US-40 Roll Over Accident

Last night drivers on US-40 witnessed a two-car roll over accident happened at roughly 9:20 p.m. near Davis Drive. Two cars were involved; one that flipped and the other showed front end damage. At least one person was take to Duke hospital. Traffic patterns were not restored until almost 11:00 p.m..

The cause has yet to be determined, but an experienced car accident lawyer may expect what legal actions will follow; however, A good attorney does not make predictions and guesses based on limited information. There are certain legal issues presented in this particular roll over accident that an injured party should be aware.

Fault in a Roll Over Accident

An attorney will need to establish a roll over wreck was due to anther party’s negligence. Legally speaking, you should view negligence as careless or reckless actions the resulted or contributed to an accident with injury. If past cases, roll over crashes have been the fault of automotive manufacturers. You likely remember the Ford Explorer claims. That became quite complicated leading to the realization the recommended tire inflation played a large part in the accident.

There is a key indicator of fault in a car accident: front end damage. While there are exceptions, that damages indicates the driver failed to maintain control of his/her vehicle sufficiently as to avoid impacting another vehicle. Driving courses have taught the  two-second rule. It is equivalent to one vehicle-length for every 5 mph of the current speed.

Durham Roll Over Accident Lawyer

There has yet to be sufficient information release regarding this particular accident, but it helps illustrates common facts in roll over wrecks. If you were hurt in a roll over accident, contact a Durham lawyer today.

Breaking and Entering Arrest in Chapel Hill

CHAPEL HILL — A police tactical team of at least 20 police officers arrested eight demonstrators Sunday afternoon and charged them with breaking and entering for occupying a vacant car dealership on Franklin Street.

Officers brandishing handguns and semi-automatic rifles rushed the building about 4:30 p.m. They pointed weapons at those standing outside and ordered them to put their faces on the ground. They surrounded the building and cleared out those inside.

About a dozen people, including a News & Observer reporter covering the demonstration, were forced to the ground and handcuffed.

Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/14/1642841/police-team-swarms-chapel-hill.html#ixzz1dh06K9Dc

What is Breaking and Entering?

According to North Carolina General Statutes § 14-54, Breaking and Entering is:

(a) Any person who breaks or enters any building with intent to commit any felony or larceny therein shall be punished as a Class H felon.

(b) Any person who wrongfully breaks or enters any building is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

(c) As used in this section, “building” shall be construed to include any dwelling, dwelling house, uninhabited house, building under construction, building within the curtilage of a dwelling house, and any other structure designed to house or secure within it any activity or property

Breaking and Entering Lawyer

Conviction for breaking and entering could be a felony. You will have to disclose this on every job application the rest of your life. There are many factors that determine if you are convicted of a felony, convicted of a misdemeanor or acquitted. Contact the Chapel Hill criminal defense of John C. Fitzpatrick if you have been charge with breaking and entering.

Assault with a Deadly Weapon Arrest

Police have charged four men with assault with a deadly weapon in connection with an Oct. 23 shooting that injured two children and a man.

Officers responding to a call at 1:13 p.m. found a 48-year-old man wounded outside 210 N. Driver St. and a 1-year-old girl and a 3-year-old boy shot inside a house at 204-A N. Driver St. All three were taken to Duke Hospital for treatment.

One suspect, John Tarver, 23, of 204-B N. Driver St., is in custody, charged with shooting the a man, whose name was not released.

Investigators also have charged Arthur Clendenning, 24, of North Hyde Park Avenue; Tavarez Brown, 24, of Spruce Street; and Jaunarais King, 23, of Kent Lake Drive with shooting the children. Police are still looking for all three.

Tarver was arrested last week and charged with shooting Tavarez Brown on Oct. 17 on Fern Street. Brown was shot several times in the buttocks during a drive-by shooting. He was treated for his injuries at Duke Hospital.

Investigators think that on Oct. 23, the occupants of a blue vehicle were seeking retaliation for the Fern Street shooting when they fired shots at Tarver, who was standing on the porch of 204-B N. Driver St. The shots missed Tarver but entered 204-A N. Driver St., wounding two children who were inside that house.

Tarver is charged with shooting the man, 48, when he returned fire at the car. The man was standing on the corner and was apparently not the intended target.

