Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Lawsuit challenges unconstitutional San Diego Police Department media policies


Attorney Rachel Baird has filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of American News and Information Services, American News owner Ed Peruta, and James "J.C." Playford defending the First Amendment right to film police activity on public property.  The lawsuit challenges unconstitutional behavior and policies of the San Diego Police Department, which has repeatedly violated the First Amendment rights of J.C. Playford, a freelance photojournalist and member of the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) currently employed by American News.

Mr. Playford has been arrested four times since 2010 for attempting to film police activity in San Diego County.  The San Diego Police Department has also revoked his police-issued press credential, in accordance with a policy by which the Department claims complete authority in determining who qualifies as a member of the news media.  Moreover, the SDPD refuses to recognize media credentials issued by private organizations such as American News, or even by more established organizations such as Fox News.

This policy is entirely inconsistent with recent Circuit Court decisions regarding the First Amendment right to film police activity on public property.  Most notably, the First Circuit ruled in 2011 that “the public’s right of access to information is coextensive with that of the press.”  Though the issue has not yet been decided upon at the Supreme Court, the Ninth and Eleventh Circuits, along with multiple federal district courts, have issued rulings consistent with the First Circuit.  The proliferation of cell phones with video capability, along with ubiquitous internet access and the instant publishing capabilities of bloggers, has made every citizen a potential member of the news media in today’s society.

The filing of the complaint coincided with an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) letter written to SDPD Chief William Lansdowne expressing strong concern about the Department’s interference with First Amendment rights.  Moreover, the NPPA Advocacy Committee has posted a blog entry about the pending litigation, which has also been chronicled in a recent article in the Courthouse News.

The Playford complaint seeks a declaratory judgment establishing new guidelines for San Diego law enforcement that will respect the First Amendment rights of citizen journalists, along with compensatory and punitive damages for violations already committed.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Sexual abuse uncovered at Connecticut Halfway House


Attorney Rachel Baird has filed a lawsuit on behalf of inmates who were sexually abused, harassed, and threatened during their time at a halfway house in Bloomfield, CT.  The sexual abuse was committed by employees of Community Solutions, Inc. (CSI), a nonprofit corporation under contract with the state to provide residential services for inmates.

Specifically, Program Director Sean Ball and general staff member Frederick Lester sexually molested and harassed inmates.  Ball and Lester also threatened inmates with disciplinary action, including returning inmates to prison, if they resisted sexual advances or reported the abuses.

The abuse problems at the halfway house were exacerbated by the indifference and slow response of the Department of Corrections (DOC) and the Department of Public Safety in investigating the matter.  In addition, the Town of Bloomfield approved the continuation and expansion of operations at the halfway house without adequately conducting biannual reviews.

The following is a timeline of the events leading up to the lawsuit, with links to corroborating documentation.  Note that more than seven months passed between the first formal inmate complaint and when an investigator finally got around to interviewing that inmate.

TIMELINE

July 9, 2007:  Inmate at Connecticut halfway house reports and makes a written statement in the company of parole officer Carolynn Lindley that Program Director Sean Ball had been inappropriate.  Manager of Parole and Community Services Residential Unit Tom O’Connor suggested to Randy Baren, Director of Parole and Community Services, that further investigation be taken.

October 18, 2007:  Inmate makes further complaints to Carolyn Lindley, which finally prompts her to draft an incident report.  The report mentions inappropriate behavior by Program Director Sean Ball and general staff member Frederick Lester, including:
·     Program Director Sean Ball inappropriately touching inmates, insisting on being called “Auntie Shawny,” and visiting the halfway house at irregular hours
·     Staff members showing favoritism toward certain inmates by allowing them to possess cell phones and pornographic materials, which would otherwise be considered contraband
·     Abuse of power by staff member Frederick Lester, who is specifically identified as a sexual predator.

November 17, 2007:  The same inmate provides an Inmate Request form to DOC Deputy Warden Monica Rinaldi stating that he had been sexually harassed.  Copies of the report are forwarded to multiple administrators, including DOC Director of Parole and Community Services Randy Braren.

November 23, 2007:  Theresa Lantz, then Commissioner, State Department of Corrections, informs Michael Lajoie, Director of Security, about possible “undue familiarity” involving staff and inmates at the halfway house.  The report states that Lantz is directing an investigation into the matter.

