by P.D. Lesko

Michael Woodyard is either Gandalf or Saruman, it just depends on whom you ask. He is challenging Judge Timothy Connors for his seat on the 22nd Circuit Court, a seat Connors has either warmed, or filled admirably, depending on whom you ask. In Washtenaw County, local lawyers simply don’t run against judicial incumbents. Lawyers will explain that it’s because a lawyer who challenges an incumbent and loses could then end up appearing before the incumbent. The obvious fear is that the incumbent judges would hold grudges against their opponents and then make them suffer for it. Considering the fact that judges are supposed to be the adults in the room while lawyers and litigants squabble and scrabble, the prospect that judges would behave vindictively because they had to run for elective office rather than get a free ride every few years should get a little more press than it does.

In Oakland County five incumbent circuit county judges are fending off challengers this election season. It is suspected that a single litigant may be secretly targeting one or more incumbent judges, as the challengers have been the beneficiaries of a million-dollar ad blitz funded by an unknown donor or donors using out-of-state corporations to conceal their identity and motives.

Michael Woodyard (right) lives in Washtenaw County, but works for the Wayne County Prosecutor. Thus, he stands to suffer little professional fall-out as a result of his run against Judge Connors—at least in Wayne County. Here in Washtenaw County, an anonymous letter allegedly mailed to Woodyard urging him to withdraw from the race suggests that his name will be mud should Woodyard “force” local members of the Bar to pony up money to fund Connors’s campaign. Of course, the letter writer implies the local Bar Association and its members are forced to pony up to cover the campaign costs of the sitting judge. Perhaps members of the local Bar prefer to think of it as extortion, rather than blackmail.

A2Buzz.org was created in 2005, and the domain name doesn’t expire until 2014. In a nutshell, the site claims to have been “instrumental in exposing the behavior of  Timothy Connors – Washtenaw  County Circuit Court judge.” The site is outdated, and many of the links broken. Rob Packard, the reporter who allegedly had this to say about Connors in a quote from A2Buzz.org, works at WNWO in Toledo, Ohio:

“As an award winning television journalist, I am frequently required to attend court hearings.  I have a great deal of respect for judges and their position.  In the hearings I attended in this matter, I observed Judge Connors to be rude, constantly interrupting, inattentive, rolling his eyes, sighing, yelling, avoiding eye contact, staring out the window.  I was shocked. There was a clear sense of bias in Judge Connors demeanor.  I have covered federal, civil and criminal court cases for more than a decade. I have never witnessed such a mean and biased behavior in any Judge before.”

Several comments posted anonymously to AnnArbor.com in response to Woodyard’s announcement that he intended to run for the Circuit Court were similarly pointed about Connors’s demeanor in his courtroom. In both 2000 and 2006, Judge Melinda Morris pulled down thousands more votes than her colleague Judge Timothy Connors when they both ran for re-election unopposed. In 2006, when he last ran for re-election, Connors got a little over 65,000 votes out of the 135,126 ballots cast.

To be sure, Michael Woodyard will be outspent, and he will have to make do with just a fraction of the endorsers and endorsements the incumbent will have. However, over the past three years, voters in Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County hasve delivered some rude surprises at the polls both to entrenched political candidates, as well as to supporters of ballot proposals that seemed sure to pass, then didn’t. Could Woodyard win? In a 1999 issue of Court Review, a piece about public confidence in our court system argues that, “For most of our nation’s history, perceptions of, and public trust and confidence in, the U.S. Supreme Court have served as the bellwether of the public’s attitudes toward the judiciary. Indeed, people’s opinions about the U.S. Supreme Court seemed to dictate the general attitude toward the judiciary.” If this is true, it’s bad news for Connors. According to a July 2012 piece in the New York Times, the U.S. Supreme Court has an approval rating of just 40 percent. The Pew Research Center’s measure of favorability concerning the U.S. Supreme Court for 2012 is the lowest in 25 years.

A2Politico: Tell us a little about yourself, your connections to Washtenaw County.

Michael Woodyard:  My family moved to Southeastern Michigan in 1976, when I was 10. I lived in Ypsilanti while I attended Eastern Michigan University, graduating in 1997. In 2002 I bought a home in Ann Arbor. I’ve lived here since, and my kids, now 10 and 8, are enrolled in the city’s public schools.

I find the question of community ties for judicial candidates fascinating. Voters who are choosing a candidate for a policy-making elective office like city council or state representative probably would want someone in office who is just like them. Having someone who has lived their whole life in town might be a good way to tell if someone is like you. But a judge doesn’t make laws or policy. A judge interprets the law as it is written, and the law is the same in Ann Arbor as it is in Ishpeming and in Detroit.

We are very fortunate that Washtenaw County, with the University of Michigan and Eastern Michigan University and various auto suppliers and tech companies, is a destination for people from all over the world. So it’s quite possible that you will find tremendously qualified people who haven’t lived here their whole lives. Basing one’s decision on who to support whether the candidate’s parents went to Huron High School sort of ignores the well-qualified folks who came here later in life.

The law requires that a judge live in the circuit in which he or she serves. So in that respect, my connection to Washtenaw County is important. This is my home, this is where my child was born, were my kids go to school. But insofar as a connection to the community makes it more or less likely that I’ll be a “good” judge, I don’t think that’s an apt data point.

I think a more appropriate question is: how much experience do I have in court, what sort of experience do I have in advocating for justice, will I hold everyone equally accountable before the law, no matter if they’re rich or poor, black or white. And on those points, I am proud of my record, and confident I will serve with distinction.

