Drug kingpin faces up to 23 years in prison after admitting in US court to trafficking and violence A Jamaican drug smuggler who unleashed a small war in Kingston last year in an attempt to avoid extradition to the US is facing more than 20 years in prison after pleading guilty in a New York court to trafficking and violence. Christopher “Dudus” Coke, 42, who was once regarded by many Jamaicans as the most powerful man in their country, admitted trafficking more than three tonnes of marijuana and 30lb (14kg) of cocaine to the US, and to ordering the stabbing of a marijuana dealer in New York. “I’m pleading guilty because I am,” said Coke, who faces up to 23 years in prison when he is sentenced in December. The plea, which saved Coke from the possibility of a life sentence, was welcomed by political leaders in Jamaica. Some will be relieved that it does not require him to reveal the powerful political ties that enabled him to run his drug trafficking empire unhindered from the Tivoli Gardens neighbourhood of the capital, Kingston, until the government finally bowed to US pressure last year and sent the police and army in to arrest him. More than 70 people died in the ensuing battle, including some in summary execution-style killings by soldiers. Coke reached the deal a week after a judge ruled that tapes of bugged phone conversations in which he discusses smuggling marijuana, cocaine and weapons could be played in court. He would also have faced several witnesses who prosecutors said would testify that Coke ran a small and violent army, known as the Shower Posse because of its tactic of showering its enemies with bullets, to control the smuggling of drugs through Jamaica. Prosecutors said they would produce evidence that Coke personally killed several people, including cutting up a man with a chainsaw. The prosecution said he was also personally responsible for other murders, shootings and beatings. “Because Coke’s heavily armed soldiers patrolled the Tivoli Gardens community, it was largely closed to Jamaican law enforcement,” prosecutors said in court papers. “Coke’s influence over his New York-based narcotics trafficking co-conspirators, from his base in Kingston, was fundamentally a function of his soldiers’ involvement and reputation for violence and the fact that many family members of these US-based traffickers had stayed behind in Jamaica and were, therefore, vulnerable to threats and intimidation.” Peter Bunting, security minister for the opposition People’s National party, told the Jamaica Gleaner that he was not surprised by Coke’s plea. “Once Mr Coke’s request to reject wiretapping evidence into evidence was turned down by the court, there would have been little chance of him getting away as the evidence, coupled with that of the witness co-operation, has been so strong.” Before his conviction, months of speculation in Jamaica suggested Coke would seek to avoid a more substantial sentence by doing a deal with prosecutors that would prove highly embarrassing to the Jamaican government and some prominent politicians. Tivoli Gardens is one of the neighbourhoods known as “garrisons” because they were built by one of Jamaica’s two political parties during their rotations of power and could be relied on to deliver up the vote accordingly. They also proved to be breeding grounds for criminal organisations that became key to the parties maintaining their grip on the vote. Tivoli Gardens is the constituency of Jamaica’s prime minister, Bruce Golding, who has denied links to Coke. But the drug lord commanded considerable support in Tivoli Gardens by helping the poor send their children to school and buying food and clothes for hard-up families, and was regarded as a political force in delivering votes for Golding and his party. The country’s political and business leaders promised that the political links with organised crime and the dependence of the poor on the gangs would change after Coke was extradited, but residents of Tivoli Gardens have complained that they have seen few improvements in their circumstances. Many remain loyal to Coke and the Jamaican press reported that many residents were shocked that he did not fight the case. Some noted that his mother’s death last week may have had a bearing on his mental state. In an editorial, the Jamaica Observer called on Coke to reveal all that he knew before he was sentenced so that the political system could finally be cleaned up. “Between now and then, we hope that Mr Coke will ‘sing like a bird’, naming names and pointing fingers. In a small society such as ours, it is not possible for Mr Coke to have been able to run such a ‘successful’ organisation without the involvement of well-placed individuals in both the public and private sectors. Not to mention the beneficiaries of his nefarious activities,” it said. “Among the 73 people who died by official count are people whose blood cries out for justice. “Someone must account for the trauma suffered by this nation, particularly during the security forces’ operation to flush out thugs from Tivoli Gardens, and for the severe battering that our national image and economy took internationally.” Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke Jamaica Drugs trade United States Chris McGreal guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Drug kingpin faces up to 23 years in prison after admitting in US court to trafficking and violence A Jamaican drug smuggler who unleashed a small war in Kingston last year in an attempt to avoid extradition to the US is facing more than 20 years in prison after pleading guilty in a New York court to trafficking and violence. Christopher “Dudus” Coke, 42, who was once regarded by many Jamaicans as the most powerful man in their country, admitted trafficking more than three tonnes of marijuana and 30lb (14kg) of cocaine to the US, and to ordering the stabbing of a marijuana dealer in New York. “I’m pleading guilty because I am,” said Coke, who faces up to 23 years in prison when he is sentenced in December. The plea, which saved Coke from the possibility of a life sentence, was welcomed by political leaders in Jamaica. Some will be relieved that it does not require him to reveal the powerful political ties that enabled him to run his drug trafficking empire unhindered from the Tivoli Gardens neighbourhood of the capital, Kingston, until the government finally bowed to US pressure last year and sent the police and army in to arrest him. More than 70 people died in the ensuing battle, including some in summary execution-style killings by soldiers. Coke reached the deal a week after a judge ruled that tapes of bugged phone conversations in which he discusses smuggling marijuana, cocaine and weapons could be played in court. He would also have faced several witnesses who prosecutors said would testify that Coke ran a small and violent army, known as the Shower Posse because of its tactic of showering its enemies with bullets, to control the smuggling of drugs through Jamaica. Prosecutors said they would produce evidence that Coke personally killed several people, including cutting up a man with a chainsaw. The prosecution said he was also personally responsible for other murders, shootings and beatings. “Because Coke’s heavily armed soldiers patrolled the Tivoli Gardens community, it was largely closed to Jamaican law enforcement,” prosecutors said in court papers. “Coke’s influence over his New York-based narcotics trafficking co-conspirators, from his base in Kingston, was fundamentally a function of his soldiers’ involvement and reputation for violence and the fact that many family members of these US-based traffickers had stayed behind in Jamaica and were, therefore, vulnerable to threats and intimidation.” Peter Bunting, security minister for the opposition People’s National party, told the Jamaica Gleaner that he was not surprised by Coke’s plea. “Once Mr Coke’s request to reject wiretapping evidence into evidence was turned down by the court, there would have been little chance of him getting away as the evidence, coupled with that of the witness co-operation, has been so strong.” Before his conviction, months of speculation in Jamaica suggested Coke would seek to avoid a more substantial sentence by doing a deal with prosecutors that would prove highly embarrassing to the Jamaican government and some prominent politicians. Tivoli Gardens is one of the neighbourhoods known as “garrisons” because they were built by one of Jamaica’s two political parties during their rotations of power and could be relied on to deliver up the vote accordingly. They also proved to be breeding grounds for criminal organisations that became key to the parties maintaining their grip on the vote. Tivoli Gardens is the constituency of Jamaica’s prime minister, Bruce Golding, who has denied links to Coke. But the drug lord commanded considerable support in Tivoli Gardens by helping the poor send their children to school and buying food and clothes for hard-up families, and was regarded as a political force in delivering votes for Golding and his party. The country’s political and business leaders promised that the political links with organised crime and the dependence of the poor on the gangs would change after Coke was extradited, but residents of Tivoli Gardens have complained that they have seen few improvements in their circumstances. Many remain loyal to Coke and the Jamaican press reported that many residents were shocked that he did not fight the case. Some noted that his mother’s death last week may have had a bearing on his mental state. In an editorial, the Jamaica Observer called on Coke to reveal all that he knew before he was sentenced so that the political system could finally be cleaned up. “Between now and then, we hope that Mr Coke will ‘sing like a bird’, naming names and pointing fingers. In a small society such as ours, it is not possible for Mr Coke to have been able to run such a ‘successful’ organisation without the involvement of well-placed individuals in both the public and private sectors. Not to mention the beneficiaries of his nefarious activities,” it said. “Among the 73 people who died by official count are people whose blood cries out for justice. “Someone must account for the trauma suffered by this nation, particularly during the security forces’ operation to flush out thugs from Tivoli Gardens, and for the severe battering that our national image and economy took internationally.” Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke Jamaica Drugs trade United States Chris McGreal guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Charities and health bodies call on equalities minister to intervene and protect rights of women to get impartial advice A coalition of women’s groups has written to the equalities minister, Lynne Featherstone, urging her to intervene in the row over backbenchers’ attempts to reform abortion protocols. They say the proposals could delay abortions and allow anti-abortion groups to counsel women. Featherstone is being asked to seek a guarantee within government that the current system won’t change, ahead of a potential vote that could overhaul the existing counselling services for women seeking to terminate a pregnancy The signatories to the letter include the Fawcett Society, the Women’s Health Equalities Consortium, the Medical Women’s Federation and the National Assembly of Women as well as the trade union Unison. It will pile pressure on the Liberal Democrat minister, who has faced criticisms that