December 5, 2007:  Captain Brian Zawilinski of the DOC is assigned to investigate the matter.

January 16, 2008:  A letter from a different inmate reports that Frederick Lester asked for urine samples (despite no test kits being available) and groped inmates’ genitals and buttocks during pat downs and pocket searches.

January 18, 2008:  A letter from another inmate indicates that between November 1, 2007 and December 21, 2007, he was sexually harassed and fondled by Frederick Lester at the halfway house, and that Director Ball was aware of Lester’s behavior but did nothing about it.  Parole Officer Carolyn Lindley informs the inmate that Ball and Lester had been named before under similar circumstances of sexual misconduct.

January 24, 2008:  Frederick Lester terminated from employment at halfway house.

February 15, 2008:  DOC Captain Brian Zawilinski finally follows up on his investigation and interviews the inmate who originally reported sexual harassment at the halfway house.

May 20, 2008:  Zawilinski interviews staff member at halfway house.  Staff member reveals that Sean Ball had pictures of the genitalia of inmates on his cell phone, and that Ball would destroy disciplinary reports for inmates who acquiesced to Ball’s sexual demands.

June 3, 2008:  Zawilinski interviews staff member who admits that the halfway house had no organization or leadership, that inmates used drugs and alcohol, and that Sean Ball would go absent from the Center with an inmate for two to three hours daily.

June 30, 2008:  Program Director Sean Ball terminated from employment.

August 25, 2008:  Captain Zawilinski submits his Investigation Report to Commissioner Theresa Lantz.

March 10, 2009:  Case is deemed complete by Captain Zawilinski.  Commissioner Lantz makes recommendations for DOC halfway houses and transitional facilities.  The recommendations fail to even mention sexual abuse, and do not include specific steps designed to investigate the extent of abuse in the system, prevent future abuses, or address the needs of victims.  The document even belittles the concerns of abuse victims with a reference to “inmate con games.”

May 6, 2010:  Associate Press reports that former deputy warden Neal Kearney was charged with sexually assaulting an inmate at the Bergin Correctional Institution in Storrs, CT.  Ironically, Neal Kearney was the officer who escorted Sean Ball from the halfway house after his termination as Program Director.  Kearney later pleads guilty to second-degree sexual assault.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

State Police attempt to destroy public records pertaining to illegal collection of fees


Attorney Rachel M. Baird is representing American News in a Freedom of Information (FOI) complaint against the State Police Bureau of Identification (SPBI).  The complaint alleges that former SPBI Office Supervisor Cynthia Powell attempted to destroy certain documents pertaining to an ongoing investigation into the illegal collection of $50.00 fees imposed on pistol permit applicants for state criminal history records checks.

Since October 2009, local issuing authorities in Connecticut have required applicants for pistol permits to pay a $50.00 fee for state criminal history records checks.  But Connecticut General Statutes § 29-11(c) waives the fees for state criminal history records checks when a state criminal history records check is requested by a federal, state, or local municipality.  Therefore, applicants are forced to pay a fee for a service that local authorities are legally entitled to receive for free.

The addition of the $50.00 fee to the pistol permit process has not been approved by the Connecticut General assembly or any other lawful authority, and thus imposes taxation without representation upon individuals applying for pistol permits in the state of Connecticut.

Since the enactment of the fee in October 2009, local authorities have unlawfully collected over half a million dollars from pistol permit applicants.  Attorney Baird has sent cease and desist letters to those authorities demanding that they stop charging the illegal fees.

American News has been investigating this issue, along with the problem of a serious backlog at the SPBI that has caused delays in the processing of pistol permit applications.  Information obtained via the Freedom of Information Act recently revealed an attempt by the state police to destroy certain documents pertaining to this investigation.  The Office Supervisor who requested the destruction of the documents has since been removed from her position.

The following is a timeline of events pertaining to the illegal collection of fees and the attempt to destroy public records that should have been obtainable under the Freedom of Information Act, with links to corroborating documents.  Though the request to destroy the documents is dated one day earlier than the FOIA request, the actual authorization of the request should have been stayed based on the pending inquiry.  In the meantime, the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) attempted to justify the delay as a programming issue, when in fact the documents were awaiting authorization for disposal.