Tarver was charged with assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in connection with the Driver Street incident, according to a police news release. He also is charged with assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in connection with the Oct. 17 Fern Street incident. He is in Durham County Jail under a $1.5 million bond.

Clendenning, Brown and King each have been charged with two counts of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury, one count of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill and one count of discharging a firearm into an occupied dwelling, according to the news release.

Anyone with information on the whereabouts of Clendenning, Brown or King is asked to call investigators at 919-560-4281, ext. 29123 or Crime Stoppers at 919-683-1200.

Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/03/1614821/4-charged-in-durham-shootings.html#ixzz1ceNj5xN6

Assault with a Deadly Weapon Lawyer

Defending Assault with a Deadly Weapon Charges

Defending complex felony charges take the experience of an attorney like John Fitzpatrick. f you were charged with assault with a deadly weapon, call now.

Raleigh Rape Suspect Caught

Six years ago, police in Youngsville searched for a man who they think lured a 15-year-old girl into his apartment and raped her. One month later, Raleigh police accused him of holding his ex-girlfriend at knifepoint.

Police plastered fliers with his likeness on telephone poles and convenience store windows. They went undercover at places he frequented and kept his apartment under surveillance. But the man they were searching for, Nathan Randall Pettigrew, had vanished.

Pettigrew, 32, was finally arrested Tuesday afternoon during a traffic stop in the Gulf Coast town of Ocean Springs, Miss., the town’s Deputy Chief Mark Dunston confirmed Wednesday.

Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/03/1614674/rape-suspect-caught-in-miss.html#ixzz1ceK3n1y3

Statutory Rape Laws

§ 14-27.7A. Statutory rape or sexual offense of person who is 13, 14, or 15 years old.
(a) A defendant is guilty of a Class B1 felony if the defendant engages in vaginal
intercourse or a sexual act with another person who is 13, 14, or 15 years old and the defendant
is at least six years older than the person, except when the defendant is lawfully married to the
person.
(b) A defendant is guilty of a Class C felony if the defendant engages in vaginal
intercourse or a sexual act with another person who is 13, 14, or 15 years old and the defendant
is more than four but less than six years older than the person, except when the defendant is
lawfully married to the person. (1995, c. 281, s. 1.)

Rape Defense

No one likes to think of lawyers defending rapists; however, it is important to remember what make our legal system the best in the world is that the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. We have seen DNA overturn conviction after the defendant spent more than 20 years in prison. Every person accused of a crime, including rape, deserves a vigorous defense.

Report of Indecent Exposure

Police are investigating four indecent exposure incidents reported on the American Tobacco Trail in southern Durham in the past nine days.

The first incident occurred Oct. 23. A woman told officers she was jogging on the trail between Woodcroft Parkway and Crooked Creek Parkway around 8:10 a.m. when a man approached her and asked her for the time. About 10 minutes later, she was jogging back on the trail when the same man approached, asked her for the time and exposed himself. He was described as white, in his early 40s, 6 feet 2 inches tall and wearing a black doo-rag, a black T-shirt and very short black shorts.

The next incident was reported about 9:30 a.m. Friday on the American Tobacco Trail between Fayetteville Street and Otis Street. A woman told officers she saw a nude man wearing only a red bandana over his head. He was described as white, in his 30s with close-cut brown hair.

A third incident was reported about 3 p.m. Saturday on the American Tobacco Trail near Scott King Road. A woman told officers that a man exposed himself. She described him as white, 6 feet tall and possibly in his 30s. He was wearing a black doo-rag, short black running shorts, a plain white long-sleeve T-shirt and white or light-colored sneakers.

The fourth incident was reported about 9:40 a.m. Sunday on the American Tobacco Trail near Legacy Lane and Fayetteville Road. The suspect was described as a white man wearing only a small hat. He was described as approximately 6 feet tall and in his 30s.

The Police Department assigned additional officers to patrol the trail since the first incident was reported and urges people to call 911 if they see any suspicious activity. Anyone with information is asked to call investigators at 919-560-4582, ext. 29370.

Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/01/1610610/women-report-flasher-on-trail.html#ixzz1cTQ5f8DV

Indecent Exposure Law

North Carolina’s Laws speaking to Indecent exposure (§ 14‑190.90)

(a)        Unless the conduct is punishable under subsection (a1) of this section, any person who shall willfully expose the private parts of his or her person in any public place and in the presence of any other person or persons, except for those places designated for a public purpose where the same sex exposure is incidental to a permitted activity, or aids or abets in any such act, or who procures another to perform such act; or any person, who as owner, manager, lessee, director, promoter or agent, or in any other capacity knowingly hires, leases or permits the land, building, or premises of which he is owner, lessee or tenant, or over which he has control, to be used for purposes of any such act, shall be guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.

(a1)      Unless the conduct is prohibited by another law providing greater punishment, any person at least 18 years of age who shall willfully expose the private parts of his or her person in any public place in the presence of any other person less than 16 years of age for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire shall be guilty of a Class H felony. An offense committed under this subsection shall not be considered to be a lesser included offense under G.S. 14‑202.1.

(b)        Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a woman may breast feed in any public or private location where she is otherwise authorized to be, irrespective of whether the nipple of the mother’s breast is uncovered during or incidental to the breast feeding.

(c)        Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a local government may regulate the location and operation of sexually oriented businesses. Such local regulation may restrict or prohibit nude, seminude, or topless dancing to the extent consistent with the constitutional protection afforded free speech. (1971, c. 591, s. 1; 1993, c. 301, s. 1; c. 539, s. 124; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c); 1998‑46, s. 3; 2005‑226, s. 1.)

Indecent Exposure Arrest

Every person is entitle to a vigorous defense. Contact a Durham criminal defense lawyer if you are charged with indecent exposure.

Contempt Case Delayed

Andrew Young, the former John Edwards aide who wrote a tell-all book about the former U.S. senator’s 2008 presidential bid, will face criminal contempt accusations in state court next year, not this month.

Young, his wife, Cherie, and federal prosecutors have been subpoenaed by lawyers for Rielle Hunter, the videographer with whom Edwards had an extramarital affair and a daughter. Hunter sued the Youngs over a property dispute that includes a videotape that purportedly shows her sexually involved with Edwards. She recently accused the Youngs of secretly passing information from that state court hearing – information sealed by a judge – to federal prosecutors involved with a separate criminal case against Edwards.

Federal prosecutors accuse Edwards, 58, of secretly obtaining payments from two wealthy friends to hide Hunter from the public while she was pregnant. The prosecutors contend the payments, which exceeded $900,000, were campaign contributions that not only weren’t reported, but also exceeded legal limit. They say the payments were meant to help Edwards keep his presidential bid alive.

Edwards and his attorneys say the payments were personal gifts – not campaign-related – that went from one party to others, not him. He has said he did not break the law.

The state case involving the property dispute between Hunter and the Youngs is somewhat related to the federal criminal case. Andrew Young is expected to be a key witness for the prosecution in the federal case.
Last week, federal prosecutors asked U.S. District Court Judge Catherine Eagles to help them make a case to quash subpoenas initiated by Hunter’s attorneys. Eagles did not issue a ruling, but said she was puzzled that prosecutors had to get information for the criminal case against Edwards from the state case.

Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/01/1610592/andrew-youngs-day-in-state-court.html#ixzz1cS34XdqN

What is Contempt of Court?

Contempt of court is often thought of as a disruption in the court room. Scenes from movies like A Few Good Men are the only exposure the general public has to this criminal charge. While this is one example, contempt is a general charge against a party who has disobeyed or disrespected the court’s authority. It may be an attorney who chooses not to disaclose information he/she feels is protected by the attorney-clients relationship. It also may be when a person having information relevant to a ongoing case withholds said the court ordered disclosed.

4 Elements of Contempt

A prosecutor has a big job in proving contempt. It may appear the “tell-all” book publish by the accused may have made this job a bit easier. A person found in contempt of court is called a “contemnor.”  To prove a contempt charge, the prosecutor must prove the four elements of contempt:

• Existence of a lawful order
• The contemnor’s knowledge of the order
• The contemnor’s ability to comply
• The contemnor’s failure to comply

There is typically an order issued with a date demanding disclosure of desire information. While this list has 4 elements, the greatest challenge in proving contempt is the ability to comply. A criminal defense attorney will argue the accuse cannot comply to the court order because he/she does not have said information or is unable to provide it due to a valid legal reason.

Halloween DWI Defense

As with all holidays, social gatherings include drinking and people are charged with DWI. Durham criminal defense lawyer John Fitzpatrick Lawyer has helped many people after what was supposed to be a fun night went wrong.

