Homeless in Arizona

California governor signs bill to deter paparazzi

Source

California governor signs bill to deter paparazzi

Associated Press Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:04 PM

SACRAMENTO, California — Paparazzi and others who harass the children of public figures will face tougher penalties under legislation that California’s governor signed Tuesday.

The bill will boost penalties for actions that include taking photos and video of a child without consent and in a harassing manner.

Celebrities such as actresses Halle Berry and Jennifer Garner urged lawmakers to support the bill. Berry testified before several legislative committees that her daughter has been intimidated by aggressive photographers who follow them daily, often shouting as they snap pictures.

The measure also will help protect the children of police officers, judges and others, who might be susceptible to harassment or unwanted attention due to their parents’ occupations, de Leon said.

Under the legislation, which goes into effect in January, violators could face up to a year in county jail and a fine of up to $10,000. Fines would increase for subsequent convictions.

The bill, signed into law Tuesday by Gov. Jerry Brown, also allows for parents to bring a civil action against violators to seek damages and attorney’s fees.

Media organizations, including the California Newspaper Publishers Association, opposed the legislation, saying it was overly broad and could restrict legitimate newsgathering activities.

Yuma officer charged with luring minor for sex

Of course personally I think it is wrong for the government to criminalize consensual sex between two or more people, so I don't think the guy did anything wrong if it was consensual sex.

Source

Yuma officer charged with luring minor for sex

Associated Press Wed Sep 25, 2013 10:47 AM

YUMA — A Yuma police officer has been charged with three felony counts of luring a minor for sexual exploitation even though the 16-year-old victim has repeatedly denied he did anything wrong.

Defense attorney Marlo Arnold told a Yuma Justice of the Peace Tuesday that 25-year-old Ron Anton Ciancimino (see-an-seh-MEE’-noh) should have his $110,000 cash-only bond lowered. The request was denied.

Ciancimino was arrested Friday by Yuma County sheriff’s deputies and formally charged Tuesday. The Yuma Sun reports (http://bit.ly/16IA10P ) the case developed last week after deputies were called to a local hospital about a girl who had been a victim of a possible sexual offense.

Deputies later arrested 27-year-old Joshua Jonathan Alpizar. They say he admitted to the allegations but details haven’t been released by the sheriff’s office.

Calif. deputy suspected of child molestation

Of course personally I think it is wrong for the government to criminalize consensual sex between two or more people, so if this was consensual sex I don't think the guy did anything wrong.

Source

Calif. deputy suspected of child molestation

Associated Press Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:33 AM

NEVADA CITY, Calif. — Authorities have arrested a long-time Sacramento County Sheriff’s deputy on suspicion of child molestation.

Forty-three-year-old Donald Michael Black was taken into custody on Tuesday in Nevada County.

Nevada County Sheriff’s Sgt. Dan Saunders says Black is facing five counts of committing lewd or lascivious acts on a child who is 14 or 15. Saunders did not know whether Black had an attorney, and The Associated Press could not find a listing for Black.

Saunders said Black bailed out of jail on Tuesday night.

Sacramento County Sheriff’s officials tell the Sacramento Bee (http://bit.ly/18pMoRh) Black has been placed on paid administrative leave. He is a 23-year veteran of the department.

Arizona DUI tests are no longer required by law!!!!!!!

Arizona Mandatory DUI Breathalyzer tests ruled unconstitutional - Don't take the !!!!

Arizona Mandatory DUI tests unconstitutional????

Arizona Supreme Court bars DUI blood tests without warrant

HOWARD FISCHER Capitol Media Services

PHOENIX -- Police cannot use the state's traffic laws to draw blood from suspected drunk drivers without a warrant absent their specific permission at the time of the test, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

In a unanimous decision, the justices rejected the contention by the Pima County Attorney's Office that all Arizona motorists give "implied consent" to having blood, breath or urine tests as a condition to be licensed to drive. They said that means, absent a clear -- and voluntary -- consent immediately prior to the blood draw, it is an illegal search without a warrant.

In a wide-ranging ruling, the high court also said that the ability of juveniles to give that voluntary consent is not absolute -- and not the same as an adult. Justice Scott Bales, writing for the court, said a trial judge must consider all the factors, including the age of the suspect and the failure to notify parents.

But the justices refused to rule that the absence of a juvenile's parents automatically means any consent is not voluntary.

Thursday's ruling most immediately means that charges of driving under the influence of drugs will be dropped against the youth, identified in court records only as Tyler B. because he was 16 at the time of the arrest.

But he is not out of the legal woods yet. Deputy County Attorney Nicolette Kneut said Tyler, who has since turned 18, still faces charges of possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia in justice court as an adult.

Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall said Thursday's ruling will complicate the job that police statewide are required to do. She said the high court has provided no guidance.

"How is the officer supposed to know whether or not it's been an express consent," she said. "It just makes it really, really tough because there isn't any bright line." [Duh, the 4th Amendment you idiot!!!!]