she has failed to intervene on other coalition policies that Labour claims adversely affected women. “Preventing abortion providers from offering decision-making support opens the door for organisations opposed in principle to abortion to become formally involved in counselling women on their pregnancy options,” the letter says. “Previous governments have always acted on evidence and taken guidance from expert medical professionals. There is no evidence of a need for change in this area and no support from professional clinical organisations for such change.” The intervention comes amid wranglings in government over how to handle an amendment that could be selected when the health bill returns to the Commons next week, which would mean all women seeking abortions would be offered counselling independent of the abortion provider, in a move that could strip charities that provide the services of their current role. It is being proposed by the Tory backbencher Nadine Dorries and Labour’s Frank Field and backed by a campaign with links to anti-abortion groups. On Sunday, the Department of Health said that it would go ahead with plans to introduce independent counselling and consult on how it would work, in a move that was interpreted as caving into the campaign. After an intervention from No 10 and furious Lib Dems, the government announced it will not support the amendment – though MPs will still get a free vote – with David Cameron and DoH ministers voting against. It also reworded its position on the plans, saying it would consult on the “best” counselling options for women but that the outcome was not a foregone conclusion. Anne Milton, the public health minister, wrote to coalition MPs yesterday to clarify the government’s position and confirm that the health ministers would vote against it. On Thursday, the Right to Know campaign, which is supporting Dorries’s and Field’s campaign and is backed by some known anti-abortionists, responded robustly to the government’s opposition to the plan. It published a poll of MPs conducted in April, prior to the row over the implications of the move, which found that some 92% backed the statement. “A woman should have a right to impartial advice when considering having an abortion, from a source that has no commercial interest in her decision.” A spokeswoman for the campaign said: “The widespread support for the objectives of this campaign is unsurprising.
Continue reading …Charities and health bodies call on equalities minister to intervene and protect rights of women to get impartial advice A coalition of women’s groups has written to the equalities minister, Lynne Featherstone, urging her to intervene in the row over backbenchers’ attempts to reform abortion protocols. They say the proposals could delay abortions and allow anti-abortion groups to counsel women. Featherstone is being asked to seek a guarantee within government that the current system won’t change, ahead of a potential vote that could overhaul the existing counselling services for women seeking to terminate a pregnancy The signatories to the letter include the Fawcett Society, the Women’s Health Equalities Consortium, the Medical Women’s Federation and the National Assembly of Women as well as the trade union Unison. It will pile pressure on the Liberal Democrat minister, who has faced criticisms that she has failed to intervene on other coalition policies that Labour claims adversely affected women. “Preventing abortion providers from offering decision-making support opens the door for organisations opposed in principle to abortion to become formally involved in counselling women on their pregnancy options,” the letter says. “Previous governments have always acted on evidence and taken guidance from expert medical professionals. There is no evidence of a need for change in this area and no support from professional clinical organisations for such change.” The intervention comes amid wranglings in government over how to handle an amendment that could be selected when the health bill returns to the Commons next week, which would mean all women seeking abortions would be offered counselling independent of the abortion provider, in a move that could strip charities that provide the services of their current role. It is being proposed by the Tory backbencher Nadine Dorries and Labour’s Frank Field and backed by a campaign with links to anti-abortion groups. On Sunday, the Department of Health said that it would go ahead with plans to introduce independent counselling and consult on how it would work, in a move that was interpreted as caving into the campaign. After an intervention from No 10 and furious Lib Dems, the government announced it will not support the amendment – though MPs will still get a free vote – with David Cameron and DoH ministers voting against. It also reworded its position on the plans, saying it would consult on the “best” counselling options for women but that the outcome was not a foregone conclusion. Anne Milton, the public health minister, wrote to coalition MPs yesterday to clarify the government’s position and confirm that the health ministers would vote against it. On Thursday, the Right to Know campaign, which is supporting Dorries’s and Field’s campaign and is backed by some known anti-abortionists, responded robustly to the government’s opposition to the plan. It published a poll of MPs conducted in April, prior to the row over the implications of the move, which found that some 92% backed the statement. “A woman should have a right to impartial advice when considering having an abortion, from a source that has no commercial interest in her decision.” A spokeswoman for the campaign said: “The widespread support for the objectives of this campaign is unsurprising.
