To help agencies submit accurate and high-quality biometric images and criminal history data enabling reliable and consistent searches, the Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division offers biometric and criminal history training free of charge to all authorized agencies.
Aside from the obvious suitability issues raised by the underlying conduct engaged in by the applicant or officer, which should be considered by the agency, Hayes may impact hiring and retaining officers by law enforcement agencies. For example, if a misdemeanor conviction pertaining to a crime of violence surfaces during the investigation, the department must determine whether the crime involved someone who had a domestic relationship with the applicant or officer.
Fbi Faces 40 Free 11
On October 5, 1985, Platt and Matix murdered 25-year-old Emilio Briel while he was target shooting at a rock pit. The pair stole Briel's car and used it to commit several robberies.[10] Briel's remains were found in March 1986 but not identified until May.[citation needed] On October 10, 1985, five days after killing Briel, Platt and Matix attempted to rob a Wells Fargo armored truck that was servicing a Winn-Dixie supermarket. After ordering him to freeze, one of the pair shot a guard in the leg with a shotgun while the other fired a handgun and shoulder weapons from the getaway vehicle. Two other guards returned fire, but neither Platt nor Matix was wounded. No money was taken in the botched robbery, but the injured guard later died from his wound. A few weeks later, on November 8, 1985, the two robbed the Professional Savings Bank in Miami, taking $41,469 in three Wells Fargo Armored Car Company money bags that had been delivered that morning.[1]
Toxicology tests showed that the abilities of Platt and Matix to fight through multiple traumatic gunshot wounds and continue to battle and attempt to escape were not achieved through any chemical means. Both of their bodies were drug-free at the time of their deaths.[13]
When Reagan took office the economy was one of double-digit inflation and interest rates near 20%. During the campaign Reagan promised to restore the free market from excessive government regulation and encourage private initiative and enterprise.
The economic gains, however, came at a cost of a record annual deficit and a ballooning national debt. The budget deficit was exacerbated by a trade deficit. Americans continued to buy more foreign-made goods than they were selling. Reagan, however adhered to his free trade stance, and was the primary proponent of the Free Trade Agreement with Canada, which evolved into the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). He also signed, reluctantly, trade legislation designed to open foreign markets to U.S. goods.
In Middle East affairs, Reagan reported in his inaugural address that the 52 American hostages held in Iran for 444 days were at that moment being released and would soon return to freedom. The President maintained a firm stance against terrorism, exemplified by the American retaliating against Libya for an air attack in 1981 and again in 1986 for the death of Americans in a Berlin discotheque. Reagan's peacekeeping force in war-torn Lebanon experienced tragedy in 1983 when a truck bomb killed 241 soldiers. Tragedy struck again in 1987 when a missile from an Iraqi warplane killed 37 sailors aboard the U.S.S. Stark, part of a U.S. naval taskforce which had been sent to the Persian Gulf to keep that waterway open during the Iran-Iraq war.
The darkest hour of the Reagan administration would become known as the Iran-Contra affair. After lengthy, nationally televised hearings, a special congressional hearings review board reported that Reagan authorized the sale of arms to Iran in exchange for help in freeing U.S. hostages in Lebanon. Investigations revealed the money gained from the arms sale was illegally diverted to aid the Contras, opponents of the Nicaraguan Sandinista government. The congressional report criticized Reagan for his detached, hands-off style of management. In the aftermath of the affair, National Security Advisors Robert McFarlane and John Poindexter, as well as National Security Council aide Colonel Oliver North were indicted by a federal grand jury and convicted of various charges regarding the Iran-Contra operations. McFarlane was later pardoned by President George H.W. Bush and both Poindexter and North's convictions were set aside on appeal for technical reasons.
The EEOC's Publication Center has many free documents on the Title I employment provisions of the ADA, including both the statute, 42 U.S.C. . 12101 et seq. (1994), and the regulations, 29 C.F.R. . 1630 (1997). In addition, the EEOC has published a great deal of basic information about reasonable accommodation and undue hardship. The two main sources of interpretive information are: (1) the Interpretive Guidance accompanying the Title I regulations (also known as the "Appendix" to the regulations), 29 C.F.R. pt. 1630 app. .. 1630.2(o), (p), 1630.9 (1997) , and (2) A Technical Assistance Manual on the Employment Provisions (Title I) of the Americans with Disabilities Act III, 8 FEP Manual (BNA) 405:6981, 6998-7018 (1992). The Manual includes a 200-page Resource Directory, including federal and state agencies, and disability organizations that can provide assistance in identifying and locating reasonable accommodations.
