Legislation Regulating Cell Phone Surveillance By Indiana Law Enforcement Not What It's Cracked Up To Be

I just had the chance to review legislation Sen. Brent Waltz (R-Greenwood) is offering in the form of SB 64 to limit Indiana law enforcement agency's access to information contained on a person's cell phone. Needless to say, I'm disappointed in its current form. It's completely useless in preventing law enforcement agencies from using software like the Stingray software used by the Indiana State Police to capture bulk cell phone data transmitted within a targeted geographic area without first obtaining a court-ordered search warrant.

The first part of the bill amends a section of the motor vehicle code that makes it unlawful to type, send and read text messages using a cell phone while operating a motor vehicle. This part of the bill prohibits a law enforcement officer from extracting information from a person's cell phone without the person's consent for purposes of enforcing the no texting while driving law unless the police officer has probable cause to believe the cell phone has been used to commit a crime, and the information is downloaded or extracted under a valid search warrant.

The second part of the bill amends a section of the criminal code setting forth the conditions under which a police officer may detain a person who the officer believes in good faith has committed an infraction or ordinance violation. A new section is added to this part of the criminal code that mirrors the first part of the bill amending the vehicle code to prohibit a police officer from downloading or extracting information from the cell phone of person who has been detained, without the person's consent, unless the police officer has probable cause to believe the cell phone has been used to commit a crime, and the police officer first obtains a valid search warrant before downloading or extracting information from the person's cell phone.

Class Action Attorneys Piling On Angie's List

It looks like there are now about six law firms that have filed class action shareholder lawsuits against Indianapolis-based Angie's List. All of the lawsuits are essentially based on the same claims: the company relied on the use of free memberships to artificially boost subscription numbers reported to investors; the company now relies on the majority of its revenues from the service provider businesses for which it supposedly provides objective reviews from its consumer members; and that it doesn't vet the service providers promoted on its website, questioning the company's website's value to members.

Seeking Alpha's Michael Sacerdote estimates that, in the worst case scenario, the total damages that could be awarded to affected investors is a little more than $1 billion, more than enough to bankrupt the company. Nonetheless, as class action suits go, Sacerdote estimates that the risk of the lawsuits collectively bankrupting the company are only about 7.7%. Based on past history, it's almost certain that no judgment in the $1 billion range would ever be obtained against the company. Less than one-half of one percent of class action shareholder suits go to trial according to Sacerdote. The average settlement is about $36 million compared to a median settlement amount of $12 million.

Sacerdote puts Angie's List odds at winning a dismissal of the suits at 50%, thereby only incurring the attorney's fees it spends defending the lawsuits. Of the remaining 50% of the cases, about half settle for the median settlement amount or less. About 25% of the cases are settled for more than the median settlement amount, which could be enough to sink the company he says; however, he notes that insurance may cover at least some of the potential liability. There's also risk that the negative publicity from the lawsuits will become very distractive for the company's leadership and dissuade investors from investing in the company. So far, the lawsuits have had minimal impact on the price of Angie's List stock, which has fallen only marginally over the past week.

Indianapolis Homicide Rate Tops 140

There were three homicides in Indianapolis yesterday alone in case you didn't notice, bringing the total for the year to 143. IMPD will claim the number is much lower than that, but if you calculate the homicide rate the way it used to be calculated before IMPD implemented the Frank Straub crime statistic gathering system (as taught to him by NYPD Police Commissioner Bill Bratton) that magically makes crime data appear rosier than it really is, that's the number you will get. It's the highest number of homicides since the city recorded 150 in 2006.

By the way, Straub's old boss Bill Bratton is returning as police commissioner of New York City, and his old counter-intelligence buddy John Miller from the FBI, who's been pretending to be a journalist at CBS News for the past several years while working for the CIA, is joining him at NYPD. The return of these two treacherous men to NYPD could signal the planning of another major false flag event in the Big Apple like 9/11.  You may recall that Straub rewarded Bratton's Altegrity Solutions after he recommended him for the job as Indy's Public Safety Director with a useless contract to flatter Straub with a glowing 49-page report on the police accountability measures he implemented at IMPD that cost taxpayers $71,000.

UPDATE: WRTV's Chris Proffitt puts Indy's homicide rate into perspective: it's higher than Chicago's rate.

An RTV6 analysis of the city's 2013 murder rate compared to Chicago's shows that Indy has seen approximately 10 percent more homicides per capita than the Windy City.

