This letter from the Illinois Attorney General's Public Access Bureau determines that the Vernon Hills Police Department improperly withheld a roster of officers from a FOIA request. The request sought the names, badge numbers, and departments of officers on various specialized police teams. The Department denied this part of the request, citing FOIA exemptions. However, the Bureau concludes the Department failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that disclosing the records would endanger the life or physical safety of officers, as is required to apply the cited FOIA exemption.
Second Appeal against Registrar CIC dated 24.03.2017Om Prakash Poddar
This document is a filing index for a second appeal made to the Central Information Commission in India regarding a request for information under the Right to Information Act 2005. The index lists 7 items, including the second appeal application dated February 16, 2017, responses from the First Appellate Authority and Central Public Information Officer, the original RTI request, and communications with the CIC and Prime Minister's Office from November 30, 2016 to January 4, 2017. The appellant argues that the CPIO and FAA did not satisfactorily provide the requested information regarding provisions for life and liberty under the RTI Act and contradictory replies from the CIC. The appellant requests true information be provided in accordance with the RTI Act and Rules.
1. The case was registered against 5 accused from the USA - Ahmed Binadullah Ali, Khushida Yusuf, Mohd. Jamal, Rashida Binty Usup Ali, and Yu Sup for various offenses under the Epidemic Diseases Act, Disaster Management Act, and IPC for violating Covid-19 restrictions while being in Delhi in March 2020.
2. The prosecution examined 56 witnesses and relied on documents to prove the charges. The accused denied the charges and knowledge of the restrictions.
3. The prosecution argued that ingredients of the offenses were proven beyond reasonable doubt. However, the court had to determine if restrictions were adequately communicated and if accused had knowledge of them
Edwards v. snowden add hbo and academy awardsPublicLeaks
1. Plaintiff Horace Edwards sues Edward Snowden and others involved in the film Citizenfour, alleging they unlawfully acquired and disclosed classified national security information stolen by Snowden, in violation of secrecy agreements.
2. The complaint alleges Snowden intentionally stole classified information from the NSA and CIA while working for those agencies. He then provided that information to filmmaker Laura Poitras, who worked with others to make the film Citizenfour, revealing the stolen classified information.
3. Plaintiff claims the disclosure of stolen classified information in the film poses a substantial risk of serious injury to himself and others. He alleges insurance fraud related to the film and asserts claims including violations of the Antiterrorism Act. The plaintiff seeks
1) The court heard a case filed by TV Today Network Limited against Anurag Srivastava and others regarding allegedly defamatory tweets.
2) The court granted the plaintiff an injunction restraining the defendant from publishing defamatory content until the next hearing.
3) Twitter was directed to suspend the handles of the individual defendant and provide subscriber information to the court.
The Supreme Court of India heard several petitions related to women's participation and recruitment in the Indian military. For one of the petitions, the Court directed the petitioner to file a rejoinder within a week and listed the matter for further hearing on September 8th. For another petition regarding a stay, the Court issued an interim order allowing women candidates to take an upcoming examination subject to the Court's further orders. The Court also directed the Union Public Service Commission to publicize the interim orders widely. The Court listed several related matters regarding women's participation in Sainik Schools and the Rashtriya Indian Military College for hearing on September 8th as well.
UFLTV’s ARGUMENTS CHALLENGING THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL ASSERTIONS OF THE COURT’S...Eric Johnson
UFLTV’s ARGUMENTS CHALLENGING THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL ASSERTIONS OF THE COURT’S RULING OF APRIL 6, 2016. Utah divorce, Utah family law, Utah Family Law TV, Utah County, district court, divorce, Wolferts v. Wolferts, American Fork, Brian Wolferts, Sonja Wolferts,
This document summarizes a Supreme Court of India case regarding oral remarks made by the Madras High Court about the Election Commission of India (ECI) during an election-related hearing. The key points are:
1) The Madras High Court allegedly made oral remarks criticizing the ECI for not enforcing COVID-19 protocols during elections, saying the ECI was "singularly responsible" for the second wave and "should be put up for murder charges."
2) The ECI filed a petition challenging these oral remarks, arguing they were made without evidence and prejudiced the ECI.
3) The Supreme Court must balance judicial freedom of expression, media reporting of courts, and accountability of constitutional bodies
Second Appeal against Registrar CIC dated 24.03.2017Om Prakash Poddar
This document is a filing index for a second appeal made to the Central Information Commission in India regarding a request for information under the Right to Information Act 2005. The index lists 7 items, including the second appeal application dated February 16, 2017, responses from the First Appellate Authority and Central Public Information Officer, the original RTI request, and communications with the CIC and Prime Minister's Office from November 30, 2016 to January 4, 2017. The appellant argues that the CPIO and FAA did not satisfactorily provide the requested information regarding provisions for life and liberty under the RTI Act and contradictory replies from the CIC. The appellant requests true information be provided in accordance with the RTI Act and Rules.
1. The case was registered against 5 accused from the USA - Ahmed Binadullah Ali, Khushida Yusuf, Mohd. Jamal, Rashida Binty Usup Ali, and Yu Sup for various offenses under the Epidemic Diseases Act, Disaster Management Act, and IPC for violating Covid-19 restrictions while being in Delhi in March 2020.
2. The prosecution examined 56 witnesses and relied on documents to prove the charges. The accused denied the charges and knowledge of the restrictions.
3. The prosecution argued that ingredients of the offenses were proven beyond reasonable doubt. However, the court had to determine if restrictions were adequately communicated and if accused had knowledge of them
Edwards v. snowden add hbo and academy awardsPublicLeaks
1. Plaintiff Horace Edwards sues Edward Snowden and others involved in the film Citizenfour, alleging they unlawfully acquired and disclosed classified national security information stolen by Snowden, in violation of secrecy agreements.
2. The complaint alleges Snowden intentionally stole classified information from the NSA and CIA while working for those agencies. He then provided that information to filmmaker Laura Poitras, who worked with others to make the film Citizenfour, revealing the stolen classified information.
3. Plaintiff claims the disclosure of stolen classified information in the film poses a substantial risk of serious injury to himself and others. He alleges insurance fraud related to the film and asserts claims including violations of the Antiterrorism Act. The plaintiff seeks
1) The court heard a case filed by TV Today Network Limited against Anurag Srivastava and others regarding allegedly defamatory tweets.
2) The court granted the plaintiff an injunction restraining the defendant from publishing defamatory content until the next hearing.
3) Twitter was directed to suspend the handles of the individual defendant and provide subscriber information to the court.
The Supreme Court of India heard several petitions related to women's participation and recruitment in the Indian military. For one of the petitions, the Court directed the petitioner to file a rejoinder within a week and listed the matter for further hearing on September 8th. For another petition regarding a stay, the Court issued an interim order allowing women candidates to take an upcoming examination subject to the Court's further orders. The Court also directed the Union Public Service Commission to publicize the interim orders widely. The Court listed several related matters regarding women's participation in Sainik Schools and the Rashtriya Indian Military College for hearing on September 8th as well.
