“You don’t need to know. You can’t know.” That’s what Kathy Norris, a 60-year-old grandmother of eight, was told when she tried to ask court officials why, the day before, federal agents had subjected her home to a furious search.
The agents who spent half a day ransacking Mrs. Norris’ longtime home in Spring, Texas, answered no questions while they emptied file cabinets, pulled books off shelves, rifled through drawers and closets, and threw the contents on the floor.
The six agents, wearing SWAT gear and carrying weapons, were with – get this- the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Kathy and George Norris lived under the specter of a covert government investigation for almost six months before the government unsealed a secret indictment and revealed why the Fish and Wildlife Service had treated their family home as if it were a training base for suspected terrorists. Orchids.
That’s right. Orchids.
Chairman Robert C. Scott, Virginia Democrat, and ranking member Louie Gohmert, Texas Republican, conducted a truly bipartisan hearing (a D.C. rarity this year).
These two leaders have begun giving voice to the increasing number of experts who worry about “overcriminalization.” Astronomical numbers of federal criminal laws lack specifics, can apply to almost anyone and fail to protect innocents by requiring substantial proof that an accused person acted with actual criminal intent.
RTFA. It isn’t just about orchids.
How come I have a feeling it when down something like this.
In the DA’s office.
OK guys we have two cases here, on involves someone distributing narcotics and one growing Orchids.
Which one do we hit and hit big?
SGT:
Hell, not the one selling narcotics. They could be Male in their 20’s or 30’s so lets go after the little old lady growing Orchids…..
so called cop #1:
We can also dress up like the real SWAT team
so called cop #2
Yeah and we can bring our guns
SGT:
I was thinking the same things guys, lets roll.
Rare species theft and trading is a real crime from which old ladies are not exempted. Not only does such activity stress species survival but it also brings diseases/pests into the USA putting our eco-system at risk.
I also would prefer our gestapo go after species terrorists than feel good drug distributors.
Mindless criticism doesn’t do anyone any good.
I was born in the US, and part of me was sad when I realized I would never live there again (wife doesn’t want to leave her home country…we agreed that was the deal) but now I’m less sad about that, because the country I grew up in is gone.
The one I live in now is technically less free (with no bill of rights and less police oversight), but there is actually far less day-to-day interference in people’s lives than in the US. People here are not constantly worried about new rules interfering with common sense. Children walk to school and say hello to the people they meet. You can grow whatever you want (barring drugs) and even sell or barter it. There are fewer lawyers in this entire country than there are in Houston.
This kind of story makes me realize that I didn’t give up any real freedom at all. Thanks!
Hey everyone knows that triffids are a form of orchid. The govt. is just doing its job.
Here in sunny Australia I got a notice today from the animal compliance department of the local council. They were hoping to perform a random inspection of my pet’s mandatory registration but unfortunately I was at work and they missed me.
Oh yeah, I have no pets. I better let them know.
Uncle Dave
Orchids aren’t illegal.
“You don’t need to know. You can’t know.”
If Orwell had written that scene in *1984*, his editor would have said “Come on now, George, that’s going a bit over the top.”
LDA,
You’re really on a roll today. Where did I say that?
The article is about abuse of power, not about orchids.
# 8 Uncle Dave
It was a joke (“RTFA. It isn’t just about orchids.”) . I (almost) apologised for the ‘Shroud’ one (just before I read this article).
Give me a break. They broke the law and were charged and found guilty. Ignorance of the law has never been an excuse but somehow if you are the one caught up in it, it must be the law that is wrong. Especially when a right wing newsrag like the Washington Times writes about it.
Importing any produce or seed into the US requires documentation and procedures. This meant to stop the further importation of invasive species such as purple loose strife.
I have no more sympathy for these criminals than I do for someone importing pot from The Netherlands.
#3 Samtheman
You are so pleased about your new found homeland but oddly seem hesitant to share the name of the country. Any reason?
#11, Bill,
That is irrelevant. I notice you didn’t post your real name and address either. When you go that extra little bit, then you can ask others to.