LaWall said the ruling means that her office will advise police to get a court-ordered warrant whenever possible before drawing blood, even when a motorist -- and now, especially a juvenile -- gives approval for a blood draw. That, she said, eliminates any possibility of having that consent later ruled involuntary.

According to court records, Tyler and two friends arrived late to school. A school monitor smelled marijuana on the boys and also saw drug paraphernalia in Tyler's car.

The boys were detained in separate rooms while sheriff's deputies were contacted.

A deputy read Tyler his Miranda warnings against self-incrimination and the right to an attorney. But the court files said that Tyler, in the presence of several school officials, admitted he had driven his car to school after smoking marijuana and that he owned some of the paraphernalia in the car.

When the deputy placed Tyler under arrested, the youth became agitated and was placed in handcuffs while the deputy retrieved a blood-draw kit from his car.

On returning, he saw Tyler had calmed down and he removed the cuffs. He then read Tyler from the law which says that Arizona motorists must consent to blood or other tests and that refusal will result in automatic suspension of driving privileges.

Tyler agreed verbally and in writing to the blood draw. But when the case went to court, Tyler argued his consent was not voluntary and that, as a minor, he lacked capacity to consent.

When the court commissioner agreed and suppressed the evidence, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. Bales said the issue has never been decided in Arizona.

Bales rejected arguments by prosecutors that "implied consent" law means there is no need to determine whether a consent at the time of the blood draw is voluntary.

"A compelled blood draw, even when administered pursuant to (the implied consent law) is a search subject to the Fourth Amendment's constraints," he wrote for the court. "Such an invasion of bodily integrity implicates an individual's most personal and deep-rooted expectations of privacy."

He said the law says only that an officer must ask a suspect to submit to the test -- and that if a person refuses, a warrant is needed and the suspect's licenses is suspended.

Bales said a motorist can allow a warrantless search "provided the consent is voluntary." But that, he said has to be decided by a court based on all the circumstances, including the suspect's age -- and even whether a parent is present.

In this case, Bales wrote, the court commissioner was correct in ruling that, based on the evidence she had, Tyler's consent was not voluntary.

He said Tyler was detained for about two hours in a room in the presence of school officials and a deputy, without his parents.

"Tyler initially was shaking and visibly nervous," Bales wrote, and placed in handcuffs until he calmed down. And he said that the law read to him about "implied consent" ended with the statement, "You are, therefore, required to submit to the specified tests."

It was only then, Bales said, Tyler consented to the blood draw.

Thursday's ruling drew a special comment from Justice John Pelander. He said his own review of the evidence leads him to believe Tyler did voluntarily consent.

But Pelander said Arizona law requires he and the other justices not to reweigh the evidence but only to consider whether the court commissioner abused her discretion in suppressing the evidence.

Affordable Care Act

Source

Health-care law: Many unknowns as coverage sign-up nears

By Ken Alltucker The Republic | azcentral.com Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:20 PM

The nation’s health-care law shifts from the political to the personal this week.

On Tuesday, millions of Americans can begin shopping for health insurance through online marketplaces established under the Affordable Care Act.

In Arizona, nearly 1 million consumers and small businesses will learn how much the law will cost them and affect their choices for doctors, hospitals and prescription-drug coverage.

Through the online marketplaces, users will be able to compare plans, prices and health-care providers.

A goal of these online marketplaces for individuals and small businesses — a cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s sweeping health-care law — is to draw a mix of young, middle-age and older adults to balance the risk for insurance companies and keep rates in check.

Most Arizona residents who use these new marketplaces will be eligible to purchase coverage at subsidized rates.

And health insurers must abide by new rules that prevent them from denying coverage to the sick or charging older adults significantly more for coverage, and that require them to provide benefits in certain categories including hospital stays, maternity care and mental health.

Arizonans can start shopping Tuesday at the government-run website www.healthcare.gov or call 1-800-318-2596. Those who need help can visit the website or call the toll-free number. Community health centers also will assist people. Visit the Arizona Alliance for Community Health Centers at www.aachc.org or call 602-253-0090 to find a center near you. The enrollment period ends March 31. The new insurance plans take effect Jan. 1.

“We’ve been working on this for three years,” said David Sayen, regional administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which will run the marketplace in Arizona and 35 other states. “We passed the security checks. We’re ready to roll.”

But the unknown is a common theme: Consumers don’t know whether health insurance will become more or less affordable. Health insurers are curious whether older or sicker consumers will flock to the marketplaces while younger or healthier consumers take a wait-and-see approach. And hospitals and doctors are preparing for a new wave of patients with freshly printed insurance cards.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services last week released examples of insurance-plan prices. Arizona’s lowest-cost middle-range “silver” plan will charge an average premium of $248 per month, compared with the national average of $310. That is before federal subsidies.

The health-care law ranks plans on four medal tiers. A bronze plan covers 60 percent of medical costs; silver, 70 percent; gold, 80 percent; and platinum, 90 percent. Catastrophic plans also will offer bare-bones coverage.