TIMELINE

October 1, 2009:  The Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) amends its Pistol Permit Application to require that an applicant submit a $50.00 fee to the issuing authority for the state criminal history records check.

April 30, 2010:  The Department of Public Safety formally declares that an application for a pistol permit is incomplete and will not be processed without the statutory $50.00 fee for the state criminal history record check.

February 28, 2012:  DESPP Chief of Staff Steven Spellman testifies at a Public Safety Committee Hearing about a backlog at the State Police Bureau of Identification (SPBI).  This backlog is causing prolonged delays in the processing of pistol permit applications.

March 5, 2012:  SPBI Office Supervisor Cynthia Powell requests the destruction of ­­­­public records pertaining to the investigation into the collection of improper fees.  On the authorization form, Ms. Powell certifies that the records meet retention requirements and do not “pertain to any pending case, claim, or action.”

March 6, 2012:  Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), American News requests access to data regarding the process of obtaining state criminal histories from SPBI.

March 9, 2012:  Cynthia Powell requests disposal of additional “reports and criminal records” pertaining to the investigation.


March 23, 2012:  Destruction of documents is approved by the Connecticut State Library Office of the Public Records Administrator.

March 28, 2012:  Data is purged from computer systems.

April 2, 2012:  Complaint lodged with Freedom of Information Commission.

April 6, 2012:  Cynthia Powell is replaced as Office Supervisor of SPBI.

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Did State Employees Use Undersecretary Lawlor's Personal Email Address To Evade Public Disclosure of Problems at the State Police DNA Laboratory?

In July 2011, American News and Information Services Inc. ("American News") received information that a state court judge, at the close of evidence in a hearing held at the superior court in Enfield, had questioned the competency and veracity of state police personnel assigned to the Computer Crimes and Electronic Evidence Laboratory.  The three witnesses at the July 18, 2011, hearing were (1) Richard Alexandre, the current state police Forensic Sciences Director, (2) Michael Hofbauer, the Commander of the Computer Crimes and Electronic Evidence Laboratory, and (3) state trooper Samantha McCord. The Honorable Michael R. Dannehy, after hearing the three witnesses testify, stated:   
I'm appalled by the testimony, frankly, and I find serious questions about the credibility of the witnesses here as to how you handle information from the courts.  There's two ways of looking at it. Either you have incredibly sloppy protocol which, being an embarrassment -- an embarrassment to the state police or you have total disdain for Court orders. Either way you don't look too good. Frankly, if you testify in front of me again, I'll have serious reservations about your credibility as witnesses and do -- I intend to have a transcript of these proceedings made, and I'm going to order -- I am going to order that the clerk distribute it to the commissioner of public safety and to the supervisor of your unit so that travesties like this don't happen.
July 18, 2011, Hearing Transcript at 32-33. Additional information  from a confidential and reliable source led to a July 21, 2011, request by American News for records of external audits conducted at the state police laboratory.  The state police disclosed on August 8, 2011, to American News president Edward A. Peruta, following a six-hour wait at state police headquarters in Middletown, the reports of two audits conducted on July 11-13, 2011.  The Hartford Courant received the audits from American News on August 8, 2011, and published a story on August 9, 2011.  Governor Dannel P. Malloy formed a seventeen member panel (Crime Lab Working Group) on August 11, 2011, to address the problems at the state police DNA laboratory cited in the two federal audits.  Governor Malloy appointed Office of Policy and Management Undersecretary Michael P. Lawlor "to lead a team of key stakeholders and experts to develop both a short- and long-term strategy to bolster our state crime lab’s ability to deal with an unprecedented increase in its workload." 

A confidential and reliable source informed American News after a March 15, 2012, meeting of the Crime Lab Working Group that Undersecretary Lawlor had distributed his personal email address at the March 15, 2012, meeting to avoid disclosure of communications about the state police DNA laboratory from requests made pursuant to the state Freedom of Information Act.  This information led to requests from American News dated March 26, 2012, and March 28, 2012, for emails sent or received by Undersecretary Lawlor at a personal email address.