Durham, Raleigh and Chapel Hill will have sobriety checkpoints. That’s what law enforcement call DWI roadblocks. In addition to these drunk driving deterrents, North Carolina law enforcement will have extra officers working. They will be looking for drivers who’s driving shows probably cause for a DWI traffic stop.

If you or your child is arrest for DWI during or after you Halloween festivities, contact a Durham criminal defense lawyer. Don’t let a mistake cascade and cause even greater troubles by not having your rights defended.

DWI Sobriety Test

Law enforcements officers rely on Field Sobriety Tests (FST) when making an arrest. This is the test of physical activities like walking a line and touching your nose. It has been shown that sober people will sometimes not be able to pass this test. It is also imperative the officer administered it correctly. You may refuse it, but your license will be suspended for 12 months even if you are not convicted of DWI.

You also do not have to take a breathalyzer; however, there is a mandatory one year suspension of your driving privileges for so. That is the machine they ask you to blow into at road side. This is not to be confused with the BAC testing that occurs after arrest. You must submit to this test. North Carolina doesn’t allow attorney to argue against the accuracy of this device, even though they are know to be inaccurate.

There is a standing argument that DWI laws in North Carolina violate the 5th Amendment. Regardless, this is how the laws stand today.

Halloween DWI Arrests

Getting arrested for DWi can cost you more than your drivers license. If you were charged with DWI, contact an experience DWI lawyer to defend your rights.

Aiding and Abetting of Terrorism

Aiding and Abetting is similar charge that occurs more frequently in Durham arrest than providing material support. A federal jury found three Triangle residents guilty of providing material support to terrorists and two of the three defendants guilty of conspiring to commit jihad overseas.

The verdict today caps a three-week trial in New Bern that offered a glimpse into government’s use of FBI informants to build a slew of terrorism cases nationwide since the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

Mohammad Omar Aly Hassan, Ziyad Yaghi and Hysen Sherifi were convicted after a jury deliberated much of Wednesday and part of today.

Though charged with conspiring to commit jihad overseas, Hassan was found not guilty of that charge. But he was convicted of providing material support to terrorists.

Yaghi and Sherifi were convicted on both counts.

Daniel Boyd, the accused ring leader of the group, and two of his sons, Dylan and Zakariya Boyd, were key witnesses for the prosecution. Prosecutors also played hours and hours of audio tape gathered by federal informants.

The three Boyds entered guilty pleas before the trial in plea arrangements with prosecutors.

Sentencing for the Boyds will follow this month’s trial.

Prosecutors contended during the trial in the New Bern federal courthouse that Hassan and Yaghi attempted to travel to Israel in 2007 to meet up with the Boyds to carry out an attack.

Prosecutors showed jurors rifles, pistols and ammunition that investigators seized from Boyd’s home, describing them as an arsenal being stored for attacks.

Defense lawyers argued the government’s case was nothing more than a prosecution of young Muslims who did little more than watch jihadist videos on computers and share Facebook posts that mentioned fighting Americans overseas

Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/10/13/1563352/jury-convicts-3-north-carolina.html#ixzz1agygMwqv

Aiding and Abetting

This case has made headlines because we have not witnessed terrorism trial in North Carolina. We have witnessed plenty of cases that are very similar, albeit not dealing with terrorism.

Aiding and abetting is a criminal charge against a person or persons who did not actually a crime, but where the accused may have carried out the illegal act(s) as an agent of the charged, working together with or under the direction of the charged party, who is an accessory to the crime.

It is derived from the United States Code (U.S.C.), section two of title 18:
(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.
(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

Aiding and Abetting Defense

To be found guilty of aiding and abetting, the charge will be considered alongside the crime itself. You can be convicted of aiding and abetting, even if the person accused of actually committing the crime is found not guilty of the crime itself. Aiding and abetting prosecution must demonstrate a crime has been committed. The terrorism charges above do not have the same provision.

It is necessary to prove the accused wilfully associated himself with the crime being committed. The prosecution will attempt to show you wanted the crime to succeed, but your own actions or lack there of. Under this law, anyone who aids or abets a crime may be charged with the crime as if they were the perpetrator.

Aiding and Abetting is serious charge. Contact the Durham criminal defense attorneys at the Law Office of John C. Fitzpatrick if you have been charged with aiding and abetting.