Chicago, with a population of more than 2.7 million, has reported 409 murders this year, according to www.DNAinfo.com, which tracks the city's crime rate. That puts it at roughly 15.1 murders per 100,000 residents.

Indianapolis, by comparison, has seen 140 homicides to its 822,000 citizens – a murder rate of 17 per 100,000 people.

It's also the first time the city has broken 100 murders since 2008.

IMPD officially acknowledges that 124 homicides have occurred this year, twenty less than the number recorded by Bart Lies. It categorizes another 16 deaths as "justifiable" as the reason for not counting them as homicides. Bart Lies has increased its number for the year to 144, adding an additional homicide after this post was first published.

Former U.S. Rep. Andy Jacobs Dies At 81




Former U.S. Rep. Andy Jacobs (D) passed away today at the age of 81. He represented Indiana's former 10th and 11th congressional districts over a span of three decades. He lost only one election in 1972 to former Indianapolis Mayor William Hudnut. Despite his long tenure in the House, he never accomplished much legislatively and was not widely respected by his colleagues, even if they enjoyed his humor. Upon his retirement in 1996, Jacobs worked very hard to ensure that Center Township Trustee Julia Carson defeated Ann DeLaney in the Democratic primary. When Carson died in 2007, Jacobs worked very hard to ensure that her grandson, Andre Carson (pictured above with Jacobs), succeeded her in Congress when he faced a very crowded field of Democratic opponents vying to succeed her. Jacobs had three wives, including his current wife, Kim Hood, a former news anchor for WRTV WTHR. Jacobs' fist wife was Kay Welsh, daughter of former Gov. Matt Welsh. He was also married for a short while to Martha Keys, a former U.S. Representative from Kansas. He is survived by two sons from his marriage with Hood, Andy Jabobs and Steven Jacobs. Gov. Mike Pence released the following statement on Jacobs' passing:

“Andy Jacobs, Jr.'s contributions to the life of our state and nation are incalculable and I mark his passing with a sense of personal loss. Andy Jacobs personified the kind of principled and compassionate leadership that Hoosiers most admire and he will be greatly missed. 

Before serving a long and illustrious career as a member of the United States House of Representatives, Andy  Jacobs served his nation in the United States Marine Corps as a combat infantryman.  Upon his return from military service, he dedicated the next three decades of his life to public service. Andy Jacobs served as a member of the Indiana House of Representatives in 1959-1960. Later, he was elected to represent Indiana’s Tenth Congressional District in 1964, serving in the same Indianapolis Congressional seat held by his father in 1948-1950 During his early years in Congress, Representative Jacobs helped to write the 1965 Voting Rights Act. As a member of the Ways and Means Committee, Representative Jacobs was known for his tireless efforts to improve the lives of America’s senior citizens by enhancing the Social Security Administration and the Medicare program

Throughout his career, Representative Jacobs was recognized by colleagues on both sides of the aisle as a champion for his principles and a man of impeccable character. When Representative Jacobs retired from Congress in 1997, he left a legacy of leadership and a reputation for integrity among his peers and the people that he served. 

On behalf of my entire family, I express our deepest sympathies and prayers to his family, his wife Kim, and to his two sons during this difficult time. God bless you, Andy Jacobs. Your compassion and servant leadership left Indiana and our nation better for you having been here.  You will be sorely missed and your many contributions to Indiana will be remembered always.”

It's kind of odd that Pence beat U.S. Rep. Carson to the punch in releasing a statement on Jacobs' passing, particularly considering their close "family" relationship. Nothing on Carson's Twitter account hours after other news outlets broke the news of his passing. Mayor Greg Ballard tweeted on his account two hours ago, "Indy has lost one of its greatest champions." I would also correct Gov. Pence's assertion that Jacobs helped write the Voting Rights Act of 1965. That's a total fabrication. He was a freshman member of the Judiciary Committee at the time. Yes, he voted for the legislation, but he played no key role in its passage whatsoever, and he certainly had no hand in writing it. In honoring Jacobs with the naming of a post office in Indianapolis after him, the late Rep. Julia Carson accurately described his role in the passage of the Voting Rights Act as recorded in the Congressional Record: "Congressman Jacobs was in fact a member of the Committee on the Judiciary that helped to write the historic 1965 Voting Rights Act, and I know a lot of my colleagues in Congress would like to be reminded that Andy Jacobs is the one that sponsored legislation that made Father's Day a legal holiday."

UPDATE: Rep. Carson has now commented on Jacobs' passing via Twitter:

With Andy Jacobs' passing, our nation lost a man who was courageous, both in his service as a Marine in Korea, and in public life.

