National Roundup

Rhode Island
Men involved in armed standoff sue state police, judge and media
PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — Several members of the group arrested after an armed standoff along a Massachusetts highway earlier this month have filed a federal lawsuit alleging that state courts have no jurisdiction over the case.

The suit filed by Rise of the Moors in U.S. District Court in Rhode Island last week alleges “defamation, discrimination of national origin and deprivation of their rights under the color of law.”

“If the state courts continue their unlawful prosecution and or conviction, they will be violating the claimants civil, national and human rights,” the suit says. It seeks $70 million in damages.

The Massachusetts State Police and several individual troopers, the judge who presided over their arraignments, the state as a whole, and several media organizations are named as defendants.

Rise of the Moors is based in Rhode Island.

A spokesperson for the state police in an email said because the agency had not seen the suit, it could not comment on the specific allegations, but said “the defendants were arrested because — and only because — they broke the law and created a clear public safety risk.”

A spokesperson for the state court system said the judge would have no comment.

The standoff started just after 1 a.m. on July 3 on Interstate 95 in Wakefield when a trooper stopped to offer assistance to two vehicles refueling on the side of the highway.

The men from Rhode Island, New York and Michigan, who were dressed in military-style clothing and body armor and were armed with long guns and pistols, did not have licenses to carry firearms in Massachusetts, police said.

The self-described leader of the group said they were a militia traveling from Rhode Island to Maine for “training” on private land, although the exact nature of the training remains unclear, according to the police report.

Ten men and a juvenile were arrested after the standoff ended peacefully hours after it started.

They are being held without bail after a series of contentious arraignments and dangerousness hearings at which members of the group said they are sovereign citizens of Moroccan descent and not subject to federal or state laws.
They face charges that include unlawful possession of a firearm.

New Jersey
Woman’s sanctions for displaying profane Biden signs dropped
ROSELLE PARK, N.J. (AP) — A New Jersey town on Tuesday dropped sanctions against a woman who got into hot water for displaying profane signs attacking President Joe Biden.

A municipal court judge in Roselle Park had ordered Patricia Dilascio to remove the signs or face a $250-a-day fine, citing an ordinance banning the display of obscene material. The town is about 12 miles (19 kilometers) southwest of New York City.
Dilascio appealed and on Tuesday, a Superior Court judge vacated the charges after the town voluntarily agreed to dismiss the underlying summons, according to the judge’s order.

Several of the signs hung on a fence on the property use expletives in referring to Biden. The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey represented Dilascio and said Tuesday the ruling confirmed that the town’s use of the ordinance infringed upon her First Amendment rights.

“The First Amendment exists specifically to make sure people can express strong opinions on political issues — or any other matter — without fear of punishment by the government,” ACLU-NJ Executive Director Amol Sinha said in a statement.

Through its attorney, the town said it decided to dismiss the charges against Dilascio after considering its impact on residents but that it stands by the municipal judge’s upholding of the summons issued to her.

“The continued attention garnered by the inappropriate display and the escalating costs to the taxpayers of continuing to litigate the matter causes far greater harm to the Borough, as a whole, than good,” the town’s statement said.

The town said it will be reviewing ordinances related to the case “to ensure that local laws continue to promote the Borough’s values.”


Wisconsin
Court nixes new trial for ‘Making a Murderer’ subject Avery
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Wisconsin Court of Appeal on Wednesday rejected a request by “Making a Murderer” subject Steven Avery to hold a hearing on new evidence that he wanted to present for a new trial.

Avery is serving a life sentence for the 2005 killing of photographer Teresa Halbach, a case that became the focus of a popular Netflix series  whose creators raised questions about the convictions of Avery and his nephew, Brendan Dassey.

Avery attorney Kathleen Zellner asked the court to consider claims ranging from insufficient scientific evidence to ineffective trial counsel. That request had been rejected in 2017 without a hearing and Avery, in his latest appeal, had asked for a hearing or new trial to consider the evidence.

But the appellate court denied the request, ruling unanimously that the motions were insufficient to entitle Avery to a hearing or new trial and that the lower court correctly denied his request.

Avery’s attorney, Kathleen Zellner, did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

Both Avery and Dassey maintain their innocence. The case gained national attention in 2015 after Netflix aired “Making a Murderer,” a multi-part documentary examining Halbach’s death. The series spawned conjecture about the pair’s innocence, but those who worked on the cases accused the filmmakers of leaving out key pieces of evidence and presenting a biased view of what happened. The filmmakers defended their work and supported calls to set Avery and Dassey free.

Dassey was 16 when he confessed to detectives he helped his uncle rape and kill Halbach at the Avery family’s salvage yard. A judge threw out the confession in 2016, ruling it was coerced by investigators using deceptive tactics. That ruling was later overturned by a federal appeals court and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear his case.

Avery has been fighting unsuccessfully for years to have his conviction overturned and to be granted a new trial.