Many people use Craigslist to get good deals from other people within their community. But, many people are also using the website to target potential robbery victims. According to the Charlotte Observer, local law enforcement is accustomed to seeing at least one Craigslist-related crime per month in the area.

How the crimes unfold vary, but often the suspect will offer something for sale. When he finds a buyer, he will meet the buyer, who is carrying cash for the sale, and rob him. Usually the item offered for sale is an electronic gadget like a phone or a iPad, for example, something of relatively high value.

In a recent case, a man was robbed at his own home after agreeing to let the Craigslist seller of a car bring the supposed car to his home for him to look at. His roommate was also robbed when the suspects came to the door armed and demanding the money.

Other cases involve a seller being contacted by a potential buyer. The buyer sends a check for the item, but makes the check out for more than the selling price. Feigning a mistake when the seller receives the case, the seller is asked to wire the other party the difference, not realizing the original check was bad and they will only be losing the money they wire.

Craigslist posts warnings all over their site about the dangers of dealing with strangers met online. They make common sense recommendations like only meeting in public and when you have someone else with you. For those that arrange meetings at their home, they aren’t only opening themselves up to robbery, but burglary of their home as well as other potential crimes.

Craigslist shoppers and buyers alike should be cautious and be suspicious. If something doesn’t seem right about an ad or the arrangements the other party is trying to make, it should send up red flags. Many see Craigslist ads as an easy opportunity to make some money. But they don’t realize that they will likely be caught and spend years behind bars for that little bit of money.

Robbery is a serious charge with serious penalties. Even if it is not armed robbery, you are facing felony charges and the likelihood of prison time for a violent offense.

If you are charged with robbery, whether you are guilty or not, we may be able to help. Contact us today for a free consultation on your case.

Marcus Reymond Robinson is a convicted murderer waiting out the remainder of his days on North Carolina’s death row. He hopes his time there will be limited, not by execution but by a commutation to a life sentence. He is the first to challenge his death sentence on the basis of racial bias in jury selection, something that’s possible in N.C. due to the Racial Justice Act.

The Racial Justice Act was passed in 2009 and was designed to ensure racism played no part in the death sentence of any offender in that state. But Robinson’s case is the first to be heard under the Act and has caught the national attention of criminal justice experts, lawmakers, and death penalty advocates and opponents alike.

Opponents of the act say it’s a back door to repealing the death penalty; they are also critical of how the cases are being challenged.

So far more than 150 inmates on North Carolina’s death row have petitioned the state for hearings under the Racial Justice Act.

The Act allows inmates to cite “statistical patterns in statewide jury selection—rather than focusing solely on their own cases—to argue that their jury selection or sentencing was racially biased.”

Those statistics are based off of a University of Michigan study that looked at the role of race in jury selection in N.C. death row cases. The study found that prosecutors eliminated blacks from the jury pool twice as often as non-black jurors. In Robinson’s case, blacks were eliminated from the pool 3.5 times the rate of white potential jurors.

Many critics of the Act are furious that defendants are allowed to cite statistics unrelated to their own trial to prove that their case may have been tainted by racial biases in jury selection.

“This whole study is a sham,” says the Robinson’s victim’s mother. “What does all this stuff from other cases have to do with this case?”

Lawmakers sought to repeal the Racial Justice Act in 2011 but their measure was vetoed by Governor Beverly Perdue who said, “It is simply unacceptable for racial prejudice to play a role in the imposition of the death penalty in North Carolina.”

Around the country, experts are eyeing the case as it could pave the way for similar laws in other states. Twenty other states have conducted studies similar to the University of Michigan study that prompted the law in North Carolina, and they’ve likely had similar findings.

Racial bias can play a role in cases far smaller than death penalty cases. Proving such bias, however, is another matter. Sometimes it’s not until the case is resolved and going through the appeals process that such allegations are treated seriously.

The Racial Justice Act is only two years old and it may be in its final days. The state Senate “rewrote” the law this week and it is now in the hands of Governor Bev Perdue who has released no indication of whether or not she will sign it. Perdue signed the act into law in 2009, but then so did the Senate.