Three Car Accident In Guilford

Two people were taken to Yale-New Haven Hospital with minor injuries following a three car accident on Durham Road Saturday morning, police said. A car backing out of the driveway of Dudley Farm, 2351 Durham Road, was apparently hit by another car traveling southbound down the roadway, Sgt. Steve Renchy said. That car, in turn, ended up striking another car.

Who is at fault in a car accident?

Here we have several cars involved in an accident with injuries. Who is at fault? Fault in car accidents may not always be black and white. At first glance, we would assume the car striking the one backing out of the drive is at fault. If the car backed out without sufficient time or space for the other driver to have avoided impact, contributory negligence may factor in to a law suit. This means expert determine that driver A held 60% of the blame and driver 2 held the other 40%.

If it could be determining the car backing out was 100% at fault, driver B could be relieve of fault for striking driver C. It can be confusing, but a skilled car accident attorney will understand how to position your case to receive the best compensation for your injuries.

Car Accident Lawyer

The insurance companies have adjusters and attorneys to fight for their rights. Who wil fight for yours? Contact John Fitzpatrick if you were involved in a car accident.

Perdue shows her true disregard for equality

North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue on Friday stated her opposition to the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage that North Carolina voters will vote on this coming May.

In a statement released on her website and quoted by news sites such as LGBTQ Nation and the Huffington Post, she asserted that she is opposed to the amendment, yet qualified that statement with the following words.

“My top priority is creating jobs. Too many people are out of work and I’ve heard from several business leaders who’ve told me that the proposed constitutional amendment will harm our state’s business climate and make it harder to grow jobs here. I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman: That’s why I voted for the law in 1996 that defines marriage as between one man and one woman, and that’s why I continue to support that law today.

But I’m going to vote against the amendment because I cannot in good conscience look an unemployed man or woman in the eye and tell them that this amendment is more important than finding them a job.”

It seems as though she may have to take this “middle ground” in regards to equality in order to keep her governorship away from her potential challengers (according to recent polling by Public Policy Polling she has a very low approval rating and is trailing or equal in the polls with her gubernatorial challengers).

But is this a stand that should be applauded, or even just met with statements like “well that’s good or “at least its a no vote” by LGBT activists? I think not, for this statement out of the Governors office shows nothing more than a lack of substance or interest in promoting equality for her gay and lesbian constituents.

Based upon her language, if a bill came before her to legalize marriage equality in the state, we would see a veto — since she continues to support and believe the discriminatory notion that marriage is only between one-man one-woman.

Instead of holding her feet to the fire, Equality North Carolina — an organization with which I normally respect and admire — issued a tepid response. Instead of calling out the governor on the ridiculousness of her “opposition”, they instead release a statement saying:

Governor Perdue’s statement makes clear that while there are issues on which we do not agree, we do agree that this amendment, and this debate, is not about legalizing same-sex marriage, but is and should be about what this amendment would actually do: eliminate legal recognition and protections for all unmarried couples, regardless of their sexual orientation.

With our communities focus on the negative economic impacts of anti-gay marriage amendments, it might seem as though we have gotten away from why marriage equality actually matters. Marriage bans are wrong because in them, we are being singled out for exclusion strictly because of our sexual orientation. We are denied legal relationship recognition because we were wired to love someone of the same-sex.

Instead of elevating the reality of our exclusion and denial of a basic fundamental right, organizations like Equality North Carolina is allowing individuals like Governor Perdue to assert that economics is the only reason to vote pro-equality. Because its “bad for business,” it is bad for the North Carolina.

It is only because it is better to “focus on jobs” and not fundamental rights that she will be voting against the bill. So does that mean that if business was booming and we were in the middle of economic growth, that the Governor would be voting for the discriminatory amendment?

That is the problem with allowing individuals like Governor Perdue to state that their opposition for marriage equality is strictly economic, rather than because such an amendment is a fundamental disregard of human rights and legal equality. A friend to our community who is only a friend because of economics is not a true friend at all.

Instead, Perdue is an opportunist and a true politician, not only disregarding standing firm for equality, but embracing economic justifications for social policy. The slave-owners of the pre-war South would find much in common with her.

From: http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2011/10/perdues-statement-on-gay-marriage-shows-her-true-disregard-for-equality/