UFLTV’s ARGUMENTS CHALLENGING THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL ASSERTIONS OF THE COURT’S...Eric Johnson
UFLTV’s ARGUMENTS CHALLENGING THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL ASSERTIONS OF THE COURT’S RULING OF APRIL 6, 2016. Utah divorce, Utah family law, Utah Family Law TV, Utah County, district court, divorce, Wolferts v. Wolferts, American Fork, Brian Wolferts, Sonja Wolferts,
This document summarizes a Supreme Court of India case regarding oral remarks made by the Madras High Court about the Election Commission of India (ECI) during an election-related hearing. The key points are:
1) The Madras High Court allegedly made oral remarks criticizing the ECI for not enforcing COVID-19 protocols during elections, saying the ECI was "singularly responsible" for the second wave and "should be put up for murder charges."
2) The ECI filed a petition challenging these oral remarks, arguing they were made without evidence and prejudiced the ECI.
3) The Supreme Court must balance judicial freedom of expression, media reporting of courts, and accountability of constitutional bodies
This document outlines rules regarding fees, costs, and procedures for requesting information under the Right to Information Act of 2005 in the state of Sikkim, India. It establishes a State Public Information Officer in each department to handle information requests. It details application procedures, including required application information, fees, response times, and procedures for samples/inspections. It also covers receiving applications, acknowledging receipt, and fees for providing information. The overall purpose is to regulate the process of requesting and providing information to the public under the state's right to information law.
This complaint contests the results of the November 4, 2014 election for a seat on the Honolulu City Council District 4. It alleges that 74 ballots that were counted as blank were actually votes for either candidate, and that miscounting these ballots could have changed the outcome of the election. It also alleges issues with the reporting of overvotes and undervotes in the district. The complaint seeks a recount of the ballots or a new election.
The document discusses a case regarding the spoliation of electronically stored information (ESI) during litigation. It describes how the plaintiff, Sekisui America Corporation, failed to institute a litigation hold until over 15 months after notifying the defendants, the Harts, of their intent to sue. During this time, Sekisui permanently deleted the email files of defendant Richard Hart and former employee Leigh Ayres. The court must now determine the appropriate sanctions for Sekisui's destruction of ESI, considering whether the deleted evidence could have been favorable to the Harts.
Andrew Livernois and Keith Cormier of the Belknap County Attorney's Office Ta...Rich Bergeron
The ACLU of New Hampshire opposes the State's motion for a court order prohibiting pre-trial publicity in the case of State v. Richard E. Bergeron, III. The ACLU argues that: 1) the Rules of Professional Conduct do not apply to pro se criminal defendants like Bergeron and cannot be the basis for a gag order; 2) even if the rules did apply, the proposed gag order exceeds the scope of the relevant rule by restricting speech that occurs far before trial and by ignoring exceptions; and 3) the proposed gag order would be an unconstitutional prior restraint on Bergeron's freedom of expression under the US and NH Constitutions.
20211117 madras hc order on caste and conversionsabrangsabrang
The petitioner, who belongs to the Christian Adi-Dravidar community, married a woman who belongs to the Hindu Arunthathiyar community. He applied for an inter-caste marriage certificate to receive benefits but was denied. The court dismissed the petition, finding that conversion of religion does not change one's caste. Since both the petitioner and his wife belonged to Scheduled Castes by birth, they do not qualify for an inter-caste marriage certificate merely due to the petitioner's religious conversion. The purpose of such certificates is to benefit those who intermarry across major caste divisions, not for couples who share the same original caste.
This document is a court document pertaining to Special Case No. 03/2020 that arose from an investigated case by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) against 4 accused persons. The case involves charges of rioting, unlawful assembly, voluntarily causing grievous hurt to deter public servants from discharging their duties, criminal conspiracy and terrorist acts under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The prosecution argues that materials in the case diary provide sufficient implication of the accused in provoking violence against police personnel. The defense counsel argues that the materials do not establish conspiracy or make out terrorist offenses. The court considers the arguments and examines the case materials to determine if charges should be framed against the accused persons.
The Supreme Court of Kansas heard a case regarding the constitutionality of a Kansas statute that caps noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases at $250,000. The Court upheld the statute as constitutional, finding that: (1) the statute and broader medical malpractice legislation further a valid public interest in promoting public welfare and healthcare availability; and (2) the legislature substituted an adequate statutory remedy for any modification of common law rights. The Court also rejected claims that the statute violated separation of powers, equal protection, or other constitutional provisions. While the cap limits damages awards, the Court found it did not prevent reasonable compensation or obstruct the right to a jury trial.
This document describes legal proceedings related to the bail application and writ petitions filed on behalf of Dr. P.V. Varavara Rao, an 81-year old undertrial prisoner accused of terrorism offenses. Rao has filed for bail and writ petitions on medical grounds citing his advanced age and health conditions. The document outlines the legal history of Rao's case and arrest, provides details of his medical conditions and treatment in prison, and describes the various bail applications and writ petitions filed seeking his release from custody on humanitarian grounds.
This document discusses 10 cases where courts have excluded prior bad acts or convictions from being entered as evidence. The cases establish that arrests without convictions cannot be used to impeach credibility, specific acts of misconduct not resulting in convictions are impermissible for impeachment, and extraneous evidence of misconduct only serves to prejudice juries. Prior convictions must have passed the appeal period and involve crimes of dishonesty or false statement to be admissible for impeachment purposes.
Mp hc wp 9799 2021_final_order_28-jul-2021ZahidManiyar
1. The petitioner challenged his detention order under the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980.
2. The petitioner was running a business and an FIR was registered against him for illegally stocking and selling oxygen cylinders without a license. A raid found 571 jumbo and 90 small oxygen cylinders in his warehouse.
3. The petitioner argued that the detaining authority failed to consider that he was already in custody at the time the detention order was passed and his potential release on bail, which is required. The court found no mention of the petitioner's custody in the detention order.
This order declares a Georgia statute capping noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases unconstitutional. The order discusses the facts of the case, in which a jury awarded damages to the plaintiffs that exceeded the statutory cap. The court considered motions to strike affidavits submitted by the plaintiffs and denied the motions. In a lengthy analysis, the court found that the statutory cap violates the right to a jury trial guaranteed by the Georgia constitution. The court examined the history and scope of the right to a jury trial and determined that the cap improperly infringes on this right. Therefore, the court declared the statutory cap unconstitutional.
This morning I filed a lawsuit against Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita for violating my first amendment rights as a journalist for barring me from his press conferences.
Second district-court-of-appeal-rulingRepentSinner
The document is an appellate court opinion regarding a temporary injunction granted to Terry Bollea (Hulk Hogan) against Gawker Media to prevent the publication of a sex tape of Bollea without his consent. The appellate court finds that the temporary injunction is an unconstitutional prior restraint under the First Amendment. While privacy matters are important, the sex tape involves a matter of public concern as it was a subject of legitimate news interest. As prior restraints on speech are prohibited in all but exceptional cases, and less restrictive measures were available, the injunction cannot stand and is reversed.