The law sought to ensure there was no racial bias in determining who would be sentenced to death in the state. It allows for appeals of a death sentence when there was racial bias present, this after research showed a murderer was far more likely to get the death penalty if the victim was white.

Since its passage, 154 out of 157 death row inmates in the state have sought hearings under the new law. While no one can realistically believe all 154 of these cases were based in racial bias, it would seem an injustice to allow even one biased sentence to be carried out.

The details on the rewrite aren’t clear and it seems that some are downplaying the changes. “This is not a repeal of the Racial Justice Act,” says Senator Thom Goolsby (R-Wilmington).  “It’s a reform, a modification.”

Senator Josh Stein (D-Raleigh), on the other hand, says, “This is an utter and total repeal.”

Opponents of the law believe that it does nothing to ensure fair application of the death sentence and is instead a backdoor attempt at an eventual repeal of the death penalty. Goolsby said the act had “very little to do with race or justice.” Calling it instead a “Trojan horse” used by people opposed to the death penalty.

Before the Senate voted on the changes, they heard from victims’ families, prosecutors, and people who had been wrongly accused of crimes. One man, an African American, spoke about being one of 7 death row inmates exonerated in North Carolina. “I was one vote away from the death penalty,” he said. “I had 11 whites and one black on my jury. If you think that race did not play a factor in my case, then you’re not living here in North Carolina.”

Because research has shown racial disparities in the administration of the death penalty, it seems only just that there be safeguards in place to ensure people aren’t treated unfairly because of their race, even when they are convicted of murder. On the other hand, it’s understandable that there may have been some loopholes in the original legislation if nearly all inmates on death row are filing for hearings.

It seems as if we won’t know the true scope of the changes until they are signed into law. If Perdue passes on the changes, the first case under the Racial Justice Act will be heard in January in Cumberland County.

Fair treatment in the criminal courts is a serious matter. It is the job of your defense attorney to do everything possible to ensure your rights are protected throughout the process. If you are accused of a criminal offense, contact our offices today to discuss your case.

Charlotte will play host to the Democratic National Convention next year. And with the promise of thousands of extra people in the city, the police are getting a refresher course on crowd control and the use of pepper spray.

According to the Charlotte Observer, Charlotte police policy is that pepper spray (also known as OC or oleoresin capsicum), should only be used when there is an “imminent threat” to the safety of the officer or another. In other words, it can’t be used solely to control an otherwise nonviolent crowd.

The issue of pepper spray policy is particularly worthy of interest given the controversial use of it in the Occupy movement across the country. The photo of a University of California, Davis police officer showering a group of seated and definitely not-resisting protestors with the spray has been cemented into history—with many alternate (and humorous) versions making the rounds too.

Police in New York, Oakland, Seattle, and Denver have all been criticized of their use of pepper spray on protestors, but none so much as the UC-Davis officer, who is now on leave during an investigation.

Charlotte Police Captain Jeff Estes says that the city’s policy would prohibit similar action here, even if protestors refused to disperse in a nonviolent manner. “Their refusal would have to include ‘violence or riotous behavior.”

More than likely, the Democratic National Convention will result in some arrests, as they are notorious for drawing crowds of protestors who feel very strongly about their causes. But because the DNC will also draw a crowd of about 15,000 members of the media, the local police will want to be sure that they act with professionalism and the law on their side or risk worldwide attention for any questionable arrests and treatment.

In 2008, pepper spray was used both at the DNC in Denver and the GOP convention in St. Paul. St. Paul saw 283 people arrested after the police used projectiles, pepper spray, and tear gas to disperse a crowd.

The police have a difficult task to keep the peace and enforce criminal law violations without infringing on the constitutional rights of the people. As Americans, we have the right to peacefully assemble and the DNC and GOP gatherings provide a perfect venue. But with this right to protest comes the risk of arrest when things go awry.

In North Carolina, if you are asked to disperse by a police officer and you fail to do so, you can be arrested and charged with a Class 2 misdemeanor. If you are facing charges of failure to disperse or even disorderly conduct, contact us today to discuss the details of your case and how we might be able to help.

