Freedom or Tyranny.com

Grandmother Joan Higgins leaving Trafford Magistrates Court in Manchester Photo: MEN (telegraph.co.uk)

A great-grandmother has been ordered to wear an electronic tag for breaching new animal welfare laws by selling a goldfish to a 14 year-old boy.

Joan Higgins, a pet shop owner, was caught selling the fish to the teenager in a ’sting’ operation by council officials. She was then prosecuted in an eight month court process estimated to have cost the taxpayer more than £20,000.

Under new animal welfare laws, passed in 2006, it is it illegal to sell goldfish to under 16s. Offenders can be punished with up to 12 months in prison.

Mrs Higgins, 66, who thought the boy was much older than 14, escaped jail but was instead ordered to wear an electronic tag and given a night time curfew. She was also fined £1,000 by Trafford Magistrates Court.

Her son Mark Higgins, who was also proscecuted in connection with the case, described the treatment of his mother as a “farce” and “legal lunacy”. He said the punishment she had received would prevent her from attending her weekly bingo sessions as well babysitting her one month-old great grandchild.

full text here

Eric Holder’s defence of Chiquita suggests he is a poor choice to be the next US attorney general.

Jason Glaser
guardian.co.uk

The selection of Eric Holder as the next attorney general of the United States is a deft political decision. Holder should face little if any opposition during the approval process given his bipartisan history. This would ensure a smooth transition at a time that requires decisive action. Still, Barack Obama’s selection may not be something to celebrate. The choice of Holder reveals a troubling disconnect between a key statement made by the president-elect during the campaign and views held by Holder. This disconnect must be examined in light of the dismal state of US foreign relations.

The issue of direct payments to the justice department by offending US corporations is a worrying trend. It is one that has risen sharply under the Bush administration and was first championed by former attorney general John Ashcroft. In lieu of a trial, companies are allowed to pay a fine directly to the justice department. These agreements are readily accepted by companies, as they are cost effective, avoid the stigma of public trial and don’t set precedents. None of the money paid goes to affected individuals or communities, which leaves any sense of justice wanting. There is also valid concern that abuse of this system may lead to companies being less scrupulous.

Representing Chiquita, Holder brokered a deal for the banana giant to pay $25m over five years to the justice department. This arrangement was made after Chiquita admitted in 2003 to providing $1.7m over six years to the paramilitary group The United Self Defense Forces of Colombia. This group was listed as a terrorist organisation by the state department. Chiquita also allegedly provided a cache of surplus Nicaraguan army AK-47s through their own transport network. The payments continued unabated for months after Chiquita’s admission.

The company claimed the payments were made to protect its workers, but it is unclear who was protected. Colombia’s attorney general, Mario Iguaran, roundly rejects Chiquita’s excuses. Iguaran believes the payments were made to secure the unimpeded production of bananas and to quell labour unrest. He claims that at least 4,000 people were killed by these paramilitaries. Hundreds of the victims were banana workers and labour organisers. Iguaran wishes to extradite the Chiquita executives responsible for approving the payments and a lawsuit is currently underway representing the families of 173 workers who were killed by the paramilitaries. Holder continues to represent Chiquita in the resulting civil case.

full text here