Andy Jacobs was a selfless public servant, who never cared about station or the trappings of his office.

The dumbass award in the media goes to WTHR's Kevin Rader, who tweeted this absurd observation:

If Indiana were to have a Mt Rushmore you could make a solid case for Andy Jacobs because of his work on civil rights.

This is how useless so-called reporters in this country have become.  Rader obviously knows nothing other than how to regurgitate talking points that are handed to him by someone with an agenda. "Work on civil rights?" Please. This is the same reporter who accepted a free trip to Turkey from a lobbyist for the Gulen movement.

Carson has now released a longer statement on Jacobs' death, including the following excerpts describing Jacobs as "family":

Congressman Jacobs was family. He served as an invaluable mentor and dear friend to my grandmother, Julia Carson, who he hired to work in his Indianapolis congressional office in 1965. It was Andy’s faith and encouragement that inspired my grandmother to run for state representative in 1972, and his support of her never wavered. 

At an early age, Andy also took an interest in me as well and imparted wisdom while serving as a role model. He continued as a valued mentor, even long after he left office.

Over 100 Cars Stolen In Indianapolis During The Past Week

This crime statistic is staggering. IMPD tells WRTV that 126 cars were stolen during the week of Christmas, often because their owners left them idling with the keys in the ignition while the car was warming up. That's closer to the number of stolen cars one would expect to be reported during the entire year, not in a single week. According to the report, only six of the stolen cars have been recovered so far.

Three-Judge Panel Recommends Removing Judge Kim Brown From Office For Misconduct

The Star is reporting that a three judge panel of masters has recommended to the Indiana Supreme Court that Marion Superior Court Judge Kim Brown be removed from office, an extraordinary step rarely utilized in disciplining a judge. The panel conducted a 7-day trial in November at which it heard evidence concerning 47 counts of misconduct brought in a complaint against her by the state's judicial qualifications commission. Judge Brown has not been accused of breaking the law; rather the charges centered on the performance of her job, including "dereliction of duty, delaying the release of at least nine defendants from jail, failing to train or supervise court employees, creating a hostile environment for staff and attorneys and failing to properly complete paperwork."

Judge Brown contested the charges at the 7-day trial but later hired new counsel and submitted a public apology and agreed to accept a suspension of 60 days, which was more in line with the punishment handed down by the Supreme Court in other cases involving judicial misconduct in the recent past. The commission asked the Supreme Court to disregard Judge Brown's offer because it was "too little, too late." The Indiana Law Blog has posted a copy of the 107-page findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommended sanction filed by the panel of masters with the Supreme Court, which you can access by clicking here.

It's rather ironic that the state's attorney disciplinary commission is asking that fellow blogger and attorney Paul Ogden be suspended for one year for complaining in a private e-mail about a judge in Hendricks County who permitted an estate case to drag on for years, and who was eventually removed from the case pursuant to the lazy judge rule. Yet when attorneys and court staff complain about Judge Brown's performance and conduct, the judicial qualifications commission seeks the most severe of punishments for the judge. The two judicial bodies seem to be sending conflicting messages.

Hamilton County Judge Denies Charlie White's Motion For Post-Conviction Relief Based On Ineffective Counsel

Hamilton County Superior Court Judge Daniel Pfleging issued an order on December 23, two days before Christmas, denying former Secretary of State Charlie White's petition for post-conviction relief based on ineffective counsel he argues that he received from Carl Brizzi, who failed to put on a defense during a jury trial in 2012 that found him guilty on six of seven vote fraud-related charges special prosecutors brought against him. Judge Pfleging had earlier denied a number of arguments White had made for a new trial, which remain ripe for review at the appellate court level, in addition to the ineffective counsel argument. Those include the following:

• The fact that the state brought criminal charges against him to remove him from office instead of a quo warranto action;
• The fact that White was a de facto elected official the state could not have charged him with theft for drawing his salary as a duly-elected town council member in Fishers;
• Jurors were provided an erroneous legal definition of "residency" for voting purposes in determining whether he had improperly registered and voted in the wrong precinct in a single election;
• Jurors were provided erroneous jury instructions when the trial judge allowed a statute dealing with vote fraud that was clearly written to apply only in the plural to be applied singularly to convict White.
• The judge erred in allowing White to be convicted twice for the same offense rather than merging the offenses into a single offense as required by law; and
• White's equal protection rights were denied when he was convicted of a novel interpretation of Indiana's voter fraud laws that essentially created a class of one crime upon which the law was applied to him to obtain felony convictions that would force his removal him from office. 