The town of Coats, NC is facing another lawsuit concerning police misconduct. The last was settled out of court in 2006. This one concerns three plaintiffs who allege police wrongdoing over a period of 6 years. Among the allegations are police brutality, false arrests, and harassment.

Among the officers named in the suit is Kelly W. Fields, one who reportedly had a reputation for being particularly harsh. According to the Fayetteville Observer the suit states that Fields “’had a reputation for being a brutal police officer among many blacks in Harnett County,’ and that black residents ‘expected to get a beat-down if they were stopped by Fields at night.’”

There are three plaintiffs, Derek Ballentine, David Carlton Strickland, and his mother Connie Williams Strickland. The Stricklands are both white and Ballentine is black. Many would think in this day in age race wouldn’t matter, but in the rural south it often still does.

Ballentine claims in 2004 he was approached in a convenience store by Officer Fields. Fields asked if he could search Ballentine, to which Ballentine consented. During the patdown, Fields reached in Ballentine’s pocket and squeezed his genitals hard. This caused Ballentine to jump away and allegedly gave Fields cause to arrest him for resisting an officer. The charges were later dropped.

Again in 2009, Ballentine had a negative run-in with Fields, when he was pulled over while driving. Ballentine was allegedly cuffed and sprayed with pepper spray five times, with the majority of these sprays occurring while Ballentine was reportedly on the ground with his hands cuffed behind his back. On this date, Fields is also accused of beating Ballentine’s head into the ground and kicking him as he lay prone.

As for the Stricklands’ part of the suit, it alleges both false arrests and police brutality after the mother and son both had Tasers used on them.

Small police agencies present unique problems not seen in the cities. There seems to be less accountability in part because there is less of a public outcry. Smaller towns seem more likely to tolerate rogue officers simply because that’s the way it’s always been—a necessary evil.

This civil suit could bring some relief to the small town of Coats, though it’s questionable since many of the alleged incidents took place after the 2006 suit.

When you are accused of a criminal offense, no matter where you are, it helps to know someone is on your side. The police and the prosecutor definitely won’t be. And while you might not be a victim of police brutality, the conduct of the police during your arrest and search are crucial in determining the outcome of your case.

This week the city of Charlotte voted to spend nearly $2 million on 1,600 new Tasers for the police officers of the city. These Tasers are reported to have a safety mechanism built in that the police chief has said is “critical” in preventing any more deaths at the hands of officers.

The new Tasers will cost $1.83 million. Most of this money will come from the city’s general fund, though $400,000 will come from an “asset forfeiture” account.

According to the Taser International of Arizona, this newest model, the Taser X2, is safer because there is a 5 second limit on each trigger pull. They also have an audible warning system that alerts suspects they are about to be tased. This alone, they say, prevents the use of the actual shock in some cases.

The whole drive to purchasing new Tasers comes after the latest suspect was killed this summer. Lareko Williams was pronounced dead about an hour after an officer fired his Taser as Williams was in the process of assaulting a woman.

In 2008, another Charlotte resident was killed by a police officer’s Taser. This one was 17-year old Darryl Wayne Turner. In this particular case, the officer held the trigger down for 37 seconds as his Taser delivered the fatal shocks. Only when Turner fell to the ground did the officer take his hand off the trigger.

While the new Tasers will only send 5 second shocks, the officer can immediately pull the trigger again to initiate a new 5 second round. There is no limit to how many times the trigger can be pulled in a row.

Charlotte isn’t the only city dealing with Taser deaths. Fayetteville recently suspended their Taser use when a suspect was killed with the device. Other cities across the country are dealing with similar issues.

Taser International defends the devices and says they are completely safe

After Turner’s death in 2008, a federal jury awarded $10 million to his family from Taser International. The city of Charlotte denied any wrongdoing but paid the family $625,000. Taser International is appealing the ruling.

Supporters of Taser use say it gives law enforcement another tool to use, between physical engagement and deadly force. But it’s often used in place of physical engagement and it’s proving to be more dangerous.

Whether you were arrested and the police used a Taser or if you just have questions about the case and how it will be handled in court, contact us for help.