Posted by Natalie Dorley.

The case of Sherman v. United States looks like a case of entrapment. Entrapment is when a “law enforcement official” forces another individual to perform an illegal activity that they would not normally do (if they were not under forced pretenses).

The defendant ended up being charged with the sale of narcotics. “A government informant and defendant initially met in a hospital where they both were being treated for drug addiction.” Since both the defendant and the government informant were very vulnerable due to their drug addiction, it is no surprise that one of the parties looked for a way to fulfill their addiction.

The government lured the defendant by expressing how he was suffering and continuously “pressed the issue.” The defendant eventually gave in to the informant. He got in contact with his drug supplier and gave the drugs to the informant. At trial, the defendant claimed entrapment as his defense. The main issue in court was whether or not if the conviction should be based on entrapment at all.

In my opinion, I feel as if this case was a case of entrapment. It is the law enforcement’s job to protect the public from crime. The fact that the official pressed on forcing someone else to get drugs for them is in violation of their duty.

The holding stated this, “The informant clearly induced the crime in this case. The informant attempted multiple times to create the crime after multiple rejections and did so in the context of a recovering drug addict, whose ability to refuse was comparatively reduced.”

The informant was well aware of their actions. The defendant had every right to claim this as entrapment.

Natalie is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Hijab Sheikh.

A long case of a Louisiana man and woman’s car accident in 2014 ended on Tuesday, March 29, 2016. The jury in Manhattan listened to them for more than two hours, blaming their accident over a defective ignition switch while the GM lawyer said there was no evidence that there was a flaw in the ignition switch.

Since 2014, there were more 30 million GM automaker recalls. There were hundreds of claims made against GM automaker. “Under certain conditions, the ignition switch can slip out of the on position, making it difficult to steer or stop as the car stalls” (Niemeiser). GM says that they fixed this issue. But if that’s the case, then why have there been so many recalls? Instead of acknowledging the fact that there was a flaw in the ignition switch, GM blamed the accident on “a key chain pulled down by the weight of other keys might have pulled it out of position” (Nieumeiser).

Randall Jackson, Plaintiff’s attorney, said the GM lawyer’s statement doesn’t make sense. GM attorney Mike Brock blamed the accident on ice and claimed that there wasn’t any major damages to the vehicle or the passengers; there were minor scrapes on the bumper, but that is about it.

GM announced the following statistics, settling “1,385 death and injury cases for $275 million and a class-action shareholders’ lawsuit for $300 million. The company paid nearly $600 million to settle 399 claims made to a fund it established. Those claims covered 124 deaths and 275 injuries.” (Nieumeiser).

GM rejected 90 perecent of the claims that were made, out of the 4,343 they received.

Bibliography

Neumeiser, Larry. “FindLaw | Legal News & Information.” Lawyers Clash over Ignition Switch Claims in 2nd GM Case. Find Law, 29 Mar. 2016. Web. 31 Mar. 2016.

Hijab is a public health major at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Posted by Brianna Montalvo.

Since 2014, General Motors has been having ignition switch issues with their vehicles which has lead to 30 million recalls. As of Tuesday, March 29 2016, a jury in New York City has yet to reach a verdict on the ignition switch controversy. This case was brought to the jury by a lawyer who is defending a man and a woman whom were in an accident on a New Orleans bridge back in 2014. The couple claim the ignition switch of their GM vehicle is to blame for the accident.

As stated, “Hundreds of claims remain against the automaker after GM revealed two years ago that it had continued to sell flawed vehicles for more than a decade after discovering an ignition switch defect in Chevy Cobalts and other small cars,” (Neumeister). It has been said that the ignition switch itself can slip out of position making it difficult to steer or stop the vehicle, which then would cause the vehicle to stall. GM has claimed they fixed their problem, which I believe is highly doubtful. The plaintiff’s attorney claimed that a key chain had pulled the weight of the keys down which would cause the switch to be pulled out of position, initiating the car to stall and cause an accident. General Motor’s attorney blamed ice as the probable cause in the accident, since there were no serious injuries or dents to the car, only a few minor scratches on the bumper.

Although a verdict has not been reached, I would not be surprised if the ignition switch in fact was the cause of the accident. In September of 2015, General Motors declared it had settled 1,385 death and injury cases for $275 million and a class-action shareholders’ lawsuit for $300 million. The company has given millions towards a numerous amount of claims. $600 million was paid to settle 399 claims to a fund GM established. 124 deaths, as well as 275 injuries were covered with those claims.

I feel that it was unethical of General Motors to continue selling their vehicles with the ignition switch defect. They claim they fixed it, but I do not believe it is something to fix that easily and quickly. There have been hundreds of deaths and injuries due to the ignition switch recall. They will always get business since vehicles will always be in demand, but I believe they should fix the ignition switch so that they wouldn’t have to deal with so many recalls, as well as have any deaths or injuries on their conscious.