Japan
Government’s a joke and they have many problems, but I go about my daily life with virtually no fear of the authorities. The only thing you need to do is keep your residence status legal and not do drugs.
Shouldn’t a punishment bare some relationship to the crime. Moreover shouldn’t the severity of the crime pay take into the context?
The person in the article going to prison for not having a sticker on his power supplies. Sure we don’t know the details – but on first inspection, a prison sentence does not appear appropriate… A fine perhaps?
If the law gets increasingly complicated – then the defense of lack of knowledge to my (non lawyer) mind gets increasingly valid. Not in court – I understand, but in what seems to make sense.
We live in a complicated world, we shouldn’t try and codify the complexity. It adds more complexity, and invariably at best only loosely captures the idea. Additionally in doing so we just make loop holes.
We should have simple broad laws which encapsulate fair. We should use judges and juries to resolve the fringe cases. And the results should not become de facto new laws. And punishments should bare some relationship to the crime + the context. Having judges and/or juries more engage their brains in whats appropriate will help hugely.
Its worth reading ‘The Death of Common Sense’
The previous administration was modelled on Orwell’s “1984”.
The current administration is following Kafka’s “The Trial”.
Perhaps the way to phrase it would be…”Having solved all other pressing problems, the Cops decided to either shoot jaywalkers, or take down Orchid merchants”
But it must have been high on Fish & Wildlife’s agenda.
Maybe the Fed shouldn’t pass so many laws. Make Congress serve only every other month.
Fish and Wildlife guys in Swat Gear and armed?
What a joke. I wonder if they kicked in the front door. Watching too many Hollywood movies I guess. They need to grow up.
#14, freddy,
Shouldn’t a punishment bare some relationship to the crime. Moreover shouldn’t the severity of the crime pay take into the context?
OK, so what punishment would you have given the idiot that brought the Purple Loosestrife into the country? How about the African honey bee? What about the smugglers that bring in rare birds strapped to their legs or endangered monkeys under their hat?
The person in the article going to prison for not having a sticker on his power supplies. Sure we don’t know the details –
Then why criticize something you don’t know about? Research and find out the details, then come back and criticize it.
We should use judges and juries to resolve the fringe cases. And the results should not become de facto new laws.
Everyone is entitled to a jury trial. Not just fringe cases. A favorite mantra from the right is saying Judges that rule against them are “legislating from the bench”. Yet, they are always very hard pressed to give an example.
Maybe you could enlighten us of where a Judge made a “de facto” law.
Wacko Part Duex. The Orchid Conspiracy.
It’s not as good as the original. There wasn’t even a tank. I wanted to see some mindless car crushing and loud AC/DC playing on the soundtrack. They didn’t even burn the house down. Epic Fail.
#10:
Yeah, sending an elderly man to a federal prison for two years is fair punishment for importing flower seeds illegally.
Whatever.
Ever think that it’s the laws that are screwed up?
#21, brm,
Can you tell us the details? I know, everyone going to prison is innocent. He didn’t do it. The government lied. … . So where did the government screw the pooch and put an innocent man behind bars in this case?
Didn’t you claim OJ Simpson was innocent at his murder trial?
#19 Mr Fusion
You must be having a bad day.
‘OK, so what punishment would you have given the idiot that brought the Purple Loosestrife into the country?’
I don’t know. Bullet to the head?
Doesn’t it depend on context (as my point)? If the person purposefully bought it into the country in order to ruin crops (perhaps they were agricultural terrorists), then it would be a different result than if someone accidentally bought it in their luggage.
‘Then why criticize something you don’t know about? Research and find out the details, then come back and criticize it.’
No, I’m not that interested. I read the article – it seemed kind of stupid. It’s a sticker. Jail time for a sticker… I qualified that I could be wrong. I’m sorry that’s so offensive. Reading this blog must be hell for you.