A Republic analysis of plans submitted by five insurance companies to the Arizona Department of Insurance show average monthly rates will range from $225 to $334. Insurance companies filing rates include Aetna, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona, Cigna, Health Net and Meritus. The filings also said monthly premiums will range from less than $100 to more than $1,700 before federal subsidies kick in.

Still, those average rates don’t necessarily reflect what people will pay for health care. Insurers expect that the most affordable plans will charge high deductibles that require people to pay a set amount, $5,000, before coverage kicks in. And insurers will offer many plans that limit a consumer’s network of doctors, hospitals and labs.

Insurance companies that will woo these new customers are among the most curious about how this great experiment will unfold.

“This is the biggest change to our health-care system since the 1960s,” said Brad Kieffer, a spokesman for Health Net, one of the health-insurance companies that will sell health-insurance plans over the online marketplaces. “Like everybody, we’re eager to see what the overall outcome will be.”

Get covered

The nation’s health-care law is anchored by the requirement that nearly everyone must have insurance.

Known as the individual mandate, consumers must secure health insurance in 2014 or pay a penalty. The penalty starts at the greater of $95 or 1 percent of a person’s income in 2014 and escalates to $695 per adult or 2.5 percent of income by 2016. Among the groups exempt from the mandate are Native Americans, religious objectors and those who don’t earn enough to file a tax return.

Of the 57 million U.S. residents who don’t have health insurance today, the Congressional Budget Office estimates just 7 million will get coverage through an exchange next year and another 9 million will enroll in Medicaid, which is expanding eligibility to up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level — $15,282 for an individual or $31,322 for a family of four — in Arizona and 25 other states.

People don’t have to enroll in the new marketplaces if they get coverage through a government program such as Medicare or Veterans Affairs, or if they have health insurance through an employer.

Those on Medicare now do not have to enroll in the new marketplaces. They will use Medicare’s traditional enrollment period to choose either government-run Medicare or a plan administered by privately run insurance companies, known as Medicare Advantage.

Companies that employ 50 or more full-time workers must provide affordable health insurance to employees as of Jan. 1, 2015. More than nine out of 10 large employers already provide health-insurance coverage to employees, and most are expected to continue.

Some employers are already making decisions even though their coverage requirement is more than one year away. Major employers such as United Parcel Service, Trader Joe’s and Home Depot scaled back coverage for some workers or spouses. And some analysts predict that the years-long trend of shifting costs to employees will accelerate with more high-deductible plans.

Smaller companies with fewer than 50 full-time workers don’t have to provide health-insurance coverage. However, some small businesses with fewer than 25 workers and paying an average wage up to $50,000 will be eligible for a tax credit if they purchase coverage through the new small-business marketplace, called the Small Business Health Options Program, or SHOP.

On Thursday, the White House delayed Internet-based enrollment for SHOP until November, but small-business owners can still enroll beginning Tuesday by calling 1-800-706-7915 on weekdays.

More options

Karen Qualtire, who owns Qualtire Plumbing and Construction, said she will keep an open mind about how the health-care law will impact her 10-employee business.

“So many business owners are opposed to it,” Qualtire said. “I’m just crossing my fingers, hoping for the best.”

Qualtire has long offered health insurance to employees as an incentive to keep quality workers from leaving. But as those workers aged, and a few contracted chronic conditions such as early-stage cancer and colitis, it became more difficult and expensive to find and pay for a plan.

Qualtire said she routinely has paid annual rate increases of 15 to 30 percent, and the choices have dwindled to just one company, UnitedHealthcare.

“The idea of the free market is you are able to shop around,” Qualtire said. “We never really have had much of a choice. No other company will write (insure) us because of age and health conditions.”

Qualtire is curious whether she can find more affordable rates on the new small-business exchange. Blue Cross Blue Shield, Meritus and Health Net told The Republic that they intend to sell plans through SHOP, but the federal government will not confirm choices before Tuesday.

The tax credit for small businesses has been available over the past two years, and Qualtire has used it, shaving the company’s tax bill by $7,000 per year.

“I am a little nervous and I don’t know what to expect,” Qualtire said. “I don’t think it will be perfect, but I hope it will be helpful.”

While Qualtire looks forward to the new options, Chris Rupp, of Phoenix, is dreading the changes.

Rupp, who owns an aerospace consulting business, said he worries because he will lose a state-run health-insurance plan for small-business owners. The Arizona Legislature cut the Healthcare Group of Arizona plan for small businesses effective Jan. 1 because those people can go to the new marketplaces.

Rupp is among more than 6,000 Arizonans who are enrolled in that plan, which covers business owners, their employees and dependents. Rupp, who cut back his staff in recent years, uses the plan for himself.

Rupp said he pays about $1,100 each month for health insurance for himself and his children. While the plan is expensive, he said it provides coverage for prescriptions he needs and offers peace of mind.

“I’m just so frustrated,” Rupp said. “One hospital visit would ruin me.”