Vice President's Remarks at the KCI Expo CenterKansas City, Missouri 11:40 A.M. CDT THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. Somehow this makesme very nervous to be surrounded by this many law enforcementofficers. I'm delighted to be here this morning and thank you for thewarm welcome to Kansas City. And I want to thank you, Larry, for thatkind introduction and also for your years of service to the nation. I was here not long ago to campaign with Congressman Sam Graves,who is able to join us today, and I've been looking forward to comingback. (Applause.) And I'm honored to bring you best wishes from a man with friends inevery corner of Missouri, President George W. Bush. The President and I are tremendously grateful to all of oursupporters here in Missouri. We were proud to carry this state in2000. The election, though five months away, we're going to doeverything we can to work hard to earn your vote once again. With yourdedication, and with the strong leadership of our President, Missouriis going to be part of a nationwide victory for George W. Bush onNovember 2nd. (Applause.) Your senators aren't here today, but as President of the Senate, Ican speak with some authority on their performance on the job. I'mproud to tell you that Kit Bond and Jim Talent are doing superb workfor the people of Missouri. And I might also add that your formersenator and governor John Ashcroft is doing a great job as AttorneyGeneral of the United States. (Applause.) I also want to thank all of the law enforcement personnel and firstresponders here today. Just about everybody, at one time or another,has needed your help or watched you at work. Your fellow citizensrespect your discipline, your presence of mind, and your courage. AndI'm proud that you're with us today. All of us in public office are serving during a time when Americahas confronted historic challenges and risen to meet tests that wenever expected to face. The past three and a half years have demandedserious choices, with alternatives carrying profound consequences. Theattacks on September 11th, 2001 signaled the arrival of an entirely newera. In the space of a few hours, we saw the violence and the griefthat 19 murderous men can inflict. And we had a glimpse of the evengreater harm that terrorists wish to do to us. Remembering what we sawon the morning of 9/11, and knowing the nature of these enemies, wehave a clear, overriding responsibility: We must do everything in ourpower to protect our homeland, and to prevent another terrorist attackon America. (Applause.) Since those terror attacks, our nation has pursued an aggressivestrategy against an organized and a determined enemy. We understandthat it's not enough to simply prosecute a series of crimes after aviolent attack has occurred. Good defenses are not enough. To fullyremove this danger, we have only one option. We must go on offense,and we will take the fight to the enemy, and we will prevail.(Applause.) We are waging war in this war on terror in many fronts. We aretracking, capturing, and destroying terrorists from the caves ofAfghanistan, to the Philippines, to the Horn of Africa. We arefighting weapons proliferation at every source -- whether the threatcomes from outlaw regimes, or from black-market operations -- to guardAmerica against catastrophic attack and against blackmail. We areapplying the Bush doctrine, which holds that any person or regime thatharbors terrorists is equally guilty of terrorist crimes and will beheld to account. And the Taliban regime in Afghanistan found out thatAmerica means exactly what we say. (Applause.) In Iraq, we took another essential step in the war on terror. Witha coalition of many nations, the United States rid the Iraqi people ofa murderous dictator and rid the world of a gathering threat to ourpeace and security. Because we and our coalition acted, the dictatorwho once brutalized a country now sits in a prison cell. And the worldcan be certain that the dictator and his sons will never again sponsorterrorists, never again endanger Iraqis' neighbors, never againthreaten the United States of America. (Applause.) Watching these developments, Colonel Moammar Ghadafi, in Libya,decided the time had come for him to end his efforts to develop nuclearweapons and to turn over to U.S. officials the uranium feed stock, theequipment needed to enrich and produce weapons-grade material, anddesign for a nuclear weapon. The key supplier of this deadlytechnology was a man named A.Q. Khan. He's now under house arrest inPakistan, and his network of suppliers is being dismantled. We and our coalition partners still face serious challenges inIraq, but our progress is steady, and no power of the enemy will stopit. In fewer than 15 months, the Iraqi people have gone from therepression they knew for decades to the verge of self-government. Andthey know the way forward. President Bush has outlined a five-stepplan to help Iraq secure democracy and freedom. Today in Baghdad, theUnited Nations Special Envoy and Iraq's new Prime Minister announcedthe members of Iraq's new interim government. As President Bush saidthis morning, the interim government "brings us one step closer torealizing the dreams of millions of Iraqis -- a fully sovereign nationwith a representative government that protects their rights and servestheir needs." We will hand over authority to that sovereign Iraqi government atthe end of this month, help the Iraqi people establish security,continue our commitment to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure, encouragemore international support, especially from our allies in NATO, andmove toward a national election that