Emails to Undersecretary Lawlor at mlawlor99@gmail.com from two Forensic Science Examiners at the state DNA Laboratory were disclosed to American News on May 30, 2012, revealing inside opinions and observations about the demise of the state DNA laboratory and "things that go behind the scenes[,] including that people will lie to get ahead[,] ... not just about the proficiency issue that caused the lapse in accreditation."

CGAIN intends to submit a demand to the Governor for a full investigation and inquiry into the practice by  state employees of using personal emails and devices to send and receive emails containing information disclosable under the Freedom of Information Act to avoid disclosure of the information to the public.

A Timeline of the events from July 11, 2011, though May 30, 2012, with relevant and corroborating documents follows: 

TIMELINE 
July 21, 2011:  American News submits a Freedom of Information request to the state police for "records related to FBI audits of the DNA unit that have been received or generated since January 1, 2008" and "all court transcripts in the possession of the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection ... where the Connecticut State Police Computer crime laboratory or personnel assigned to same are the subject of criticism by a Federal or State Judge." 
July 21, 2012:  State police attorney Thomas Hatfield assigns case number 11-541 to American News' July 21, 2012, FOIA request.
August 8, 2011:  State police major William Podgorski provides state police attorney Thomas Hatfield external audits conducted of the state police DNA laboratory.
August 8, 2011State police attorney Thomas Hatfield discloses to American News the National Forensic Science Technology Center External DNA Audit of Connecticut State Police Laboratory, Report on Compliance With The FBI Director's Quality Assurance Standards For Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories, performed July 11-13, 2011, and the National Forensic Science Technology Center External DNA Audit of Connecticut State Police Laboratory, Report on Compliance With The FBI Director's Quality Assurance Standards For DNA Databasing Laboratories, performed July 11-13, 2011, which contain findings that the state police laboratory does not have or follow a documented evidence control system to ensure the integrity of physical evidence (Standard 7.1 at page 23) and laboratory personnel do not have the education, training, and experience commensurate with the testimony and evidence presented. (Standard 5.1 at page 10), respectively.
August 8, 2011:  American News discloses the audits to The Hartford Courant.                                   
August 9, 2011The Hartford Courant, "Feds Criticize State Police Crime Lab Operations," Josh Kovner.  "'The audits,' said Michael Lawlor, chief of criminal justice planning for Gov. Dannel Malloy, 'fit into a larger picture.  There are serious problems at the state crime lab.  A lot has to do with understaffing but there may be other problems as well.'"
August 11, 2011The Hartford Courant, "Malloy Appoints Panel to Fix State Crime Lab Woes," Josh Kovner.  Governor Malloy appoints a seventeen (17) member panel of experts and legislative leaders (Crime Lab Working Group) to develop a plan to reduce the backlogs at the DNA laboratory after the  audits cite "weaknesses in supervision, reporting of case results, evidence control, data security, quality assurance, adherence to standard operating procedures for DNA analyses and validation techniques for DNA test results, among other issues."
March 15, 2012Meeting of the Crime Lab Working Group at Connecticut State Police Lab.  Office of Policy and Management Undersecretary Lawlor provides his personal email address, mlawlor99@gmail.com, to the Crime Lab Working Group and state police employees assigned to the Connecticut State Police Laboratory in attendance. 
March 16, 2012:  State laboratory Forensic Science Examiner in attendance at the March 15, 2012, Crime Lab Working Group meeting emails Undersecretary Lawlor at mlawlor99@gmail.com requesting a confidential meeting, asking Undersecretary Lawlor to maintain confidentiality, and informing Undersecretary Lawlor that "people will lie to get ahead and it's not right" stating further that the reference to lying was not limited to "the proficiency issue that caused our lapse in accreditation."
March 26, 2012:  State laboratory Forensic Science Examiner in attendance at the March 15, 2012, Crime Lab Working Group Meeting emails Undersecretary Lawlor at mlawlor99@gmail.com to provide Undersecretary Lawlor with a "theory of the demise of the Lab" and what he believes "can be done to get the lab back on some solid ground for the future." 
March 26, 2012Email from American News to state police attorney Thomas Hatfield copying Undersecretary Lawlor and the Office of the Attorney General indicating that American News has received "credible information from a confidential source that attempts are being made in the Malloy administration to conceal public information from FOI mandates."
March 26, 2012Email from Undersecretary Lawlor to American News denying he is "aware of any such attempt to conceal public information."
March 26, 2012: Freedom of Information Act request by American News for emails to or from Undersecretary Lawlor using any email address(es) other than a “ct.gov email” address containing information subject to FOIA disclosure.
March 27, 2012Email from Undersecretary Lawlor responding to March 26, 2012, FOIA request.
March 27, 2012Correspondence from American News to Undersecretary Lawlor reiterating March 26, 2012, FOIA request.
March 28, 2012Resubmission of Freedom of Information Act request by American News for emails to or from Undersecretary Lawlor using any email address(es) other than a “ct.gov email” address containing information subject to FOIA disclosure.
March 28, 2012Letter from Nancy McLean, Executive Secretary of Legal Affairs, Office of Policy and Management, to Attorney Rachel M. Baird, acknowledging receipt of Freedom of Information Request to Undersecretary Lawlor for Emails Disclosable under the Freedom of Information Act.
May 30, 2012: Disclosure of emails received by Undersecretary Lawlor at his mlawlor99@gmail.com address on March 16, 2012, and March 26, 2012.