Brianna is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2018.

Posted by Alexa Christie.

In Frankfort, Kentucky, Attorney General Andy Beshear sues Volkswagen claiming the automaker’s diesel emissions cheating scheme violated the state’s consumer protection law. There were 3,800 vehicles registered in Kentucky with this defect. The lawsuit was filed in a state court. “”We have a very strong law that is meant to prevent companies like this … from making an outright lie that they then use to sell what’s a pretty expensive product,” Beshear said at a state Capitol news conference.” Beshear thinks that Volkswagen should be held accountable for this scheme of false advertisement. Last year, 600,000 cars were sold in the United States with software that was designed to cheat on required emissions tests.

Volkswagen was trying to advertise that their customers, who wanted a “green” car were getting one, when in fact they were not. A Volkswagen spokeswomen announced that the company, Volkswagen, was working with federal environmental regulators to resolve this problem. Texas, New Mexico, New Jersey, and West Virginia were also filing separate lawsuits against Volkswagen. The company has received more than $20 billion in fines from state and federal regulators. In September, Volkswagen admitted to using illegal software installed in their “clean diesel” engines.

Alexa is a business administration major with a concentration in management at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2018.

Posted by Natalie Dorley.

In March 2005, the plaintiff who was aged fifty-two at the time, went to the emergency department of the hospital. The patient was experiencing symptoms of “…transient episodes of blurred vision” (Laska) and numbness of the right hand. “He was examined by a doctor and nurse “A.” “The plaintiff’s symptoms quickly resolved and a CT scan did not reveal abnormalities”(Laska). Thus, he seemed to be in a stage where all was well and that there was nothing wrong with him. The doctor gave the plaintiff a diagnosis of ischemic attack and contacted his treating physician.

In addition to the examination, his physician requested a neurological evaluation and arranged a transfer to the hospital’s telemetric monitoring area (Laska). The doctor and nurse “A” performed a final examination of him before following his physician’s orders and found no neurological abnormalities. “About twenty minutes later the plaintiff was examined by another nurse,’B,’ who noted slurred speech, confusion, and weakness on the right side” (Laska). Nurse “B” reported these symptoms to the emergency department and was told that the symptoms were nonexistent when the doctor and nurse “A” examined the plaintiff. “Nurse “B” then contacted the doctor who then requested an immediate neurological consultation by a neurologist. The neurologist examined the plaintiff over an hour later” (Laska). By then, it was already too late for the plaintiff to receive the treatment, since the plaintiff has already been at the hospital for over six hours. The treatment must administered to the patient within three hours of the symptoms.

The next day, the plaintiff experienced a full stroke. He eventually was transferred to another hospital and was hospitalized for a certain amount of weeks. I believe the doctor and nurse “A” should have administered all the neurological tests possible because one test may show symptoms while another may not. Now, the plaintiff has lasting conditions that affected his quality of life forever. The plaintiff “…continued to have partial paralysis of his right arm, aphasia, mild impairment of cognitive functions, and foot drop of the right foot” (Laska). Even though he functions through most of his everyday life activities, he requires a cane now (Laska). Since they were not as attentive as they should have been, a $4 million dollar settlement was instated at the end of the trial.

Natalie is an accounting major at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2019.

Posted by Alexa Christie.

Amazon has sued their logistics executive after he violated a non-compete clause for joining a rival company. Arthur Valdez was hired as Target’s new chief supply chain and logistics officer and disclosed confidential information about Amazon to Target. Amazon filed a suit in King County Superior Court in Washington against Valdez. “Mr. Valdez’s new position with a key Amazon competitor will involve the disclosure and use of Amazon’s confidential and proprietary information to Amazon’s detriment and Target’s advantage in a core area of competition between the companies: the cost-effective and rapid movement of goods in the most efficient way possible for retail customers,” Amazon said in the suit.

Valdez signed the non-compete clause in 2012 and was expected to start work at Target next week (March 27, 2016-April 2, 2016). Valdez leaked information to Target about Amazon. Target’s spokeswoman claims the information will remain confidential and did not comment any further at that time.

Alexa is a business administration major with a concentration in management at the Feliciano School of Business, Montclair State University, Class of 2018.

The Justice Department charged fourteen people, including nine current or former FIFA figures and five sports marketing professionals, for allegedly “‘foster[ing] a culture of corruption and greed that created an uneven playing field for the biggest sport in the world,’” FBI Director James Comey said. The government alleged racketeering and corruption involving more than $150 million in bribes and kickbacks spanning two decades.

“The investigation grew out of allegations of payoffs to officials who decided where to hold the next two World Cups, the biggest international event in sports, that landed the games in Russia for 2018 and Qatar in 2022, according to three senior U.S. law enforcement officials. The U.S. was runner-up to Qatar’s win.”