Providers prepare

While consumers and businesses adjust to the new landscape, health-care providers are preparing for a rush of newly insured customers.

“By bringing in potentially 1 million more patients statewide, there is going to be a need for more physicians and more nurses,” said David Parra, director of community outreach for AARP Arizona.

Even experienced health-care executives say they don’t know for certain how things will change when enrollment starts.

While the nation’s new health-care law does not impact how older adults choose a Medicare plan during traditional enrollment, the law will impact how hospitals and doctors care for some Medicare patients.

Hospitals have adapted by hiring primary-care doctors and working to better coordinate care. Medicare will now penalize hospitals with a poor track record of readmitting patients for the same condition within 30 days of discharge. The federal government believes that if hospitals do a better job of explaining to people what they need to do after leaving the hospital, costly readmissions can be significantly cut.

Medicare also has started pilot programs that pay hospitals and health systems a set amount for a group of patients, with the providers sharing the risk if health care becomes too expensive.

These new accountable-care organizations are one factor cited for the combination of Scottsdale Healthcare and John C. Lincoln, two long-standing metro Phoenix hospital systems.

Banner Health has opened eight primary-care clinics across metro Phoenix in anticipation that newly insured people will need to choose a doctor. There are people who may have gone to a hospital emergency room or an urgent care center in the past.

“This will require them to search for more options,” said Peter Fine, CEO of Banner Health.

Fine said he is curious whether the newly insured will seek out primary-care doctors or convenient health care at retail settings such as chain drugstores staffed by nurse practitioners or primary-care clinics like the ones Banner is establishing.

While there is still talk about repealing the Affordable Care Act, Fine said larger forces are at play in health care.

Employers, individuals and insurers are all looking to clamp down on costs. So with or without the nation’s health-reform law, market forces will demand better care at a lower cost, Fine said.

“The horse has already left the barn,” Fine said. “The cost of health care is too much. Something is going to have to change. I don’t think the country is willing to tolerate health-care costs the way we once were.”

Reach the reporter at ken.alltucker@arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-8285.

----

Ask our experts: Have questions about health-care reform and how it impacts you? A panel of experts assembled by The Republic and 12 News will take your calls from 5 to 7 p.m. on Monday September 30. Call 602-258-1212. Or e-mail questions to healthcare@azcentral.com. You can also post questions on Twitter, #azhealthreform.

Source

Health-care law: 10 ways Affordable Care Act may change your life

By Ken Alltucker The Republic | azcentral.com Fri Sep 27, 2013 6:02 PM

Arizonans will get a raft of new consumer protections and requirements under the nation’s sweeping health-care law, the Affordable Care Act.

Some benefits already have kicked in. Consumers have received free preventive screens, rebates from health insurers and expanded coverage for young adults.

Even more changes will take effect Jan. 1. Consumers won’t be denied coverage for an existing health condition, nor will they face annual limits on coverage for medical expenses.

The biggest change coming next year requires most Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a fine. Also called the individual mandate, it requires both savvy consumers and those who never had been insured to make important decisions that will influence their finances and access to health care.

Although health-reform proponents often champion the law’s consumer protections, insurance companies warn that some added perks will come at a price: Insurers will either seek to pass along costs for more robust plans or narrow options of providers for consumers who choose less-expensive plans.

So experts say consumers should pay close attention to health-insurance plans that will be available. Consumers will be able to compare plans, costs and coverage details beginning Oct. 1 at www.healthcare.gov.

“There are millions of Americans who have never had health insurance,” said David Parra, director of community outreach for AARP Arizona. “These are folks whose employers do not offer insurance. They are not old enough for Medicare and not poor enough for Medicaid. So this is a very new concept to them.”

How to dump Obamacare

Source

Why some will choose to opt out of Obamacare

Victoria Colliver

Published 6:58 pm, Saturday, September 28, 2013

Obamacare gives Americans a choice: buy health insurance or pay a fine. Ann Kneeland of San Rafael will probably opt for the fine.

It's not that Kneeland, a Christian Scientist, objects to the concept of health insurance or even the law's requirement that most Americans obtain coverage by next year. It's that the insurance offered doesn't cover the type of care she relies on: prayer.

"The real issue for me is to be required to buy insurance that doesn't cover the care I'm accustomed to and is found to be effective," said Kneeland, who also provides spiritual treatment to others as a Christian Science practitioner.

Regardless of her religious beliefs, Kneeland isn't likely to be eligible for the religious exemption in the Affordable Care Act.

That's because the rules defining the religious exemptions are so narrow that health experts say they're pretty much limited to the Amish, Mennonites or other sects that disavow all forms of insurance, including Social Security.

The Affordable Care Act, which begins a new phase Tuesday with the opening of state and federal online marketplaces where policies can be purchased, requires that all U.S. residents who aren't exempt from the law have medical coverage by March 31 or face a fine. The law is designed for people who either have no insurance or are covered by policies they purchased themselves. Deciding to opt out

Even with the exchanges, like California's Covered California, the law's most ardent supporters say they expect some Americans to pay the fine rather than buy the coverage.

