Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

April 16th, 2016:

Saturday video break: Inside Out

From their second album, which was of course called “Volume 3”, the Traveling Wilburys:

Not bad, and a treat to see George Harrison again. They just weren’t quite as good without Roy Orbison, though.

And for a completely different song with the same name, here’s Phil Collins from his third album, which was not called “Volume 2”:

Collins went in a different direction stylistically with “No Jacket Required”, a direction that his subsequent work with Genesis emulated, but it still holds up all these years later. And who knew he played the piano? Nice live rendition of this song – not everything from the synth era translated well to the stage, but Collins managed it nicely.

It’s a conspiracy!

Oh, noes! Planned Parenthood is in cahoots with the Harris County DA! Run for your lives!

The anti-abortion activist accused of falsifying records to secretly videotape Planned Parenthood officials in Houston is accusing the Harris County district attorney’s office of illegally colluding with the nonprofit.

The allegations were raised in court documents filed Thursday seeking to dismiss the charge against David Robert Daleiden, of Davis, Calif.

[…]

On Thursday, his attorneys filed motions to quash the indictments, saying the Harris County grand jury that handed down the indictments was not properly empaneled.

“The DA’s office has chosen to wage a war on the pro-life movement,” said attorney Jared Woodfill. “We believe there is clear evidence of Planned Parenthood actually colluding with and pushing the District Attorney’s office to move forward with these indictments.”

At a press conference on the courthouse steps that Daleiden did not attend, Woodfill and attorney Terry Yates said the indictments are “fatally flawed.”

The motions filed to quash the felony charge is here, and for the misdemeanor charge is here. I’ve read through the first one, and with the usual reminder that I Am Not A Lawyer, it looks to me like the bulk of the issue being taken is with the grand jury being held over:

The investigation of Planned Parenthood was brought before the 232nd grand jury [in] September [of 2015].

However, at the close of the 2015 term, no action had been taken in the investigation of Planned Parenthood. A grand jury “hold over” order was drafted by the Harris County District Attorney’s office and presented to the 232rd Court for entry on December 16, 2015. (Exhibit “B”). However, in that order, the prosecutor failed to specifically state or articulate any specific individual or case that the grand jury was holding over to investigate. The order recites boilerplate language set forth in Section 19.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure; however, due to the lack of specificity required the order is deficient.

From there, they complain that evidence from the grand jury hearings was provided to lawyers for Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation, including video evidence that was supposed to be covered by a temporary restraining order, and that Daleiden’s lawyers were never notified that he had become a target of the investigation. They cite various mainstream media accounts published after Daleiden and Merritt were indicted as evidence of this.

I’ll leave it to the attorneys in attendance to comment on the claims made by Woodfill and Yates. My layman’s impression is that hold over grand juries are fairly routine – whether they need specific instructions about who or what is being investigated is not something I know – and as for the alleged collusion, I kind of have a hard time believing the lawyers involved, including the assistant DAs, would be that stupid if this was indeed something shady. I would also note that Tamara Tabo, who unlike me is a lawyer and who also unlike me opposes abortion, believes it is clear that Daleiden did indeed break the law. Which doesn’t mean that the indictments weren’t compromised and won’t be tossed, but it is worth keeping in mind. Woodfill and Yates aren’t arguing Daleiden isn’t guilty of anything, they’re arguing the process went bad. I can’t wait to see what the judge makes of this. The Trib, which supplied the defendant’s motions, and the Press have more.

HPD rolls out its body cameras

The first wave has been deployed.

The Houston Police Department handed out Thursday the first wave of 4,100 body cameras being distributed to all first-line officers over the next 12 to 18 months, initiating a new policy that will require officers to wear the cameras for all law-enforcement related activities.

About 200 officers – those on duty at Central Patrol – received their body cameras Thursday. Mayor Sylvester Turner joined Acting Police Chief Martha I. Montalvo, District Attorney Devon Anderson and several city council members at a press conference at Central Patrol to announce the new policy.

[…]

Under the plan, officers are required to wear the camera on their chest, so it is clearly visible to anyone interacting with law enforcement. They’re expected, according to HPD’s policy, to keep the devices in standby mode and then to activate them before arriving at any call, initiating a traffic stop, detaining or arresting someone, conducting a search, interviewing witnesses, or engaging in a pursuit, among other interactions. Officers are not permitted to turn the cameras on and off at their own discretion.

The footage will be downloaded and stored on a server at the station and transferred to a disaster recovery site. Video involving an incident classified as Class B or above will be retained for 10 years, or until the statute of limitations expires. For some crimes, including homicides, the statute never expires.

Class C traffic violations will see footage stored for one year. Informational cases, in which an officer interacts with a citizen but no crime is committed, will have footage stored for 180 days.

