In the continuing series of remarkable commercials, Honda chips in.
Accord Perfection
Reply
Author Archives: Tom
Again, why bother with a trial?
The popular view is that R. Allen Stanford is a crook and should spend the rest of his life in prison.
But doesn’t the U.S. Constitution — not to speak of simple human decency — provide him with the opportunity to contest the government’s charges against him fairly?
These earlier posts (here, too) touched on the indefensible prison conditions that the federal government has imposed on R. Allen Stanford as he awaits trial on criminal fraud charges arising from the demise of Stanford Financial Group.
Last week, Stanford’s lawyers filed the motion below requesting that U.S. District Judge David Hittner release Stanford on strict conditions pending his trial that would make it virtually impossible for him to go to the corner drug store without the U.S. Marshals being notified immediately.
Judge Hittner promptly denied the motion without comment, which is next to inexplicable given what is contained in the motion. Here is a mere sampling:
Mr. Stanford has been incarcerated since June 18, 2009 and was moved to the [Federal Detention Center] on September 29, 2009. Immediately upon his arrival at the FDC, he underwent general anesthesia surgery due to injuries that were inflicted upon him at the Joe Corley Detention Facility. He was then immediately taken from surgery and placed in the Maximum Security Section — known as the “Special Housing Unit” (SHU) — in a 7′ x 6 1/2′ solitary cell. He was kept there, 24 hours a day, unless visited by his lawyers. No other visitors were permitted, nor was he permitted to make or receive telephone calls. He had virtually no contact with other human beings, except for guards or his lawyers.
When he was taken from his cell, even for legal visits, he was forced to put his hands behind his back and place them through a small opening in the door. He then was handcuffed, with his arms behind his back, and removed from his cell. After being searched, he was escorted to the attorney visiting room down the hall from his cell; he was placed in the room and then the guards locked the heavy steel door. He was required, again, to back up to the door and place his shackled hands through the opening, so that the handcuffs could be removed. At the conclusion of his legal visits, he was handcuffed through the steel door, again, and then taken to a different cell where he was once again required to back up to the cell door to have his handcuffs removed and then forced to remove all of his clothing. Once he was nude, the guards then conducted a complete, external and internal search of his body, including his anus and genitalia. He was then shackled and returned to his cell. In his cell there was neither a television nor a radio and only minimal reading material was made available to him. He remained there in complete solitude and isolation until the next time his lawyers returned for a visit.
In short, Mr. Stanford was confined under the same maximum security conditions as a convicted death row prisoner, even though the allegations against him are for white collar, non-violent offenses. He is certainly not viewed as someone who poses a threat to other persons or the community, nevertheless, he has been deprived of human contact, communication with family and friends, and was incarcerated under conditions reserved for the most violent of convicted criminals. Officials at the FDC informed counsel that this was for Mr. Stanford’s “own protection” and to minimize their liability. . . .
The U.S. criminal justice system used to be an institution that distinguished a free society from those that endured under oppressive regimes.
But with cases such as Stanford’s, it’s sure getting hard to tell the difference between the U.S. system and the supposedly more oppressive ones.
The Light in the Darkness
Every Christmas since 1949, The Wall Street Journal has published the following op-ed — In Hoc Anno Domini — from the late Vernon Royster.
Royster’s piece reminds us not only the the brutal nature of life in the Roman Empire, but the extraordinary impact that Judeo-Christian culture has had over the past two thousand years in improving the quality of life.
We take it for granted at our peril.
So the light came into the world.
When Saul of Tarsus set out on his journey to Damascus the whole of the known world lay in bondage. There was one state, and it was Rome. There was one master for it all, and he was Tiberius Caesar.
Everywhere there was civil order, for the arm of the Roman law was long. Everywhere there was stability, in government and in society, for the centurions saw that it was so.
But everywhere there was something else, too. There was oppression—for those who were not the friends of Tiberius Caesar. There was the tax gatherer to take the grain from the fields and the flax from the spindle to feed the legions or to fill the hungry treasury from which divine Caesar gave largess to the people. There was the impressor to find recruits for the circuses. There were executioners to quiet those whom the Emperor proscribed. What was a man for but to serve Caesar?
There was the persecution of men who dared think differently, who heard strange voices or read strange manuscripts. There was enslavement of men whose tribes came not from Rome, disdain for those who did not have the familiar visage. And most of all, there was everywhere a contempt for human life. What, to the strong, was one man more or less in a crowded world?
Then, of a sudden, there was a light in the world, and a man from Galilee saying, Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.
And the voice from Galilee, which would defy Caesar, offered a new Kingdom in which each man could walk upright and bow to none but his God. Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. And he sent this gospel of the Kingdom of Man into the uttermost ends of the earth.
So the light came into the world and the men who lived in darkness were afraid, and they tried to lower a curtain so that man would still believe salvation lay with the leaders.
But it came to pass for a while in divers places that the truth did set man free, although the men of darkness were offended and they tried to put out the light. The voice said, Haste ye. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness come upon you, for he that walketh in darkness knoweth not whither he goeth.
Along the road to Damascus the light shone brightly. But afterward Paul of Tarsus, too, was sore afraid. He feared that other Caesars, other prophets, might one day persuade men that man was nothing save a servant unto them, that men might yield up their birthright from God for pottage and walk no more in freedom.
Then might it come to pass that darkness would settle again over the lands and there would be a burning of books and men would think only of what they should eat and what they should wear, and would give heed only to new Caesars and to false prophets. Then might it come to pass that men would not look upward to see even a winter’s star in the East, and once more, there would be no light at all in the darkness.
