The Fight Against Corruption, UN Global Compact, United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC)

UN Global Compact, The Fight Against Corruption UN Secretary-General Mr. Ban Ki-moon
UN Global Compact, The Ten Principles

Corruption is now recognized to be one of the world's greatest challenges. It is a major hindrance to sustainable development, with a disproportionate impact on poor communities and is corrosive on the very fabric of society. The impact on the private sector is also considerable - it impedes economic growth, distorts competition and represents serious legal and reputational risks. Corruption is also very costly for business, with the extra financial burden estimated to add 10% or more to the costs of doing business in many parts of the world. The World Bank has stated that "bribery has become a $1 trillion industry." Start the Certificate Course

Fight Corruption, UN Global Compact, Convention Against Corruption by Neil Gillespie

United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC)

Corruption is a complex social, political and economic phenomenon that affects all countries. The United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) is the only legally binding universal anti-corruption instrument. Signed by the United States December 9, 2003 and ratified October 30, 2006: Entry into force. Reservations and Declarations of the United States.

Article 6. Preventive anti-corruption body or bodies. 1. Each State Party shall, in accordance with the fundamental principles of its legal system, ensure the existence of a body or bodies, as appropriate, that prevent corruption by such means as:

(a) Implementing the policies referred to in article 5 of this Convention and, where appropriate, overseeing and coordinating the implementation of those policies;
(b) Increasing and disseminating knowledge about the prevention of corruption.

2. Each State Party shall grant the body or bodies referred to in paragraph 1 of this article the necessary independence, in accordance with the fundamental principles of its legal system, to enable the body or bodies to carry out its or their functions effectively and free from any undue influence. The necessary material resources and specialized staff, as well as the training that such staff may require to carry out their functions, should be provided.

3. Each State Party shall inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the name and address of the authority or authorities that may assist other States Parties in developing and implementing specific measures for the prevention of corruption.

United Nations Convention Against Corruption, Wikipedia
UN Convention Against Corruption, English PDF
United Nations Convention Against Corruption, Entry into Force
The U.N. Global Compact site anti-corruption resources
UNODC's Action against Corruption and Economic Crime

Constitutional Provision, Treaties of the United States, U.S. Senate website

Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the Supremacy Clause, which explicitly states that a ratified treaty is the Supreme Law of the land and all state law provisions which conflict with the treaty are overridden by the treaty.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, U.S. Senate website
Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, annotated, Cornell Legal Information Institute
Article Six of the United States Constitution, Wikipedia
Supremacy Clause, Wikipedia

CRS Annotated Constitution - U.S. Constitution Annotated, Law Legal Information Institute

The 2013 Centennial Edition of the Constitution Annotated, Congeress.gov

The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (popularly known as the Constitution Annotated) contains legal analysis and interpretation of the United States Constitution, based primarily on Supreme Court case law. This regularly updated resource is especially useful when researching the constitutional implications of a specific issue or topic. The Featured Topics and Cases page highlights recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions that demonstrate pivotal interpretations of the Constitution's provisions.

The Constitution comprises the primary law of the United States. It describes the three chief branches of the Federal Government and their jurisdictions, and lays out the basic rights of the country's citizens. The world's longest surviving government charter, the Constitution was framed in May 1787 by a convention of delegates from twelve of the thirteen original states in Philadelphia.

The Constitution Annotated provides a clause-by-clause explanation of this landmark document, with references to nearly 8,000 Supreme Court cases. Constitutional law experts from the Congressional Research Service author the treatise and the Government Printing Office publishes the editions and supplements.

The 2013 Centennial Edition of the Constitution Annotated
The centennial edition of the treatise was published by the Government Printing Office (GPO) in 2013, along with a web version. Publications were formerly limited to hard-bound decennial editions and separate soft-cover biannual supplements, but the online resource allows for the publication of up-to-date PDF versions of the treatise throughout each Supreme Court term. Both full-text searches and browsing by subject or case are available through the GPO FDsys website.

United States Constitution, Library of Congress
Texts, Commentaries, Historical Texts and Judicial Decisions

US Constitution Annotated 2002, Government Printing Office
S. Doc. 108-17 - Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis, and Interpretation
S. Doc. 108-17 - The Constitution of the United States of America (With Analysis)

The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

Petition 13-7280 Supreme Court, HECM reverse mortgage

Petition 13-7280 SCOTUS, HECM reverse mortgage by Neil Gillespie

Music - Stress Relief - Pictures at an Exhibition

Pictures At an Exhibition - part 2 of 3
Pictures At an Exhibition - part 3 of 3
Pictures at an Exhibition, all arrangements

Music - Stress Relief in Litigation, Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition
Romanian Youth Orchestra, conducted by Cristian Mandeal
Spring Music Flavours 2011 - Bucharest, Ateneul Roman

Modest Petrovich Mussorgsky (1839 – 1881) was a Russian
composer,...an innovator of Russian music in the romantic period.
He strove to achieve a uniquely Russian musical identity, often in
deliberate defiance of the established conventions of Western music.

Pictures at an Exhibition...is a suite in ten movements (plus a
recurring, varied Promenade) composed for piano by Mussorgsky in
1874. The suite is Mussorgsky's most famous piano composition,...

Urgent Appeal to UN, Protection from Political Persecution in the United States, Observer for SCOTUS petition

Urgent Appeal to Mrs. Knaul and Mr. Chalklen Special Rapporteurs.pdf by Neil Gillespie

I have a well-founded fear of political persecution

Affidavit of Neil Gillespie to Special Rapporteurs, Well-Founded Fear of Political Persecution.pdf by Neil Gillespie

Maurice Ravel, Boléro, and brain injury

Maurice Ravel: Boléro - conducted by Fayçal Karoui and performed by the Orchestre Lamoureux. Selections from Maurice Ravel, Wikipedia:

Ravel in 1925

Joseph-Maurice Ravel (March 7, 1875 – December 28, 1937) was a French composer known especially for his melodies, orchestral and instrumental textures and effects. Along with Claude Debussy, he was one of the most prominent figures associated with Impressionist music...Ravel is perhaps known best for his orchestral work Boléro (1928), which he considered trivial and once described as "a piece for orchestra without music"...