Right now, only first-line officers are receiving cameras, though the department hopes to extend the policy to officers in Investigations after the full rollout, Skillern said. Officers in the traffic enforcement division, who have a high volume of interactions with citizens, will receive cameras next. Then, it’s southeast patrol, followed by a different patrol group each month. The staggered distribution is meant to handle any training and technical issues.

Questions still remain about how the camera data will be stored and how it will be accessed. No one questions the utility of these things, though. Let’s see what they can do, and let’s make sure that any questions that arise get answered in a way that promotes transparency. The Press has more.

Meet the toucan light

The first of its kind in Houston, though maybe not the last.

Not that kind of toucan

The new traffic signal suspended above Appel at Yale and Seventh is a first for Texas, but also an adjustment for residents – some of whom are unsure of its benefit.

Called a toucan, as in “two can go,” the signal gives pedestrians and bicyclists a red-yellow-green signal and stops vehicular traffic with a traffic light at the touch of a button. In other spots around Houston, pedestrians can activate walk signs or flashing red lights. Cyclists along Lamar receive a special traffic light along the street’s green cycle path.

The toucan takes the signal to another level, said Jeff Weatherford, deputy director of Houston Public Works, who oversees traffic management.

“The (traffic) volumes on 7th are not really there,” he said. “It will never meet the warrants for a regular traffic signal.”

However, the trail – often bustling with joggers and cyclists and strollers – has enough demand to command its own green lights to stop traffic. Trail users can activate the signal with a button, similar to pedestrian crossings at major intersections. Drivers stop as they would in any other traffic signal circumstance.

“It’s a traffic signal to them, no difference at all,” Weatherford said.

The timing is set to give pedestrians time to cross the street. As trail use increases in various spots around Houston, Weatherford said the toucan signals could be installed in other spots where practical and when funding allows it.

[…]

Trammell Crow Residential, developers of two apartment buildings along Yale near the trail, paid for the toucan’s analysis and construction, estimated to cost between $150,000 and $200,000, said Ben Johnson with Trammell Crow.

The company agreed to pay for the signal during discussions with residents skeptical about the developments, which are expected to increase traffic on Yale.

The city will pay for maintenance and operations, including the cost of electricity to operate the signals.

The trail’s new location, however, has alarmed some. To line up the signal with Seventh, a requirement of state traffic codes, the trail curves headed east and deposits cyclists and pedestrians on the east side of Seventh into a median installed in the middle of the street.

The center location is less safe, said Shirley Summers, as she pushed her daughter Molly, 2, in a stroller.

“Cars turning right can’t see where I’m going,” she said last week.

I’m glad to see this, because crossing Yale at that location is indeed scary – traffic is heavy, there’s four lanes of it, and pretty much nobody pays attention to the speed limit. If this works as hoped, I’d suggest the city look at installing another one of these on 11th Street where the trail that runs along Nicholson crosses, because it’s the exact same situation. A word of warning, via a comment on Facebook, is that cars apparently don’t always respect the light at the head of the TC Jester trail. Having now driven past this light on Yale headed northbound, I can tell you that it’s actually kind of hard to see the light as you approach it from 6th Street. There’s a tree on the east side of Yale that blocks your view of the light (or at least, it blocked mine) until you’re quite close to it. Might be a good idea for the city to look into that, and also for HPD to have some traffic enforcement there in the early going. I sure hope this does what it promises to do. What do you think?

Sid Miller’s spokesperson jumps ship

Who could blame her?

Sid Miller

The top spokeswoman for Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller resigned Monday, citing a “tremendous lack of communication” at the agency.

The spokeswoman, Lucy Nashed, a former aide to then-Gov. Rick Perry, said she was leaving after just five months on the job without having another position lined up.

“I have appreciated the opportunity to serve the Texas Department of Agriculture and the Texas agriculture industry, but I’m leaving to pursue other opportunities,” Nashed said. “It’s clear that there’s a tremendous lack of communication at the TDA, which makes it difficult for me as a (communications) person to do my job.”

No replacement has been chosen, according to the agency.

[…]

Perhaps most significantly for a communications officer, the department twice withheld public records about the Oklahoma trip.

The agency also gave differing explanations about the Mississippi trip: Nashed told the Chronicle (and the Texas Tribune) that the airplane travel mistakenly was booked using an agency credit card, but Miller acknowledged to the Chronicle that it was done intentionally because he hoped to schedule a work-related meeting during the trip.

See here for some background. I meant to run this earlier in the week, but was overwhelmed by events. It’s tempting to feel sorry for Lucy Nashed, who must have felt under siege this past month, but she’s a big girl who’s been around Republican politics for awhile and surely must have known who and what Sid Miller is. It was hardly a secret when he was in the Lege, after all. Better luck with the next gig, but maybe do a little due diligence this time.