And so Paul, the apostle of the Son of Man, spoke to his brethren, the Galatians, the words he would have us remember afterward in each of the years of his Lord:
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Merry Christmas from the Family
It wouldn’t be Christmas in Texas without taking a moment to listen to Texas singer-songwriter and Houston native Robert Earl Keen‘s classic Texas Christmas carol and video, Merry Christmas from the Family Keen is playing the House of Blues at 8 p.m. on Monday.
Have a restful, joyous and safe holiday!
To Everything There is a Season
Still sounding darn good in 2006, Roger McGuinn, Chris Hillman and David Crosby sing Pete Seeger’s classic that The Byrds made famous in the 1960’s, Turn! Turn! Turn!
On the Tiger Myth
I really didn’t think that I would do more than one post on the Tiger Woods affair, but a couple of recent articles merit taking the topic up one last time.
First, in this weekend op-ed piece, the NY Times’ Frank Rich piously excoriates Woods and his handlers for promoting a myth about Woods that was as fictitious as the pre-collapse myths about Enron (among others).
Of course, Rich fails to comprehend that the mainstream media’s myths about Enron after its demise weren’t any closer to the truth.
Meanwhile, Golf Digest’s Jaime Diaz — the golf writer who has known Woods the longest and best — provides this far more insightful article on Woods’ life, as well as the expectations and pressures that may have contributed to his secret life.
Morality plays are easy to embrace. The truth is usually more nuanced and difficult, but ultimately much more fulfilling to understand.
2009 Weekly local football review
(AP Photo/Jeff Roberson photo; previous weekly reviews for this season are here).
It is a reflection of the Texans (7-7) endearing mediocrity that they can out-gain the Rams (1-13) by almost 200 yards and struggle to win by a field goal.
Now the Rams have been playing reasonably well over the past month and a half (only one blow-out loss during that span), but come on. They are still the Rams.
Although most sports talk hosts and fans think the Texans are underachieving, my sense is that their record is an accurate measure of their ability at this point in time.
For a variety of reasons, the Texans do not run the ball well. They do spray the ball reasonably well in the passing game, but they lost their second-most explosive receiver (Owen Daniels) to injury several games ago.
The defense has improved steadily during the season, but the lack of a consistent pass rush still puts too much pressure on the secondary, which is the weak link in the unit. The fact that 2007 first-round draft choice DT Amobi Okoye is doing a good imitation of former first-round DT bust Travis Johnson isn’t helping matters on the defensive line.
Finally, kicker Kris Brown has been so inconsistent that he looks as if he has all the confidence of a professional golfer undergoing a swing change in an effort to save his career.
Thus, with two games to go (the Dolphins at Miami and home against the Patriots), the Texans still have a chance to register the best record of their tortured eight-season existence. As a team, the Texans don’t seem to play with much confidence, which is probably attributable in good part to the overall youth of the team.
But the reality is that the Texans continue to improve. Just not as fast as their followers prefer.
The issue that Texans owner Bob McNair has to resolve is whether it is more likely that such improvement will continue under Gary Kubiak? Or is it more likely to continue under another head coach?
The answer is not clear.
That wild Landry’s ride continues
Owning shares of stock in Houston-based Landry’s Restaurants, Inc. has never been for the faint-hearted.
First, Landry’s board of directors failed to obtain a standstill agreement from Landry’s chairman and CEO, Tilman Fertitta, as his failed take-private offers over the past couple of years that would have prevented Fertitta from acquiring majority stock ownership in the company while its stock tanked.
Then, the Pershing Square Capital hedge fund entered the picture, bought up a bunch of Landry’s shares and announced that it opposed Fertitta’s most recent buyout offer.
Now, as Steve Davidoff explains, it appears that Fertitta has not been complying with his board’s instructions in making public disclosures about his buyout offers.
At least partly as a result, counsel for a special committee of Landry’s board that was created to negotiate Fertitta’s buyout offers resigned, apparently in protest.
As a result of this disclosure and other developments, don’t be surprised if the Securities and Exchange Commission comes knocking on Landry’s door to look into these developments.
And Tilman Fertitta’s firm grip on Landry’s from its inception may be slowly slipping away.
Unreliable eyewitness
This video demonstrates one of the reasons that eyewitness accounts are often unreliable.
They got how much? For doing what?
Just when it looked as if progress was being made, the harsh reality of the severe trial penalty and the absurd severity of punishment parameters in white collar criminal cases reared its ugly head.
This time its the harsh sentences that U.S. District Judge Melinda Harmon handed down on Thursday to three former El Paso Natural Gas Company natural gas traders — 14 years to one defendant and 11 years and 3 months to the other two. They were convicted of multiple counts fraud and false reporting in connection with what has become known in Houston as "the trader cases."
The severity of the sentences is mind-boggling when compared with the nature of the alleged "crime."
The government alleged that the three traders provided false information to natural gas industry publications such as the Inside FERC Gas Market Report, which use data from traders to calculate an index price of natural gas.
Inasmuch as movement in index prices can theoretically affect the level of profits that traders can generate, the government’s theory was that the defendants provided false information so that they and El Paso could reap higher profits on their trades.
However, the government never proved that the magazines actually used the false information that the defendants provided to them or that the information actually affected the natural gas markets at all. Indeed, a myriad of market factors affect natural gas prices, as with the price of any commodity.
That was no problem for prosecutors, though. The government contended that the market effect of providing the false information was irrelevant and that the prosecution needed only to prove that false information was reported to the magazines in order to make a gain a conviction of the defendants. And they got away with it.
So, key point to all businesspeople — don’t ever provide any information to a publication about your business that could be construed to be false. It really doesn’t make any difference whether the false information affects your company. The government contends that the mere transmittal of the false information is the crime.
Meanwhile, three relatively young men (the oldest is 49) with families and promising careers are now facing over a decade of imprisonment for the "crime" of reporting false price information to a magazine.
Just what is the purpose of this?