"CHINESE SHOPLIFTER IS SENT TO PRISON," Victoria Daily Times. December 23, 1913. Page 18.
----
Stole Bottle of Perfume From Spencer Store and Gets Two Months
----
There have been some complaints made to the police about petty pilfering in the stores during the Christmas rush, but nothing very extensive is being done, and there do not appear to be any professional shop-lifters at work.
Acting on information the police had received in regard to a Chinese, Detective Macdonald arrested So Kee as he came out of Spencer's about eight o'clock last night, following him across View street and arresting him on the other side. So Kee had in his hand a small parcel wrapped up, but a casual feeling of his clothes failed to reveal anything concealed.
Macdonald took his prisoner to the detective-office for more careful search. The door was locked and he had to reach for his keys. When the Chinese heard the keys jingle he began to struggle with the officer and proved to be a husky individual. Macdonald had to call in the assistance of a passing citizen to open the door for him.
In the struggle a bottle fell from the clothes of the man and broke on the pavement. When he had the man secured inside, Macdonald went out and found a twelve-ounce bottle which had contained perfume. In falling the corner had been knocked off the bottom and the contents had vanished, but the air carried scents of new-mown hay such as even the market building never knew before. The bottle was unwrapped and there was everything to indicate that it had not left Spencer's as a purchase.
Inquiry there showed that no sale had been made of the bottle, and today So Kee was accused of stealing it from David Spencer, Limited, pleading not guilty and being defended by J. S. Brandon.
Miss Mary Bell, assistant manager of the drug department, identified the bottle and her marks on it. The bottle was one from which perfume was retailed, and none of the clerks would have been able to sell it either whole or part filled without obtaining a price on it from the manager or herself. She was certain that the bottle had not been sold, as under the office system it would be impossible for this to take place without her knowledge, and a record being in existence.
There was nothing to be said for the defence, and So was sent to jail for two months.
Hey remember when Tumblr banned porn and everyone fled to Twitter and the internet by and large became that much more insufferable?
Yeah well, we’re about to get the sequel no one’s been waiting for
A recent lawsuit is calling into question the very law that makes user-generated content possible on the internet and it’s going before a bunch of old people who have no idea how the internet works.
If Section 230 gets repealed or modified, the internet as we know it will radically change forever. Content policing will be that much worse; and either the guidelines will be so restrictive it’ll squeeze the life out of their sites, or sites will close their doors all together by not being able to meet the moderation demand and not wanting to risk being liable.
Unlike SOPA way back in the day, this one is quietly flying under everyone’s radar so there’s no big pushback like last time, so there is a very real possibility this goes down in the worst way possible.
So
Yeah
Ya’ll may want to start saving your favorite content if you feel it’s going to go bye-bye
So tell me more about how women "manipulate the police and courts" and how "women lie about being abused and get believed and men get put in prison for 20 years over false accusations"
He set her on fire after she begged several police stations for help and nobody took her fears seriously
(Despite him having a history of violence, a history of mental health issues, and a court order telling him to stay away from her and her children, which he ignored, which are all warning signs that SHOULD have been listened to)
Tell me more about how totally innocent men get punished by this "unfair system"
star trek show that's an anthology series in which every episode is a different recognizable genre but in the context of a canon star trek culture like High School Drama on Vulcan, Police Procedural on Betazed, Breaking Bad on Ferenginar,
I cannot stop thinking about how Kevin and Neil are so certain that Andrew will protect them even though there is no evidence for that. What is Andrew supposed to do? What does he actually do?
I don't want to hate on the books. Like I said in a previous post, I liked the books because they scratched an itch. But there is just no evidence whatsoever that Andrew could even protect himself let alone anyone else, especially not from the yakuza and the like. Why do Kevin and Neil just assume Andrew could do anything at all to help them???
Wow, they're seriously making shoplifting a worse offence?
So you cry about whenever rich businesses lose some money, but you couldn't bat an eye whenever we the people are in poverty?
You're putting my mum through a process right now where she is losing alot of money AND you make her pay an income tax when she makes poverty level money.
We have to go to two government run places a week to be able to get food to survive.
I was caught shoplifting once and had to go to juvy, and now owe a fine of $240 dollars to my mother because you made her pay it to get me out of juvy.
And you're crying about big businesses losing money they're not even going to notice is gone in 2 days, just because they choose to take out their frustrations on other people?
Maybe those companies should shut their goddamn mouths and substitute the money with money they already fucking have than force us to make up for shoplifting. You're only villianising people who NEED to shoplift to survive by saying 'and it's because of these people that the prices on these items are rising to make up for the stolen stock'.
"CHARGE PIGEON THEFT." Montreal Gazette. December 12, 1913. Page 3.
---
Upon a warrant from the Police Court charging him with the theft of 21 pigeons from the shop of Arthur Rapelle at 33 St. Margaret street, Paul Corbin, 17 years of age, of 100 Palm street, was arrested by Detectives Kavanagh and Fouccault yesterday afternoon. The prisoner was locked up at headquarters to appear in the Arraignment Court this morning.
The Supreme Court handed down a decision on Wednesday which effectively gives Border Patrol agents who violate the Constitution total immunity from lawsuits seeking to hold them accountable.
Justice Clarence Thomas’s majority opinion in Egbert v. Boule, moreover, has implications that stretch far beyond the border. Egbert guts a seminal Supreme Court precedent, Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971), which established that federal law enforcement officers who violate the Constitution may be individually sued — and potentially be required to compensate their victims for their illegal actions.
Egbert is a severe blow to the broader project of police accountability. While it does not target lawsuits against state law enforcement officers who violate the Constitution, it all but eliminates the public’s ability to sue border patrol officers — and possibly all federal officers — who commit similar violations.
In fairness, Egbert does indicate that people who believe their rights were violated by federal law enforcement may file a grievance with the law enforcement agency that employs the officer who allegedly violated the Constitution. But such grievances will be investigated by other law enforcement officers, and no court or other agency can review a law enforcement officer’s decision to exonerate a fellow officer.
And, perhaps most importantly, Egbert most likely shuts down a civil rights plaintiffs’ ability to be compensated if their rights are violated.
the girlbossification of ruth bader ginsburg has to be one of the most just plain annoying aspects of white liberal feminism. like it's not as actively harmful as a lot of other shit obviously. but it is soooooo annoying. if I never see another notorious rbg tote bag as long as I live it will be too soon