Federal order-on-hogans-motion-for-a-preliminaryRepentSinner
The court denied Hulk Hogan's request for a preliminary injunction requiring Gawker Media to remove excerpts of Hogan's sex tape from their website. The court found that Hogan did not meet the high burden required for a prior restraint on speech under the First Amendment. While Hogan has a privacy right in the sex tape's contents, Gawker's First Amendment rights outweigh Hogan's in this case because the tape discusses matters of public concern, such as Hogan's public persona from his reality show and autobiography discussing his sex life. As such, Gawker's decision to publish excerpts is protected editorial discretion that cannot be restricted with a preliminary injunction. The court found Hogan's privacy interests are better addressed through damages
State's Objection to Motion to Dismiss (Filed by Deputy Grafton County Attorn...Rich Bergeron
After two straight motions with no response, Tara Heater finally has something to say and doesn't want the case thrown out. Judge O'Neill will no doubt give her whatever she wants, no matter how poorly she is prepared for trial. See more at www.nhdrugtaskforce.com
This document is a memorandum opinion from a federal district court case. The court is granting the defendant City of St. Paul's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiff Aaron Foster's lawsuit. Foster, an African American employee of the St. Paul Police Department, was suspended without pay after being indicted for a 1981 murder. Though later acquitted, Foster claimed this suspension constituted race discrimination. However, Foster admitted there was no evidence of race discrimination. The court also found Foster's other claims unsupported and granted the City's motion for summary judgment.
The document is a judgment from the Gauhati High Court regarding an appeal filed by the National Investigation Agency against a lower court order granting bail to Akhil Gogoi. Some key details:
- NIA's charges against Gogoi include leading a violent protest that turned into an economic blockade and pelted stones at police, with one officer sustaining grievous injuries.
- The lower court had granted Gogoi bail after the charge sheet was submitted. NIA argued this was an error as evidence showed Gogoi's role in conspiring violence and targeting a community.
- The High Court heard arguments on whether Gogoi's actions met the definition of "terrorist act" under
The petitioners, Siddharth Varadarajan and another, filed a writ petition seeking to quash an FIR registered against them under Sections 153-B and 505(2) of IPC by the Rampur Police. The state was given 3 weeks to file a counter affidavit. The court also ordered that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners pursuant to the interim protection granted by the Supreme Court until the next hearing on November 24th. The petitioners must also submit a self-attested computer generated copy of the Supreme Court order along with an identity proof.
Thomas Woznicki vs. Jeff Moberg (Decision, Wisconsin Court of Appeals)SteveJohnson125
This Decision, filed with the Wisconsin Court of Appeals on October 4, 2016, concludes as follows: “We conclude that Woznicki has failed to demonstrate that a public interest in nondisclosure of his District personnel file outweighs the strong and presumptive public interest in access to, and disclosure of, his personnel file under Wisconsin’s open records law. We therefore affirm the order denying Woznicki’s request for an injunction.
By the Court.—Order affirmed.”
This document is a complaint filed by Twitter against the U.S. Department of Justice and other government agencies and officials. Twitter seeks a declaratory judgment that government restrictions on its ability to publish information about national security requests it receives, such as National Security Letters and court orders issued under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, violate its free speech rights under the First Amendment. The government has classified information in Twitter's draft transparency report and has only approved preapproved formats established in a settlement with other tech companies for reporting aggregated data about national security requests. Twitter argues these restrictions are unconstitutional.
This document is a complaint filed by Twitter against the U.S. Department of Justice and other government agencies and officials. Twitter seeks a declaratory judgment that government restrictions on its ability to publish information about national security requests it receives, such as National Security Letters and court orders issued under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, violate its free speech rights under the First Amendment. The government has classified information in Twitter's draft transparency report and has only approved preapproved formats established in a settlement with other tech companies for reporting aggregated data about national security requests. Twitter argues these restrictions are unconstitutional.
This document outlines rules regarding fees, costs, and procedures for requesting information under the Right to Information Act of 2005 in the state of Sikkim, India. It establishes a State Public Information Officer in each department to handle information requests. It details application procedures, including required application information, fees, response times, and procedures for samples/inspections. It also covers receiving applications, acknowledging receipt, and fees for providing information. The overall purpose is to regulate the process of requesting and providing information to the public under the state's right to information law.
This complaint contests the results of the November 4, 2014 election for a seat on the Honolulu City Council District 4. It alleges that 74 ballots that were counted as blank were actually votes for either candidate, and that miscounting these ballots could have changed the outcome of the election. It also alleges issues with the reporting of overvotes and undervotes in the district. The complaint seeks a recount of the ballots or a new election.
The document discusses a case regarding the spoliation of electronically stored information (ESI) during litigation. It describes how the plaintiff, Sekisui America Corporation, failed to institute a litigation hold until over 15 months after notifying the defendants, the Harts, of their intent to sue. During this time, Sekisui permanently deleted the email files of defendant Richard Hart and former employee Leigh Ayres. The court must now determine the appropriate sanctions for Sekisui's destruction of ESI, considering whether the deleted evidence could have been favorable to the Harts.
Andrew Livernois and Keith Cormier of the Belknap County Attorney's Office Ta...Rich Bergeron
The ACLU of New Hampshire opposes the State's motion for a court order prohibiting pre-trial publicity in the case of State v. Richard E. Bergeron, III. The ACLU argues that: 1) the Rules of Professional Conduct do not apply to pro se criminal defendants like Bergeron and cannot be the basis for a gag order; 2) even if the rules did apply, the proposed gag order exceeds the scope of the relevant rule by restricting speech that occurs far before trial and by ignoring exceptions; and 3) the proposed gag order would be an unconstitutional prior restraint on Bergeron's freedom of expression under the US and NH Constitutions.
20211117 madras hc order on caste and conversionsabrangsabrang
The petitioner, who belongs to the Christian Adi-Dravidar community, married a woman who belongs to the Hindu Arunthathiyar community. He applied for an inter-caste marriage certificate to receive benefits but was denied. The court dismissed the petition, finding that conversion of religion does not change one's caste. Since both the petitioner and his wife belonged to Scheduled Castes by birth, they do not qualify for an inter-caste marriage certificate merely due to the petitioner's religious conversion. The purpose of such certificates is to benefit those who intermarry across major caste divisions, not for couples who share the same original caste.
This document is a court document pertaining to Special Case No. 03/2020 that arose from an investigated case by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) against 4 accused persons. The case involves charges of rioting, unlawful assembly, voluntarily causing grievous hurt to deter public servants from discharging their duties, criminal conspiracy and terrorist acts under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The prosecution argues that materials in the case diary provide sufficient implication of the accused in provoking violence against police personnel. The defense counsel argues that the materials do not establish conspiracy or make out terrorist offenses. The court considers the arguments and examines the case materials to determine if charges should be framed against the accused persons.
The Supreme Court of Kansas heard a case regarding the constitutionality of a Kansas statute that caps noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases at $250,000. The Court upheld the statute as constitutional, finding that: (1) the statute and broader medical malpractice legislation further a valid public interest in promoting public welfare and healthcare availability; and (2) the legislature substituted an adequate statutory remedy for any modification of common law rights. The Court also rejected claims that the statute violated separation of powers, equal protection, or other constitutional provisions. While the cap limits damages awards, the Court found it did not prevent reasonable compensation or obstruct the right to a jury trial.