The fines start small - at $95 for an individual in 2014, or 1 percent of household income if that's higher - but escalate to $695 annually by 2016, or 2.5 percent of household income.

But some people with specific financial, religious and other "hardship" reasons will be able to bypass the requirement without paying a fine. Aside from the Amish and similar sects, people who belong to a "health care sharing ministry" will be exempt from fines, as will members of federally recognized Indian tribes.

Hardship exemptions may be granted for a number of reasons, including foreclosure or natural disasters. And people can also opt out if the lowest-priced medical coverage available would cost more than 8 percent of their annual household income or if they don't file tax returns because their income is too low.

As states try to get the word out about Obamacare, right-wing or free-market groups have waged online campaigns to discourage Americans from participating. A form of protest

A conservative advocacy group called FreedomWorks is telling Americans to "Burn Your Obamacare Card," although no such cards are issued under the law. Patient Opt Out, backed by an organization called the Social Security Institute, is providing a national registry for people who object to the "socialized takeover of our medical system."

Web ads introduced this month from the conservative Generation Opportunity, bankrolled by billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch, feature a creepy, masked Uncle Sam character who pops up between a woman's legs during a gynecological exam. The ads end with the kicker: "Don't let government play doctor."

The campaigns are "a form of protest and is very much in the American spirit of opposing legislation and government actions you disagree with," said Lawrence McQuillan, senior fellow at the Independent Institute, a free-market think tank in Oakland.

Several efforts encouraging people to opt out of Obamacare, like the Generation Opportunity ads, are aimed at young adults. They're considered key to the success or failure of the law because the exchanges need young, healthy people to sign up to offset the cost of older, sicker enrollees who use more care.

"You really want those healthy people to buy insurance if they're not getting it through their employer," said Stephen Shortell, former dean of UC Berkeley's School of Public Health and professor of health policy. "But a number of them will not, because they feel they won't need it - the young, healthy 'invincibles' - and think it's just much cheaper to pay the $95."

Young people less insured

Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access in Sacramento, a consumer group that supports the health law, said it's a myth that young people don't want insurance.

"Young people, when offered coverage on the job, take it up at similar rates as older folks," he said. "The reason young folks are the most uninsured group is they tend to be lower income and be in jobs that don't offer health insurance."

And while paying a fine instead of buying health insurance may meet the letter of the law, it doesn't provide anything for the price.

"Paying a fine may be cheaper than heath insurance, but then you still don't have health insurance," said Karen Pollitz, a senior fellow at the Kaiser Family Foundation. "Most people need some kind of health care at some point in their lives."

Learn more

To learn more about opting out of Obamacare without having to pay a penalty, visit: https:// www.healthcare.gov/exemptions.

To find out your coverage options through the state's health marketplace, Covered California, go to www.coveredca.com.

Victoria Colliver is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: vcolliver@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @vcolliver

Court to debate right to grow own medicinal marijuana

They want to remove the 25 mile limit for growing medical marijuana!!!

Court to debate right to grow own medicinal marijuana

Posted: Wednesday, October 2, 2013 5:30 pm

By Howard Fischer, Capitol Media Services

PHOENIX — Medical marijuana patients could learn later this month if they have a constitutional right to grow their own weed.

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Katherine Cooper said Wednesday she will consider on Oct. 18 a bid by the Department of Health Services to have the lawsuit thrown out. Assistant Attorney General Gregory Falls hopes to convince her that nothing in the Arizona Constitution about the rights of patients to choose their own health care extends to making their own drugs.

If Cooper doesn't buy that argument, she is ready for the next step: She scheduled an Oct. 21 hearing to allow Michael Walz, the attorney for two medical marijuana patients, to tell her why she should order state Health Director Will Humble to let them have their plants.

If Walz ultimately succeeds, the implications go far beyond these two men. It would pave the way for similar rights for the approximately 40,000 individuals who already have been granted permits to possess the drug but now are required to purchase their supply from one of the state's nearly 100 state-regulated dispensaries.

At issue is what Walz said is a conflict between the Medical Marijuana Act that voters enacted in 2010 and a separate constitutional amendment, also approved by voters, two years later.

The 2010 law allows those with a doctor's recommendation to obtain up to 2 1/2 ounces of marijuana every two weeks. It also envisioned dispensaries around the state.

That law also allows anyone not within 25 miles of a dispensary to grow up to 12 plants at any one time. And since no dispensaries were operating, every cardholder initially got that right.

But Humble said that now virtually all Arizonans are within that 25-mile radius. So he is denying grow rights to individuals as they renew their annual permits.

Walz, however, points to a 2012 constitutional amendment which overrules any law that requires anyone to “participate in any health care system.” And that, he argued, means individuals can't be forced to give up the cheaper option of growing their own plants.