‘Everyone is entitled to a jury trial. Not just fringe cases. A favorite mantra from the right is saying Judges that rule against them are “legislating from the bench”. Yet, they are always very hard pressed to give an example.’
Thats great and all. But that wasn’t my point – which I suppose I didn’t clearly make, is that there has been a process taken over many years to remove ‘common sense’ in judgements, by trying to codify everything into law. Ie by removing the human element. The observation is that doesn’t work very well. That in essence is the subject matter of that book.
‘Maybe you could enlighten us of where a Judge made a “de facto” law.’
All the time – when judgements become precedents for new cases. Thats not always a bad thing – in that it allows some efficiency in not having to go through the whole process every time. But it does add to complexity – as they become ‘de facto laws’ in effect, making ‘law’ in general even more complex.
I’m arguing that the legal system can and should be simplified. That the human element should not be removed as it is essential, not least to handle context. Thats not my idea – thats the essence of that book. But it makes sense to me.
That’s all.
Take a chill pill 😉
#23, freddy,
If the person purposefully bought it into the country in order to ruin crops (perhaps they were agricultural terrorists), then it would be a different result than if someone accidentally bought it in their luggage.
Sort of like if someone was playing with a lighter around an open can of gas. They know the danger but, … . Or if a bunch of guys were checking out someone’s new shotgun, … while they and the gun are loaded. How about if a couple of guys just have a friendly drag race down a back road, with their lights off.
Here the man purposely imported the orchids. There was no “accidentally in the luggage” about it. Now, the seven kilos of cocaine might be an accident, but, …
there has been a process taken over many years to remove ‘common sense’ in judgements, by trying to codify everything into law.
Exactly. That way when ever anyone looks at a law he can tell what it means. Otherwise you end up with a patchwork of different interpretations.
BTW, there is no such thing as “Common Sense”. It is a figment of someone’s imagination for trying to explain why everyone doesn’t think the same way he does. In principle in law is called the “reasonable person”.
‘Maybe you could enlighten us of where a Judge made a “de facto” law.’
All the time – when judgements become precedents for new cases.
All the time doesn’t answer the question. And please note, there is a huge difference between defining what a law means (and its extent) and making “de facto law”. Making laws is the exclusive jurisdiction of a legislature. Defining those laws is the exclusive jurisdiction of a Judge.
The estimated number of state, local, federal, tribal and many foreign laws that YOU are subject to is unknown but estimated at over 10,000!
If you want to see something fascinating on the subject, look up “Don’t talk to cops” part 1, on Youtube.
You can go to jail for violating Honduran laws!
Maybe they were looking for the Cactus mafia
[image deleted for violation of blog guidelines –ed.]
This is what happens when Pols “Get Tough On Crime” – EVERYTHING BECOMES A CRIME !!! Remember, America – the “Land of the Free” has more people in jail than ANY OTHER COUNTRY !!! More than Russia, China, Cuba, etc …
Anyone know how big the US Criminal Code actually is ?
We have to many laws.
These are disturbing stories, but they are tainted by their association with the Washington Times, owned by Sun Myung Moon and his Unification Church, and the Cato Institute, libertarian think tank funded by Koch Industries, the largest privately-owned oil company in the U.S.
It’s only a matter of time before Judge Death tips up!
Curious that none of the newspapers serving Spring, Tx. have any mention of this raid, and that the case hasn’t yet been filed with the Federal Courts. Maybe later today.
Reports of this kind of action always makes my blood pressure rise, but phony reports piss me off. If and when the case does get filed, I have a response ready.
Until then, I’ll just a couple of items which really concern one of the other posters.
The Purple Loose Strife was imported by settlers from Europe in the early 1800’s. The U.S. Commission on Fish and Fisheries was not established until 1871. How would they make that case, and who would they prosecute?
Look up “Africanized_bee” on Wikipedia. It’s one of their better articles. Those bees are bred from queens accidentally released in Brazil in 1956. They flew over the border and entered our country without documentation; should we call the FAA or the Border Patrol?
I’m not sure Dvorak will allow the link, but here it is