This document describes legal proceedings related to the bail application and writ petitions filed on behalf of Dr. P.V. Varavara Rao, an 81-year old undertrial prisoner accused of terrorism offenses. Rao has filed for bail and writ petitions on medical grounds citing his advanced age and health conditions. The document outlines the legal history of Rao's case and arrest, provides details of his medical conditions and treatment in prison, and describes the various bail applications and writ petitions filed seeking his release from custody on humanitarian grounds.
This document discusses 10 cases where courts have excluded prior bad acts or convictions from being entered as evidence. The cases establish that arrests without convictions cannot be used to impeach credibility, specific acts of misconduct not resulting in convictions are impermissible for impeachment, and extraneous evidence of misconduct only serves to prejudice juries. Prior convictions must have passed the appeal period and involve crimes of dishonesty or false statement to be admissible for impeachment purposes.
Mp hc wp 9799 2021_final_order_28-jul-2021ZahidManiyar
1. The petitioner challenged his detention order under the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980.
2. The petitioner was running a business and an FIR was registered against him for illegally stocking and selling oxygen cylinders without a license. A raid found 571 jumbo and 90 small oxygen cylinders in his warehouse.
3. The petitioner argued that the detaining authority failed to consider that he was already in custody at the time the detention order was passed and his potential release on bail, which is required. The court found no mention of the petitioner's custody in the detention order.
This order declares a Georgia statute capping noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases unconstitutional. The order discusses the facts of the case, in which a jury awarded damages to the plaintiffs that exceeded the statutory cap. The court considered motions to strike affidavits submitted by the plaintiffs and denied the motions. In a lengthy analysis, the court found that the statutory cap violates the right to a jury trial guaranteed by the Georgia constitution. The court examined the history and scope of the right to a jury trial and determined that the cap improperly infringes on this right. Therefore, the court declared the statutory cap unconstitutional.
This morning I filed a lawsuit against Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita for violating my first amendment rights as a journalist for barring me from his press conferences.
Second district-court-of-appeal-rulingRepentSinner
The document is an appellate court opinion regarding a temporary injunction granted to Terry Bollea (Hulk Hogan) against Gawker Media to prevent the publication of a sex tape of Bollea without his consent. The appellate court finds that the temporary injunction is an unconstitutional prior restraint under the First Amendment. While privacy matters are important, the sex tape involves a matter of public concern as it was a subject of legitimate news interest. As prior restraints on speech are prohibited in all but exceptional cases, and less restrictive measures were available, the injunction cannot stand and is reversed.
Federal order-on-hogans-motion-for-a-preliminaryRepentSinner
The court denied Hulk Hogan's request for a preliminary injunction requiring Gawker Media to remove excerpts of Hogan's sex tape from their website. The court found that Hogan did not meet the high burden required for a prior restraint on speech under the First Amendment. While Hogan has a privacy right in the sex tape's contents, Gawker's First Amendment rights outweigh Hogan's in this case because the tape discusses matters of public concern, such as Hogan's public persona from his reality show and autobiography discussing his sex life. As such, Gawker's decision to publish excerpts is protected editorial discretion that cannot be restricted with a preliminary injunction. The court found Hogan's privacy interests are better addressed through damages
State's Objection to Motion to Dismiss (Filed by Deputy Grafton County Attorn...Rich Bergeron
After two straight motions with no response, Tara Heater finally has something to say and doesn't want the case thrown out. Judge O'Neill will no doubt give her whatever she wants, no matter how poorly she is prepared for trial. See more at www.nhdrugtaskforce.com
This document is a memorandum opinion from a federal district court case. The court is granting the defendant City of St. Paul's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiff Aaron Foster's lawsuit. Foster, an African American employee of the St. Paul Police Department, was suspended without pay after being indicted for a 1981 murder. Though later acquitted, Foster claimed this suspension constituted race discrimination. However, Foster admitted there was no evidence of race discrimination. The court also found Foster's other claims unsupported and granted the City's motion for summary judgment.
The document is a judgment from the Gauhati High Court regarding an appeal filed by the National Investigation Agency against a lower court order granting bail to Akhil Gogoi. Some key details:
- NIA's charges against Gogoi include leading a violent protest that turned into an economic blockade and pelted stones at police, with one officer sustaining grievous injuries.
- The lower court had granted Gogoi bail after the charge sheet was submitted. NIA argued this was an error as evidence showed Gogoi's role in conspiring violence and targeting a community.
- The High Court heard arguments on whether Gogoi's actions met the definition of "terrorist act" under
The petitioners, Siddharth Varadarajan and another, filed a writ petition seeking to quash an FIR registered against them under Sections 153-B and 505(2) of IPC by the Rampur Police. The state was given 3 weeks to file a counter affidavit. The court also ordered that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners pursuant to the interim protection granted by the Supreme Court until the next hearing on November 24th. The petitioners must also submit a self-attested computer generated copy of the Supreme Court order along with an identity proof.
Thomas Woznicki vs. Jeff Moberg (Decision, Wisconsin Court of Appeals)SteveJohnson125
This Decision, filed with the Wisconsin Court of Appeals on October 4, 2016, concludes as follows: “We conclude that Woznicki has failed to demonstrate that a public interest in nondisclosure of his District personnel file outweighs the strong and presumptive public interest in access to, and disclosure of, his personnel file under Wisconsin’s open records law. We therefore affirm the order denying Woznicki’s request for an injunction.
By the Court.—Order affirmed.”
This document is a complaint filed by Twitter against the U.S. Department of Justice and other government agencies and officials. Twitter seeks a declaratory judgment that government restrictions on its ability to publish information about national security requests it receives, such as National Security Letters and court orders issued under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, violate its free speech rights under the First Amendment. The government has classified information in Twitter's draft transparency report and has only approved preapproved formats established in a settlement with other tech companies for reporting aggregated data about national security requests. Twitter argues these restrictions are unconstitutional.
This document is a complaint filed by Twitter against the U.S. Department of Justice and other government agencies and officials. Twitter seeks a declaratory judgment that government restrictions on its ability to publish information about national security requests it receives, such as National Security Letters and court orders issued under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, violate its free speech rights under the First Amendment. The government has classified information in Twitter's draft transparency report and has only approved preapproved formats established in a settlement with other tech companies for reporting aggregated data about national security requests. Twitter argues these restrictions are unconstitutional.
Twitter v. holder suit to disclose ns lsPublicLeaks
This document is a complaint filed by Twitter against the U.S. Department of Justice and other government agencies and officials. Twitter seeks a declaratory judgment that government restrictions on its ability to publish information about national security requests it receives, such as National Security Letters, violate its free speech rights under the First Amendment. The government has prohibited Twitter and other companies from publishing any information about such requests unless it follows pre-approved disclosure formats established by the government, which Twitter argues unconstitutionally restrict its right to discuss matters of public concern.
This letter responds to a Freedom of Information Act request about documentation related to the Hutchinson Effect. The requester was seeking information about an evaluation of the Hutchinson Effect conducted by Los Alamos National Laboratory on behalf of the U.S. government. Los Alamos National Laboratory conducted searches but found no responsive records. John Alexander, who was previously employed by the laboratory, confirmed that in the 1980s the U.S. Army had contracted work related to the Hutchinson Effect but that a report was written and no documentation was kept at the laboratory.