“People are legally entitled, if their doctor gives them certification, to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes,” Walz said Wednesday.

“Many people cannot afford the prices that are charged by dispensaries,” he continued.”Therefore, they need to be able to grow their marijuana for themselves.”

And Walz said that, for some patients, the strain of marijuana is crucial.

“A particular strain may be effective to treat their specific condition and they need that strain,” Walz argued. “They can't depend on a dispensary to make the effort of providing a specific strain for any particular person.”

Humble isn't buying the argument — and not only because he rejects the idea that the Arizona Constitution guarantees individuals the right to make their own regulated medicine. He pointed out that voters themselves approved the provision in the 2010 law, which says the right to grow disappears once there is an available dispensary.

Walz dismissed that as irrelevant.

“I don't know that the voters were aware of that specific provision,” he said.

“They clearly were aware that some patients would be able to grow,” Walz said. “As far as when and how many of those rights would be extinguished, I don't think the voters had a clue.”

Mississippi Judge abuses Sikh

Judge Ordered Sikh to Remove 'That Rag' from Head, Says ACLU

By RUSSELL GOLDMAN | Good Morning America

The ACLU has filed two complaints with Mississippi state officials, claiming that a Sikh truck driver was harassed by traffic cops for possessing a religious talisman and then further humiliated by a county judge who referred to his turban as "that rag."

"This is a disgrace and a clear infringement of religious rights," said Bear Atwood, a lawyer for the Mississippi office of the American Civil Liberties Union. "He was treated disgracefully by the Department of Transportation. Then he came back to Mississippi for his court date and was treated very badly by a judge whose behavior was despicable."

On Jan. 16, Jagjeet Singh, 49, a long-haul truck driver from California on his way to pick up chickens for delivery in Texas, was pulled over for driving with a flat tire in Pike County, Miss.

Officers at a weigh station operated by the Department of Transportation demanded that Singh turn over his "kirpan," a 3-inch ceremonial blade carried by all Sikh men and frequently sewed into the waistband of their trousers, according to the ACLU.

"Contending, wrongly, that his kirpan was illegal, the DOT officer demanded that Mr. Singh turn it over. Mr. Singh tried to explain that he was a Sikh and that the kirpan was a sacred religious article," the ACLU wrote in a letter of complaint to the DOT. "In response, however, the officer laughed at him and mocked his religious beliefs.

"One officer declared that all Sikhs are depraved and 'terrorists,'" the ACLU said in its letter. DOT officers then arrested Singh for "refusing to obey a command" when he would not turn over his kirpan to police, according to the ACLU.

A state DOT spokesman confirmed Singh's arrest and his agency's receipt of the letter, but would not comment on the allegations directly, calling them a "personnel matter."

"We just got the letter. We're looking into the allegations," said DOT spokesman Jared Ravencraft. "This incident happened in January and this is the first anyone has mentioned these types of allegations against our employees."

Singh appeared in court on March 26, when, his lawyers said, he was further demeaned by Pike County Judge Aubrey Rimes.

"Court officers told him he had to leave because he was wearing a turban and the judge wanted it removed. He was intimidated and horrified," said the ACLU's Atwood.

Rimes allegedly called Singh's turban "that rag" and insisted he remove it or his case would be called last on the docket after everyone else in the courtroom had left. Singh refused to remove the turban and was called last.

According to the ACLU, Singh pleaded guilty to the charge of refusing to obey a command and paid a fine.

Repeated messages left at the nursery Judge Rimes owns and at his chambers were not returned.

Pike County Administrator Andrew Alford referred ABC News to a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice agreeing to close an initial federal investigation if Pike County revised its nondiscrimination policy and implemented sensitivity training.

The ACLU called the DOJ's letter a "first step," but said action would have to be taken at the state level both at the Department of Transportation and by the Mississippi Judicial Commission.

Darlene Ballard, executive director of the commission, which investigates ethics violations by state jurists, said it could not comment on a specific case or confirm if a complaint had been made until and unless the commission recommended sanctions to the state Supreme Court.

Saudi Court Ups Gang-Rape Victim Sentence To 200 Lashes

Saudi Court Ups Gang-Rape Victim Sentence To 200 Lashes After Her Lawyer Protests Original 90-Lash Penalty

By Jonathan Vankin, Sat, September 28, 2013

The Saudi justice system is based on the Islamic religious legal code known as Sharia, but if a case that burst onto the international scene this week is any example, the word “justice” is a misnomer.

In 2007, A Saudi court sentenced a gang-rape victim to a 90-lash whipping for violating the ban on women having contact with men who are not their relatives.

When the woman’s defense lawyer protested the sentence, calling for some compassion for this teenager who was sexually assaulted by seven men, the Saudi General Court increased her punishment to 200 lashes and a six-month jail term.

The incident happened in 2006 in the Eastern Province city of Qatif. The “Qatif Girl," as she has become known in Saudi Arabia — her identity has not been made public — was then 19 years old. She got into a car with a teenage boy she knew in high school, intending to retreive a picture of herself from him.