will bring forward the leaders ofa democrat Iraq. In Afghanistan, an interim government has been established; aconstitution has been written; and later this fall, free elections willbe held. An Afghan National Army has been established so the Afghanswill be able to contribute to their own security. The stakes in Iraqand Afghanistan are historic, and the terrorists understand that aswell as we do. Iraq will either be a peaceful, free country, or itwill again be a source of violence, a haven for terror, and a danger toAmerica and the world. America will help Iraqis persevere in thiscause and will defeat the enemies of liberty and secure a freeself-governing Iraq. (Applause.) This nation will never go back to the false comforts of the worldbefore 9/11. We are engaging the enemy as we must, in places like Iraqand Afghanistan, so we will not have to face them here at home. And weare not letting our guard down in the defense of the Americanhomeland. At the President's request, Congress created the Departmentof Homeland Security, the largest reorganization of the federalgovernment since Harry Truman was President. We have taken decisive,focused action to improve security at our borders and our ports, and toprotect travelers on commercial aircraft. We added billions in newfunding for cutting-edge drugs and other defenses against biologicalattack. We changed the mission of the FBI, and reassigned hundreds ofagents to counterterrorism duties, to help prevent terrorist attacksbefore they can be launched. And we took another vital step in defending our homeland with thepassage of the USA Patriot Act, which the President signed into law in2001. That law solved some dramatic problems that became clear in thepost-9/11 world, problems that put our government at a significantdisadvantage in the hunt for terrorists inside America. Before 9/11, there were rigid restrictions on the way lawenforcement agents, intelligence officers, and national securitypersonnel could share information about potential threats. The FBI andthe CIA often failed to share critical information -- and in somecases, divisions within the FBI were not permitted to share, even witheach other. The Patriot Act broke down these walls that kept keyofficials from seeing critical information held by their colleagues inour own government. Because of the Patriot Act, our homeland securitypersonnel are now working together and sharing information so that wecan do everything in our power to prevent another attack. The Patriot Act also corrected several dangerous double standardsin our investigation laws. For example, during the years al Qaeda wasplanning the 9/11 attacks, law enforcement officers had a number ofeffective tools to track drug smugglers and mobsters -- tools that werelegally forbidden in the fight against terror. If a crime bossroutinely changed his telephone number to evade the police, all of theconversations could be monitored by a single court order. But if thegovernment was investigating a terrorist, such roving wiretaps were notavailable, and investigators had to go back to the judge for anotherwarrant. Before the Patriot Act, it was also easier for lawenforcement to get business records in an embezzlement case than it wasin a terrorism case. These double standards made no sense. And now,thanks to the Patriot Act, investigators are far better able to followmoney trails and track telephone contacts, making it easier to find andbreak up terror cells. Another problem that law enforcement faced before 9/11 involvedwhat is called a delayed-notification search warrant. These allow lawenforcement personnel, with court approval, to carry out a lawfulsearch without tipping off suspects and giving them a chance to flee orto destroy evidence. Before September 11th, the standards for thesekinds of warrants were different around the country. The Patriot Actprovided a clear national standard and allows these warrants to be usedeffectively in terrorism cases. The legal theory here is very simple:If these warrants cannot be used -- if these, excuse me, if thesewarrants can be used against drug dealers, then it is absolutelyessential for law enforcement to be able to use them effectivelyagainst terrorists. The Patriot Act was carefully written to protect the civilliberties that have long defined American democracy. All of theinvestigative tools I have described require the approval of a judgebefore they can be carried out. And similar statutes have been on thebook for years, and tested in the courts, and found to beconstitutional. Many provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year,including the sections that allow intelligence and law enforcementagencies to share information. Congress can renew the act in full, yetsome legislators seem to believe that the Patriot Act is no longerneeded to confront the terrorist threat. One of those legislatorshappens to be the Democratic Candidate for President. When it came time to vote on the Patriot Act in 2001, Senator Kerryvoted yes -- and so did all other senators who voted, but one. AsPresident of the Senate, I can tell you this: When you have John Kerry,Ted Kennedy, and 96 other senators supporting a law, that's a fairamount of bipartisan support. In a statement supporting the Patriot Act, Senator Kerry said thelaw would, and I quote, "make it a lot more difficult for new terroristorganizations to develop." I won't be saying this very often duringthe next few months, but Senator Kerry was right. (Laughter andapplause.) Since 9/11, we have dismantled terrorist cells in Oregon, New York,North Carolina, and Virginia. We have prosecuted terrorist operativesand supporters in