Illness and Death

In 1932, Ravel suffered a major blow to the head in a taxi accident. This injury was not considered serious at the time. However, afterwards he began to experience aphasia-like symptoms and was frequently absent-minded....On April 8, 2008, the New York Times published an article suggesting Ravel may have been in the early stages of frontotemporal dementia during 1928, and this might account for the repetitive nature of Boléro. This accords with an earlier article, published in a journal of neurology, that closely examines Ravel's clinical history and argues that his works Boléro and Piano Concerto for the Left Hand both indicate the impacts of neurological disease....In late 1937, Ravel consented to experimental brain surgery...On December 17, he entered a hospital in Paris, following the advice of the well-known neurosurgeon Clovis Vincent. Vincent assumed there was a brain tumor, and on December 19 operated on Ravel. No tumor was found, but there was some shrinkage of the left hemisphere of his brain, which was re-inflated with serous fluid. When Ravel awoke from the anaesthesia, he asked for his brother, but quickly sank into a deep coma, from which he never awoke. He died on December 28, at the age of 62, in Paris....Ravel's death was probably a result of the brain surgery, with the underlying cause arguably being a brain injury caused by the automobile accident in 1932...Wikipedia, Maurice Ravel

Clerk’s letter, Supreme Court of the United States

Clerk's letter, SCOTUS USA11 No. 13-11585, Oct-28-2013.pdf by Neil Gillespie

Moby - Everloving

Bergensbanen railway in Norway
Post for relaxation and the
wonder of public transport

The Bergen Line (Norwegian: Bergensbanen), also called the Bergen Railway, is a 371-kilometre (231 mi) long standard gauge railway line between Bergen and Hønefoss, Norway. The name is often applied for the entire route from Bergen via Drammen to Oslo, where the passenger trains go, a distance of 496 kilometres (308 mi). It is the highest mainline railway line in Northern Europe, crossing the Hardangervidda plateau at 1,237 metres (4,058 ft) above sea level.

The railway opened from Bergen to Voss in 1883 as the narrow gauge Voss Line. In 1909 the route was continued over the mountain to Oslo and the whole route converted to standard gauge, and the Voss Line became part of the Bergen Line. The line is single track, and was electrified in 1954-64. The Bergen Line is owned and maintained by the Norwegian National Rail Administration, and served with passenger trains by Norwegian State Railways (NSB) and freight trains by CargoNet. The Flåm Line remains as the only branch line, after the closure of the Hardanger Line. The western section from Bergen to Voss is also served by the Bergen Commuter Rail, and was shortened following the 1966 opening of the Ulriken Tunnel.
Read more on Wikipedia

How did America’s police become a military force on the streets?

How did America’s police become a military force on the streets?
ABA Journal Magazine July 2013 Issue
By Radley Balko
Posted July 1, 2013 5:10 AM CDT

Editor's Note: In a remarkable speech at the National Defense University in May, President Barack Obama signaled an end to the war on terrorism; maybe not an end, it turns out, but a winding down of the costly deployments, the wholesale use of drone warfare, and even the very rhetoric of war. Click here to read the President's remarks.

Are cops constitutional?

In a 2001 article for the Seton Hall Constitutional Law Journal, the legal scholar and civil liberties activist Roger Roots posed just that question. Roots, a fairly radical libertarian, believes that the U.S. Constitution doesn’t allow for police as they exist today. At the very least, he argues, police departments, powers and practices today violate the document’s spirit and intent. "Under the criminal justice model known to the framers, professional police officers were unknown," Roots writes.

The founders and their contemporaries would probably have seen even the early-19th-century police forces as a standing army, and a particularly odious one at that. Just before the American Revolution, it wasn’t the stationing of British troops in the colonies that irked patriots in Boston and Virginia; it was England’s decision to use the troops for everyday law enforcement. This wariness of standing armies was born of experience and a study of history—early American statesmen like Madison, Washington and Adams were well-versed in the history of such armies in Europe, especially in ancient Rome.

If even the earliest attempts at centralized police forces would have alarmed the founders, today’s policing would have terrified them. Today in America SWAT teams violently smash into private homes more than 100 times per day. The vast majority of these raids are to enforce laws against consensual crimes. In many cities, police departments have given up the traditional blue uniforms for "battle dress uniforms" modeled after soldier attire.

Police departments across the country now sport armored personnel carriers designed for use on a battlefield. Some have helicopters, tanks and Humvees. They carry military-grade weapons. Most of this equipment comes from the military itself. Many SWAT teams today are trained by current and former personnel from special forces units like the Navy SEALs or Army Rangers. National Guard helicopters now routinely swoop through rural areas in search of pot plants and, when they find something, send gun-toting troops dressed for battle rappelling down to chop and confiscate the contraband. But it isn’t just drugs. Aggressive, SWAT-style tactics are now used to raid neighborhood poker games, doctors’ offices, bars and restaurants, and head shops—despite the fact that the targets of these raids pose little threat to anyone. This sort of force was once reserved as the last option to defuse a dangerous situation. It’s increasingly used as the first option to apprehend people who aren’t dangerous at all.

OUR 'RUNT PIGLET' AMENDMENT

The Third Amendment reads, in full: "No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."

You might call it the runt piglet of the Bill of Rights amendments—short, overlooked, sometimes the butt of jokes. The Supreme Court has yet to hear a case that turns on the Third Amendment, and only one such case has reached a federal appeals court. There have been a few periods in American history when the government probably violated the amendment [the War of 1812, the Civil War and on the Aleutian Islands during World War II], but those incursions into quartering didn’t produce any significant court challenges. Not surprisingly, then, Third Amendment scholarship is a thin field, comprising just a handful of law review articles, most of which either look at the amendment’s history or pontificate on its obsolescence.

Given the apparent irrelevance of the amendment today, we might ask why the framers found it so important in the first place. One answer [lies in] the "castle doctrine." If you revere the principle that a man’s home is his castle, it hardly seems just to force him to share a portion of it with soldiers—particularly when the country isn’t even at war. But the historical context behind the Third Amendment shows that the framers were worried about something more profound than fat soldier hands stripping the country’s larders.

At the time the Third Amendment was ratified, the images and memories of British troops in Boston and other cities were still fresh, and the clashes with colonists that drew the country into war still evoked strong emotions. What we might call the "symbolic Third Amendment" wasn’t just a prohibition on peacetime quartering, but a more robust expression of the threat that standing armies pose to free societies. It represented a long-standing, deeply ingrained resistance to armies patrolling American streets and policing American communities.

And, in that sense, the spirit of the Third Amendment is anything but anachronistic.