The Indiana Law Blog has provided a copy of Judge Pfleging's Order, which you can view here. The Order essentially rubber stamps the views of special prosecutors Dan Sigler and John Dowd with respect to White's allegations that Brizzi provided ineffective counsel during his trial. Most objective legal observers agree that Brizz's representation of White during the trial was a total farce. Judge Pfleging saw no prejudice resulting from Brizzi's decision during voir dire to ask jurors if they agreed jury nullification was appropriate in a case involving a charges for which a prosecutor rarely, if ever, prosecutes a person for a technical violation of the law, implying to prospective jurors that White had violated the laws for which he had been charged. Pfleging reasoned that Brizzi didn't argue the inappropriate defense during the trial once the jurors were seated or during closing argument.

Brizzi refused to put on a defense because he believed that the state had failed to prove any of the charges against White. White claimed that Brizzi sprung that defense strategy on him at the last minute without discussing it with him. Super Bowl weekend in Indianapolis was also fast approaching at that point, although I'm sure that Brizzi's desire to take part in the big party downtown had nothing to do with his decision not to put on a case. Jurors in the case couldn't be put up at a hotel for sequestration because all area hotel rooms were booked up with out-of-town visitors attending the Super Bowl game Sunday night. They were instructed to continue deliberating into the wee hours of that weekend's Saturday after the case went to the jury shortly after mid-day on Friday, an instruction with which the trial court judge indicated the jurors did not object.

Brizzi mistakenly believed that all of the documentary evidence to which the parties had stipulated prior to trial that White had intended to offer to prove that he resided for voting registration purposes at his ex-wife's home at the time he registered to vote and cast a single ballot in one election using that registered voting address had actually been tendered at trial even though he never tendered any of the evidence during trial. In finding that Brizzi did not provide ineffective counsel, Judge Pfleging's findings of fact in his Order makes no mention of that glaring omission on Brizzi's part. Judge Pfleging's order draws negative inferences about virtually every potential witness Brizzi failed to call, including those who testified at the state Recount Commission hearing on White's behalf, which concluded that White had not violated Indiana's vote fraud statutes for purposes of qualifying as a candidate for office in 2010. In castigating White's expert GPS witness, the Order makes no issue of the substance of what his testimony would have been, which if offered, would have tended to prove White primarily resided at his ex-wife's home during the time in question. It should be pointed out that Judge Pfleging's daughter works at the same law firm that is defending Brizzi in the malpractice lawsuit White has filed against his former trial counsel. Judge Pfleging offered to recuse himself from hearing White's post-conviction relief petition due to the appearance of a conflict of interest but White's attorney waived his recusal offer.

White is going forward with his appeal to the Court of Appeals. That prospect should make many Republican and Democratic officials across the state of Indiana very uneasy if the convictions against White stand. Dozens and dozens of elected officials and candidates have handled their voting registration and balloting in the past based upon the same laws and court opinions upon which White relied but which this lone trial court in Hamilton County rejected in toto. White stands alone as the only candidate for office in the state's modern history to which a harsh, exacting residency standard has been applied for voting purposes. If the Charlie White standard had been applied to Evan Bayh and Richard Lugar, both would have faced multiple felony charges. In order to uphold the convictions against White, the appeals court will have to stand Indiana residency and vote fraud laws on their head, which in my opinion is precisely what these over zealous special prosecutors and the trial court permitted to happen in that courtroom in Hamilton County nearly two years ago.

UPDATE: WISH-TV's political reporter Jim Shella proves once again why he's nothing but a stooge for the corrupt insiders who run this state. Here's his take on the denial of White's PCR motion:

Former Secretary of State Charlie White has lost his bid for a new trial.  A Hamilton County judge rejected his argument that Carl Brizzi was incompetent as a defense attorney.

Let’s review:

White lied to voters about where he lived and where he voted.  He was convicted of voter fraud.  He was thrown out of office.

He blamed Brizzi.  He paid another attorney to pursue post conviction relief.  He lost.

Now Charlie White says he will appeal his conviction.

That’s a small government Republican tying up our court system with frivolous pleadings.

Did I mention that White has a law degree of his own?

Wouldn’t his time be better spent finding a new career?