Continue reading …Congressperson Ann Marie Buerkle (NY-25) with a surprise win against Dan Maffei, rode into Congress in 2010 with the rest of her tea party compatriots. Buerkle promised fiscal responsibility and a new way to do business in Washington DC. I’m not sure that she could claim to be entirely successful in that endeavor, but she has managed some choice committeeships (Oversight and Government Reform, Foreign Affairs and Veteran Affairs) and a sparkly 80 percent score from Heritage Foundation , the highest of any New York representative. Congresswoman Buerkle also displays the same amount of sparkly intelligence and grasp of how things really work as the rest of her tea party buddies : A fun nugget buried in this story about Rep. Ann Buerkle’s (R-NY) first town hall meeting as an elected member of Congress. Constituents repeatedly asked a puzzled Buerkle about her health benefits. She couldn’t figure out why. But her staff sure could. Buerkle, who voted to repeal the health care reform act, was twice asked about the health insurance she receives as a government employee. At first she said she couldn’t understand why people were so interested in her health insurance, and that taxpayers didn’t pay anything for it. She later corrected herself after being handed a note from a staffer. Like most employees, she pays for a portion of her insurance and her employer, the government, pays the rest, she said. Well, no, technically her employer is NOT the government. It’s the people (a government for, by and of the people, remember?), and more specifically, it’s being paid for by taxpayers. But that’s not something any other American (for, by and of the people, remember?) should be able to have, right?
Continue reading …Congressperson Ann Marie Buerkle (NY-25) with a surprise win against Dan Maffei, rode into Congress in 2010 with the rest of her tea party compatriots. Buerkle promised fiscal responsibility and a new way to do business in Washington DC. I’m not sure that she could claim to be entirely successful in that endeavor, but she has managed some choice committeeships (Oversight and Government Reform, Foreign Affairs and Veteran Affairs) and a sparkly 80 percent score from Heritage Foundation , the highest of any New York representative. Congresswoman Buerkle also displays the same amount of sparkly intelligence and grasp of how things really work as the rest of her tea party buddies : A fun nugget buried in this story about Rep. Ann Buerkle’s (R-NY) first town hall meeting as an elected member of Congress. Constituents repeatedly asked a puzzled Buerkle about her health benefits. She couldn’t figure out why. But her staff sure could. Buerkle, who voted to repeal the health care reform act, was twice asked about the health insurance she receives as a government employee. At first she said she couldn’t understand why people were so interested in her health insurance, and that taxpayers didn’t pay anything for it. She later corrected herself after being handed a note from a staffer. Like most employees, she pays for a portion of her insurance and her employer, the government, pays the rest, she said. Well, no, technically her employer is NOT the government. It’s the people (a government for, by and of the people, remember?), and more specifically, it’s being paid for by taxpayers. But that’s not something any other American (for, by and of the people, remember?) should be able to have, right?