FIFA appears to be relieved with the indictments. In a statement posted on its website, it said it “welcomes actions that can help contribute to rooting out any wrongdoing in football.”  FIFA further said, “We are pleased to see that the investigation is being energetically pursued for the good of football and believe that it will help reinforce measures that FIFA has already taken.”

The Clinton Foundation is under scrutiny for accepting money from FIFA and Qatar.  “In 2014, the Qatar 2022 Supreme Committee, set up by the Qatar government to ensure a successful FIFA world cup, awarded the Clinton Foundation between $250,000 and $500,000; the State of Qatar donated between $1 million and $5 million.”  According to the Clinton Foundation website, the money was for “research and development for sustainable infrastructure at the 2022 FIFA World Cup to improve food security in Qatar, the Middle East, and other arid and water-stressed regions throughout the world.”

Posted by Sam Battista.

I came across this article recently about these topics that were brought up in class, and I thought it was appropriate to write a blog pertaining to this article. Seven reputable members of the Geneovese crime family were recently arrested on accounts of money laundering and racketeering. The group allegedly raked in millions of dollars through the Garden State by gambling, loansharking, and unlicensed check cashing. Most of these charges fall under the RICO laws because this is organized crime.

The group ran a massive loansharking operation, which generated about 1.3 million dollars in interest a year. It operated an offshore Costa Rica Gambling website and an unlicensed check cashing business, making over nine million in fees over a four year run. The group also laundered $660,000 dollars in drug money out of a Florida based check cashing entity. The group also gave out multimillion dollar loans with interest rates upwards of 156 percent. In addition, the group ran a illegal check cashing business out of a restaurant in Newark that cashed-in over 400 million dollars.

All of these violations are prohibited in the RICO laws and are considered organized crime. Most of the acts committed were covered or ran out of legitimate businesses. These individuals were all from New Jersey and are currently being prosecuted for their federal violations. People often think these type of crimes only happen in movies, but the truth is it’s a multimillion dollar business with violations happening everyday.

Sam is a business administration major with a concentration in real estate at Montclair State University, Class of 2016.

Posted by Jen Suarez.

On April 6th, 2015, Phi Kappa Psi at University of Virginia announced that it is taking legal action against Rolling Stone Magazine for falsely accusing them of gang rape. Columbia Journalism School Review stated the magazine “acted recklessly and defamed the chapter’s members” by publishing this “shock narrative” and as a result the fraternity house has been vandalized. A police investigation was started but was suspended due to lack of evidence after two weeks.

The woman who wrote the article, only identified as “Jackie,” claimed to be the victim of this gang rape. Rolling Stone magazine vowed to analyze their practices and remove the article, which has been viewed by millions, but publisher Jann S. Wenner refused to fire anyone for this obvious case of bad journalism. The fraternity stated, “The reporter in question not only failed to apologize to members of Phi Kappa Psi, but doesn’t even acknowledge the three witnesses she quoted in the article but never interviewed.” This controversy has damaged the school’s reputation, sparked protests, and hurt efforts to fight sexual violence. Rolling Stone Managing Editor, Will Dana, and author, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, have both apologized but the school and fraternity are still waiting for a sincere apology from corporate and for those responsible for this serious fault to be reprimanded.

Libel is the defamation by written or printed words, pictures, spoken words, or gestures. It is also defined as malicious and damaging misrepresentation. We have all seen ignorant comments on the Internet from people all over the world. They say inaccurate and hurtful things because they can hide behind a keyboard and these vicious comments can be very damaging to the reputation of the individual and company. They cry out “Freedom of Speech!” but they aren’t exercising their rights; they are intentionally trying to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Defamation is considered a civil wrong and is cause for a lawsuit for damages. In many cases, the target must be able to prove that the statements published were a lie. In this case, however, there is overwhelming lack of evidence and inaccurate information.

Jen is a business administration major with a concentration in management at Montclair State University, Class of 2017.

Cell phone video capability is commonplace now, and police in New Jersey are getting used to it. Experts claim that under the First Amendment recording police in plain view is protected. A police officer may not seize a cell phone, delete anything on it, or even demand that the person turn it over to him without a warrant. As long as the person is not truly interfering with a police investigation, they can record as much as they want.

Robert W. Fox, president of the New Jersey State Fraternal Order of Police, stated police should face the fact that cell phone cameras are a reality.  “‘We tell our officers out there . . . that, anything they do, consider themselves being filmed,’” Fox said. “‘No matter where you are anymore, there is some sort of video on the incident – whether it comes from a building camera or an individual cellphone or things like that.’” Arguably, the videos not only protect citizens but also the police from being falsely accused. For most police, video recording should not matter, because they are doing things by the book anyway.

It should be noted that cell phone videos may not capture everything that is taking place during a police encounter. Therefore, rushing to judgment against police would be unfair.