The memorandum provides the following key points:
1) The Carter Page FISA warrant and renewals relied heavily on the Steele dossier, which was funded by the DNC and Clinton campaign. The source's political connections were not disclosed to the FISA court.
2) The FISA application cited a Yahoo News article that was based on leaks from Steele himself, incorrectly assessing that Steele did not directly provide the information.
3) Steele had numerous undisclosed contacts with the media in violation of FBI rules and demonstrated unreliability, yet continued to be cited in warrant applications.
4) Bruce Ohr maintained contact with Steele after he was terminated as a source, and Ohr's wife worked for Fusion
Using Apache Spark and Differential Privacy for Protecting the Privacy of the...Databricks
The document discusses using differential privacy to protect the privacy of respondents in the 2020 US Census. It describes how the Census Bureau is using Spark and differential privacy to perform roughly 2 million optimizations to balance data accuracy and privacy. Challenges include developing monitoring systems in Amazon's GovCloud to oversee multiple computing clusters running thousands of applications testing differential privacy techniques. The goal is to improve on privacy protections used in 2010 by quantifying and limiting re-identification risk from the published census data.
COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act signed into law by President Biden; Appends existing laws, and makes them stronger, protecting minorities against hate crimes.
Final presentation rev 1 - USA Patriot Actgbsmith5
The USA PATRIOT Act was passed 45 days after 9/11 to enhance domestic security and increase surveillance powers. It impacted laws around intelligence gathering, immigration, and more. While proponents argued it granted needed powers to fight terrorism, critics said it infringed on civil liberties. There have been ongoing legal challenges around its scope and application. As time has passed, there are calls to reevaluate the act and ensure powers are not abused.
Please answer this short question asap. Thanks in advance. 1.What .pdfagarshailenterprises
Please answer this short question asap. Thanks in advance.
1.What are attributes and rows as they relate to relations?
2.What is a schema?
3.What is the difference between a primary key and a candidate key?
4.What is a relation?
5.What relationship is enforced through referential integrity?
Also please summarize this - Write a paragraph about your feelings about the data the
American government keeps, noting areas where you are particularly worried and areas where
what the government does could be improved.
" [United States[edit]
Further information: National databases of United States persons and Identity documents in the
United States
National ID card: The United States does not have a national ID card, in the sense that there is no
federal agency with nationwide jurisdiction that directly issues such cards to all American
citizens for mandatory regular use.
Passport: The only national photo identity documents are the passport and passport card, which
are issued to U.S. nationals only upon voluntary application.
Social Security number: The vast majority of, but not all, Americans have a Social Security
number because it is required for many purposes including employment, federal child tax
deductions, and financial transactions. Social security numbers have become a de facto standard
for uniquely identifying people in government and private databases.[67] The Numerical
Identification System (Numident) is the Social Security Administration's computer database file
of an abstract of the information contained in an application for a Social Security number (Form
SS-5). It contains the name of the applicant, place and date of birth, and other information. The
Numident file contains all Social Security numbers since they first were issued in 1936.
Social Security Death Index: a database of death records created from the U.S. Social Security
Administration's Death Master File Extract. Most persons who have died since 1936 who had a
Social Security Number and whose death has been reported to the Social Security Administration
are listed in this index. The database includes given name and surname, and since the 1990s,
middle initial; date of birth; month and year of death, or full date of death for accounts active in
2000 or later; social security number, state or territory where the social security number was
issued; and zip code of the last place of residence while the person was alive.[69][70] The index
is frequently updated; the version of June 22, 2011 contained 89,835,920 records.
Driver's licenses: these are issued by state departments of motor vehicles and registries of motor
vehicles, and are the most common form of identification in the United States; the issuing
agencies maintain databases of drivers, including photographs and addresses. States also issue
voluntary identification cards to non-drivers, who are then also included in the motor vehicle
department or registry of motor vehicle databases. Although most American adults carry their.
Whistle Blower - Another Reason why Open Government is ImportantMujtaba Hussain
The document discusses whistleblowers and provides several definitions and perspectives on what constitutes a whistleblower. It also provides brief summaries on notable whistleblowers such as Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange, and Mark Klein. While whistleblowing aims to expose unlawful or unethical behavior, whistleblowers often face negative consequences for their actions such as termination, legal punishment, or risk to their safety and security. However, in some cases whistleblowers have also received compensation or recognition for bringing important issues to light in the public interest. The document concludes that laws protecting whistleblowers are important but not always effective, and more participatory democracy is needed to support whistleblowers and the information they bring forward.
Hawaii Law Sets Restrictions on Online Mugshot PublicationsMugshot Removal
This Hawaii law decision set restrictions on the dissemination of online mugshots by requiring mugshot websites to remove the photos and arrest records of people whose charges have been expunged or could be expunged.
This document is an affidavit in support of an application for a search warrant of a residence in Urbandale, Iowa as part of an ongoing criminal investigation. The affidavit provides background details on the investigation, which involves allegations of ongoing criminal conduct, conspiracy, solicitation, extortion, and witness tampering against Tracey Richter. It outlines a complex set of events involving Richter, her ex-husbands Dr. John Pitman and Michael Roberts, and a man named Dustin Wehde who was shot and killed by Richter in 2001 during an alleged home invasion.
504 Part II Criminal Procedure# 151053 Cust Cengage .docxtroutmanboris
504 Part II Criminal Procedure
# 151053 Cust: Cengage Au: Hall Pg. No. 504
Title: Criminal Law and Procedure Server: __________________
K
Short / Normal
DESIGN SERVICES OF
S4-CARLISLE
Publishing Services
information or access to their systems for the government to collect data. In others, the
government has obtained FISC orders. In recent years third-party authority has been
scrutinized in the context of metadata, or non content information. An example of
metadata is the government’s collection of phone numbers dialed but not the content
of those conversations. In its review of an application for an order to capture a huge
amount of “telephony metadata,” FISC ruled in 2013 that such intelligence gathering is
analogous to the phone records sought in Smith v. Maryland.37 In that case the Supreme
Court held that when an individual dials a phone number he is transmitting the data
to a third party, the telephone company, and as a consequence loses his privacy in the
number he dialed. For this reason the acquisition of the number dialed, but not the
content of the call, does not raise implicate the Fourth Amendment. FISC held that
this conclusion is not changed because of the size of the data request.38 The amendments
to the FISA mentioned earlier empowered the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
to review and approve programs that collect metadata, in addition to individual orders
of surveillance.
One particularly controversial authority created by the Patriot Act is the National
Security Letter. Without subpoena, the government is empowered to demand non-
content data from Internet service providers, communication companies, and busi-
nesses about their clients. Again, non content data include web sites visited, telephone
numbers called, and e-mail addresses. Thousands, in some years tens of thousands, of
NSLs have been issued yearly since 9/11. NSLs come with a “gag” order. That is, the
recipient of the NSL is ordered, under criminal penalty, to not disclose to anyone, in-
cluding the client who is named in the NSL, that the letter has been received. A federal
district judge found this and other provisions of the NSL law to be contrary to the First
Amendment’s protection of free speech and the Fourth Amendment in 2013.39
FISC is aimed at foreign governments and its agents, abroad. As you can see, the
authority of the United States to spy on U.S. persons abroad is limited to when U.S.
persons are acting as foreign agents and when engaged in terrorism. If the United
States wants to conduct a search within the United States, the Fourth Amendment and
Title III rules you have already learned apply, even if the underlying offense is a viola-
tion of a national security law. If the government acquires otherwise protected infor-
mation during an otherwise legitimate surveillance, the information is to be destroyed
unless the contents indicate a threat of serious bodily harm or death to any person.