A2Politico:  Generally, sitting judges get free rides during elections because lawyers who work in the same county are afraid to challenge them for office. You live in Washtenaw County, but work in Wayne County. That explains why you don’t have to fear professional retaliation in Washtenaw County for challenging an incumbent judge, but what makes you think you’ll do a better job than a jurist whose been there since 1997?

Michael Woodyard:  The Circuit Court has jurisdiction over felony criminal cases, certain civil cases, divorce, adoption, child protection, child custody, juvenile delinquency, and other matters. All of these are important areas of law, but the heart of the court lies in its administration of criminal justice. And as a 10-year veteran of the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office, I have an expertise and depth of experience in law and the administration of justice that is not matched by any other candidate.

According to the Michigan Code of Professional Responsibility, a prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate. So as a “minister of justice,” I have fought for 10 years on behalf of children and families. I’ve represented the People of the State of Michigan in 20 different district courts and in front of 27 different circuit court judges. I’ve tried more than 100 cases to verdict before juries and judges. I’ve handled more than 800 arrest warrants. I have an intimate and deep familiarity with the workings of the system of justice.

My opponent has been assigned a civil docket for the past 15 years. These cases are important, with real people trying to resolve important questions. But my opponent simply doesn’t have the depth of experience that I have in criminal law, in advocating for justice under difficult, adversarial circumstances. It is that rich experience that makes me uniquely qualified to serve as judge.

A2Politico:  Who’s on Team Woodyard, helping you with your campaign?

Michael Woodyard:  My campaign is a completely grass-roots effort. The everyday staff consists of me and my girlfriend, Veena Kulkarni, a magnificent concert pianist, teacher, and gracious thinker. Ebru Uras, a friend and former United States Foreign Service officer, is contributing her expertise. Several attorneys I work with are involved. We’ve got a number of strong supporters at our church, and of course, my kids are a big help, too.

A2Politico:  Both you and Judge Connors are on Facebook, and you’re on Twitter. Is social media playing a significant role in your campaign?

Michael Woodyard:  Social media is a great way to keep supporters up to date on what’s going on, to invite folks to events, and to share information about the campaign.

In fact, we recently updated my website (woodyard4judge.com) to provide direct links to court opinions and government documents containing information about my record and my opponent’s record, so voters can see the facts, without any spin or campaign gloss. This is a terrific way to fold important campaign information and digital technology into a seamless presentation.

A2Politico:   Judge Connors was appointed by a Republican governor (Engler). While judgeships are technically non-partisan, politicos-in-the-know understand that Michigan’s bench has become politically polarized. Where do you fall on the political spectrum?

Michael Woodyard:  I’m a life-long Democrat, and my perspective on the law is formed with a background in prosecution. I believe that we all have a responsibility to work to improve society, and I also believe that people must be accountable for their conduct. I think that interpretation of statutes should be careful, and precedent must be followed. The law is the law, and my conviction is to apply it fairly and with integrity, regardless of who the lawyer is standing in front of me, regardless of the social status of the litigants.

A2Politico:  A2Politico has been getting emails from local lawyers about the fact that Judge Connors works for the University of Michigan as a Lecturer (with a .9 appointment and a pro-rata salary of $609,145.78 as of 2011) and yet he refuses to recuse himself when cases involving the University of Michigan come before him. Should a Circuit Court Judge recuse himself from hearing and ruling on cases that involve his employer, or is this a tempest in a judicial teapot?

Michael Woodyard:  Michigan Court Rule 2.003 lists a variety of situations in which a judge might disqualify himself, or in which a party may seek a judge’s disqualification. One circumstance is when the judge has “more than a de minimis economic interest in the subject matter in controversy that could be substantially impacted by the proceeding.”

I suppose one would have to argue that my opponent could get fired from his $54,000 a year teaching job at U of M if he doesn’t rule in favor of the university, and he therefore has a direct interest in the outcome of the cases. But that is nothing more than speculation, and probably not true, anyway.

What isn’t speculative, however, is that his substantial paycheck from the university – and his wife’s new appointment as a family law professor at the university’s law school – raises fair questions about the appearance of impropriety. And that is the subject of a few provisions of the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct.

“Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. A judge must therefore accept restrictions on conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly.” M.C.J. Canon 2 (2)(A)

In particular, while a judge is encouraged to teach and take part in activities that promote understanding of the law, the “judge should refrain from financial and business dealings that tend to reflect adversely on the judge’s impartiality or judicial office, interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties, exploit the judicial position, or involve the judge in frequent transactions with lawyers or persons likely to come before the court on which the judge serves.” M.C.J. Canon 5 (C)(1).

If a judge takes in about $54,000 from a teaching job at the U of M, and his wife also is employed by the University as a law school professor, at the same time that the judge regularly rules on controversies involving the University, those facts alone do not appear to violate any specific canons or rules of ethics. The situation may, however, raise a legitimate question about the appearance of impropriety. And that is a question that each judge will have to answer for himself.

A2Politico:  In May, you allegedly received an anonymous letter (which you posted to your Facebook page) urging you to drop out of the race. It wasn’t a threat, per se, but nonetheless it wasn’t very sporting to suggest anonymously that you have no business running for office because you don’t practice in Washtenaw County, and will cost members of the local bar money when they are be forced to contribute to Judge Connors’s re-election campaign. The letter does make a fair point that few in the political/legal communities in the county know you, professionally. Someone recently suggested to A2P that you’re either very brave or extremely foolish. Which is it? A little of both, maybe?

Michael Woodyard:  Judges are required to act on behalf of litigants and the community, not on behalf of their friends or local attorneys or the political classes. So the question is really whether the voters think my decade of experience fighting for the rights of children and families who have been victimized by crime in one of the largest and busiest and most violent jurisdictions in the United States qualifies me to fairly and justly determine controversies as judge.

I also think it’s fair to point out that “professional,” for a lawyer, has to do with written and oral advocacy, and the lawyer’s demonstrated abilities to be just. That is a different question from whether one talks to a lawyer at bar association functions, or if one thinks the lawyer is a nice guy.

That said, I’m neither brave nor foolish. I am dedicated to public service, and committed to the ideas of accountability, safety and community. Since at least 1954, Michigan law has provided for contested, non-partisan election of circuit court judges. Local media has reported that this race is the first time that an incumbent Washtenaw Circuit judge has been challenged. I think that’s a shame. I think that a judge, like any elected public servant, should be proud of their record and should place that record before the electorate every chance he gets. And if the electorate thinks another person has the qualifications needed to fulfill those specific duties, than someone else should be elected.

A2Politico:  How’s the fundraising going? Care to share how much money you’ve raised thus far for your campaign? Have you self-funded at all?

Michael Woodyard:  Our campaign is a grass-roots labor of love. I haven’t raised tons of money, I haven’t gotten donations from PACs or Super PACs. I am supported by friends, family, members of my church, and the many, many people that I meet and talk with about my record.

I predict that when financials are reported by the state Bureau of Elections later this month, you will see that my opponent has crushed me in terms of raising money from local attorneys, PACS and members of the political and social establishment.

A2Politico:  You endorsed a candidate in the August primary. A2P got a tip that this is against the Judicial Code of Ethics for Michigan Judges. You’re not a judge, of course, so it’s a moot point, and we told our tipster to take two aspirin and call us in the morning. However, one would expect a candidate for judge to know the rules about endorsing in political contests. Then again, Michigan Supreme Court candidate Bridget McCormack, just endorsed Judge Connors and he graciously accepted it via his blog. Care to comment?

Michael Woodyard:  It’s not a moot point. The particular canon prohibits the endorsement of candidates for non-judicial elected office, and applies to judges and candidates for judicial office as well. Frankly, I was very surprised when you asked me this question, because I haven’t endorsed any candidate for non-judicial office. (In fact, I had to ask you whom I had endorsed!)

It turned out that I attended a fund raiser in May, 2012, for Chuck Warpehoski (my girlfriend serves on the board of the Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice, an organization of which Chuck is the director), and the names written down on the sign-in sheet ended up on Chuck’s website under the heading “endorsements.” When you brought this to my attention I immediately asked Chuck to take my name off the list, and he did.

A2Politico:   You write on your website: “As judge, Mike will bring his passion for service to every decision he makes. He will respect the law, not bend it to favor rich or poor. He’ll respect the office, recognizing that a judge, like everyone else, has to earn your trust every day. And Mike will respect the people who appear before him, treating everyone fairly, ensuring that justice is served.” Certainly, several comments in response to the AA.com article in which your candidacy was announced, suggest Judge Connors should be voted out of office. Are you intimating that Judge Connors bends the law to favor certain groups, or treats petitioners and attorneys unfairly?

Michael Woodyard:  I am simply sharing what I value, how I will comport myself as judge. I will respect the law, the litigants and the system of public justice. I will devote myself to improving the community through fair, evenhanded and predictable application of the law. I’ve seen the comments and talked with lots of people in the community, but I have not appeared in front of Judge Connors. I would let attorneys and others who have appeared in front of Judge Connors discuss his judicial temperament.

A2Politico:  Campaigns for judgeships are the condiciones sine quibus non for a game of insider political baseball. Can you finish up by explaining (without using Latin) why the race for this circuit court judgeship should matter a lot to the average citizen? How does a circuit judge touch the life of an average voter?

Michael Woodyard:  Circuit judges are involved in the most important issues affecting a person’s life: child custody, divorce, felony criminal cases, civil disputes, and family matters of various types. A circuit court judge has a far more direct and immediate effect on the individual appearing before the court than do all of the larger structures of government. And by assuming such a direct role with the individual, the court, by extension, plays an essential part in the community.

These are the things I’ve learned over the past decade, representing the People of the State of Michigan in court every day of the week. The circuit court can be a partner in the community, working to foster a sense of accountability, to improve and maintain safety and to strengthen the community by dispensing justice in a fair, evenhanded and predictable manner. As judge, that is what I will do.

by P.D. Lesko

It pays, literally, to live in at least one of the high rent neighborhoods in Ann Arbor. Specifically, outgoing Ward 2 Council member Tony Derezinski’s neighborhood. Between January and September 2012, within a 1 mile radium of Derezinski’s home, there were just 27 crimes reported, the majority of them forced entry burglaries. After burglaries, cars were the most common targets for thieves in Derezinski’s ‘hood—vehicle thefts and, more commonly, vehicle break-ins plagued the Council member’s tony Ward 2 neighborhood. There were no drug-related crimes, sex crimes, arsons, DUIs, or homicides reported to the Ann Arbor Police Department within 1 mile of Derezinski’s home. There were three assaults, but all of them were related to domestic violence complaints.

