Daily Archives: July 18, 2006

How not to treat friends

Posted on by
Reply

BetonSports.gifFirst, federal prosecutors heavy-handed tactics generated a political firestorm with one of America’s closest allies over the NatWest Three case. Now this:

In a sharp escalation of their crackdown on Internet gambling, United States prosecutors said yesterday that they were pressing charges against the chief executive of BetOnSports, a prominent Internet gambling company that is publicly traded in Britain, and against several other current and former company officers.
Federal authorities arrested the chief executive, David Carruthers, late Sunday as he was on layover at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport on his way from Britain to Costa Rica. In a hearing yesterday in Federal District Court in Fort Worth, he was charged with racketeering conspiracy for participating in an illegal gambling enterprise.

Let me get this straight. Carruthers is a UK citizen, legally runs a UK-based company with a UK-based website, and he gets arrested in the US because US citizens are gambling on his website?
Here’s hoping that the UK raises hell with the Bush Administration over this latest incident as well as the handling of the NatWest Three case (which, by the way, has not generated even a civil case in the UK, much less a criminal one). As Larry Ribstein has pointed out on many occasions, the remedy of granting federal prosecutors broad latitude to criminalize business interests is generating a wave of prosecutorial abuse that is far more troubling than the original “problem” that the remedy is supposed to address. Christine Hurt has more.

“A peep show of utter horror”

Posted on by
Reply

death penalty2.jpgOn of my favorite books of 2003 was Erik Larson’s Devil in the White City (Crown 2003) (website here), the engaging tale of Chicago and the 1893 World’s Fair, which has just finished an astounding 124th straight week on the NY Times Bestseller List. A movie is currently being planned for the book, so the Chicago Sun-Times interviewed Larson and several other experts on the “White City” to determine the source of the fascination over the 1893 Fair:

On the one hand, Larson says, the White City was designed and built by the Gilded Age elite “as a way of demonstrating that America could come up with this level of sophistication. They went for drama at a time when architecture had very little relevance for most of the country, paving the way for things to come by inserting into the American psyche an appreciation for architecture. The sheer beauty in that array of buildings in the Court of Honor, ingeniously using the backdrop of the lake to stage the whole thing, was enough to knock anybody flat.”
But if the White City was a dream made real, much of the rest of Chicago was a nightmare.
“The fair gripped people,” [Chicago Architecture Foundation lecturer Christopher] Multhauf says, “partly because it was a vision of beauty in a place that was so squalid.” The streets were a quagmire of mud and manure, the air laced with soot and the rank aroma of stockyards and slaughterhouses. Poverty was widespread; labor unrest simmered and sometimes boiled. Prostitution flourished. Not far from the baronial mansions of Prairie Avenue, there were 31 brothels on Clark Street between Congress and Harrison, all of which were open at the time of the fair. The German writer Paul Lindau called Chicago “a peep show of utter horror, but extraordinarily to the point.”

Read the entire article and, if you have not already done so, pick up this fine book.

Innocence as a distraction

Posted on by
4

death penalty.jpgDavid Dow, a University Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Houston, is one of nation’s leading experts on the death penalty and the author of Executed on a Technicality: Lethal Injustice on America’s Death Row (Beacon 2006) (previous death penalty posts here). Rick Garnett passes along this NY Times op-ed from several weeks ago in which Professor Dow makes the interesting point that “innocence is a distraction” in the political and legal debate over capital punishment:

For too many years now, though, death penalty opponents have seized on the nightmare of executing an innocent man as a tactic to erode support for capital punishment in America.
Innocence is a distraction. . . [M]ost people on death row did what the state said they did. But that does not mean they should be executed.
Focusing on innocence forces abolitionists into silence when a cause cÈlËbre turns out to be guilty. When the DNA testing [proved that such a defendant] was a murderer, and a good liar besides, abolitionists wrung their hands about how to respond. They seemed sorry that he had been guilty after all.
I, too, am a death penalty opponent, but I was happy to learn that [the defendant] was a murderer. I was happy that the prosecutors would not have to live with the guilt of knowing that they sent an innocent man to death row. . . .
As Justice Scalia has said elsewhere, of course we are going to execute innocent people if we have the death penalty. The criminal justice system is made up of human beings, and fallible beings make mistakes.
But perhaps that is a price society is willing to pay. If the death penalty is worth having, it might still be worth having, despite the occasional loss of innocent life. . .
[We] ought to focus on the far more pervasive problem: that the machinery of death in America is lawless, and in carrying out death sentences, we violate our legal principles nearly all of the time.

Professor Dow nails the key issue in the death penalty debate. Proponents of the death penalty reason that it is not wrong for the state to kill a person as punishment for murder where that person was lawfully convicted in a fair and accurate criminal justice process. However, reasonable proponents of the death penalty must confront the reality that errors will occur in carrying out the death penalty in even a morally-justified criminal justice system. By making the above-stated moral justification the central issue in the debate, proponents of the death penalty are overlooking the glaring defects in the process that undermine the moral justification.

Dome redevelopment plan lurches forward

Posted on by
1

Reliant Astrodome Hotel.jpgHas it really been almost two years since we began talking about what to do with the Astrodome? (previous posts here, here, here and here).
After floating a Gaylord Texan-type concept for the past year or so, Astrodome Redevelopment Corp. and Harris County are ready to enter into a letter of intent regarding ARC’s $450 million plan to reinvent the Astrodome as a luxury convention hotel with a parking garage and new exit from Loop 610 South to keep the facility from interfering with Houston Texans games and the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo. ARC is a consortium comprised of Oceaneering International Inc., a publicly traded firm working in engineering, science and technology; URS, an architectural and design firm; NBGS International, a theme park developer; and Falcon’s Treehouse, a Florida-based design firm.
Although touted “as a major milestone,” the letter of intent is not such a big deal. ARC needs it to be able to negotiate deals with the array of entities (Texans, Rodeo, Harris County, financiers, investors, etc.) that it will have to cut deals with in order to make a deal of this magnitude come together. The letter of intent requires ARC to have its financing arranged in six months and to have its final deal cut with the county in a year.
Although I’m surprised that this proposal has gotten this far, I give the chances of the Astrodome hotel actually coming together without public financing as roughly the same as the Texans making the Super Bowl this upcoming season.