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

CGAIN

What is CGAIN?
The Corporate and Governmental Accountability and Intelligence Network (CGAIN) operates as an integral stand-alone and support unit within the Torrington-based law practice of Attorney Rachel M. Baird. The goal of the unit is to hold corporations and  government agencies accountable when their failure to follow the law negatively impacts individual rights. The last resort of CGAIN is formal litigation in state and federal courts.
History of CGAIN
Since opening her law practice in 2001, Attorney Baird has addressed corporate and governmental accountability issues as they have come to her attention in the course of representing clients. CGAIN's sole source of outside compensation is by award of fees through settlement or judgment in formal litigation.  CGAIN has worked closely with individuals who support its mission. In referring to the work of Attorney Baird, the intention is to include the collective work of those who have contributed to CGAIN including long-time freedom of information and government accountability advocate Edward A. Peruta.  CGAIN is pending incorporation and is not a non-profit organization.
Cases
The focus of CGAIN this summer will be on five matters, including:
1.      An action against the one-hundred-sixty-nine Connecticut municipalities and the Connecticut state police challenging an unauthorized fee of $50.00 charged to applicants for temporary state permits to carry pistols and revolvers. A Notice and Demand to Cease and Desist was served on every temporary state permit local issuing authority in April 2012 and Attorney Baird expects to file an action  in federal court during the Summer 2012.  The Connecticut state police responded by letter dated May 8, 2012, to each of the municipalities.
2.     A First Amendment case arising in the County of San Diego involving the right to record police officer activity in gathering news brought on behalf of California resident JC Playford and American News and Information Services, a Connecticut corporation.
3.     A nation-wide class action against Sunoco for charging improper fees for gas to business card holders.
4.     An action against the Police Officer Standards and Training Council for failure to adequately train Connecticut law enforcement officers in firearms laws to the detriment of Connecticut state permit holders. 
5.     Federal civil rights actions filed on behalf of former inmates of the state Department of Correction alleging sexual assaults and other behaviors that victimized residents of a half-way house located in Bloomfield, Connecticut, and operated by state contractor Community Solutions, Inc.

The Police Officer Standards and Training Council: A Failure to Train

Summary of the Case
James F. Goldberg entered a Chili's Restaurant in Glastonbury, Connecticut, on the night of June 21, 2007, to place an order for food to take with him from the restaurant. The Chili's manager, Laura Smith, noticed that Mr. Goldberg carried a handgun into the restaurant on his side secured in a holster. Ms. Smith called 911 emergency dispatch and inquired whether it is legal in Connecticut to openly carried a firearm. Ms. Smith did not complain during the call that Mr. Goldberg acted in a threatening manner and no complaint followed from Ms. Smith or anyone else that Mr. Goldberg acted in a threatening manner. Mr. Goldberg presented a valid state permit to carry pistols and revolvers upon the arrival of the responding police officers. The officers seized Mr. Goldberg's handgun and state permit and and placed Mr. Goldberg under arrest for the criminal offense of Breach of Peace in the Second Degree. A summary of the issues and the facts of this case are described further in a Request for Assistance submitted to the National Rifle Association Civil Rights Defense Fund. The NRA responded to Mr. Goldberg's request on May 9, 2011.