A2Politico.com used CrimeMapping.com to take a look at the rate of crimes committed (and reported), the type of crimes and frequency of crime within a 1 mile radius of the homes of all of the city’s elected officials, including John Hieftje and all of the 10 City Council members. According to the company’s web site, “CrimeMapping.com has been developed by The Omega Group to help law enforcement agencies throughout North America provide the public with valuable information about recent crime activity in their neighborhood. Our goal is to assist police departments in reducing crime through a better-informed citizenry. Creating more self-reliance among community members is a great benefit to community oriented policing efforts everywhere and has been proven effective in combating crime. CrimeMapping.com utilizes ESRI’s advanced mapping engine, which helps us provide a high level of functionality as well as flexibility to the agencies we serve. Crime data is extracted on a regular basis from each department’s records system so that the information being viewed through a Web browser is the most current available. This data is always verified for accuracy and all address information is generalized by block in order to help ensure privacy is protected.”

Type in an address, select a radius ranging from 500 feet to 2 miles, and the site provides data so that users can see the number, location and type of crime reported during the dates specified.

Like Derezinski, within a 1 mile radius of Ward 2 Council member Jane Lumm’s home, there were a comparatively small number of crimes reported between January and September 2012, 44 in total, or about five reports filed per month. There were seven forced-entry burglaries, 10 assaults, 10 vehicles break-ins, and one drug-related crime (possession of marijuana).

In other high-priced neighborhoods, such as on Baldwin Avenue near Burns Park, where John Hieftje lives, crime is much more frequent and violent. Between January and September 2012, there were 294 crimes reported by residents who lives within a 1 mile radius of Hieftje’s home. There were 12 drug-related crimes, all of which were possession of marijuana. There were 67 burglaries, the majority of which saw thieves forcing their way into homes, as opposed to residents leaving open doors and/or windows, and 52 assaults. While in Lumm’s neighborhood, the majority of assaults were classified as intimidation, within a 1 mile radius of Hieftje’s home, the assaults were more serious, including aggravated/felony assaults, not related to domestic violence, as was the case in Derezinski’s neighborhood. There were four sex crimes, all involving forcible contact and loads (50 reports filed) of larceny/theft. In Lumm’s neighborhood, there was one instance of vandalism involving private property reported in nine months. In Hieftje’s Burns Park neighborhood, there were 61 instances of vandalism reported during the same time frame, or one instance of vandalism every four days, or so. There were no homicides or instance of disturbing the peace. There were, however, two fires classified and reported as arson.

Ward 4 Council member Margie Teall lives in Burns Park, as well, just off of Packard, in what University of Michigan faculty refer to as the “untenured” side of the neighborhood. In Lower Burns Park, the houses are smaller, closer together, less pricey than homes on the “tenured” side of Packard, near Burns Park Elementary School. In this part of Burns Park, within a 1 mile radius of Teall’s home, there were 228 crimes reported in the 9 month period in question including 30 assaults, 41 thefts, 54 acts of vandalism, 56 burglaries, .

Ward 5 Council member Mike Anglin lives on the Old West Side, just off of Main Street, a few blocks from Downtown Home and Garden. Between January and September 2012 within a 1 mile radius of Anglin’s home there were 392 crimes reported, or more than 14 times the number of crimes reported in Tony Derezinski’s Ward 2 neighborhood. In Derezinski’s neighborhood, there was a crime reported to the Ann Arbor Police once every 10 days between January and September 2012; in Anglin’s neighborhood during the same period, there were 1-2 crimes reported daily. While there were fewer burglaries (63) reported in Anglin’s neighborhood than in Hieftje’s neighborhood (67), assault is a more prevalent, even while the types of assaults are not a serious as those committed in Hieftje’s Burns Park area. In Anglin’s neck of the woods, the majority of the 101 assaults reported over the 9 month period were simple assaults, including domestic violence. There were just three more drug-related crimes reported in Anglin’s neighborhood (15) as in Hieftje’s (12). However, while Hieftje’s Burns Park neighbors got nabbed for smoking and possessing pot, in Anglin’s neighborhood the police nabbed suspects in possession of crack, synthetic narcotics and dangerous drugs in addition to marijuana use and possession. Finally, in Anglin’s Old West Side neighborhood, there were 10 sex crimes reported.

So how does the AAPD use crime data to determine where patrols are most frequent? Chief John Seto, when asked, stressed that policing is primarily reactive, in other words, in response to calls reporting crimes, or requesting help.

“We divide the city into four sectors,” explained Seto.

These sectors correspond, roughly to north, south, east and west. It doesn’t mean that a patrol car cruising one sector won’t respond to a call for assistance in another sector. In fact, in cars with a single officer, in certain circumstances, it’s necessary for the officer to wait for back-up. As A2Politico revealed in 2010, “On any given morning, there are between 6-10 police officers responding to calls from the people who live in Ann Arbor. On the afternoon shift, there are between 6-10 police officers on patrol. On the midnight shift, when most serious crime happens, in Ann Arbor there are 10-12 police officers on patrol.”

While John Hieftje’s mantra is “crime is down,” sources in the AAPD have repeatedly alleged that thousands of crime reports have not been filed and that of those reports that have been filed, crimes are being misclassified to appear. Sources within the AAPD revealed:

“There are not enough officers to file reports the same way that officers who worked in the AAPD five years ago filed reports,” another source within the AAPD, who spoke to A2Politico on condition of anonymity explained. “The next call is waiting.”

There are other ways that the multiple sources within the department allege Ann Arbor’s crime statistics are being manipulated so that it appears crime has dropped even as the number of officers has been steadily reduced.

“Say a call comes in to 911. The Ann Arbor dispatch takes the call, writes it up—classifies it—and dispatches officers. When county dispatchers get involved they routinely down-classify the crimes reported in the calls. A & B (assault and battery) becomes disorderly conduct. Open calls get closed out then reclassified.”