As with the castle doctrine, colonial America inherited its aversion to quartering from England. And as with the castle doctrine, England wasn’t nearly as respectful of the principle in the colonies as it was at home. The first significant escalation of the issue came in the 1750s, when the British sent over thousands of troops to fight the Seven Years’ War (known in the United States as the French and Indian War). In the face of increasing complaints from the colonies about the soldiers stationed in their towns, Parliament responded with more provocation. The Quartering Act of 1765 required the colonists to house, feed and supply British soldiers (albeit in public facilities). Parliament also helpfully provided a funding mechanism with the hated Stamp Act.

Protests erupted throughout the colonies, [and] some spilled over into violence, most notably the Boston Massacre in 1770. England only further angered the colonists by responding with even more restrictions on trade and imports. Parliament then passed a second Quartering Act in 1774, this time specifically authorizing British generals to put soldiers in colonists’ homes. The law was aimed squarely at correcting the colonies’ insubordination. England then sent troops to emphasize the point.

Using general warrants, British soldiers were allowed to enter private homes, confiscate what they found, and often keep the bounty for themselves. The policy was reminiscent of today’s civil asset forfeiture laws, which allow police to seize and keep for their departments cash, cars, luxury goods and even homes, often under only the thinnest allegation of criminality. Read more

Jimmy Carter Remembers Coretta and Dr. King - 50th Anniversary of March on Washington

 Guardians of King’s Dream Regroup in Washington
The New York Times
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: August 28, 2013

WASHINGTON — "The dream is not dead," said Dr. Alveda King, a minister and niece of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., as she walked into the Shiloh Baptist Church here Wednesday morning. "People are proving the dream is not dead. The biggest thing is love."

Fifty years to the day after her uncle roused the nation with his "I Have a Dream" speech, Dr. King’s descendants gathered for a morning interfaith service to begin a day that will culminate with a speech by the nation’s first black president in the very spot — the steps of the Lincoln Memorial — where Dr. King delivered his call to civil justice.

As the service got under way, thousands of people were flocking to the National Mall and the Lincoln Memorial in preparation for an afternoon ceremony, including President Obama’s speech. Security was extremely tight, with most streets around the National Mall closed to cars. The security and a light rain seemed to be keeping down the size of the early crowds.

But at Shiloh Baptist, a historic church founded 150 years ago by former slaves — and where Dr. King spoke in 1960 — the mood was festive as dignitaries streamed into the soaring chapel. The service was a reminder that at his core, Dr. King was a religious man whose civil rights work was rooted in his faith and a desire for what he called "the beloved community" — a world without poverty or racism or war.

"The true essence, the true nature, the true character of Martin Luther King Jr. is that he was a pastor, he was a prophet, he was a faith leader," his daughter, the Rev. Bernice A. King, the chief executive of the King Center for Nonviolent Social Change in Atlanta, told those gathered here.

"We are here today," she said, "to call upon our faith, to call upon our spirituality, to call upon our higher selves recognizing that nothing in the world will ever change if it’s not for people of faith coming together."

Wednesday’s events are part of a weeklong commemoration of the Aug. 28, 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Justice that began Saturday with a similar civil rights march on the National Mall. Wednesday’s event is intended, organizers said, as more of a call to unity. Mr. Obama will be joined former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, and the ceremony will include a bell-ringing ceremony at 3 p.m., along with concurrent bell-ringing ceremonies in cities and communities across the nation. Read more here

Photos from the original March on Washington and 50th Anniversary 

King Center for Nonviolent Social Change 

The Carter Center
U.S. Finally Ratifies Human Rights Covenant
By Jimmy Carter, 29 Jun 1992

Judge Hanen orders ethics probe after lawyer’s acquittal in Judge Abel Limas court corruption case

US Judge Hanen

Judge Hanen orders ethics probe
Valley Morning Star
By EMMA PEREZ-TREVINO
August 19, 2013

U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen has issued an order focusing on unresolved ethical and factual issues following a jury’s acquittal of attorney Eduardo "Eddie" Lucio Tuesday on racketeering, conspiracy and extortion charges.

Hanen expressed concerns about possible violations on the part of Lucio and others of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct arising from the testimony in Lucio’s trial regarding alleged forging of documents, the settlement and distribution of funds surrounding the case of murderer Amit Livingston, and legal and criminal action that was taken relative to the seizure of $901,000 from a truck.

The Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct govern the conduct of attorneys.

Hanen directed the government in an order filed for the public record Friday to provide all information regarding three cases that surfaced in Lucio’s trial to the proper authorities at the State Bar of Texas.

"The court does not have a preference as to which government attorneys comply with this order as long as it complies as soon as practical," Hanen ordered.

Lucio defense attorney Luis M. Avila said after the trial that he was not surprised that Hanen directed the government to provide information to the State Bar of Texas, noting that Hanen had given the same directive regarding other attorneys.

A Corpus Christi jury on Tuesday found Lucio not guilty of paying kickbacks to his former law partner, ex-Cameron County District Attorney Armando R. Villalobos, and former 404th state District Judge Abel C. Limas in exchange for prosecutorial and judicial favors. Villalobos, found guilty by a Brownsville jury for racketeering and other crimes is an attorney and Limas, who has pleaded guilty to racketeering, already has lost his license to practice law.

Lucio had been charged with five counts of racketeering, conspiracy and three counts of aiding extortion.

"The government just didn’t put a solid case," Avila said following the verdict. Avila, together with defense co-counsel Rigoberto Flores Jr., stressed reasonable doubt during their closing statements to the jury.

The five-count indictment that a federal grand jury returned against Lucio charged him with violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act by giving an $80,000 kickback to Villalobos in two $40,000 payments from the $200,000 he received in attorney fees in the civil lawsuit against convicted murderer Amit Livingston; giving $1,000 to Limas so that he would keep quiet regarding the Livingston case; and a $5,000 bribe to Villalobos relative to $901,000 seized from a truck, of which $42,000 went to Lucio.

The government’s case also included testimony of a confidential informant (CI) involving the controlled-seizure by Villalobos’ Special Operations Group of $145,000 from the CI who was working in an undercover capacity.

Hanen noted in his order that he is not prejudging any particular fact situation. "This order should not be taken by the State Bar or any other investigative body as to what its ultimate conclusion should or should not be," Hanen wrote.

"This court never saw a complete file in any of the above instances and never heard an explanation by the attorneys involved," he added.

"Further, the ‘not guilty’ verdict . . . should also not be taken as deciding any ethical or factual issues regarding the concerns raised by the court," Hanen added.