California, Ohio, Texas, and Florida. We have frozenand seized about $200 million in terrorist assets around the world.Since September 11th, we have charged over 300 people interrorism-related investigations. So far, more than half of thosecharged have been convicted or pled guilty. There has been steady progress toward a more secure America, thetype of quiet progress not often reported on the nightly news or in themorning newspaper. And the Patriot Act has been crucial to many of oursuccesses. Yet Senator Kerry has chosen this moment, after thesevictories, to share his second thoughts on the Patriot Act. He nowcalls the Patriot Act a "blind spot in the American justice system."He now says he wants to let vital elements of the Patriot Act expire atthe end of next year. What he has not shared, however, is a singleexample of the Patriot Act actually being abused. And those who havelooked closely for abuses have found none. One of Senator Kerry'sDemocratic colleagues, Dianne Feinstein of California, had this to sayon the topic: She said, "I have never had a single abuse of the PatriotAct reported to me. My staff e-mailed the American Civil LibertiesUnion and asked them for instances of actual abuse. They e-mailed backand said they had none." End quote. Keep all of this in mind, ladies and gentlemen, the next time youhear Senator Kerry make baseless claims about the Patriot Act andsupposed abuses. This good law has done nothing to diminish ourliberty -- it has helped us to defend our liberty. (Applause.) The Patriot Act was passed at a time when the smoking ruins anddestruction in New York, Pennsylvania, and at the Pentagon were freshin our memories. And that law was the clear bipartisan response of anation determined to see that such horrors never took place again. Atthe time, Senator Kerry shared that determination, and he has aresponsibility, as a candidate for high office, to explain why hissupport for the Patriot Act changed. Every morning in our briefings, the President and I are remindedthat the terrorists are still with us, still active, still out there,the threat is still very real. The Patriot Act has been usedeffectively and responsibly. And it must be renewed in full.(Applause.) Senator Kerry has indicated a number of times that he believes thewar on terror is, in his words, "not primarily a military operation."He prefers to call it, "an intelligence gathering, law enforcement,public diplomacy effort." While all of those are important, obviously,we've found that that's not sufficient. I don't agree with SenatorKerry's analysis and neither does the President. Even if you take the Senator's view, however, opposing the PatriotAct makes no sense. If you believe the war on terror is primarily amatter of law enforcement, why in the world would you deny lawenforcement professionals the tools they need to fight terror? No doubt the Senator will try to offer a very nuanced explanationof this apparently glaring contradiction. But to the rest of us, theproblem is pretty clear, and it is part of a pattern. On issue afterissue -- from the war in Iraq, to funding the needs of our troops, tothe Patriot Act itself -- Senator Kerry has taken both sides on themost vital issues of our time. And that should make it a lot easierfor voters to decide which candidate for President they trust to fightand win the war on terror. (Applause.) The contrast between the candidates this November will be sharperthan at any time in recent years. And the stakes could hardly behigher. Over the next four years, the President will chart the courseof the war on terror and direct the effort at home to protectAmericans. In more than three years as President, George W. Bush has built anational security record of his own. America came to know thePresident after one of the worst days in our history. He saw Americathrough tragedy; he has taken the fight to the enemy; and under hisleadership, our country has once again led the armies of liberation --freeing millions of men, women and children from tyranny, and makingour nation and the world more secure. In this campaign, President Bush will draw many distinctionsbetween his vision for America's future and the vision of hisopponent. The election is still five months off, yet it's alreadyclear what one of the greatest differences will be: President Bushwill do whatever it takes to give our troops, our law enforcementagencies, our intelligence officers and our homeland security personnelevery tool and every resource they need to defend America. (Applause.) These are not times for leaders who shift with the political winds,saying one thing one day and another the next. We need aCommander-in-Chief of clear vision and resolve and that's just what wehave in the White House today. (Applause.) All Americans, regardless of political party, can be absolutelycertain that when George W. Bush makes a commitment, he keeps hisword. And all Americans can take pride in all that our nation hasachieved in this historic time. As the President has said, America didnot seek the challenges we have faced since September 11th, yet this isthe world as we find it. We will do our duty. We will see the causeof freedom through to a safer America and a more peaceful world. Andin that mission, we can count on the steady, strong, confidentleadership of President George W. Bush. Thank you very much. (Applause.) END 12:00 P.M. CDT Printer-Friendly Version Email this page to a friend IssuesBudget Management
Education
Energy
Health Care
Homeland Security
Hurricane Recovery
Immigration
Jobs & Economy
Medicare
National Security
Pandemic Flu
Patriot Act
Renewal in Iraq
Social Security
More Issues 2ff7e9595c
コメント