBP protects borders and official ports of entry.  The joint efforts of the CBP and CPSC specifically target products that do not meet health and industry codes within the United States.  


Source: Customs and Border Protection

PHA Manager Defrauded Philadelphia of $431,848

PHA Manager Defrauded Philadelphia of $431,848


On November 30, 2012, the US Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania announced that Richard Perri of Philadelphia was charged with defrauding the Philadelphia Housing Authority (PHA) of $431,848.  He was the former materials coordinator for the PHA Maintenance Department from November 1998 to July 2008.  


During his duties, he oversaw purchases of material for PHA properties and maintenance projects.  He had permission by the PHA to order materials for sites, charge those purchases to the PHA, and access budgets for property sites.  


According to court documents, Perri was able to avoid the requisition process required by PHA by ordering and receiving materials from vendors and then submitting the requisition for payments after the materials were delivered and he received the vendor’s invoice.  The PHA was less likely to notice the fraud scheme through this method.  


From 2002 to 2008, Perri bought materials that were supposed to be used for PHA properties but then sold the materials for profits to builders who weren’t working on PHA projects.  During this time period, he submitted false requisitions to the PHA to make it appear the materials were going to PHA projects.  Perri and another co-conspirator worked together to hide the payments and delivery of materials.  


The co-conspirator worked as a middle man who received payments for the purchased materials and then picked up the materials and delivered them to non-PHA properties.  Perri and the co-conspirator sold the materials for half of their actual value and split the profits.  


Perri is subject to 15 years in prison if he is convicted.  He will also receive supervised release and mandatory restitution.  


The case was investigated by the FBI, HUD’s Office of Inspector General, and the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office General.  The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney K.T. Newton.  


Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation

Flordia State Prison

Flordia State Prison

Florida state prisons are governed by the Florida Department of Corrections. The Florida state prison system is the third largest prison system in the country, and currently has a budget of over two billion dollars. There are over sixty two Florida state prisons, along with 146 facilities, 33 work release centers, 46 work camps, five road prisons, and one treatment center. 
The Florida state prisons currently have about 27,000 employees working in the system, with nearly 75% of the staff being either probation officers or certified corrections officers. On average, the typical Florida State prison employee is about forty years old, and has already served the Department of Corrections for nine years.
Most of the prisons in the state of Florida are run by the Department of Corrections, though there are six privately operated prisons in the state. Furthermore, the Florida jails are operated and run by each of the individual counties in the state. 
Jails are used more as holding individuals that are awaiting court and sentencing, while the Florida state prisons are meant to hold inmates that have already been convicted of a crime and received sentencing. Also, Florida jails will often hold inmates that have been convicted of minor crimes and misdemeanors that carry a sentence of no more than a year.
Currently, the Florida state prison system houses nearly forty thousand inmates in state prisons, with over 100,000 offenders being under the control