She was soon to marry someone else, and she couldn’t have this former high school flame carrying her picture around.

That was her offense. What happened next was irrelevant to the court, at least as far as the Qatif’s girl’s punishment was concerned. Seven men kidnapped the pair, assaulting and raping both the woman and her male acquaintance.

The male rape victim was also sentenced to 90 lashes. The rapists received varying sentences, the harshest being five years in prison and 1,000 lashes.

Whipping is a common sentence in Saudi Arabia for crimes ranging from consuming alcohol to homosexuality.

The court cited the fact that the woman’s lawyer went to the media as a reason that her sentence was increased. But there may be other factors. Her attorney, Abdul Rahman al-Lahem, is a human rights activist who has defended critics of Saudi Arabia’s ruling royal family.

Also, the “Qatif Girl” belongs to the Shiite Muslim minority in a country dominated by Sunni Muslims.

Even the original sentence of 90 lashes was considered excessive within Saudi Arabia. The 200-lash sentence has set off international protests.

According to the New York-based Human Rights Watch, this sentence “not only sends victims of sexual violence the message that they should not press charges, but in effect offers protection and impunity to the perpetrators.”

Rabbi leads Glendale City Council’s inaugural prayer

Source

Rabbi leads Glendale City Council’s inaugural prayer

The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Sep 26, 2013 9:10 AM

Rabbi Sholom Lew led elected officials and the public in prayer before the Glendale City Council’s meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 24, becoming the inaugural prayer leader since the council voted to replace its moment of silence with prayers.

Lew, a Glendale resident and director of Chabad of the West Valley, said he felt a particular challenge writing meaningful remarks for a non-denominational setting.

“I want to make sure that I don’t offend any sensibilities, because it is not our intention to proselytize or to try to encourage others to believe what we believe,” he said moments before the meeting started.

“Having said that, there are certain common themes that do unite humanity or mankind. My intent tonight in the couple minutes is to perhaps reflect upon and try to zero in on these common themes,” he said.

During the meeting, Mayor Jerry Weiers led those in attendance in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance as usual. Then he asked Lew to come to the front of Council Chamber, where he prayed while reading from a prepared script.

Lew asked God to guide city leaders in their pursuit justice and equality.

The crowd remained standing and respectful until he finished the presentation, which clocked in at just over two minutes. Then the government portion of the meeting began.

Weiers, a former state representative, initiated the idea of prayers several months ago to “solemnize” the proceeding, noting that prayers are typically offered before sessions of the state legislature. The council approved a 20-point policy on the prayers or invocations in a 4-3 vote earlier this month

Lew said Weiers contacted him about two weeks ago, asking him to lead the first prayer for the council. Lew acknowledged the pressure he felt in preparing the prayer.

“The responsibility of knowing you’re the first, obviously, makes you realize and appreciate just a little bit more that you have to be even more sensitive, because people are going to be looking and going over it with a fine-tooth comb,” he said.

xxx

1) link to main page http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/20131005arizona-mother-killed-stabbing-god-pinal-county-sheriff-brk.html?nclick_check=1 Pinal sheriff: Man kills mother, said God told him to By D.S. Woodfill The Arizona Republic-12 News Breaking News Team Sat Oct 5, 2013 8:53 AM A man who stabbed his 65-year-old mother to death on Friday said it was God who made him do it, authorities said. Pinal County sheriff’s officials said it was the quick actions of a neighbor that prevented further death when 38-year-old Joseph Cain Cecil turned on his aunt at a home just outside Casa Grande. Ronna Thomas was pronounced dead at Casa Grande Regional Medical Center and her 63-year-old sister, who was not identified, was taken to a hospital in Phoenix. The victim’s sister was in stable condition Saturday. Pinal County sheriff’s deputies rushed to the home in the 18000 block of West Camino Grande, at about 6 p.m. in response to a 911 call of a stabbing in progress. When they arrived, they found a neighbor standing over a blood covered man later identified as Cecil. Sheriffs officials said the neighbor came running to the victims’ aid and struck Cecil several times with a shovel to make him stop. Deputies found the man’s aunt in the front yard with numerous stab wounds and his mother on the floor in the house with stab wounds. “Had it not been for the intervention of the neighbor who stopped the attack, we would have undoubtedly had another homicide victim,” said Sheriff Paul Babeu. When detectives asked Cecil why he stabbed his mother and aunt, he responded “God told me to do it,” according to Babeu. Cecil was booked into the Pinal County Adult Detention Center on suspicion of first-degree murder, attempted murder and aggravated assault. Such police incidents involving delusional suspects are far from rare, according to reports. Police encounters involving mentally ill suspects are on the rise, according to a recent USA Today article. The paper reported that according to some estimates, 20 percent of calls-for-service involve mentally troubled people. The article also cited a review by Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics showing 56 percent of state prison inmates and 45 percent of federal prisoners had symptoms of mental illness.