Those are serious allegations but not outlandish.

In 2004 Atlanta’s new Police Chief, Richard Pennington, released an independent audit of his department’s police practices that shocked the nation. He criticized his department for underreporting crime. The Los Angeles Times reports, “The independent report covers the years prior to Atlanta’s 1996 Summer Olympics through Pennington’s tenure as chief, which began in 2002. It described ‘a broken police department’ that, during a period when officials here were concerned about the city’s image as a tourist destination, discarded crime records and improperly closed cases.”

In January of this year, The New York Times reported that David N. Kelley, Chief of Police for the city of New York, announced that “three former federal prosecutors would review the department’s internal crime-reporting system.” The article goes on to report that, “Critics have long suggested that the crime data has been undermined by departmental incentives or threats that in many cases prompt those responsible for assessing, reporting and recording crimes — from patrol officers to precinct commanders — to downgrade offenses….”

Ann Arbor’s internal crime-reporting system has never been reviewed or audited by an independent agency or group.

“It needs to be audited,” says a source within the AAPD. “It’s the only way the public will ever get the truth about crime in our city.”

In the meantime, CrimeMapping.com remains a resource for those interested in learning more about reported crimes (the rate of solved crimes and/or closed reports is another kettle of stinking fish, according to AAPD officers in the know).

The bright spot in all of this is that Ann Arbor’s new Police Chief, John Seto, is a big believer in pro-active policing; in other words, he believes a robust police presence deters crime. With new members of City Council preparing to take office—candidates who told voters that they favor rebuilding our decimated safety services—John Seto will, perhaps, find allies willing to move the AAPD back in the direction of pro-active policing. As for an audit of the city’s crime reports and crime-reporting system, one Council member chuckled at the suggestion.

“If we pushed for an audit like that John (Hieftje) would have a stroke.” The Council member grinned broadly. “It’s a great idea.”

by Ernesto Van Dersar

John Wiley & Sons, one of the world’s largest textbook publishers, is continuing its efforts to crack down on BitTorrent piracy. The company has now named several people who allegedly shared Wiley titles online, and is demanding a jury trial against them. If these actually go ahead it will be the first time that BitTorrent-related evidence is tested in a US court.

Last fall, John Wiley and Sons became the first book publisher to go after BitTorrent users in the US.

By filing a mass-BitTorrent lawsuit the company followed mostly in the footsteps of several movie studios, who together have sued more than 250,000 people in the U.S. since early 2010. And the publisher didn’t stop at just one.

In recent months Wiley has filed more than a dozen mass BitTorrent lawsuits involving a few hundred John Doe defendants in total. The Does are all accused of sharing digital copies of titles including WordPress for Dummies, Hacking for Dummies and Day Trading for Dummies.

Wiley’s attorney William Dunnegan said previously that one of the main goals of the legal campaign is to obtain the personal details of the alleged infringers and offer them the opportunity to solve the matter through a settlement.

“Our intention is to stop the infringement and let individuals know that they are violating the law and depriving the creators of the works of rightful compensation. Our preference is to educate, settle, and prevent further infringement,” Wiley’s attorney William Dunnegan said.

However, this strategy doesn’t always work. While the courts and Internet providers have been cooperative in assisting Wiley to obtain the personal details of the alleged book pirates, a new filing suggest that some defendants are not taking the publisher’s settlement offer.

In one of Wiley’s cases four defendants have now been named in an amended complaint.

New York residents Jeff Ng, Ralph Mohr, Robert Carpenter and Xiaoshu Chen are no longer anonymous Does. Wiley is proceeding to call for a full jury trial against the quartet in which they will face accusations of copyright infringement and up to $150,000 in penalties for each offense.

Wiley’s attorney William Dunnegan declined to comment on the recent developments in these specific cases. “We are proceeding with these cases as a part of Wiley’s overall copyright enforcement and education program,” was the comment we got instead.

If one or more of the three cases indeed proceeds to a full trial it will be the first time that actual evidence against BitTorrent infringers is tested in court. This is relevant because the main piece of evidence the copyright holders have is an IP-address, which by itself doesn’t identify a person but merely a connection.

In a past RIAA court case experts described the evidence gathering techniques “as factually erroneous,” “unprofessional” and “borderline incompetent.” In addition, academics have shown that due to shoddy technique even a network printer can be accused of sharing copyrighted files on BitTorrent.

If the evidence is indeed tested in court, it should be a case to watch for sure.

That said, there’s also the chance that the lawyers are using the threat of a full trial by jury as a pressure tool to convince the defendants to settle. After all, the RIAA’s litigation campaign against individual file-sharers has shown that even when a jury awards hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages, lengthy trials cost more than they bring in.

First posted to Torrent Freak.

A2P Notes: This is the debut of Amy Kerr Hardin on A2Politico. However, it is not her first foray into politics or writing. She is an experienced political consultant, and in her neck of the woods (near Traverse City, Michigan) she has worked on multiple candidate campaigns. Get her answering machine and you will hear a voice message that is a clever dig at the state’s Emergency Manager law (Public Act 4) and the people who support the law—a law which Hardin has worked to see overturned. Her interest in politics extends to all three branches of government—a level of interest and curiosity that should impress anyone who reads her carefully crafted and researched writing. She is not a one topic wonder, but rather a political polymath. A magazine recently asked me to name Michigan’s most influential political bloggers and to talk about the political writers whom I read regularly. I put Amy Hardin on that list of Michigan writers whose work is well-crafted, well-researched and thought-provoking. I think you’ll agree that Amy Kerr Hardin is a must-read. Look for her pieces on Sunday.

Amy begins this week with a piece about the push by Michigan’s Republican-controlled state legislature to reshape the state’s prison system into a profit center for industry. The Atlantic Monthly cover, below, is from an issue of the magazine published in 1998. Attempts have been ongoing in states around the country to privatize and outsource the operations of the state-owned prisons, along with schemes to exploit the labor pool of prisoners. The game? To produce big profits for big corporate overseers. Amy writes about companies spending millions (sometimes illegally) lobbying. The idea is to add Michigan to the list of states that outsource prison operations and the labor of prisoners to billion dollar conglomerates.

At long last, some promising employment news for the Midwest.

Michigan lawmakers, under the leadership of Governor Rick Snyder, are truly enabling their corporate partners to bring meaningful employment back to that once great state.

They’ve cleverly attracted some key corporate “job creators” through a controversial $1.8 billion dollar corporate tax cut.  Sure, their plan lacked an accountability mechanism, which worried many because it was a huge calculated risk.  However, throwing money at the rich, and gambling on a job-creating pay-off, is exactly the kind of brilliant manuever expected out of a great corporate genius like Snyder.  He campaigned as the “Nerd,” and it was his keen head for business that drew-in Michiganders to bet their taxpayer dollars on Snyder when they swept him into office in 2010.  He promised what seemed the impossible — to turnaround Michigan through the application of some basic business principles.

And it’s working.  The “job creators” have 43,000 employment opportunities awaiting those beleaguered Michiganders — a population that has endured a one-state depression for over a decade.

Now, thanks to Governor Snyder’s bold leadership, relief is finally in the cards.

Who are these super-hero corporate job creators? And how can one get a piece of that long awaited full-time employment action?

Private prison corporations are the “who,” and the commission of a felony is the “how.”

As it turns out, a Michigan resident has a better chance of finding employment if incarcerated than they do through traditional means. Knocking off a liquor store will land them guaranteed full-time employment faster than any advanced degree.

Michigan lawmakers are rushing to privatize their prisons so they may be managed by for-profit corporations who view the 43,000 inmates currently incarcerated as a golden money-making opportunity — not in terms of turning an easy taxpayer buck off of running the facility itself  — no, that’s just the goose.   The golden egg is “employing” the prisoners in a for-profit scheme under the provisions found in the Prison Industries Enhancement Certification Program, (PIECP, or  ”PIE” for short, but it’s not a sweet pie).

To the mind of a pure capitalist, the competitive bidding process will achieve the maximum savings potential for Michigan taxpayers who currently outlay two billion dollars a year on corrections operations.  However, many of these bidders are clearly gaming the system.  Take a moment to Google any combination of the following corporations and you will discover that they are interrelated in multiple ways:  Group 4 Falck, Group 4 Securicor, GEO Group Inc., Premier Custodial, Global Solutions Ltd., Wackenhut Corp., Correctional Services Corp., just to name a few.

These are the bidders.

There’s more incest here than among the Hapsburgs.  Some are subsidiaries of each other, others are merged, some are offshoots, and they are frequently heavily invested in one another.  Furthermore, examination of their lists of principals shows plenty of cross-pollination in the boardroom too.  Their complex corporate web spans the globe – wherever there are prisons and prisoners, you’ll find the same usual suspects.  Untangling all their connections would be a venn diagram from hell.

Under PIECP these corrections system vendors drive the policy of prison labor practices by controlling it through a sub-contracted privatized oversight committee, the National Correctional Industries Association.  The board of the NCIA is heavily weighted by private industry advocates.  The corporate fox guarding the “pen” house.

These same private vendors have a history of buying politicians. Correctional Services Corporation was fined $300,000 for buying votes in New York State, and Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) was similarly fined for inappropriate lobbying.  But, to them that’s all simply part of doing business — it’s factored-in. These fines are a pittance compared to their profits. One company with deep roots in Michigan, GEO Group Inc., hauled-in $1.27 billion in 2010.  Its top six executives earned a combined income $13.5 million that same year.  That’s on average $2.25 million a piece.  The inmates that slave-away for them earn, at best, a couple of bucks an hour.  A full-time inmate laborer can expect $4,000 to $5,000 a year, that’s .002 percent of those profiting off their sweat.

CCA is currently on a big sales push. They recently sent a letter to 48 states, including Michigan, attempting to corner the market on prison labor under the guise of claiming to help states cut correctional systems costs. In that letter they promised that, with a signed 20 year contract in hand, they will maintain a 90 percent occupancy rate in their facilities.

Just how can they accomplish that?  They certainly don’t control the crime rate.  However, what they do hold sway over is the incarceration rate and sentencing laws.

In a report issued this past January by The Sentencing Project, a research and advocacy group, it is documented that the CCA spends on average $1.4 million a year nationally lobbying for its causes, and in 2010 alone they spent an additional $1.2 million on campaign contributions.  Here’s a disturbingly frank excerpt from the CCA 2010 Annual Report:

“Our growth is generally dependent upon our ability to obtain new contracts to develop and manage new correctional facilities. This possible growth depends on a number of factors we cannot control, including crime rates and sentencing patterns in various jurisdictions and acceptance of privatization. The demand for our facilities and services could be adversely affected by relaxation of enforcement efforts, leniency in conviction and parole standards and sentencing practices or through the decriminalization of certain activities that are currently proscribed by our criminal laws.”