Federal Trial Court Decision
Mr. Goldberg filed a federal complaint in 2007 alleging violations of his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. As a result of a September 17, 2010, decision by federal district court Judge Stefan R. Underhill finding that Mr. Goldberg's mere act of lawfully bearing a pistol in a public place constituted per se reckless conduct, the government was granted apparent authority in Connecticut to detain and arrest individuals based on lawful conduct when that conduct involves the exercise of a Second Amendment right. This exception created by the district court and termed in Mr. Goldberg’s Brief to the appellate court as the “Goldberg exception” to the Fourth Amendment grants unfettered authority to the government to detain any individual exercising his or her Second Amendment right to bear arms absent any indicia of criminal conduct. Judge Underhill issued his decision from the bench on September 17, 2010, following oral argument by the parties.

Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals
Mr. Goldberg presented two issues in his appeal: (1) Was the investigatory stop conducted by the three Town of Glastonbury police officers justified at its inception and, if so, reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place? (2) Did the three police officers have probable cause to arrest Mr. Goldberg? Mr. Goldberg filed a Brief and Special Appendix with Volume One and Two of a Joint Appendix on March 24, 2011. The Joint Appendix contains three-hundred-thirty pages of documents relevant to the appeal including police reports and deposition transcripts. Oral argument was held on November 21, 2011, in New York before The Honorable Jon O. Newman, The Honorable Ralph K. Winter, and The Honorable Robert A. Katzmann. The appellate court issued a decision on December 13, 2011, affirming the federal district court opinion of Judge Underhill. In the appellate decision, the court did not decide whether there was probable cause to arrest Mr. Goldberg because it concluded that the Town of Glastonbury and its officers were entitled to qualified immunity. According to the court, "[o]n these facts, and given the lack of settled Connecticut law on the issue, we conclude that reasonable officers could, at minimum, disagree on whether there was probable cause to arrest plaintiff for breach of the peace in the second degree, and accordingly the district court's qualified immunity determination ought to be affirmed."

Peruta v. Commissioner of Public Safety
In a state court case, Edward A. Peruta had attempted prior to the December 13, 2011, federal appellate court decision in Goldberg v. Glastonbury to settle the law in Connecticut by asking: "Whether a Connecticut state permit holder has the right in Connecticut to carry a pistol or revolver openly, without concealing the pistol or revolver, in any location where carrying a pistol or revolver is not otherwise prohibited by the premises' owner or by law." The appellate court decided on May 24, 2011, that "depending on the specific circumstances, a person who openly carries a pistol conceivably may be subject to arrest for violating several statutes, even if section 29-35 does not prohibit a permit holder from carrying a pistol openly." The court avoided the issue by placing the burden upon Mr. Peruta to supply the Department of Public Safety with specific factual circumstances to determine if the open carry of a firearm is lawful.

Conclusion
In Goldberg v. Glastonbury the federal appellate court determined that the law in Connecticut is not settled. This resulted in a finding that the Glastonbury police officers would not be held liable for any infringement of Mr. Goldberg's Fourth Amendment rights. In Peruta v. Commissioner of Public Safety state appellate court placed the burden on individuals such as Mr. Peruta to use private funding and resources to settle the law by thinking of every conceivable set of circumstances under which an individual may engage in the lawful open carry of a handgun and then filing a petition to the Department of Public Safety requesting a ruling on whether or not under the circumstances described an individual would be placed under arrest.  The Torrington Police Department and the Wethersfield Police Department have issued training memorandums addessing and clarifying this issue since it was raised in Goldberg v. Glastonbury.

But the same cannot be said for the Police Officer Standards and Training Council (POST Council). As recently as April 12, 2012, a Norwalk Police Department officer and 2010 graduate of the training academy, testified that Connecticut state statutes specify a permit that allows for only the concealed carry of a pistol or revolver by permit holders while open carry requires no permit at all. As long as the law remains unsettled and police officers remain untaught and confused, arrested individuals bear the burden of the unsettled law. Courts will find, as the courts did in Goldberg v. Glastonbury, that the unsettled status of the law provides an excuse for law enforcement, relieving law enforcement of accountability for violations of individual rights.