xxx

http://www.azcentral.com/news/free/20131018billboards-new-gospel-no-religion-no-problem.html Billboards’ new gospel: No religion? No problem By Niraj Warikoo Detroit Free Press Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:55 PM DETROIT -- Who needs religion? That’s the question being raised by a group of secular activists that has put up billboards in Michigan containing photos of smiling people that read: “Millions of Americans are living happily without religion.” Those might be provocative words for the devout, but the Center for Inquiry — a New York-based group that also put up the billboards in Indiana, New York, and Washington, D.C. — says its “Living Without Religion” campaign will resonate with growing numbers of Americans. It points to surveys that show an increasing percentage of people in the U.S. don’t identity with any religion. “We want to let nonreligious people in our communities know that they’re not alone,” said Jennifer Beahan, assistant director of the Center for Inquiry’s Michigan chapter. “They are among millions of Americans living happy, purposeful lives without religion.” Beahan, 25, of Grand Rapids, was raised as a conservative Christian — first Baptist and then Calvinist — trained to believe that every word of the Bible was true. But the more she read, she said, she found errors and contradictions that didn’t make sense. Around age 20, she realized: “I’m not comfortable believing this stuff anymore.” “I wanted to find a community where I could ask questions without being told we’re going to hell” for not believing. Hassan Khalifeh, 25, of Detroit, used to be a devout Muslim but also has given up his faith. “I was actually extremely religious,” he said. “I read the Quran, prayed five times a day.” But at 17, Khalifeh started reading more science and philosophy and felt that Islam wasn’t for him. Now, he’s a student organizer at a secular students group at Wayne State University, where he studies business. A survey released last year by the Pew Research Center shows that people like Khalifeh and Beahan are increasingly not alone. About 1 in 5 Americans is not affiliated with any religion. That rises to 1 of 3 for those younger than 30. One-third of all adults say they’re not a “religious person,” the survey said. The smiling, diverse photos in the billboards — one white, one African-American, Latino — were by design, said organizers. They want to help dispel stereotypes people may have about atheists and others who question religion. “We’re honest, hardworking people who love our families, and we’re involved in our communities,” Beahan said. “Please stop demonizing us. Atheists aren’t immoral, terrible, angry people.”

xxx

1) link to main page http://www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/20131015real-life-ghost-hunters-share-tricks-trade.html Real-life ghost hunters share tricks of the trade in Glendale By Caitlin McGlade The Republic | azcentral.com Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:00 AM They say they’ve been scolded, picked on, welcomed and even hit on — by spirits. It comes along with the job for a ghost investigator. And, for Lindsay Brown and much of his team, Ghosts of Arizona, it means helping the living understand the dead. For some, it’s a calling. “I’ve felt spirits since I was a kid. I kind of get drawn to living in haunted houses, or they wind up getting haunted. I get visitors,” said Michele Harbaugh, the team’s medium. “I was always called the freak and the weirdo, but I’ve learned to accept it and I love it.” Brown’s team traverses the state to record voices without bodies, measure energy in rooms with no electricity and photograph people with no beating heart. For Brown, the task takes such tools as four digital cameras, one 35 mm camera, two digital video cameras, four tripods, electromagnetic field meters, two laser splitters, flashlights, glow sticks, three voice recorders, a laser thermometer and a lot of spare batteries. Saturday, Oct. 19, he’s taking that equipment to the Glendale Main Library to share how the technology works, how his team conducts investigations and how he debunks haunting myths. Brown, who lives in Mesa, launched Ghosts of Arizona in 2004. He has picked up a handful of team members from around the state that include technology whizzes and spirit mediums. They conduct an investigation about every other month, based on requests from people living or working in places where unexplained things happen. The ghost investigators do all their work for free. “Ninety-nine percent of the time they just want validation or they want to know that nothing is going on. They want someone to come in and they say, ‘give me alternative explanations,’ ” team member Shawn Bechtel said. And the team often does. Brown and Bechtel said they go into every investigation skeptical and seek to debunk the notion that ghosts are causing the bumps in the night. Brown also takes it upon himself to debunk photographs of ghosts circulating on the Internet. Digital cameras can easily pick up what look like apparitions, especially if the photographer has deployed the “night mode” setting. That setting often results in distorted lighting, which may coincidentally take the form of a person, he said. But the team has certainly had its share of evidence that members say prove a haunting. At Vulture Mine in Wickenburg, the crew say they captured on a recorder the sound of nails being pried out of a crate, a man breathing, running machinery and a voice saying “Dad.” The recording stopped with a giant bang, Brown said. For every investigation, the crew conducts interviews and compiles research on the sight. They walk through the site and take electromagnetic field and other readings at the start of the investigation. They then take readings throughout the investigation for comparison. Brown is hoping to drum up interest from West Valley residents, an area that his team has not yet tapped. He has, however, received a few informal requests to investigate two city buildings and the Sahuaro Ranch Park plantation home.

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

Previous articles Church, Religion Crimes and Abuse.