The two biggest players in the prison privatization game are CCA and  GEO Group. Both are former members of, and substantial contributors to, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).  CCA struck-out on its own in 2010 to conduct their own lobbying efforts, and GEO alike, did so a few years earlier. Both corporations grew large enough that they no longer wished to share the pie with lesser players vying for attention through ALEC.

ALEC, nonetheless, remains a major driving force behind model legislation across the country.  The bulk of the lobbyist-written bills are intended to tighten criminal laws and increase mandatory sentencing.  ALEC’s official status with the IRS is as a 501(c)(3) corporation, which legally prevents them from participating in the crafting of legislation. However, they apparently feel the law simply doesn’t apply to them. They’re churning-out model legislation on prisons, criminal laws and sentencing mandates as fast as their lawmaker members can introduce them on the floor, often ver batum from the ALEC model.

Michigan’s Attorney General, Bill Schuette, is pushing hard for new legislation called VO-4, — that is short for a “four strikes and you’re out” law for violent offenders. Schuette wants an automatic sentence of 25 years for those convicted of a fourth offense.  This comes with a hefty price new price tag though. It’s estimated that Michigan prisons would require an additional 17,798 beds over the next 25 years, adding $585 million per year in new spending to the current $2 billion outlay for state-wide corrections costs.

How do they plan to pay for this?  The Republican mantra is that increased privatization will make up the difference, however the experts just aren’t buying it. The Michigan Corrections Organization issued a detailed report, “Pitfalls and Promises” that refutes the privatization concept, and goes further to demonstrate why it will cost the state more in tax dollars rather than less.

If Schuette has his way, Michigan can expect their current prison population of 43,000 to continue to reinforce the national trend of the gross over-incarceration of its citizenry. The United States holds nearly 2.3 million people in its prisons – that’s 25 percent of the world’s total prisoners, a number made all the more shocking knowing that the U.S. comprises only 5 percent of the world’s overall population.  America, the free-est nation in the world, locks-up the equivalent of the populations of Delaware, South Dakota, and Wyoming combined, that’s 730 people for every 100,000 in the country — the highest rate in the world.  The global average is 125. Up until 1975, the U.S. averaged 110, but in the mid-70′s there was a national push for longer prison terms, and Americans now enjoy the world’s harshest sentencing system.

Michigan has been particularly aggressive in incarcerating its youthful offenders. The State has 359 inmates that have been sentenced to life without parole for crimes committed when they were children.  This is the second highest number in the nation. Only Pennsylvania locks-up more kids and throws away the key.

Under the policies set by PIECP, watchdogged by the private vendors themselves through the NCIA, and enabled by the stricter laws they lobbied for via ALEC, among others, the United States now offers 2.3 million of its people, with 43,000 in Michigan alone, to be exploited by companies like Wal-Mart, Victoria’s Secret, Boeing, Microsoft, Starbucks, K-Mart, JC Penney, Eddie Bauer, Honda, TWA, and Northern Outfitters, among many others. These companies routinely hide behind sub-contractors — giving Victoria’s “Secret” a whole new meaning.  Under the PIECP rules, the prisons must pay the “prevailing wage” to inmate worker-slaves, but they are allowed to deduct up to 80 percent of that to cover “costs,” plus taxes, and they do.

Michigan lawmakers are taking it a step further. They want to allow the private prison companies to employ the prisoners to perform duties within the prison, such as custodial and food service, but first the state must legislate an exemption to the minimum wage laws so the private companies can have what will amount to a free work force to run the prison where they will literally have a huge captive labor force at their disposal to contract-out to make millions in corporate profits, all while enjoying Snyder’s generous corporate tax cut on their bounty.

This isn’t the kind of job creation Michigan voters were hoping for when they gambled on Snyder, but it’s the hand they’ve been dealt.

Amy Kerr Hardin writes at Democracy-tree.com.

John Hieftje sat down to an interview with AnnArbor.com’s “editorial board,” almost one year ago to talk about the city’s budget. The city’s CFO Tom Crawford tagged along, primarily to nod, as it is commonly known around City Hall that Crawford uses his fingers to count, and that certain staffers in the finance department do all the heavy lifting. Third Ward Council member Christopher Taylor also participated in the interview. Taylor, a member of the Burns Park Players, evidently thought it was a open call for actors. It wasn’t until after he’d finished a slightly modified rendition of the Elvis Presley classic “I Can’t Help Falling In Love With Me,” that the “editorial board” members asked Taylor to have a seat.

Taylor, an entertainment lawyer, is a self-proclaimed city finance expert. In an open letter to AnnArbor.com, Taylor explained to city residents that the city’s debt position was, actually, nothing to fret about—despite the fact that it had doubled.

It was later revealed that Taylor had understated the city’s total debt by $215,000,000 and that the debt had not doubled, but had quadrupled to close to half a billion dollars.

In the interview with AnnArbor.com, John Hieftje talked about cuts made to the city’s police and fire departments. Hieftje told AnnArbor.com that Ann Arbor residents had nothing to fret about with respect to cuts made to the fire department. He said: “We’re getting some pretty good opinions that our initial response times probably won’t be affected on the fire side.”

The “pretty good opinions,” it was later revealed by the AnnArborChronicle.com were coming from the executive directors of several local social service non-profits. AAChronicle revealed the executive directors, all of whom earn at least $80K per year, would give “pretty good opinions” on just about anything Hieftje told them to protect the money from the city to their organizations. AnnArborChronicle.com writer David Askins happened to be perched on a commode in the men’s washroom at City Hall and capitalized on an opportunity to “chronicle” a “closed-session meeting” between Hieftje and several unidentified executive directors about “pretty good opinions.”