An ex.
This document is a thesis submitted to American Public University examining the justification for the NSA's domestic bulk data collection and surveillance program. It provides background on the NSA's origins and mission, as well as the laws governing domestic surveillance. It discusses the controversy around the NSA's activities following the Snowden leaks, debating whether the national security benefits outweigh civil liberty costs. The thesis conducts a qualitative analysis of sources on both sides and aims to determine if the current legal framework requires reform while still protecting national security within the Constitution.
Cia director grandiosity v. abilt justicePublicLeaks
This document is a declaration by John Brennan, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, asserting the state secrets privilege and CIA statutory privileges to prevent disclosure of classified information in a lawsuit brought by a former CIA employee. Brennan asserts these privileges to protect information about specific CIA intelligence operations, the identities and roles of covert employees, and sources and methods. He argues that disclosure of such information could reasonably be expected to cause serious or grave damage to national security.
For Kim Woods OnlyAssignment 2 Intelligence Gathering.docxzollyjenkins
******For Kim Woods Only*****
Assignment 2: Intelligence Gathering
After terrorists attacked the United States on 9/11, the US government implemented the USA Patriot Act, designed to gather intelligence and prevent future terror attacks on the United States. The USA Patriot Act reduced restrictions on law enforcement agencies’ ability to monitor telephone conversations, e-mail communications, and medical, financial, and other records.
Additionally, the act eased restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States; expanded the authority of the secretary of the Treasury to regulate financial transactions, particularly those involving foreign individuals and entities; and broadened the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting immigrants suspected of terrorism-related acts.
However, critics of the USA Patriot Act opine that it is an infringement on civil liberties and should be abolished. Opponents of the law criticize the authorization of indefinite detention of immigrants and search of a home or business without the owner’s or the occupant’s permission or knowledge.
The USA Patriot Act also expanded the use of National Security Letters, which allows the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to tap telephone calls, e-mail, and financial records without a court order, and expanded access to business records, including library and financial records. Since its passage, several legal issues have been brought against the act, and federal courts have ruled that a number of provisions in the USA Patriot Act are unconstitutional.
Click
here
to access a film titled
Spying on the Home Front
. The film has five segments, totaling about one hour. This film explores some of the controversies surrounding the USA Patriot Act. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/video/flv/generic.html?s=frol02p6d&continuous=1
Submission Details:
After watching all five segments of
Spying on the Home Front
, by
Saturday, June 11, 2016
, in a minimum of 250 words, post to the
Discussion Area
your response to the following:
What are the intelligence-gathering tools being used in the United States to fight terrorism?
Is there adequate intelligence sharing between different law enforcement agencies?
Do you think the USA Patriot Act is an effective tool for fighting terrorism, or do you think it infringes on individual civil liberties?
How have intelligence-sharing systems changed since 9/11?
Provide concrete examples that support your positions on each of the above questions.
****************************************************************************************************************************
Assignment 3: Weapons of Mass Destruction
Consider the following scenario:
A bomb has just exploded in a nuclear fuel storage facility in Centervale. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is worried because of the extremely high levels of radiation and nuclear particulates contaminating air and water in Center.
Wikileaks is a non-profit organization that collects and disseminates classified information from governments in an effort to promote transparency. The release of documents like the "Collateral Murder" video and diplomatic cables has caused embarrassment for governments and damaged relationships. Governments responded by trying to prosecute Julian Assange and find the sources of the leaks. The leaks revealed sensitive information and vulnerabilities in data security, fueling efforts to better protect classified information.
#WenguiGuo#WashingtonFarm Guo Wengui Wolf son ambition exposed to open a far...rittaajmal71
Since fleeing to the United States in 2014, Guo Wengui has founded a number of projects in the United States, such as GTV Media Group, GTV private equity, farm loan project, G Club Operations Co., LTD., and Himalaya Exchange.
ग्रेटर मुंबई के नगर आयुक्त को एक खुले पत्र में याचिका दायर कर 540 से अधिक मुंबईकरों ने सभी अवैध और अस्थिर होर्डिंग्स, साइनबोर्ड और इलेक्ट्रिक साइनेज को तत्काल हटाने और 13 मई, 2024 की शाम को घाटकोपर में अवैध होर्डिंग के गिरने की विनाशकारी घटना के बाद अपराधियों के खिलाफ सख्त कार्रवाई की मांग की है, जिसमें 17 लोगों की जान चली गई और कई निर्दोष लोग गंभीर रूप से घायल हो गए।
Federal Authorities Urge Vigilance Amid Bird Flu Outbreak | The Lifesciences ...The Lifesciences Magazine
Federal authorities have advised the public to remain vigilant but calm in response to the ongoing bird flu outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza, commonly known as bird flu.
13062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
17062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
Why We Chose ScyllaDB over DynamoDB for "User Watch Status"ScyllaDB
Yichen Wei and Adam Drennan share the architecture and technical requirements behind "user watch status" for a major global media streaming service, what that meant for their database, the pros and cons of the many options they considered for replacing DynamoDB, why they ultimately chose ScyllaDB, and their lessons learned so far.
Slide deck with charts from our Digital News Report 2024, the most comprehensive exploration of news consumption habits around the world, based on survey data from more than 95,000 respondents across 47 countries.
लालू यादव की जीवनी LALU PRASAD YADAV BIOGRAPHYVoterMood
Discover the life and times of Lalu Prasad Yadav with a comprehensive biography in Hindi. Learn about his early days, rise in politics, controversies, and contribution.
Christian persecution in Islamic countries has intensified, with alarming incidents of violence, discrimination, and intolerance. This article highlights recent attacks in Nigeria, Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, and Iraq, exposing the multifaceted challenges faced by Christian communities. Despite the severity of these atrocities, the Western world's response remains muted due to political, economic, and social considerations. The urgent need for international intervention is underscored, emphasizing that without substantial support, the future of Christianity in these regions is at grave risk.
https://ecspe.org/the-rise-of-christian-persecution-in-islamic-countries/
15062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
18062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
projet de traité négocié à Istanbul (anglais).pdfEdouardHusson
Ceci est le projet de traité qui avait été négocié entre Russes et Ukrainiens à Istanbul en mars 2022, avant que les Etats-Unis et la Grande-Bretagne ne détournent Kiev de signer.
Shark Tank Jargon | Operational ProfitabilityTheUnitedIndian
Don't let fancy business words confuse you! This blog is your cheat sheet to understanding the Shark Tank Jargon. We'll translate all the confusing terms like "valuation" (how much the company is worth) and "royalty" (a fee for using someone's idea). You'll be swimming with the Sharks like a pro in no time!