"The jury was never presented with all the relevant information and was never asked to resolve any of the ethical issues raised. Finally, this order should not be taken as an order to any ethical investigation agency as to what it should investigate or as a limitation as to what it may investigate," Hanen said.

"The purpose of this order is solely to ensure that the government provides what information it has already gathered and to raise a suggestion of topics that need to be addressed based solely upon what little evidence this court saw during the trial," the judge stated.

Insofar as the case involving the CI, Hanen said that there had been testimony in the trial that certain contracts and affidavits were forged as were certain settlement checks resulting from a lawsuit. "If true, and if a lawyer participated in this fraudulent conduct, there were violations of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct," Hanen wrote.

Insofar as the Livingston case, where his $500,000 bond on a murder charge was attached in a civil wrongful death suit filed by Lucio on behalf of the victim’s family of which $200,000 went to him and $300,000 to the family, Hanen said: "The entire settlement and distribution of settlement funds should be reviewed in a setting where the privilege against self incrimination is not applicable."

Hanen wrote that "particular attention should be paid" as to whether there were any violations of Texas law regarding a state statute. The statute he listed addresses the payment of referral fees to a prosecutor.

Hanen wrote that payments in violation of this statute would also be in violation of disciplinary rules.

Hanen also pointed out that the evidence presented at trial indicated that Lucio represented a defendant, Rafael Sanchez, in a criminal money laundering case while at the same time, he, Lucio was pursuing the same funds at issue in a civil forfeiture case, despite the fact that Sanchez had disclaimed any interest in the money.

"This scenario suggests two problems. First, how can a lawyer in good faith pursue funds in a case in which his client has disclaimed an interest?" Hanen asks.

"More importantly the client had allegedly assigned all the proceeds of the forfeiture action to the attorney in exchange for his representation in both the civil and criminal cases. The attorney’s pursuit of the funds at issue in the civil case, the recovery of which only benefits the attorney, and from which only the attorney profits, obviously indicates his client’s interest in the money, thus harming the client in the criminal case," Hanen pointed out.

"If true, this is a classic conflict situation, and continued representation under these alleged circumstances would undoubtedly have violated (disciplinary rules)," the judge added. Read more

Related story ABA Journal: Ethics probe ordered after lawyer’s acquittal in court corruption case

Trial begins for final lawyer charged in judicial bribery scheme; convicted ex-judge is star witness

Judge Abel Limas

Trial begins for final lawyer charged in judicial bribery scheme; convicted ex-judge is star witness
ABA Journal Law News Now
By Martha Neil
August 7, 2013
A convicted former South Texas judge testified Wednesday in federal court against an Austin attorney accused of participating, with his former law partner, who was then the Cameron County district attorney, in a "cash for court favors" scheme.

Eduardo "Eddie" Lucio, who is charged with extortion and racketeering, is the 12th defendant in the case to have his day in court. His case is being tried in Corpus Christi, rather than Brownsville, because he requested a change of venue. In opening statements Tuesday, the prosecution portrayed Lucio as a "figure man and straw man" whose "strings" were "pulled" by former Cameron County District Attorney Armando R. Villalobos. The defense said evidence was lacking, according to the Brownsville Herald and KGBT.

On Wednesday morning, former 404th District Court Judge Abel Limas, who has admittedly taken bribes, began testifying against Lucio., reports KGBT.

Lucio is not related to two state lawmakers from Brownsville with similar names.

Villalobos was convicted in a related case earlier this year. Accused of operating the DA's office as a criminal racketeering enterprise, Villalobos argued that he had acted within his prosecutorial discretion. However, with Limas as a star witness against him, the former DA was convicted in May of racketeering conspiracy and five counts of extortion, the Valley Morning Star reported. He was acquitted on two extortion counts.

Lucio is accused of funneling $80,000 to Villalobos, for referring a murder victim's family to him to file a civil lawsuit. The convicted murderer, Amit Livingston, jumped bond after being released by Limas on a 60-day pass, and the money for the DA came from a $500,000 bond forfeiture, according to the Brownsville Herald and the station. Read more

The Brownsville Herald: Judge Abel Limas pleads guilty to racketeering charge

US v. Judge Abel Limas, RICO Indictment, Texas Court Corruption, 1.11-Cr-00296 by Neil Gillespie

Zimbabwe Chief Justice Deplores Corruption & Election Violence

Shun Corruption and Violence...Chidyausiku

Zimbabwe Chief Justice Deplores Corruption & Election Violence
By Chris Tongogara
January 15, 2013

The Chief Justice of Zimbabwe, Godfrey Chidyausiku, has taken a swipe at high level corruption within the government structures that include the police, prisons and justice system. He appealed for a commonly-engaging platform with realistic solutions to end the problem corruption bug.

Addressing the legal services folks who included lawyers, bench members and courts personnel at the official launch of the 2013 legal year at the Harare High Court on Monday, Chidyausiku reiterated the need for concerted efforts among stakeholders and citizens at large in taming the wild horse of corruption that stood to weaken the foundations of efficiency and trust in public service.

He also noted that it would be ideal to explore practical solutions rather than play the blame game in labeling others as more corrupt in government. As an example he stated that neither lawyers nor prison guards or police should be quick to blame judges or vice versa because no one was perfect in ethics.

Chidyausiku mainly bewailed the debilitating effect of corruption on the justice delivery system where justice could be abandoned as dollars changed hands. Resultantly, courts were not giving out a 100% output.

"One corrupt official in the justice delivery chain taints the entire system," said Chidyausiku.

While the problem was rampant, some measures were being implemented to bring culprits to book. Also an electronic case-tracking system in the Civil Registry department could prevent backdating of pleadings, case records being "lost", or taken before judges deemed more lenient or given first priority in place of the deserving ones. Read more

When Good Courts Go Bad: The Iowa Supreme Court Issues an Absurd Decision on Sexual Jealousy and Employment

When Good Courts Go Bad: The Iowa Supreme Court Issues an Absurd Decision on Sexual Jealousy and Employment
Justia.com
by Joanna L. Grossman
January 8, 2013

In 2009, the Iowa Supreme Court made national news for its surprising and unanimous decision in Varnum v. Brien, in which it held that the state’s ban on same-sex marriage violated the state constitution’s guarantee of equal protection.  Iowa was not the first state to legalize same-sex marriage—Massachusetts came first in 2004, followed by a handful of others in 2008—but it was the first to do so outside of the liberal confines of the Northeast.