This is the same reporter who personally attacked those who questioned the legality of Richard Lugar registering to vote and repeatedly casting a vote from a home in Indianapolis which he had sold nearly 36 years earlier. Yet he thinks it's perfectly normal for a candidate between homes and marriages to be charged and convicted of multiple felonies for casting a single ballot in a single election using his ex-wife's home as his residence.

Class Action Lawsuit Could Spell Big Trouble For Angie's List

A class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana charges key officers of Angie's List of defrauding investors who purchased stock in the company between between February 14, 2013 and October 23, 2013 by issuing  materially false and misleading statements regarding the strength of the company’s business model and its financial performance and future prospects and failed to disclose adverse effects on the company's prospects of becoming profitable. Named in the lawsuit are the company's CEO, William Oesterle, the company's co-founder and Chief Marketing Officer, Angie Hicks Bowman, current and past CFOs Charles Hundt and Robert Millard, and Thapur Manu, the recently-terminated Chief Information Officer.

The serious allegations contained in the lawsuit call into question the legitimacy of the subscription-based reviews of local service providers on the company's website because of its shifting business model, which increasingly relies on revenues it now derives from referral fees to those same service providers. According to the lawsuit, Angie's List this year began relying on offering free membership subscriptions in order to artificially boost the number of subscribers in order to mislead investors. This helped boost the price of the stock significantly during the period in question. Oesterle and the other officers cashed out many shares they owned during this period for a handsome profit. Ooesterle sold 486,400 shares of stock for more than $10.3 million, while the other officers collectively sold about $3 million of their personally-held shares of common stock "to the unsuspecting public at fraud-inflated prices."

At the same time, the company's assertion that "You can't pay to be on Angie's List" appears dubious based on the company's growing reliance on revenues it derives from service providers. The company has increasingly started relying on fees it collects from service providers (more than half of its revenues) in consideration for listing them more prominently on the company's website than service providers which don't pay the additional fees. In some instances, the lawsuit alleges that Angie's List "sometimes charges service providers hundreds of dollars for 'hot leads.'" Those costs are "passed along to . . . subscribers, increasing the prices consumers were paying and decreasing the benefit to them of using the website," the lawsuit alleges.

The entire legitimacy of the company's business model for service providers rated on its website is "called into question" as a result of the company "forcing service providers to pay high fees to be listed as highly rated service providers" the lawsuit contends. If service providers don't ante up and pay the high fees, they won't get customer referrals from the company's website. Even worse, the lawsuit claims that Angie's List  does not vet service providers listed and recommended on its website, "either for qualifications or for safety," which caused many subscribers to question the website's value and made them less willing to pay the subscription fees. The lawsuit claims the company's officers "lacked a reasonable basis" for positive statements they made to investors about the company's business model and its financial prospects.

Angie's List's stock price closed yesterday at $15.03 per share. The company's stock reached a high of $28.32 earlier this year before starting to slide the second half of this year. The stock has traded as low as $11.14 this year. After nearly 20 years in business, the company has yet to turn a profit during a single fiscal year.

Park Tudor Earned A "D" Last Year

It's the most expensive private schools in the state of Indiana where some of the wealthiest and most influential residents in the Indianapolis area send their children. So why did Park Tudor earn a "D" on recent report cards issued by the Indiana Department of Education to the state's schools? According to the Chalkbeat blog, the school's officials blame the poor grade on error.

Neal pointed to Park Tudor, an expensive and highly regarded private school in Indianapolis, which received a D grade despite 100 percent of its graduates going on to college and a slew of academic honors, as another example of a strange report card result.

Park Tudor spokeswoman Cathy Chapelle said its grade, too, was in error.

“The assessment grade reflects issues of reporting and communication, not of academic performance,” Chapelle said in a statement. “In fact, our academic standards and results are among the highest in the state. In 2013 alone, 201 Park Tudor students in grades 9-12 took a total of 490 Advanced Placement exams; 62% of the exams earned a score of 4 or 5 and over 87% earned a score of 3 or higher.”

Chapelle did not elaborate on what the school meant by “reporting and communication” or how it could have influenced Park Tudor’s grade.

If schools like Christel House and Park Tudor decide to appeal to the state board, would they prevail? Elsener was not encouraging, suggesting the best strategy might be just to move on.

“I think I’d say this year was a hiccup,” he said. “You have to decide where to put your best investment of time.”

Parents who send their children to Park Tudor pay tuition ranging from $15,330 to $18,830 per school year. Damn. It costs a hell of a lot of money to be an elitist. About one-third of the students receive financial assistance. The average financial assistance award is $9,000.