Alas, a $54,000 December 2011 report on the city’s fire services done by consulting firm International City/County Management Association found that: “The department fails to meet national standards for response times,” and that there is “a significant fire problem within the city.”

In the April 2011 interview, Hieftje also told the “editorial board”: “We’ve been pretty comfortable in reducing police numbers,” he said, pointing out crime is going down and the University of Michigan now has 54 of its own officers. And we’re studying the fire side, looking very intently at it. So we’re pretty comfortable with what we’re doing.”

A2Politico decided to ask Hieftje to revisit his April 2011 comments in light of 82 break-ins in the first 49 days of 2012, a string of unsolved serial rapes and the sudden resignation of Police Chief Barnett Jones. Hieftje spoke to A2Politico by phone from his vacation home in Northern Michigan where he lives smugly off the grid.

A2P: Let’s begin by talking about crime in Ann Arbor. Chief Jones told 150 city residents in a recent meeting that there have been 82 break-ins and home invasions in the first 48 days of 2012, up from 49 break-ins and home invasions over the past two years. Under your administration the city has reduced the number of police officers from 241 to 121. Do you think there might be a connection?

Hieftje: No connection. Not at all. 82 break-ins? Not at my house. You know, Downtown Development Authority (DDA) Board member Joan Lowenstein said it best in that essay she wrote. That crime stuff is just all the old, Republican, conservative naysayers in Ann Arbor talking. It’s Newcombe Clark all over again. [In 2010 at a candidate debate, it was reported that Hieftje angrily told Downtown Development Authority Board member Newcombe Clark, who was running for City Council, "You're trying to scare people." Hieftje played down Clark's comments on recent robberies and concerns about other crimes as "political rhetoric."]

A2P: Chief Barnett Jones also recently talked about the serial rapist who hasn’t been caught. He said: “We’re still living this case. We’re still living this case because this is someone who brought fear to our community, more fear to our community than I experienced in this community in the last six years.” Again, might there be a connection between cuts made to police staffing and the ability of the AAPD to check out the hundreds of tips called in and investigate the rapes?

Hieftje: No connection. Not at all. Serial rapes? Not at my house. Listen, I’ve consulted with Chief Barnott Jaynes very closely on these serial rapes. Let’s talk fear. Council member Jane Lumm scares me to death. Not that I think Jane has anything to do with crime in Ann Arbor. I hope not. Single-stream recycling. Listen, Ann Arbor is America’s best cities for singles. I don’t have all the facts and figures, but some of those singles need to walk around in groups after dark.

A2P: The Fifth Avenue underground parking garage….

Hieftje: Let me say that I never supported that project, never voted for it, never thought building another underground parking garage was the right thing for Ann Arbor….Wait is this Ryan Stanton from AnnArbor.com? It’s not, is it? Let me circle back and rephrase my last comments. I may have, ahem, indeed voted in support of that project under duress. I was being pressured by certain people in the community and on Council. Have you seen [First Ward Council member and DDA Board member] Sandi Smith when she gets ticked off? She’s almost as scary as Jane Lumm. However, I came to see that we had no other choice but to spend that $50 million we didn’t have on a garage we didn’t need. Otherwise, the Circuit Court judges would have had nowhere to go. Wait. That’s why we built the new city hall we couldn’t afford and didn’t need. Bike paths.

A2P: What I was going to ask is that with the rise in crime and with a serial rapist on the loose do you think it might discourage women from using the new underground garage when it opens?

Hieftje: Oh. No, women have nothing to worry about. Again, Chief Joiynes and I consult regularly on the fact that the increase in rapes, assaults, break-in and home invasions in Ann Arbor is nothing for anyone to worry about. Newcombe Clark and the old, conservative Republican naysayers who live here now are really just trying to scare people.

A2P: Residents often complain about having to wait for hours for officers to show up to crime scenes and car wrecks. The head of the patrol officers’ union said in July 2011: “Ten years ago, we used to catch people. Now we just don’t even have the staffing to set up a perimeter or bring in a K-9 unit — we’re so reactive now.” Shouldn’t residents in the city expect pro-active and as opposed to reactive policing? The cops are saying they don’t have enough officers to catch the bad guys and investigate the crimes.

Hieftje: I think one accident is too many, but as we look at all of the statistical evidence, accidents continues to go down in the city. Of course, there’s going to be peaks and valleys, and periods where things seem to be picking up a little bit. But when you sit down at year’s end, I think we’re going to arrive at another year where we see accidents down in the city. [A2P can't make this stuff up. This is a quote from Hizzoner.]

A2P: Chief Barnett Jones is retiring after six years. Fire Chief Dominick Lanza quit rather than makes cuts to the fire staffing he deemed too deep. This might lead one to conclude that the professionals see cuts made to safety department staffs not only unwise but downright dangerous. Lanza has said as much in comments from beyond he has posted to AnnArbor.com.

Hieftje: Over the past years, I’ve become extremely close to Burnett Jaynes. He has worked very hard keeping a straight face while telling the public that these cuts have had no impact on public safety. I told him he should try out with the Burns Park Players. He sings and dances around the truth better than Chris Taylor. All I can say is that with his $20,000 pension, along with the other ones he has from his previous jobs, I think he’ll be quite comfortable in his next position. I’m proud Ann Arbor taxpayers were able to help him out with that five-year-pension-vesting program.