December 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2003

« Local Programming: Drinking Liberally Tonight | Main | Back to No Life »

June 17, 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I beg to differ. You may be quite sure that a local is running illegal but not have enough proof to go to trial. Innocent, maybe not. You then use the administrative law to shut them down.

We knew a renter was pimping out her daughters. Couldn't prove it because the girls were underage and refused to testify. Brought in admin law and broke her prostitution ring. She has a 15-25, the girls are placed in care and the johns are all in sex offender status.

Don't think I'd waste such a uselful device on protestors. First Amendment.

Moffat did kind of screw up by not stepping forward immediately as the owner of the property. With no one claiming ownership and the building itself apparently looking rather rough, the police would have a rational basis to believe the inhabitants were squatters.

On the other hand, it also sounds like the police were deliberately harassing Moffat et al solely for their activism. That's scary.

I am surprised L&I would work that closely with the PD in Philadelphia. I've observed the opposite in other urban areas -- there will be problem buildings, e.g., an obviously abandoned structure being used as a crack house, and it will take literally years to get a condemnation order issued so the building can be demolished.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Support This Blog


Philadelphia Bloggers