Continue reading …“Speaker Says No, So Obama Delays Speech” is how The New York Times's September 1 front page headline spun the short squabble over the timing of President Obama's upcoming speech before Congress on his job creation plan. “Spat Over Which Day to Address Economy,” added a subheadline. The online version opted for a headline that went lighter on the loaded language: “Obama Moves Jobs Speech After Skirmish With Boehner.” For their part, Times writers Helene Cooper and Jackie Calmes ginned up the perpetual lament of partisan discord in Washington, before going on to portray President Obama as the bigger man for amending his initial wish to speak to Congress next Tuesday at 8 p.m. Eastern: WASHINGTON — Any hopes that a kinder, gentler bipartisan Washington would surface once Congress returns after Labor Day were summarily dashed on Wednesday when President Obama and Speaker John A. Boehner clashed over, of all things, the date and time of the president’s much-awaited speech to the nation about his proposal to increase jobs and fix the economy. In a surreal volley of letters, each released to the news media as soon as it was sent, Mr. Boehner rejected a request from the president to address a joint session of Congress next Wednesday at 8 p.m. — the same night that a Republican presidential debate is scheduled. In an extraordinary turn, the House speaker fired back his own letter to the president saying, in a word, no. Might the president be able to reschedule for the following night, Sept. 8? For several hours, the day turned into a very public game of chicken. By late Wednesday night, though, the White House issued a statement saying that because Mr. Obama “is focused on the urgent need to create jobs and grow our economy,” he “welcomes the opportunity to address a joint session of Congress on Thursday, Sept. 8.” Cooper and Calmes later went on to present Boehner's rejection of the September 7 speaking request as an “unprecedented” departure from decorum: Congressional historians said Mr. Boehner’s move was unprecedented. “The Senate Historical Office knows of no instance in which Congress refused the president permission to speak before a joint session of Congress,” Betty K. Koed , associate historian with the Senate, said in an e-mail. “Permission to speak in a joint session is given by resolution of the House and Senate, and arrangements are made through the leadership offices of each chamber.” Of course, Obama wasn't “refused” permission to speak, as the text of Boehner's letter made clear , in which the Speaker “respectfully invite[d]” the president to “address a Joint Session of Congress on Thursday, September 8, 2011 in the House chamber, at a time that works best for your [President Obama's] schedule.”
Continue reading …“Speaker Says No, So Obama Delays Speech” is how The New York Times's September 1 front page headline spun the short squabble over the timing of President Obama's upcoming speech before Congress on his job creation plan. “Spat Over Which Day to Address Economy,” added a subheadline. The online version opted for a headline that went lighter on the loaded language: “Obama Moves Jobs Speech After Skirmish With Boehner.” For their part, Times writers Helene Cooper and Jackie Calmes ginned up the perpetual lament of partisan discord in Washington, before going on to portray President Obama as the bigger man for amending his initial wish to speak to Congress next Tuesday at 8 p.m. Eastern: WASHINGTON — Any hopes that a kinder, gentler bipartisan Washington would surface once Congress returns after Labor Day were summarily dashed on Wednesday when President Obama and Speaker John A. Boehner clashed over, of all things, the date and time of the president’s much-awaited speech to the nation about his proposal to increase jobs and fix the economy. In a surreal volley of letters, each released to the news media as soon as it was sent, Mr. Boehner rejected a request from the president to address a joint session of Congress next Wednesday at 8 p.m. — the same night that a Republican presidential debate is scheduled. In an extraordinary turn, the House speaker fired back his own letter to the president saying, in a word, no. Might the president be able to reschedule for the following night, Sept. 8? For several hours, the day turned into a very public game of chicken. By late Wednesday night, though, the White House issued a statement saying that because Mr. Obama “is focused on the urgent need to create jobs and grow our economy,” he “welcomes the opportunity to address a joint session of Congress on Thursday, Sept. 8.” Cooper and Calmes later went on to present Boehner's rejection of the September 7 speaking request as an “unprecedented” departure from decorum: Congressional historians said Mr. Boehner’s move was unprecedented. “The Senate Historical Office knows of no instance in which Congress refused the president permission to speak before a joint session of Congress,” Betty K. Koed , associate historian with the Senate, said in an e-mail. “Permission to speak in a joint session is given by resolution of the House and Senate, and arrangements are made through the leadership offices of each chamber.” Of course, Obama wasn't “refused” permission to speak, as the text of Boehner's letter made clear , in which the Speaker “respectfully invite[d]” the president to “address a Joint Session of Congress on Thursday, September 8, 2011 in the House chamber, at a time that works best for your [President Obama's] schedule.”