Iowa’s high court made headlines again in 2010, when three of the justices who joined the Varnum opinion were recalled from the bench because of the decision.  The three included the court’s only woman; all three vacancies were filled by men.

Now the court is back in the news—or at least, it should be—for an illogical decision that misinterprets governing civil rights statutes and reaches a preposterous result.  In this ruling, in Nelson v. Knight, the court held that a male dentist did not violate a law banning sex discrimination when he fired his very competent female dental assistant because he found her to be an "irresistible attraction" whose very presence might incite him to commit sexual harassment and, perhaps ultimately, cost him his marriage.

In this column, I’ll explain why this ruling hearkens back to mistakes of the 1970s, when courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, struggled to figure out just exactly what "sex discrimination" is.  But forty years of anti-discrimination law later, we know it when we see it.  And this is definitely it. The Iowa court has done women’s workplace equality a colossal injustice by allowing men’s inability to control themselves to define women’s employment rights.

A Day in the Life of Dr. Knight’s Dental Office

In 1999, dentist James Knight hired Melissa Nelson to be a dental assistant in his office.  She was 20 years old and had just received a two-year college degree.  She worked in that position for over ten years and was, according to Dr. Knight, a "good assistant."  She, in turn, said he was a person of "high integrity" and that he generally treated her in a respectful manner.  Both Knight and Nelson were both married with children.

The tenor in the office seemed to change in the last year-and-a-half of Nelson’s employment.  (The opinion does not reveal Knight’s age, but a mid-life crisis jumps out as one possible explanation.)  Knight began to comment to Nelson that her clothing was "distracting," too tight, or too revealing.  Nelson denied that her clothing was inappropriate, but did put on a lab coat whenever he complained.  (Nelson states in a video interview with CNN, given after the verdict, that she wore t-shirts and scrubs to work.)

At some point, Knight and Nelson began texting each other about both work and personal matters.  Some of these matters were innocuous—such as updates on their respective children’s activities—and others were more intimate.  According to the available evidence, the in-person comments and texts of a sexual nature seemed to emanate exclusively from Dr. Knight.  Knight admits that he once told Nelson if she saw his pants "bulging" then she would know she was dressed in too sexy a manner.  He texted her once to complain that the shirt she wore that day was too tight.  Nelson replied that she thought his complaint was unfair.  His surreply? He told her it was a good thing she did not wear tight pants too, because then he would get it coming and going. Read more

Are businesses and individuals giving up on the courts? Yes, and it’s ‘a disaster,’ judge says

Are businesses and individuals giving up on the courts? Yes, and it’s ‘a disaster,’ judge says
ABA Journal Law News Now
By James Podgers
August 8, 2013

As the funding crisis for justice services continues to grind on, state courts are facing the need—some might say they have the opportunity—to reassess their efforts to provide access to the widest possible range of individuals and businesses seeking to resolve legal disputes.

The interplay between funding shortfalls and access issues was the focus of a program held Thursday morning in San Francisco as the 2013 ABA Annual Meeting began. The meeting is being held at the Moscone Convention Center and numerous other locations around San Francisco through Tuesday.

Even before state legislatures began cutting budgets in response to the recent recession—including funding for the courts and related justice services—questions were being raised about whether more businesses were turning to private dispute resolution services as a more efficient alternative to the courts and whether more individuals were simply avoiding the courts because they couldn't afford legal and filing fees. But the recession only intensified those concerns.

More and more people are giving up on the courts, "and that is a disaster," said Wallace B. Jefferson, chief justice of the Supreme Court of Texas. "If we don't help people protect their rights, no one else will do it."

The program, titled Are Courts Dying? The Decline of Open and Public Adjudication, was co-sponsored by the ABA Standing Committees on Federal Judicial Improvements and Judicial Independence.

Increasingly, judges, lawyers and court administrators are thinking about the ramifications if fewer parties use the courts, said Tani Cantil-Sakauye, chief justice of the California Supreme Court. In part, these discussions have been prompted by the fiscal crisis, she said, but they also need to go on regardless of financial conditions. "We're overdue for change," she said.

In California, for instance, there was "a brief discussion" about permitting nonlawyers to assist low-income litigants bring their cases to court, Cantil-Sakauye said. "It raised a can of worms about who will license and regulate these people. And besides, why should it be the poor who have to rely on nonlawyer providers?" (In Washington state, a program has been in place for about 30 years that licenses nonlawyers to engage in limited legal practice. Responsibility for operating the program was recently transferred by the legislature to the state bar association.)

Cantil-Sakauye said courts shouldn't start thinking about their future operations on the assumption that funding cuts in recent years will become a permanent fact of life. She said 2013 is the first year since the start of the recession in which state revenues are higher than projected, and similar upticks are occurring in some other states, as well. Officials of the other government branches "recognize the need to rebuild the courts," she said, but those efforts will require a partnership among all the branches that also recognizes the need to bolster other programs that saw their budgets slashed.

"We have hit bottom, and we're starting to climb," Cantil-Sakauye said, "but it will be a slow climb." Read more

Tampa police chief launches investigation of DUI unit; mayor weighs in

Tampa police chief launches investigation of DUI unit; mayor weighs in
Tampa Bay Times
By Jessica Vander Velde and
Sue Carlton, Times Staff Writers
August 6, 2013

TAMPA — In an effort to restore public confidence in a police department rocked by a DUI scandal, Tampa police Chief Jane Castor on Tuesday announced a team of "experts" to review drunken driving arrests.

A six-person panel, including retired Circuit Judge Barbara Fleischer and Nick Cox, the Florida attorney general's statewide prosecutor, will look at all open cases involving Sgt. Ray Fernandez and Officer Tim McGinnis. The team will then review a random sample of about 50 other DUI cases.

Fernandez and McGinnis were the officers involved in the controversial Jan. 23 arrest of lawyer C. Philip Campbell, which prosecutors last week concluded was a setup involving a rival law firm. Also, in February, Fernandez was involved in the arrest of Cuban trade advocate Al Fox, 69, on a DUI charge that did not stick. Fox had a 0.000 blood-alcohol level. Read more

Lawyer’s claimed mid-trial DUI arrest set-up by opposing counsel leads to panel review of many cases

Melissa Personius, paralegal

Lawyer’s claimed mid-trial DUI arrest set-up by opposing counsel leads to panel review of many cases
ABA Journal Law News Now
By Martha Neil
August 8, 2013

A six-person team including a retired Florida judge and a lawyer from the state attorney general's office will review all open drunken-driving cases involving two Tampa police officers accused of setting up a lawyer for a driving-under-the-influence arrest with the help of his opposing counsel at a then-ongoing civil trial.

The panel will also review a random sampling of all DUI cases being pursued by the Tampa police department, its police chief announced this week. Prosecutors in Hillsborough County also recently sent a copy of a blistering review by the state's attorney's office, which led to the dismissal of the DUI case against lawyer C. Philip Campbell, to 24 defense lawyers in cases in which one of the two police officers is a witness, reports the Tampa Bay Times.

A lawyer for Campbell called the plan "a baby step" toward the accountability which he and his client are seeking.

Attorney John Fitzgibbons said retired Circuit Judge Barbara Fleischer and prosecutor Nick Cox of the AG's office are "very distinguished members of the legal community," adding that he hopes they are given "a broad mandate to look at anything and everything they want."

A Tampa Tribune article provides additional details. Read more

SA Bernie McCabe-Nolle Prosequi DUI-Charles P Campbell Jr by Neil Gillespie

Triple header weekend: Sen. Warren Speech CFPB Director Corday Confirmed, Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros, and Cornel West on American Empire

Thank you Senator Warren, congratulations!

Alex Ebert on keeping dreams alive.

Dr. Cornel West on Racism, Inequality, & American Empire

Martin Luther King, Jr. - I Have A Dream - August 28, 1963

Eugene Pettis, Florida Bar President, living the Dream of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Dr. King Weeps From His Grave, by Cornel West, The New York Times
The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, by Michelle Alexander

Full program with Travis Smiley and company

Eugene K. Pettis - First African-American President of The Florida Bar

Eugene K. Pettis - First African-American President of The Florida Bar
The Florida Bar Journal
July/August, 2013 Volume 87, No. 7
by Jan Pudlow

When Eugene Pettis was a little boy, a speech impediment smacked a "K" sound at the start of every word.

Neighbors would tell the other Pettis kids: "Go get your brother," because they wanted to hear Eugene talk for comical entertainment.

Lifelong friend and neighbor Lockey Anderson remembers Eugene called her "Kockey"; her dad Joe, "Koe"; and her mother Shirley, "Kirley."

They laughed, and little Eugene laughed with them.

But his first-grade teacher wasn’t laughing. When school officials said Eugene had to wait until the second grade to receive speech therapy, his first-grade teacher insisted: "No, he’s getting help this year."

Not only did Eugene get into the speech program as a first-grader, he can still remember the green and beige books his mother would lecture him on every night at the dining room table, pronouncing word after word until that "K" sound vanished.

"The neighbors still remember it as if it were yesterday. And now I make a living talking," Pettis said laughing. "Who would have thought that?"

Years later, after building a reputation as a successful civil trial lawyer, commanding the attention of jurors with his deep, sonorous voice, Pettis invited that first-grade teacher, along with his kindergarten teacher, high school basketball coach, and a few other special mentors to his home just to say thanks.

"Life had turned out pretty good for me, and I could look back with clarity and see that those six people, along with many others, had a hand in that," Pettis said. "While I was blessed with a great family, I’ve also been blessed with an even greater community of people."

Now the 52-year-old, co-founding partner at Haliczer, Pettis & Schwamm in Ft. Lauderdale and Orlando becomes The Florida Bar’s first African-American president. He credits God and his strong mother for giving him the confidence at an early age to know he could be whatever he chose to be. Read more here

Introduction to the President: Eugene K. Pettis , President of The Florida Bar, 2013-2014
 
2013 Florida Bar General Assembly: Installation and Incoming President’s Message 



2013 Florida Bar General Assembly: Incoming President's Message

Congratulations, Eugene K. Pettis, Florida Bar President by Neil Gillespie

Force feeding video - standard Guantánamo Bay procedure

Published on July 8, 2013
Yasiin Bey (aka Mos Def) force fed under standard Guantánamo Bay procedure
Subscribe to the Guardian HERE.

As Ramadan begins, more than 100 hunger-strikers in Guantánamo Bay continue their protest. More than 40 of them are being force-fed. A leaked document sets out the military instructions, or standard operating procedure, for force-feeding detainees. In this four-minute film made by Human Rights organisation Reprieve and Bafta award-winning director Asif Kapadia, US actor and rapper Yasiin Bey (formerly known as Mos Def), experiences the procedure. Warning: some viewers may find these images distressing. Read more about Ramadan force-feeding AT Guantánamo Bay HERE and HERE

Notice of Hunger Strike, Gillespie v. 13th Circuit, 5.11-Cv-00539, US Dist Ct., MD Fla. by Neil Gillespie

Social Security Disability Again the Subject of Congressional Inquiry

Social Security Disability Again the Subject of Congressional Inquiry
Social Security Disability Law Blog
By Jonathan Ginsberg
June 25, 2013

CBS News reports this morning that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will begin hearings on Thursday, June 27 about the role of administrative law judges in awarding benefits.

Critics of the current disability system point to SSA’s own statistics which show that judges currently approve slightly more than half of the claims brought before them (this is down from a 60% approval rate in 2010).  Claims approved at hearings were previously rejected twice by state employees called adjudicators.

Critics also claim that too many judges are approving undeserving cases simply to clear out growing backlogs – the judges complain of quotas – which may delay a hearing date for longer than 12 months.

Others contend that long term unemployed workers claim disability when their unemployment benefits run out [fn1] [See the NPR report Unfit for Work]

A Social Security spokesman argues that the increase in beneficiaries is the result of an aging population. [fn2]. [See the Goldman Sachs study]

What can we expect from the House subcommittee report and from Social Security?  I expect the following:

• there will be continued pressure on Social Security ALJ’s to reduce the number of approved cases and to process more cases

• there will be an increased focus on continuing disability reviews as a means to terminate benefits – we will see a significant expansion in this part of the program 

• Adjudicators and ALJ’s will be encouraged to deny claims where there is no objective evidence of disability.  Fibromyalgia claims, mental health claims and claims with limited medical evidence will be much harder to win

• there will be a push to change the hearing procedures.  I do not think we will see SSA representatives appear to contest claims (this would be too expensive) but I think we will see new rules that limit new evidence submissions after a certain date and new limits on how judges evaluate evidence

• Social Security is under immense pressure to reduce the cost of its disability programs.  The disability trust fund will run out of money in 2016 which will force Congress to redirect funds from Social Security retirement.  Such a redirection will be politically unpopular

• I expect the hearing approval rate at hearings will continue to trend downward

1. This was the premise of a controversial NPR report entitled Unfit for Work: the Startling Rise of Disability in America – see my video about this story here.

2.  A Goldman Sachs study confirms this assertion, noting that the rise in SSDI beneficiaries has only modestly outstripped SSA’s own pre-recession forecasts

Also see,  Planet of the Blind, it’s not as dark as you think.

Moby - Why Does My Heart Feel So Bad - Saving Private Ryan

Special Program: NSA Surveillance Leaks: Facts and Fiction

Special Program: NSA Surveillance Leaks: Facts and Fiction
Date: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 at 4:00 PM
Location: Newseum, Knight TV Studio
Note: This program will be streamed live online at newseum.org.

WASHINGTON — The Newseum, the American Bar Association, the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University, and The Robert R. McCormick Foundation, are hosting a special program, "NSA Surveillance Leaks: Facts and Fiction," at the Newseum.

The National Security Agency's clandestine surveillance program, PRISM, has emerged from the shadows as a result of recent disclosures made by NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

The first round of disclosures has touched the hot-button topics of government secrecy, intrusion into American citizens' privacy interests, and the beginning of the era of Big Data.

National security and protecting privacy are becoming the central interests of the emerging technological revolution. How do democracies and emerging democracies create frameworks for these vital interests? Read more here

The Times they are a Changin' - Bob Dylan

Credit to Denia Vega for making this video. Official Bob Dylan site.

Why not let nonlawyers help regulate the legal profession? Law prof makes case for change

James Moliterno

Why not let nonlawyers help regulate the legal profession? Law prof makes case for change
ABA Journal Law News Now
May 20, 2013
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Lawyers are not all-knowing and could benefit by allowing nonlawyer outsiders to help regulate the profession, a law professor says in a law review article.

Washington and Lee law professor James Moliterno tells the Wall Street Journal Law Blog (sub. req.) that nonlawyers should be allowed to serve in leadership and policy positions in the ABA and state bar associations, where they could help set standards for the profession. He makes his case in an Emory Law Journal article (PDF) and a new book, The American Legal Profession in Crisis: Resistance and Responses to Change.

In an interview with the Law Blog, Moliterno outlines possible changes if nonlawyers help govern the profession. There could be a movement to a national law license or a relaxed admission-on-motion system to allow freer law practice across borders. Ethics rules barring nonlawyer ownership of law firms would likely be relaxed. And entities such as LegalZoom and Rocket Lawyer would gain ground as a way to assist low- and middle-income people needing legal help.

Here are some excerpts from Moliterno’s article:

"The profession seems to repeat the same question in response to every crisis: How can we stay even more ‘the same’ than we already are? In short, the legal profession is ponderous, backward looking, and self-preserving. …

"I recommend a more forward-looking approach that welcomes the views, and even control, of nonlawyers and innovators in business and other enterprises. My hope is that the legal profession can be more like companies that have thrived because of their innovative tendencies (e.g., Apple, IBM, and Western Union), and less like companies whose stagnancy caused large-scale problems (e.g., Kodak). …

"History demonstrates that lawyers are inept at being their own exclusive regulators. Lawyers tend to look backward to precedent and sideways to existing articulations of law. When lawyers do look forward, their primary task is to predict and guard against risk. It is not in lawyers’ nature to be forward-looking planners or sensitive to cultural trends. …

"The unwelcome cure is to enlist nonlawyers—planners and evaluators of cultural trends—in the regulation of the legal profession. These people, who have a wider view and can see the path ahead and not merely the ground already trod, can regulate the legal profession without the same self-interest as established members of the bar." Read more here

Edward Sharpe and The Magnetic Zeros Live on Letterman - Man On Fire

I’m a man on fire, Walking through your street, With one guitar, And two dancing feet, Only one desire, That’s left in me, I want the whole damn world, To come dance with me, Ohhhhhhhh, Come dance with me, Over murder and pain, Come and set us free, Over heartache and shame...lyrics

President Obama Speaks at the National Conference on Mental Health

The White House
June 3, 2013 

President Obama delivers remarks to open the National Conference on Mental Health at the White House, part of the Administration’s effort to launch a national conversation to increase understanding and awareness about mental health.

Remarks by the President at National Conference on Mental Health

East Room, 10:00 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you so much.  Welcome to the White House.  And thank you, Janelle, for that introduction and sharing your story, and making such a difference through your organization.  We’re really proud to have you here.

I want to thank Secretary Sebelius, Secretary Arne Duncan, Secretary Ric Shinseki for their leadership and helping to organize this event.  And I also want to acknowledge some outstanding members of Congress who are here and who care deeply about this issue.

And finally, I want to thank all of you for participating in this national conference on mental health.  We wanted to bring together folks who’ve suffered from mental illness and families who’ve supported them.  We wanted to bring together advocates and educators, faith leaders, veterans, local officials.

All of you have shown an extraordinary commitment to what is a critical goal, and that is to make sure that people aren’t suffering in silence and that we have the capacity to pull together all the resources and support and love that’s out there to go after an extraordinary challenge in our society.

The main goal of this conference is not to start a conversation -- so many of you have spent decades waging long and lonely battles to be heard.  Instead, it’s about elevating that conversation to a national level and bringing mental illness out of the shadows.

We want to let people living with mental health challenges know that they are not alone, and we’ve got to be making sure that we’re committed to support those fellow Americans, because struggling with a mental illness or caring for someone who does can be isolating.  And I think everybody here who’s experienced the issue in one way or another understands that.  It begins to feel as if not only are you alone, but that you shouldn’t burden others with the challenge and the darkness, day in, day out -- what some call a cloud that you just can't seem to escape -- begins to close in.

The truth is, in any given year, one in five adults experience a mental illness -- one in five.  Forty-five million Americans suffer from things like depression or anxiety, schizophrenia or PTSD.  Young people are affected at a similar rate.  So we all know somebody -- a family member, a friend, a neighbor -- who has struggled or will struggle with mental health issues at some point in their lives.  Michelle and I have both known people who have battled severe depression over the years, people we love.  And oftentimes, those who seek treatment go on to lead happy, healthy, productive lives.

So we know that recovery is possible, we know help is available, and yet, as a society, we often think about mental health differently than other forms of health.  You see commercials on TV about a whole array of physical health issues, some of them very personal.  (Laughter.)  And yet, we whisper about mental health issues and avoid asking too many questions.

The brain is a body part too; we just know less about it.  And there should be no shame in discussing or seeking help for treatable illnesses that affect too many people that we love.  We've got to get rid of that embarrassment; we've got to get rid of that stigma.  Too many Americans who struggle with mental health illnesses are still suffering in silence rather than seeking help, and we need to see it that men and women who would never hesitate to go see a doctor if they had a broken arm or came down with the flu, that they have that same attitude when it comes to their mental health.

We see it in veterans who come home from the battlefield with the invisible wounds of war, but who feel somehow that seeking treatment is a sign of weakness when in fact it's a sign of strength.  We see it in parents who would do anything for their kids, but who often fight their mental health battle alone -– afraid that reaching out would somehow reflect badly on them.

We see it in the tragedies that we have the power to prevent.  And I want to be absolutely clear:  The overwhelming majority of people who suffer from mental illnesses are not violent.  They will never pose a threat to themselves or others.  And there are a whole lot of violent people with no diagnosable mental health issues.  But we also know that most suicides each year involve someone with a mental health or substance abuse disorder.  And in some cases, when a condition goes untreated, it can lead to tragedy on a larger scale.

We can do something about stories like these.  In many cases, treatment is available and effective.  We can help people who suffer from a mental illness continue to be great colleagues, great friends, the people we love.  We can take out some pain and give them a new sense of hope.  But it requires all of us to act.  And there are a few ways we can do our part.

First, we’ve got to do a better job recognizing mental health issues in our children, and making it easier for Americans of all ages to seek help.  Today, less than 40 percent of people with mental illness receive treatment -- less than 40 percent.  Even though three-quarters of mental illnesses emerge by the end of -- by the age of 24, only about half of children with mental health problems receive treatment.  Now think about it:  We wouldn’t accept it if only 40 percent of Americans with cancers got treatment.  We wouldn’t accept it if only half of young people with diabetes got help.  Why should we accept it when it comes to mental health?  It doesn't make any sense.

The good news is, there are plenty of groups that are stepping up to change that.  So a former colleague of mine, Gordon Smith, a former Republican Senator, lost his son to suicide 10 years ago.  And I remember him speaking so eloquently about it.  Gordon is now the head of the National Association of Broadcasters, and today, the National Association of Broadcasters is announcing a new campaign designed to change attitudes about mental illness through TV ads and social media,   because Gordon doesn’t want other parents to go through the agonizing loss that he’s endured.  So we thank you, Gordon, for that great work.  (Applause.)

You’ve got secondary school principals who are holding assemblies on mental health.  You’ve got organizations like the YMCA who are volunteering to train staff to recognize the signs of depression and other mental illnesses in our young people.  You got leaders from different faith communities who are getting their congregations involved.  And dozens of other organizations have today made similar commitments, so we’ve very thankful to all of you.

There are other people who are leading by example.  My great friend, Patrick Kennedy, when he was running for reelection back in 2006, he could have avoided talking about his struggles with bipolar disorder and addiction.  Let’s face it, he’s a Kennedy.  (Laughter.)   He was -- his seat was pretty safe.  Everybody loved him.  And yet, Patrick used his experience as a way to connect and to lift up these issues, not hide from them.

And one day, a woman came up to Patrick at a senior center and told him she was afraid to tell her friends she was taking medication for a mental illness because she was worried they might treat her differently.  She told Patrick, "You’re the only one who knows aside from my son."  And so Patrick started realizing how much power there could be for people to speak out on these issues.  And Patrick carried these stories back with him to Washington, where he worked with a bipartisan group of lawmakers, including his dad, to make sure the mental health services you get through your insurance plan at work are covered the same way that physical health services are -- a huge victory.  (Applause.)

So because of Patrick's efforts and the colleagues who worked with him, it's easier for millions of people to join him on the road to recovery, which brings me to a second point.  It’s not enough to help more Americans seek treatment -– we also have to make sure that the treatment is there when they're ready to seek it.

For years now, our mental health system has struggled to serve people who depend on it.  That’s why, under the Affordable Care Act, we’re expanding mental health and substance abuse benefits for more than 60 million Americans.  (Applause.)  New health insurance plans are required to cover things like depression screenings for adults and behavioral assessments for children.  And beginning next year, insurance companies will no longer be able to deny anybody coverage because of a pre-existing mental health condition.  (Applause.)

We’re also investing in science and basic research to make it easier to diagnose and treat disease early.  And earlier this year, I announced an ambitious initiative to develop tools for mapping the human brain, which could help scientists and researchers unlock the answers to conditions that affect mental health.

We’re also doing more to support our troops and our veterans who are suffering from things like traumatic brain disorder -- or traumatic brain injury or PTSD, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.  Today, we lose 22 veterans a day to suicide -- 22.  We've got to do a better job than that of preventing these all too often silent tragedies.  That’s why we’ve poured an enormous amount of resources into high-quality care and better treatment for our troops.

And today, under Ric Shinseki's leadership, the VA is going even further.  They’re partnering with 24 communities in nine states to help reduce wait times for veterans seeking mental health care.  And they're -- they’ve met their goal of hiring 1,600 new mental health providers, which means this summer they're going to hold more than 150 summits like this one in communities all across the country so that every one of our servicemembers and veterans understand -- just like you take care of yourself and each other on the battlefield, you’ve got to do the same thing off the battlefield.  That’s part of being strong.

For many people who suffer from a mental illness, recovery can be challenging.  But what helps more than anything, what gives so many of our friends and loved ones strength, is the knowledge that you are not alone.  You’re not alone.  You’re surrounded by people who care about you and who will support you on the journey to get well.  We're here for you.

And that’s what this conference is about.  That’s why these issues are so important.  So if there's anybody out there who's listening, if you’re struggling, seek help.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Thank you, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT:  You're welcome.  (Applause.)  If you know somebody who is struggling, help them reach out.  Remember the family members who shoulder their own burdens and need our support as well.  And more than anything, let people who are suffering in silence know that recovery is possible.  They’re not alone.  There's hope.  There's possibility.  And that’s what all of you represent with the extraordinary advocacy and work that you've already done.

So thank you all for being here.  Let’s do everything we can to help our fellow Americans heal and thrive.  And now I’d like to turn it over to Secretary Sebelius who will be leading our opening panel.

Thank you very much, everybody.  (Applause.)

END
10:15 A.M. EDT

Remarks by President Obama at National Conference on Mental Health, June-03-2013 by Neil Gillespie