1. April 6, 2021
Via electronic mail
Mr. Zach Watson
zachwatson13@gmail.com
Via electronic mail
Mr. Mallory A. Milluzzi
Partner
Klein, Thorpe and Jenkins, Ltd.
20 North Wacker Drive, Suite 1660
Chicago, Illinois 60606
mamilluzzi@ktjlaw.com
RE: FOIA Request for Review – 2020 PAC 65941
Dear Mr. Watson and Ms. Milluzzi:
This determination is issued pursuant to section 9.5(f) of the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 ILCS 140/9.5(f) (West 2018)). For the reasons stated below, the
Public Access Bureau concludes that the Vernon Hills Police Department (Department)
improperly withheld the roster responsive to Mr. Zachary Watson's November 3, 2020, FOIA
request.
On that date, Mr. Watson submitted an eight-part FOIA request to the Department
seeking, in relevant part, copies of:
[1] The most up-to-date records showing the leadership of
the Northern Illinois Police Alarm System (NIPAS) and its various
teams, including but not limited to the President, Vice President,
Secretary, Treasurer, NIPAS Systems Managers, Communications
Coordinator, the Commanders of the Emergency Services Team
(EST) and the Mobile Field Force (MFF), and the Team Leader of
the Bicycle Response Unit (BRU). [and]
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
STATE OF ILLINOIS
KWAME RAOUL
ATTORNEY GENERAL
2. Mr. Zachary Watson
Ms. Mallory Milluzzi
April 6, 2021
Page 2
[2] The most up-to-date rosters of officers that compose the
EST, MFF, and BRU, including officers' names, badge numbers,
and home municipal police departments.[1]
On November 10, 2020, the Department responded to Mr. Watson's request. In
relevant part, the Department provided him with a copy of a record showing the leadership of
NIPAS except for the BRU Team Leader, and denied the second part of his request pursuant to
sections 7(1)(d)(i), 7(1)(d)(vi), and 7(1)(v) of FOIA (5 ILCS 140/7(1)(d)(i), (1)(d)(vi), (1)(v)
(West 2018), as amended by Public Acts 101-434, effective January 1, 2020; 101-452, effective
January 1, 2020; 101-455, effective August 23, 2019). On December 3, 2020, Mr. Watson
submitted the above-referenced Request for Review disputing the Department's denial. On
December 7, 2020, Mr. Watson notified this office: "To be more specific about our concerns
with the Vernon Hills FOIA record, we believe that the refusal to name the badge numbers,
home departments and names of NIPAS officers violates" a determination issued by this office,
Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 26630, issued January 23, 2014, "regarding the use of
exemption" section 7(1)(d)(vi).2
On December 14, 2020, this office forwarded a copy of the Request for Review to
the Department and asked it to provide unredacted copies of the contested records for this
office's confidential review, and a detailed written explanation of the applicability of sections
7(1)(d)(i), 7(1)(d)(vi), and 7(1)(v) of FOIA. On December 23, 2020, this office received those
materials, including two versions of its written response: a complete version for this office's
confidential review and a redacted version for forwarding to Mr. Watson. On December 29,
2020, this office forwarded a copy of the Department's non-confidential response to Mr. Watson.
On that same date, Mr. Watson submitted a reply. On January 6, 2021, the Department
submitted an unsolicited response to Mr. Watson's reply. Additionally, on January 7, 2021,
NIPAS submitted an unsolicited response to Mr. Watson's Request for Review.
DETERMINATION
"All records in the custody or possession of a public body are presumed to be
open to inspection or copying." 5 ILCS 140/1.2 (West 2018); see also Southern Illinoisan v.
Illinois Dept. of Public Health, 218 Ill. 2d 390, 415 (2006). A public body "has the burden of
proving by clear and convincing evidence" that a record is exempt from disclosure. 5 ILCS
140/1.2 (West 2018).
1
E-mail from Zach Watson to whom it may concern (November 3, 2020).
2
E-mail from Zachary Watson to Lorraine Dunham (December 7, 2020).
3. Mr. Zachary Watson
Ms. Mallory Milluzzi
April 6, 2021
Page 3
Section 7(1)(d)(vi) of FOIA
Section 7(1)(d)(vi) of FOIA exempts from disclosure:
Records in the possession of any public body created in the
course of administrative enforcement proceedings, and any law
enforcement or correctional agency for law enforcement purposes,
but only to the extent that disclosure would:
* * *
(vi) endanger the life or physical safety of law
enforcement personnel or any other person[.]
NIPAS "is a joint venture of suburban municipal police departments in the
Chicago metropolitan area" that provide member agencies with "assistance for any situation its
command staff believes the agency cannot handle with its own resources."3
In its first, non-
confidential response to this office, the Department argued that the roster of officer names, badge
numbers, and home police departments is exempt under section 7(1)(d)(vi) of FOIA because
"given the specific and unique threat to officers involved in NIPAS and officers' involvement in
public protests, releasing officers' names and badge numbers would endanger an officer and his
or her family's physical safety."4
The Department submitted a confidential affidavit from NIPAS
President Thomas Weitzel and asserted that it contains "a detailed and comprehensive
assessment of both the general and the specific danger to NIPAS officers and their families that
would be caused by the release of information identifying the individual NIPAS officers to the
public."5
The Department further contended:
We are at a unique time in society where police officers, and
specifically police officers charged with keeping the peace during
times of public protest, have become the target of threats and
crimes. It does not matter that home addresses are not being
provided; in today's internet age all anyone needs is a name to
discover where someone lives, their family members and other
personal details, all of which can and has been used to target and
3
Northern Illinois Police Alarm System, https://www.nipas.org (last visited February 4, 2020).
4
Letter from Mallory A. Milluzzi, Klein Thorpe & Jenkins, Ltd., to Jane Sternecky, Assistant
Attorney General, Public Access Bureau (December 23, 2020), at [3].
5
Letter from Mallory A. Milluzzi, Klein Thorpe & Jenkins, Ltd., to Jane Sternecky, Assistant
Attorney General, Public Access Bureau (December 23, 2020), at [3].
4. Mr. Zachary Watson
Ms. Mallory Milluzzi
April 6, 2021
Page 4
threaten police officers and their family due to police officers
performing their duties.[6]
Moreover, the Department stated that Mr. Watson has stated on Twitter that he intends to reveal
the identities of the NIPAS officers, and argued that disclosing the records to Mr. Watson would
result in disclosure to people who have made death threats against those officers.
In his reply, Mr. Watson again referenced the Public Access Bureau's non-binding
determination in 2013 PAC 26630, in which this office determined that a police department
failed to demonstrate that records regarding police officers who were working on specific days,
including roll call, log sheets, and work schedules, were exempt from disclosure under section
7(1)(d)(vi) of FOIA. Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 26630, at 5. Mr. Watson noted that the
determination states that "information identifying non-undercover police officers is ordinarily
not exempt from disclosure under section 7(1)(d)(iv)." Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 26630,
at 3. In that matter, the police department had concealed the identity of a police officer who
fatally wounded an assisted living resident while attempting to subdue him. Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC
Req. Rev. Ltr. 26630, at 2. Although the police department demonstrated that members of the
public had made violent threats against the police department and its officers as a result of the
incident, this office concluded that the police department had failed to prove that disclosure of
the records would endanger officers' lives or physical safety "beyond the risks that are inherent in
police work." Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 26630, at 4. The determination further
explained: "Facing threats, at times violent, is an unfortunate aspect of public service for many
public officials, whether engaged in law enforcement or not. Despite such threats, the public's
ability to identify its public officials fosters transparency, efficiency, and accountability." Ill.
Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 26630, at 4. With this language, this office was not weighing the
public interest in disclosure as a factor in the section 7(1)(d)(vi) analysis, but instead explaining
that the exemption cannot be read to mean that public bodies may withhold routine records of
public employees' and officials' names whenever threats are made because of the risks attendant
to performing public duties.
In response to Mr. Watson's reply, the Department argued that the NIPAS officers
are at "a heightened risk" because "this specialized duty is beyond the general inherent job duties
of police officers" in that it is "specifically tied to protests."7
The Department stated that "[i]n
the past few months, NIPAS members have been injured at protests due to protesters using
fireworks and throwing bricks at officers and recent protests have attracted groups affiliated with
6
Letter from Mallory A. Milluzzi, Klein Thorpe & Jenkins, Ltd., to Jane Sternecky, Assistant
Attorney General, Public Access Bureau (December 23, 2020), at [3].
7
E-mail from Mallory A. Milluzzi, Partner – Klein, Thorpe, and Jenkins, Ltd., to Jane Sternecky,
Assistant Attorney General, Public Access Bureau (January 6, 2021).
5. Mr. Zachary Watson
Ms. Mallory Milluzzi
April 6, 2021
Page 5
ANTIFA and other organizations that specifically seek to harm officers."8
The Department
argued that an officer's assignment to NIPAS, while not an undercover role, is nonetheless "more
akin to an undercover assignment rather than a regular police assignment."9
The Department's
explanation for this claim is that "NIPAS officers do not have their names on their uniforms, just
roster numbers, which allows complaints (to which there have been none) to be tracked but also
intentionally protect the officer's identity."10
The Department's argument that section 7(1)(d)(vi) applies to the roster because
NIPAS officers face a heightened risk similar to that of undercover officers is unpersuasive.
Unlike undercover officers, whose physical safety would be starkly compromised if their true
identities as police officers were revealed to the targets of their investigations, NIPAS officers
openly interact with the public in full uniform. Any decision by NIPAS to provide only roster
numbers on officers' uniforms does not support the assertion that their names are exempt from
disclosure in response to a request for records under FOIA. NIPAS supports its member police
departments' efforts. It is hardly uncommon for police officers to participate in public events
that are the subject of controversy or opposition. In 2012, the Chicago Police Department (CPD)
reported assigning 3,100 CPD officers, in addition to officers from other agencies that are not
members of NIPAS, to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization summit that triggered widespread
demonstrations.11
Adopting the Department's rationale for the applicability of section 7(1)(d)(vi)
would permit public bodies to conceal the identities of all of the many thousands of officers who
police protests or are involved in an incident that generates strong criticism.
There is no indication that the General Assembly intended the section 7(1)(d)(vi)
exemption to broadly apply to the identities of uniformed police officers performing their public
duties in public settings. As was the case in Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 26630, Mr.
Watson's FOIA request does not seek home addresses or other private information that could be
used to target particular officers. Although Mr. Watson may intend to publish the roster and
although it may be possible to use a name to find additional information about a person on the
internet, the assertion that disclosure of the basic information in the roster would endanger the
8
E-mail from Mallory A. Milluzzi, Partner – Klein, Thorpe, and Jenkins, Ltd., to Jane Sternecky,
Assistant Attorney General, Public Access Bureau (January 6, 2021).
9
E-mail from Mallory A. Milluzzi, Partner – Klein, Thorpe, and Jenkins, Ltd., to Jane Sternecky,
Assistant Attorney General, Public Access Bureau (January 6, 2021).
10
E-mail from Mallory A. Milluzzi, Partner – Klein, Thorpe, and Jenkins, Ltd., to Jane Sternecky,
Assistant Attorney General, Public Access Bureau (January 6, 2021).
11
Lauren Petty, Hundreds of Outside Cops Helping Chicago for NATO Summit, NBC 5 NEWS
CHICAGO (May 16, 2012, 1:44 p.m.), https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/hundreds-outside-cops-helping-
chicago-for-nato-summit/1956609/
6. Mr. Zachary Watson
Ms. Mallory Milluzzi
April 6, 2021
Page 6
life or physical safety of NIPAS officers is speculative. Because NIPAS officers perform public
duties as police officers in a manner dissimilar to undercover officers, and because the roster
contains basic rather than sensitive information, section 7(1)(d)(vi) does not permit the
Department to withhold its roster.
Section 7(1)(v) of FOIA
Section 7(1)(v) of FOIA exempts from disclosure:
Vulnerability assessments, security measures, and response
policies or plans that are designed to identify, prevent, or respond
to potential attacks upon a community's population or systems,
facilities, or installations, the destruction or contamination of
which would constitute a clear and present danger to the health or
safety of the community, but only to the extent that disclosure
could reasonably be expected to jeopardize the effectiveness of the
measures or the safety of the personnel who implement them or the
public. Information exempt under this item may include such
things as details pertaining to the mobilization or deployment of
personnel or equipment, to the operation of communication
systems or protocols, or to tactical operations.
In its non-confidential response in this matter, the Department stated that the
NIPAS roster is exempt from disclosure under section 7(1)(v) because "[r]evealing the identities
of individual NIPAS officers involved in the different NIPAS teams would interfere with
response policies and plans of member agencies."12
The Department's confidential response
included three more sentences regarding the applicability of section 7(1)(v).
By its plain language, the section 7(1)(v) exemption applies to vulnerability
assessments, security measures, and response policies or plans themselves; it does not encompass
tangentially related records. The NIPAS roster is not a vulnerability assessment, security
measure, or response policy or plan within the scope of section 7(1)(v).
Accordingly, this office determines that the Department did not sustain its burden
of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the NIPAS roster is exempt from disclosure
under section 7(1)(d)(vi) or section 7(1)(v) of FOIA. To remedy its improper denial, this office
asks the Department to provide Mr. Watson with an unredacted copy of the roster.
12
E-mail from Mallory A. Milluzzi, Partner – Klein, Thorpe, and Jenkins, Ltd., to Jane Sternecky,
Assistant Attorney General, Public Access Bureau (January 6, 2021).
7. Mr. Zachary Watson
Ms. Mallory Milluzzi
April 6, 2021
Page 7
The Public Access Counselor has determined that resolution of this matter does
not require the issuance of a binding opinion. If you have any questions, you may contact me by
mail at the Chicago address listed on the first page of this letter or by e-mail at
jsternecky@atg.state.il.us. This letter serves to close this file.
Very truly yours,
JANE STERNECKY
Assistant Attorney General
Public Access Bureau
65941 f 71dvi improper 71v improper pd
cc: Via electronic mail
Ms. Lisa Straza
FOIA Officer
Vernon Hills Police Department Record Division
740 Lakeview Parkway
Vernon Hills, Illinois 60061
vhrecords@vhills.org