Continue reading …Psychopaths use charm and manipulation to achieve success in the workplace, according to a US study One out of every 25 business leaders could be psychopathic, a study claims. The study, conducted by the New York psychologist Paul Babiak, suggests that they disguise the condition by hiding behind their high status, playing up their charm and by manipulating others. Favourable environmental factors such as a happy childhood mean they can function in a workplace rather than channelling their energies in more violent or destructive ways. Revealing the results in a BBC Horizon documentary, Babiak said: “Psychopaths really aren’t the kind of person you think they are. “In fact, you could be living with or married to one for 20 years or more and not know that person is a psychopath. “We have identified individuals that might be labelled ‘the successful psychopath’. “Part of the problem is that the very things we’re looking for in our leaders, the psychopath can easily mimic. “Their natural tendency is to be charming. Take that charm and couch it in the right business language and it sounds like charismatic leadership.” Babiak designed a 111-point questionnaire with Professor Bob Hare, of the University of British Columbia in Canada, a renowned expert in psychopathy. Hare believes about 1% of Americans can be described as psychopaths. The survey suggests psychopaths are actually poor managerial performers but are adept at climbing the corporate ladder because they can cover up their weaknesses by subtly charming superiors and subordinates . This makes it almost impossible to distinguish between a genuinely talented team leader and a psychopath, Babiak said. Hare told Horizon: “The higher the psychopathy, the better they looked – lots of charisma and they talk a good line. “But if you look at their actual performance and ratings as a team player and productively, it’s dismal. Looked good, performed badly. “You have to think of psychopaths as having at their disposal a very large repertoire of behaviours. So they can use charm, manipulation, intimidation, whatever is required. “A psychopath can actually put themselves in your skin, intellectually not emotionally. “They can tell what you’re thinking, they can look at your body language, they can listen to what you’re saying, but what they don’t really do is feel what you feel. “What this allows them to do is use words to manipulate and con and to interact with you without the baggage of feeling your pain.” • Horizon: Are You Good Or Evil? is on BBC2 at 9pm on Wednesday 7 September Psychology Work & careers Steven Morris guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Names emerged from interviews with Breivik and English anti-Muslim blogger Paul Ray, say Norwegian police Norwegian police say they are to question several British citizens in their search for potential accomplices of mass killer Anders Behring Breivik. Officers in Oslo said the names of individuals and several far-right groups emerged from questioning of British anti-Muslim blogger Paul Ray as well as further interviews with Breivik. Police press officer Roar Hanssen said: “We have some names and also some groups we are investigating. They came from Paul Ray, and also from Breivik and also from other things we have been investigating.” Breivik, 32, admitted killing 77 people last month when he detonated a truck bomb outside government offices in Oslo, and then went on a shooting spree at a youth camp at Utøya, 25 miles away. He was questioned again on Wednesday and prosecutor Paal-Fredrik Hjort Kraby said officers focused on Breivik’s manifesto, his alleged links to a group called the Knights Templar and potential ties to the UK. Hanssen said: “A lot of people are mentioned in Breivik’s manifesto and we, of course, want to speak to them and there are some links to the UK. I don’t know if there are specific areas they are from but there are some rightwing groups.” Ray was interviewed last week after claims he may have been the “mentor” mentioned by Breivik in his “manifesto”, posted online shortly before he carried out the killings on 22 July. Ray, who wrote his blog under the name Lionheart, has said it appeared Breivik drew inspiration from some of his ideas and writings, but he has repeatedly denied any link, saying he never met Breivik and was horrified by the killings. He said he travelled to Norway to “clear his name”. Breivik wrote that he attended the founding meeting of the Knights Templar Europe “military order” in London in 2002 where he met a “mentor” who used the pseudonym Richard, after Richard the Lionheart. He signed the 1,500-page document with an anglicised version of his name and datelined it London 2011. Breivik also repeatedly praised the English Defence League, saying he had 600 EDL supporters as Facebook friends and had spoken with members and leaders. The EDL has condemned the killings and has denied any official contact with Breivik, insisting it is a peaceful, non-racist organisation opposed to extremism. Kraby said Norwegian police did not have evidence that Breivik had accomplices, but “did not rule out the possibility.” Norwegian officers are now deciding whether to carry out the interviews in the UK or in Norway. Hanssen said: “We can ask for help from the British police. It is not decided what we will do yet but these are possibilities.” Anders Behring Breivik Norway Europe Matthew Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …