U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail For Law Enforcement

by Ron Nixon, New York Times

 

Leslie James Pickering noticed something odd in his mail last September: a handwritten card, apparently delivered by mistake, with instructions for postal workers to pay special attention to the letters and packages sent to his home.

“Show all mail to supv” — supervisor — “for copying prior to going out on the street,” read the card. It included Mr. Pickering’s name, address and the type of mail that needed to be monitored. The word “confidential” was highlighted in green.

“It was a bit of a shock to see it,” said Mr. Pickering, who with his wife owns a small bookstore in Buffalo. More than a decade ago, he was a spokesman for the Earth Liberation Front, a radical environmental group labeled eco-terrorists by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Postal officials subsequently confirmed they were indeed tracking Mr. Pickering’s mail but told him nothing else.

As the world focuses on the high-tech spying of the National Security Agency, the misplaced card offers a rare glimpse inside the seemingly low-tech but prevalent snooping of the United States Postal Service.

Mr. Pickering was targeted by a longtime surveillance system called mail covers, a forerunner of a vastly more expansive effort, the Mail Isolation Control and Tracking program, in which Postal Service computers photograph the exterior of every piece of paper mail that is processed in the United States — about 160 billion pieces last year. It is not known how long the government saves the images.

Together, the two programs show that postal mail is subject to the same kind of scrutiny that the National Security Agency has given to telephone calls and e-mail.

The mail covers program, used to monitor Mr. Pickering, is more than a century old but is still considered a powerful tool. At the request of law enforcement officials, postal workers record information from the outside of letters and parcels before they are delivered. (Opening the mail would require a warrant.) The information is sent to the law enforcement agency that asked for it. Tens of thousands of pieces of mail each year undergo this scrutiny.

The Mail Isolation Control and Tracking program was created after the anthrax attacks in late 2001 that killed five people, including two postal workers. Highly secret, it seeped into public view last month when the F.B.I. cited it in its investigation of ricin-laced letters sent to President Obama and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. It enables the Postal Service to retrace the path of mail at the request of law enforcement. No one disputes that it is sweeping.

“In the past, mail covers were used when you had a reason to suspect someone of a crime,” said Mark D. Rasch, who started a computer crimes unit in the fraud section of the criminal division of the Justice Department and worked on several fraud cases using mail covers. “Now it seems to be, ‘Let’s record everyone’s mail so in the future we might go back and see who you were communicating with.’ Essentially you’ve added mail covers on millions of Americans.”

Bruce Schneier, a computer security expert and an author, said whether it was a postal worker taking down information or a computer taking images, the program was still an invasion of privacy.

“Basically they are doing the same thing as the other programs, collecting the information on the outside of your mail, the metadata, if you will, of names, addresses, return addresses and postmark locations, which gives the government a pretty good map of your contacts, even if they aren’t reading the contents,” he said.

But law enforcement officials said mail covers and the automatic mail tracking program are invaluable, even in an era of smartphones and e-mail.

In a criminal complaint filed June 7 in Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, the F.B.I. said a postal investigator tracing the ricin letters was able to narrow the search to Shannon Richardson, an actress in New Boston, Tex., by examining information from the front and back images of 60 pieces of mail scanned immediately before and after the tainted letters sent to Mr. Obama and Mr. Bloomberg showing return addresses near her home. Ms. Richardson had originally accused her husband of mailing the letters, but investigators determined that he was at work during the time they were mailed.

In 2007, the F.B.I., the Internal Revenue Service and the local police in Charlotte, N.C., used information gleaned from the mail cover program to arrest Sallie Wamsley-Saxon and her husband, Donald, charging both with running a prostitution ring that took in $3 million over six years. Prosecutors said it was one of the largest and most successful such operations in the country. Investigators also used mail covers to help track banking activity and other businesses the couple operated under different names.

Other agencies, including the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services, have used mail covers to track drug smugglers and Medicare fraud.

“It’s a treasure trove of information,” said James J. Wedick, a former F.B.I. agent who spent 34 years at the agency and who said he used mail covers in a number of investigations, including one that led to the prosecution of several elected officials in California on corruption charges. “Looking at just the outside of letters and other mail, I can see who you bank with, who you communicate with — all kinds of useful information that gives investigators leads that they can then follow up on with a subpoena.”

But, he said: “It can be easily abused because it’s so easy to use and you don’t have to go through a judge to get the information. You just fill out a form.”

For mail cover requests, law enforcement agencies submit a letter to the Postal Service, which can grant or deny a request without judicial review. Law enforcement officials say the Postal Service rarely denies a request. In other government surveillance programs, like wiretaps, a federal judge must sign off on the requests.

The mail cover surveillance requests are granted for about 30 days, and can be extended for up to 120 days. There are two kinds of mail covers: those related to criminal activity and those requested to protect national security. Criminal activity requests average 15,000 to 20,000 per year, said law enforcement officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are prohibited by law from discussing them. The number of requests for antiterrorism mail covers has not been made public.

Law enforcement officials need warrants to open the mail, although President George W. Bush asserted in a signing statement in 2007 that the federal government had the authority to open mail without warrants in emergencies or in foreign intelligence cases.

Court challenges to mail covers have generally failed because judges have ruled that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy for information contained on the outside of a letter. Officials in both the Bush and Obama administrations, in fact, have used the mail-cover court rulings to justify the N.S.A.’s surveillance programs, saying the electronic monitoring amounts to the same thing as a mail cover. Congress briefly conducted hearings on mail cover programs in 1976, but has not revisited the issue.

The program has led to sporadic reports of abuse. In May 2012, Mary Rose Wilcox, a Maricopa County supervisor in Arizona, was awarded nearly $1 million by a federal judge after winning a lawsuit against Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The sheriff, known for his immigration raids, had obtained mail covers from the Postal Service to track her mail. The judge called the investigation into Ms. Wilcox politically motivated because she had been a frequent critic of Mr. Arpaio’s, objecting to what she considered the targeting of Hispanics in his immigration sweeps. The case is being appealed.

In the mid-1970s the Church Committee, a Senate panel that documented C.I.A. abuses, faulted a program created in the 1950s in New York that used mail covers to trace and sometimes open mail going to the Soviet Union from the United States.

A suit brought in 1973 by a high school student in New Jersey, whose letter to the Socialist Workers Party was traced by the F.B.I. as part of an investigation into the group, led to a rebuke from a federal judge.

Postal officials refused to discuss either mail covers or the Mail Isolation Control and Tracking program.

Mr. Pickering says he suspects that the F.B.I. requested the mail cover to monitor his mail because a former associate said the bureau had called with questions about him. Last month, he filed a lawsuit against the Postal Service, the F.B.I. and other agencies, saying they were improperly withholding information.

A spokeswoman for the F.B.I. in Buffalo declined to comment.

Mr. Pickering said that although he was arrested two dozen times for acts of civil disobedience and convicted of a handful of misdemeanors, he was never involved in the arson attacks the Earth Liberation Front carried out. He said he became tired of focusing only on environmental activism and moved back to Buffalo to finish college, open his bookstore, Burning Books, and start a family.

“I’m no terrorist,” he said. “I’m an activist.”

Mr. Pickering has written books sympathetic to the liberation front, but he said his political views and past association should not make him the target of a federal investigation. “I’m just a guy who runs a bookstore and has a wife and a kid,” he said.

 

NSA Leaker Snowden Hiding in Hong Kong

Associated Press

The former CIA employee who suddenly burst into headlines around the globe by revealing himself as the source of top-secret leaks about U.S. surveillance programs has just as quickly gone to ground again.Two days after Edward Snowden checked out of a Hong Kong hotel where he told the Guardian newspaper that he had "no intention of hiding who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he was in hiding Wednesday, despite being the central figure in the biggest news story in the world.

But a Hong Kong newspaper, the South China Morning Post, said it was able to locate and interview him at a secret place.

"I am not here to hide from justice. I am here to reveal criminality," it quoted Snowden as saying.

Snowden said he planned to stay in Hong Kong and "fight the United States government in the courts, because I have faith in Hong Kong's rule of law."

Snowden, 29, arrived in Hong Kong from his home in Hawaii on May 20, just after taking leave from his National Security Agency contracting firm Booz Allen Hamilton, which has since fired him.

With little new information to report on Snowden or his whereabouts, many of Hong Kong's notoriously boisterous newspapers, and others around the world, fixated on his American girlfriend, a dancer who posted partially nude photographs on herself online before she also apparently disappeared.

"Spy on the run: girlfriend ill at ease," read one Apple Daily headline above a picture of the 28-year-old Lindsay Mills in a provocative pose taken from her blog, which has since gone offline.

Mills is not believed to be traveling with Snowden.

Apple Daily quoted unidentified sources with the Hong Kong immigration department as saying they had no record of Snowden leaving the territory. A spokesman for the department, speaking on routine condition of anonymity, said it could not confirm the paper's information because it did not comment on individual cases.

Reporter Ewen MacAskill of Britain's the Guardian newspaper, who interviewed Snowden for exclusive stories about his revelations, wrote late Tuesday that "it is thought" Snowden was now in a private home in Hong Kong, but offered no details.

Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald, who also interviewed Snowden in Hong Kong, has given a series of interviews about the case, but refused to reveal any information about Snowden's location or his future plans.

Despite the uncertainty, Hong Kong supporters of Snowden have organized a protest march featuring local human rights activists and prominent pro-democracy politicians to pass in front of the U.S. Consulate on Saturday afternoon.

"We call on Hong Kong to respect international legal standards and procedures relating to the protection of Snowden; we condemn the U.S. government for violating our rights and privacy; and we call on the U.S. not to prosecute Snowden," the organizers said in a news release.

Questions remain about why Snowden chose to go public in Hong Kong, a Chinese autonomous region that maintains a Western-style legal system and freedom of speech, although he said he considered the territory to be relatively free and open. Hong Kong has an extradition agreement with the United States, but there are exceptions in cases of political persecution or where there are concerns over cruel or humiliating treatment.

U.S. authorities have yet to bring charges against Snowden or file an extradition request with Hong Kong. Legal experts say quirks in the Hong Kong legal system could allow Snowden to draw that process out for months or years through appeals.

Snowden might also block extradition altogether by claiming he would be subject to the same harsh treatment as WikiLeaks source Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, who was held alone for nine months in a windowless cell 23 hours a day, sometimes with no clothing, drawing complaints from human rights groups and the United Nations' chief torture investigator.

Snowden could still attempt to leave Hong Kong for another destination, possibly including nearby jurisdictions or countries that do not have extradition treaties with the United States, such as China. Snowden himself has given no indication he is prepared to cooperate with any foreign intelligence service, including China's.

Outside of Asia, Snowden might also consider seeking asylum in countries like Iceland and Russia. According to the Kommersant Daily newspaper, Moscow has said it might provide asylum.

Susan Powell's Father Hires Private Eye to Review File

by Associated Press Writers Paul Foy and Brady McCombs

Police say they've taken their best shot at finding missing Utah mother Susan Powell. Now, her dad is hoping a review of the newly released case file containing tens of thousands of pages of detective reports, maps, interview transcripts and more might turn up something the investigators missed.

Chuck Cox told reporters Tuesday at a news conference in Seattle that a private eye has offered to help comb through the records, perhaps yielding new or overlooked clues about the sensational case.

"That's one of the reasons we wanted it: to find out what (the police) really had, because that would point us in a different direction and give us a place to search for my daughter," Cox said.

Susan Powell disappeared in December 2009, and her husband, Josh Powell, was long a suspect in the case. But last year, he killed himself and the couple's two young sons in an explosive house fire in Washington state, and investigators turned their attention to Powell's brother, Michael, who, they now believe, helped Josh Powell dispose of Susan's body.

Michael committed suicide by jumping off a parking garage in Minneapolis three months ago. That left authorities with no direct suspects, and this week they announced they were closing the active part of the investigation and opening their books on the case. They insisted they never had enough evidence to charge either brother.

"We didn't have a body. We don't have a crime scene," West Valley City Deputy Chief Mike Powell said.

The documents show that police had always doubted Josh Powell's bizarre alibi. Powell claimed he wasn't home when his wife vanished because he had just left the house in the middle of the night to take their 2 and 4-year-old boys camping in the Utah desert in the middle of a snowstorm.

They describe how Powell gave muddled answers when asked where authorities should look for her, and how detectives painstakingly followed up on tips called in by hunters, campers, prisoners, other law enforcement agencies and even psychics. They checked mine shafts and shallow pet graves, tracked down a potential witness in Michigan, used wiretaps and put a tracking device on Josh Powell's van.

Detective reports also reveal that Josh Powell apparently had an affair with a woman he met through a dating service months before his wife vanished. The woman, whose full name is redacted, told them they had sex five to six times during daytime meetings, and he paid her about $800.

The revelations about the affair and about Michael Powell's potential involvement were surprising, Cox said, and he was eager to see what else was in the files.

Cox and Anne Bremner, a Seattle attorney for the family, said they continue to believe that prosecutors did, in fact, have enough evidence to arrest Josh Powell and convict him for murder. Not having a body can make it tougher to prove a murder charge, but prosecutors across the country have won convictions in such circumstances.

In this case, Bremner said, the circumstantial evidence was remarkably strong: Powell's alibi was nonsensical. He hemmed and hawed when questioned by police. He couldn't explain why he had her cellphone with the digital SIM card removed, and he couldn't explain why, in the days after she disappeared, he rented a car and drove it 800 miles.

There was also a potential motive: Josh Powell cleaned out Susan Powell's retirement accounts 10 days after her disappearance, and he had taken out $1.5 million in life insurance policies on her.

"In some ways, circumstantial evidence is the best evidence," said Bremner, a former prosecutor. "With direct evidence, you can have a witness lie. With forensic evidence, you can have problems with collection. But circumstantial evidence never lies and you can't change it.

"They could have arrested him, and they should have, based on that evidence."

Bremner told the news conference that even as Utah police close the active part of their investigation into her disappearance, federal authorities continue to review the case, a claim that was denied by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Salt Lake City.

Bremner said she and Cox were apprised earlier Tuesday of the federal investigation by an agent who has been directly involved in the case. She said she requested permission to announce the development at the news conference, and the agent granted it. Bremner said the scope involved looking into what Josh Powell's father, Steve, knew about his daughter-in-law's disappearance.

In response, Melodie Rydalch, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Utah, issued a statement saying that federal agencies in Utah had assisted in the investigation and would be happy to do so again should circumstances warrant.

"However, we do not have plans to conduct any further investigation," she said.

West Valley City Deputy Police Chief Mike Powell said he wasn't immediately aware of any ongoing federal investigation.

Steve Powell had a sexual obsession with Susan Powell and thoroughly documented it in journals seized by police. He is currently serving a prison sentence after being convicted of voyeurism charges for secretly recording young neighbor girls.

Utah police said Monday that they do not believe he was directly involved with Susan Powell's disappearance but may know more about it than he has let on.

Police said both Steve and Michael Powell were uncooperative in the investigation.

They interviewed Michael numerous times about why he left his car at an Oregon junk yard weeks after Susan's disappearance _ a fact police didn't learn until nearly two years later. Officials said he offered evasive answers about why he got rid of the car and how he had used it in late 2009.

CIA Moves To The Cloud

by Tim Dees, April 23, 2013, Policeone.com

In what may be the ultimate confirmation of perceived reliability, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) recently announced they would be moving their data and much of their operating software into “the cloud.” Specifically, they have contracted with Amazon Web Services (AWS) to host much of the CIA’s information technology activity. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) made a similar move last year.

Mission-critical operations are usually among the last to adopt new technologies, preferring to wait until the bugs are worked out and their utility is proven before betting the ranch on a new gadget’s performance.

The federal government is especially reticent to buy new consumer technology, which is ironic when you consider that the Department of Defense regularly contracts to buy aircraft, vehicles and ships that haven’t been invented yet. Often, these new designs have numerous flaws that keep them from going operational for years, and usually cost millions or billions more to perfect and manufacture.

In the roughly 35 years we have had personal computers in the workplace, both private and public sector organizations have traditionally purchased both hardware and software outright. The IT industry moves so fast that the new gear seems outdated within a year or three, although it typically performs about as well on day 1,000 as it did on day one.

When we’re running Windows 7 and saving files to massive solid state hard drives and peanut-size flash drives at home, it’s a letdown to go to work and use a computer running Windows 95, pulling files off of floppy disks. Don’t laugh, I personally know of a medical office which was doing exactly that until last year.

The practice of having both software and data in the cloud, on a remote server, is sometimes called Software-as-a-Service (SaaS).

Maintaining relatively low-powered (and inexpensive) thin client terminals at the work site, the applications and data are called down from the cloud as needed. The outfit hosting SaaS is responsible for keeping everything running, from tending and powering the physical computers to constantly tweaking and upgrading the software to provide maximum efficiency.

Google has a free SaaS option called Google Docs, and the latest iteration of Microsoft Office, called Office 365, runs on a SaaS subscription.

For an operation like the CIA, SaaS has result in significant savings. Much of their role is in data collection and archiving, but the analysis function occasionally demands some high-powered computing resources. By paying for these resources only when it needs them, the agency saves the cost of buying high-end computing equipment that may sit idle most of the time, can occasionally be unavailable because of higher-priority needs, and will be obsolete in a few years.

AWS offers computing services that are similar to hotel rooms. If you travel to another city frequently, you could buy a house to stay in while you’re there, but the house will be vacant most of the time.

Instead, you rent a hotel room to use when you need it, and let the hotel take care of it both when you need it and when you don’t. The hotel tries to maximize its revenue by keeping that room occupied as much as possible, and there is a delicate balance between having rooms available when anyone wants one and having too much excess inventory that’s not making money.

AWS does the same thing with computers. Both private and public companies occasionally need some major processing power, and AWS will sell it to them when they need it. Similarly, they build data storage centers in geographically separate locations, so it’s unlikely a single disaster will take down much of the system at once.

That doesn’t mean it never happens. AWS hosts much of Netflix’s streaming video collection, which can account for one-third of all North American internet traffic at peak use hours.

Last Christmas Eve, folks who wanted to put on Santa Claus Conquers the Martians for the rug rats were disappointed when the entire Netflix streaming network crashed.

Don’t blame Netflix. The problem was attributed to a human error by an Amazon employee.

Is AWS reliable enough to handle national security? Even with the occasional failure, it’s probably more reliable — and considerably cheaper — than a single-source data storehouse operated by the government. I have to hope that people smarter than me and who are knowledgeable about encryption systems have been heard on the security of this enterprise. If it is robust enough for the DHS and CIA, it’s going to be good enough for state and local law enforcement as well.

Boston Marathon Crime Scene and Forensic Techniques

By Roxanne Palmer | April 16 2013 12:36 PM

The next few days of the investigation into the Boston Marathon bombings will be an intense forensic exercise, as officials analyze a mountain of videos and photographs and sweep a 12 city-block area looking for evidence.

“This is the most complex crime scene we’ve dealt with in the history of our department,” Boston Police Department Commissioner Ed Davis said at a news conference on Tuesday morning.
Processing the crime scene around Copley Square could take several days, officials said.

 

The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation is leading the probe, which involves Massachusetts state police, Boston Police, and special explosives experts from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, among other agencies.

 

The FBI isn't yet commenting on the nature of the two devices used in the Boston bombings. Some experts say the preliminary evidence points toward a pipe bomb device. This kind of bomb, made from a tube (usually metal or plastic), capped with both ends and filled with explosive material, is one of the most commonly encountered explosive devices in the U.S.

Fred Burton, a former special agent from the Diplomatic Security Service division of the State Department, told U.S. News and World report that the explosive plume from one of the blasts was what you might expect from a high-powered pipe bomb. FBI veteran Paul Fennewald said white smoke from the blasts suggests the device used black or smokeless powder, not plastic explosives or C-4.

 

Recovering DNA evidence that could point toward the perpetrator is no easy task. A study published in the Journal of Forensic Science in 2004 found that they could pick up DNA from metal or PVC pipe fragments in just four out of 20 cases – and those experimental bombs were subject to low-grade explosions with smokeless powder.

 

“The variables that appeared to have the greatest influence on the success of generating a DNA profile were the amount of fragmentation and subsequent recovery of the bomb fragments,” the authors wrote. “It is suspected that successful DNA profiling could also be dependent upon the bomb assembler’s propensity to slough skin cells on objects they handled.”

While it might be hard to lift genetic material off of a pipe bomb itself, investigators may have more luck with the packaging material around a bomb. Tape, envelopes, switches, or whatever the bomb was concealed in could harbor just enough saliva, sweat or skin cells to offer clues.

 

Some ATF agents will be using specially trained dogs to search for unexploded devices, as well as residue from the explosion. Finding even the tiniest bit of evidence at a crime scene is a task that canines are ideally suited for. Some scientists estimate that a dog’s nose is 10,000 to 100,000 times better at sniffing than our own. Whereas we might be able to detect a teaspoon of sugar in a cup of coffee, a dog could sniff out a teaspoon of sugar diluted in a million gallons of water, Barnard College dog researcher, Alexandra Horowitz, told NOVA.

 

If there’s some evidence that manufactured explosives were used in the Boston attack, these might be traced throughout the supply chain via the U.S. Bomb Data Center, a division of the ATF, which collects information from manufacturers.

 

Officials will also be analyzing the pattern of damage and injuries sustained from the explosion to better understand just what the bomb was made of, the exact location of the device and which direction the blast traveled in. If there’s a crater left behind, investigators can estimate the weight of the bomb based on the crater’s diameter.

 

Of course, forensics is just one part of the investigation. The coming days and weeks will see witnesses interviewed, trails followed and, possibly, some glimpses of answers.

IRS Releases "Dirty Dozen" Tax Scams For 2013

Originally posted at IRS.gov in March of 2013

The Internal Revenue Service today issued its annual “Dirty Dozen” list of tax scams, reminding taxpayers to use caution during tax season to protect themselves against a wide range of schemes ranging from identity theft to return preparer fraud.

The Dirty Dozen listing, compiled by the IRS each year, lists a variety of common scams taxpayers can encounter at any point during the year. But many of these schemes peak during filing season as people prepare their tax returns.

"This tax season, the IRS has stepped up its efforts to protect taxpayers from a wide range of schemes, including moving aggressively to combat identity theft and refund fraud," said IRS Acting Commissioner Steven T. Miller. "The Dirty Dozen list shows that scams come in many forms during filing season. Don't let a scam artist steal from you or talk you into doing something you will regret later."

Illegal scams can lead to significant penalties and interest and possible criminal prosecution. IRS Criminal Investigation works closely with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to shutdown scams and prosecute the criminals behind them.

The following are the Dirty Dozen tax scams for 2013:

Identity Theft

Tax fraud through the use of identity theft tops this year’s Dirty Dozen list. Identity theft occurs when someone uses your personal information such as your name, Social Security number (SSN) or other identifying information, without your permission, to commit fraud or other crimes. In many cases, an identity thief uses a legitimate taxpayer’s identity to fraudulently file a tax return and claim a refund.

Combating identity theft and refund fraud is a top priority for the IRS, and we are taking special steps to assist victims. For the 2013 tax season, the IRS has put in place a number of additional steps to prevent identity theft and detect refund fraud before it occurs. We have dramatically enhanced our systems, and we are committed to continuing to improve our prevention, detection and assistance efforts.

The IRS has a comprehensive and aggressive identity theft strategy employing a three-pronged effort focusing on fraud prevention, early detection and victim assistance. We are continually reviewing our processes and policies to ensure that we are doing everything possible to minimize identity theft incidents, to help those victimized by it and to investigate those who are committing the crimes.

The IRS continues to increase its efforts against refund fraud, which includes identity theft. During 2012, the IRS prevented the issuance of $20 billion of fraudulent refunds, including those related to identity theft, compared with $14 billion in 2011.

This January, the IRS also conducted a coordinated and highly successful identity theft enforcement sweep. The coast-to-coast effort against identity theft suspects led to 734 enforcement actions in January, including 298 indictments, informations, complaints and arrests. The effort comes on top of a growing identity theft effort that led to 2,400 other enforcement actions against identity thieves during fiscal year 2012. The Criminal Investigation unit has devoted more than 500,000 staff-hours to fighting this issue.

We know identity theft is a frustrating and complex process for victims. The IRS has 3,000 people working on identity theft related cases — more than double the number in late 2011. And we have trained 35,000 employees who work with taxpayers to help with identity theft situations.

The IRS has a special section on IRS.gov dedicated to identity theft issues, including YouTube videos, tips for taxpayers and an assistance guide. For victims, the information includes how to contact the IRS Identity Protection Specialized Unit. For other taxpayers, there are tips on how taxpayers can protect themselves against identity theft.

Taxpayers who believe they are at risk of identity theft due to lost or stolen personal information should contact the IRS immediately so the agency can take action to secure their tax account. Taxpayers can call the IRS Identity Protection Specialized Unit at 800-908-4490. More information can be found on the special identity protection page.

Phishing

Phishing is a scam typically carried out with the help of unsolicited email or a fake website that poses as a legitimate site to lure in potential victims and prompt them to provide valuable personal and financial information. Armed with this information, a criminal can commit identity theft or financial theft.

If you receive an unsolicited email that appears to be from either the IRS or an organization closely linked to the IRS, such as the Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS), report it by sending it to phishing@irs.gov.

It is important to keep in mind the IRS does not initiate contact with taxpayers by email to request personal or financial information. This includes any type of electronic communication, such as text messages and social media channels. The IRS has information that can help you protect yourself from email scams.

Return Preparer Fraud

About 60 percent of taxpayers will use tax professionals this year to prepare their tax returns. Most return preparers provide honest service to their clients. But some unscrupulous preparers prey on unsuspecting taxpayers, and the result can be refund fraud or identity theft.

It is important to choose carefully when hiring an individual or firm to prepare your return. This year, the IRS wants to remind all taxpayers that they should use only preparers who sign the returns they prepare and enter their IRS Preparer Tax Identification Numbers (PTINs).

The IRS also has created a new web page to assist taxpayers. For tips about choosing a preparer, red flags, details on preparer qualifications and information on how and when to make a complaint, visit www.irs.gov/chooseataxpro.

Remember: Taxpayers are legally responsible for what’s on their tax return even if it is prepared by someone else. Make sure the preparer you hire is up to the task.

IRS.gov has general information on reporting tax fraud. More specifically, report abusive tax preparers to the IRS on Form 14157, Complaint: Tax Return Preparer. Download Form 14157 and fill it out or order by mail at 800-TAX FORM (800-829-3676). The form includes a return address.

Hiding Income Offshore

Over the years, numerous individuals have been identified as evading U.S. taxes by hiding income in offshore banks, brokerage accounts or nominee entities, using debit cards, credit cards or wire transfers to access the funds. Others have employed foreign trusts, employee-leasing schemes, private annuities or insurance plans for the same purpose.

The IRS uses information gained from its investigations to pursue taxpayers with undeclared accounts, as well as the banks and bankers suspected of helping clients hide their assets overseas. The IRS works closely with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to prosecute tax evasion cases.

While there are legitimate reasons for maintaining financial accounts abroad, there are reporting requirements that need to be fulfilled. U.S. taxpayers who maintain such accounts and who do not comply with reporting and disclosure requirements are breaking the law and risk significant penalties and fines, as well as the possibility of criminal prosecution.

Since 2009, 38,000 individuals have come forward voluntarily to disclose their foreign financial accounts, taking advantage of special opportunities to comply with the U.S. tax system and resolve their tax obligations. And, with new foreign account reporting requirements being phased in over the next few years, hiding income offshore will become increasingly more difficult.

At the beginning of 2012, the IRS reopened the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP) following continued strong interest from taxpayers and tax practitioners after the closure of the 2011 and 2009 programs. The IRS continues working on a wide range of international tax issues and follows ongoing efforts with DOJ to pursue criminal prosecution of international tax evasion. This program will be open for an indefinite period until otherwise announced.

The IRS has collected $5.5 billion so far from people who participated in offshore voluntary disclosure programs since 2009.

“Free Money” from the IRS & Tax Scams Involving Social Security

Flyers and advertisements for free money from the IRS, suggesting that the taxpayer can file a tax return with little or no documentation, have been appearing in community churches around the country. These schemes promise refunds to people who have little or no income and normally don’t have a tax filing requirement – and are also often spread by word of mouth as unsuspecting and well-intentioned people tell their friends and relatives.

Scammers prey on low income individuals and the elderly and members of church congregations with bogus promises of free money. They build false hopes and charge people good money for bad advice including encouraging taxpayers to make fictitious claims for refunds or rebates based on false statements of entitlement to tax credits. For example, some promoters claim they can obtain for their victims, often senior citizens, a tax refund or nonexistent stimulus payment based on the American Opportunity Tax Credit, even if the victim was not enrolled in or paying for college. Con artists also falsely claim that refunds are available even if the victim went to school decades ago. In the end, the victims discover their claims are rejected. Meanwhile, the promoters are long gone. The IRS warns all taxpayers to remain vigilant.

There are also a number of tax scams involving Social Security. For example, scammers have been known to lure the unsuspecting with promises of non-existent Social Security refunds or rebates. In another situation, a taxpayer may really be due a credit or refund but uses inflated information to complete the return.

Beware: Intentional mistakes of this kind can result in a $5,000 penalty.

Impersonation of Charitable Organizations

Another long-standing type of abuse or fraud is scams that occur in the wake of significant natural disasters.

Following major disasters, it’s common for scam artists to impersonate charities to get money or private information from well-intentioned taxpayers. Scam artists can use a variety of tactics. Some scammers operating bogus charities may contact people by telephone or email to solicit money or financial information. They may even directly contact disaster victims and claim to be working for or on behalf of the IRS to help the victims file casualty loss claims and get tax refunds.

They may attempt to get personal financial information or Social Security numbers that can be used to steal the victims’ identities or financial resources. Bogus websites may solicit funds for disaster victims. As in the case of a recent disaster, Hurricane Sandy, the IRS cautions both victims of natural disasters and people wishing to make charitable donations to avoid scam artists by following these tips:

• To help disaster victims, donate to recognized charities.
• Be wary of charities with names that are similar to familiar or nationally known organizations. Some phony charities use names or websites that sound or look like those of respected, legitimate organizations. IRS.gov has a search feature, Exempt Organizations Select Check, which allows people to find legitimate, qualified charities to which donations may be tax-deductible.
• Don’t give out personal financial information, such as Social Security numbers or credit card and bank account numbers and passwords, to anyone who solicits  a contribution from you. Scam artists may use this information to steal your identity and money.
• Don’t give or send cash. For security and tax record purposes, contribute by check or credit card or another way that provides documentation of the gift.

Call the IRS toll-free disaster assistance telephone number (1-866-562-5227) if you are a disaster victim with specific questions about tax relief or disaster related tax issues.

False/Inflated Income and Expenses

Including income that was never earned, either as wages or as self-employment income in order to maximize refundable credits, is another popular scam. Claiming income you did not earn or expenses you did not pay in order to secure larger refundable credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit could have serious repercussions. This could result in repaying the erroneous refunds, including interest and penalties, and in some cases, even prosecution.

Additionally, some taxpayers are filing excessive claims for the fuel tax credit. Farmers and other taxpayers who use fuel for off-highway business purposes may be eligible for the fuel tax credit. But other individuals have claimed the tax credit although they were not eligible. Fraud involving the fuel tax credit is considered a frivolous tax claim and can result in a penalty of $5,000.

False Form 1099 Refund Claims

In some cases, individuals have made refund claims based on the bogus theory that the federal government maintains secret accounts for U.S. citizens and that taxpayers can gain access to the accounts by issuing 1099-OID forms to the IRS. In this ongoing scam, the perpetrator files a fake information return, such as a Form 1099 Original Issue Discount (OID), to justify a false refund claim on a corresponding tax return.

Don’t fall prey to people who encourage you to claim deductions or credits to which you are not entitled or willingly allow others to use your information to file false returns. If you are a party to such schemes, you could be liable for financial penalties or even face criminal prosecution.

Frivolous Arguments

Promoters of frivolous schemes encourage taxpayers to make unreasonable and outlandish claims to avoid paying the taxes they owe. The IRS has a list of frivolous tax arguments that taxpayers should avoid. These arguments are false and have been thrown out of court. While taxpayers have the right to contest their tax liabilities in court, no one has the right to disobey the law.

Falsely Claiming Zero Wages

Filing a phony information return is an illegal way to lower the amount of taxes an individual owes. Typically, a Form 4852 (Substitute Form W-2) or a “corrected” Form 1099 is used as a way to improperly reduce taxable income to zero. The taxpayer may also submit a statement rebutting wages and taxes reported by a payer to the IRS.

Sometimes, fraudsters even include an explanation on their Form 4852 that cites statutory language on the definition of wages or may include some reference to a paying company that refuses to issue a corrected Form W-2 for fear of IRS retaliation. Taxpayers should resist any temptation to participate in any variations of this scheme. Filing this type of return may result in a $5,000 penalty.

Disguised Corporate Ownership

Third parties are improperly used to request employer identification numbers and form corporations that obscure the true ownership of the business.

These entities can be used to underreport income, claim fictitious deductions, avoid filing tax returns, participate in listed transactions and facilitate money laundering and financial crimes. The IRS is working with state authorities to identify these entities and bring the owners into compliance with the law.

Misuse of Trusts

For years, unscrupulous promoters have urged taxpayers to transfer assets into trusts. While there are legitimate uses of trusts in tax and estate planning, some highly questionable transactions promise reduction of income subject to tax, deductions for personal expenses and reduced estate or gift taxes. Such trusts rarely deliver the tax benefits promised and are used primarily as a means of avoiding income tax liability and hiding assets from creditors, including the IRS.

IRS personnel have seen an increase in the improper use of private annuity trusts and foreign trusts to shift income and deduct personal expenses. As with other arrangements, taxpayers should seek the advice of a trusted professional before entering a trust arrangement.

Protecting The Second Amendment - Why All Americans Should Be Concerned

by Professional Soldiers .Com Forum, January 29, 2013

We are current or former Army Reserve, National Guard, and active duty US Army Special Forces soldiers (Green Berets). We have all taken an oath to “...support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.…” The Constitution of the United States is without a doubt the single greatest document in the history of mankind, codifying the fundamental principle of governmental power and authority being derived from and granted through the consent of the governed. Our Constitution established a system of governance that preserves, protects, and holds sacrosanct the individual rights and primacy of the governed as well as providing for the explicit protection of the governed from governmental tyranny and/or oppression. We have witnessed the insidious and iniquitous effects of tyranny and oppression on people all over the world. We and our forebears have embodied and personified our organizational motto, De Oppresso Liber [To Free the Oppressed], for more than a half century as we have fought, shed blood, and died in the pursuit of freedom for the oppressed.

Like you, we are also loving and caring fathers and grandfathers. Like you, we have been stunned, horrified, and angered by the tragedies of Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Fort Hood, and Sandy Hook; and like you, we are searching for solutions to the problem of gun-related crimes in our society. Many of us are educators in our second careers and have a special interest to find a solution to this problem. However, unlike much of the current vox populi reactions to this tragedy, we offer a different perspective.

First, we need to set the record straight on a few things. The current debate is over so-called “assault weapons” and high capacity magazines. The terms "assault weapon" and "assault rifle" are often confused. According to Bruce H. Kobayashi and Joseph E. Olson, writing in the Stanford Law and Policy Review, “Prior to 1989, the term ‘assault weapon’ did not exist in the lexicon of firearms. It is a political term [underline added for emphasis], developed by anti-gun publicists to expand the category of assault rifles.”

The M4A1 carbine is a U.S. military service rifle - it is an assault rifle. The AR-15 is not an assault rifle. The “AR” in its name does not stand for “Assault Rifle” - it is the designation from the first two letters of the manufacturer’s name – ArmaLite Corporation. The AR-15 is designed so that it cosmetically looks like the M4A1 carbine assault rifle, but it is impossible to configure the AR-15 to be a fully automatic assault rifle. It is a single shot semi-automatic rifle that can fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute depending on the skill of the operator. The M4A1 can fire up to 950 rounds per minute. In 1986, the federal government banned the import or manufacture of new fully automatic firearms for sale to civilians. Therefore, the sale of assault rifles are already banned or heavily restricted!

The second part of the current debate is over “high capacity magazines” capable of holding more than 10 rounds in the magazine. As experts in military weapons of all types, it is our considered opinion that reducing magazine capacity from 30 rounds to 10 rounds will only require an additional 6 -8 seconds to change two empty 10 round magazines with full magazines. Would an increase of 6 –8 seconds make any real difference to the outcome in a mass shooting incident? In our opinion it would not. Outlawing such “high capacity magazines” would, however, outlaw a class of firearms that are “in common use”. As such this would be in contravention to the opinion expressed by the U.S. Supreme Court recent decisions.

Moreover, when the Federal Assault Weapons Ban became law in 1994, manufacturers began retooling to produce firearms and magazines that were compliant. One of those ban-compliant firearms was the Hi-Point 995, which was sold with ten-round magazines. In 1999, five years into the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the Columbine High School massacre occurred. One of the perpetrators, Eric Harris, was armed with a Hi-Point 995. Undeterred by the ten-round capacity of his magazines, Harris simply brought more of them: thirteen magazines would be found in the massacre's aftermath. Harris fired 96 rounds before killing himself.

Now that we have those facts straight, in our opinion, it is too easy to conclude that the problem is guns and that the solution to the problem is more and stricter gun control laws. For politicians, it is politically expedient to take that position and pass more gun control laws and then claim to constituents that they have done the right thing in the interest of protecting our children. Who can argue with that? Of course we all want to find a solution. But, is the problem really guns? Would increasing gun regulation solve the problem? Did we outlaw cars to combat drunk driving?

What can we learn from experiences with this issue elsewhere? We cite the experience in Great Britain. Despite the absence of a “gun culture”, Great Britain, with one-fifth the population of the U.S., has experienced mass shootings that are eerily similar to those we have experienced in recent years. In 1987 a lone gunman killed 18 people in Hungerford. What followed was the Firearms Act of 1988 making registration mandatory and banning semi-automatic guns and pump-action shotguns. Despite this ban, on March 13, 1996 a disturbed 43-year old former scout leader, Thomas Hamilton, murdered 16 school children aged five and six and a teacher at a primary school in Dunblane, Scotland. Within a year and a half the Firearms Act was amended to ban all private ownership of hand guns. After both shootings there were amnesty periods resulting in the surrender of thousands of firearms and ammunition. Despite having the toughest gun control laws in the world, gun related crimes increased in 2003 by 35% over the previous year with firearms used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the preceding 12 months. Gun related homicides were up 32% over the same period. Overall, gun related crime had increased 65% since the Dunblane massacre and implementation of the toughest gun control laws in the developed world. In contrast, in 2009 (5 years after the Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired) total firearm related homicides in the U.S. declined by 9% from the 2005 high (Source: “FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Master File, Table 310, Murder Victims – Circumstances and Weapons Used or Cause of Death: 2000-2009”).

Are there unintended consequences to stricter gun control laws and the politically expedient path that we have started down?

In a recent op-ed piece in the San Francisco Chronicle, Brett Joshpe stated that “Gun advocates will be hard-pressed to explain why the average American citizen needs an assault weapon with a high-capacity magazine other than for recreational purposes.”We agree with Kevin D. Williamson (National Review Online, December 28, 2012): “The problem with this argument is that there is no legitimate exception to the Second Amendment right that excludes military-style weapons, because military-style weapons are precisely what the Second Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear.”

“The purpose of the Second Amendment is to secure our ability to oppose enemies foreign and domestic, a guarantee against disorder and tyranny. Consider the words of Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story”: ‘The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.’

The Second Amendment has been ruled to specifically extend to firearms “in common use” by the military by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v Miller (1939). In Printz v U.S. (1997) Justice Thomas wrote: “In Miller we determined that the Second Amendment did not guarantee a citizen’s right to possess a sawed-off shot gun because that weapon had not been shown to be “ordinary military equipment” that could “could contribute to the common defense”.

A citizen’s right to keep and bear arms for personal defense unconnected with service in a militia has been reaffirmed in the U.S. Supreme Court decision (District of Columbia, et al. v Heller, 2008). The Court Justice Scalia wrote in the majority opinion: “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.“. Justice Scalia went on to define a militia as “… comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense ….”

“The Anti-Federalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved.” he explained.

On September 13, 1994, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban went into effect. A Washington Post editorial published two days later was candid about the ban's real purpose:“[N]o one should have any illusions about what was accomplished [by the ban]. Assault weapons play a part in only a small percentage of crime. The provision is mainly symbolic; its virtue will be if it turns out to be, as hoped, a stepping stone to broader gun control.”

In a challenge to the authority of the Federal government to require State and Local Law Enforcement to enforce Federal Law (Printz v United States) the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a decision in 1997. For the majority opinion Justice Scalia wrote: "…. this Court never has sanctioned explicitly a federal command to the States to promulgate and enforce laws and regulations When we were at last confronted squarely with a federal statute that unambiguously required the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program, our decision should have come as no surprise….. It is an essential attribute of the States' retained sovereignty that they remain independent and autonomous within their proper sphere of authority.”

So why should non-gun owners, a majority of Americans, care about maintaining the 2nd Amendment right for citizens to bear arms of any kind?

The answer is “The Battle of Athens, TN”. The Cantrell family had controlled the economy and politics of McMinn County, Tennessee since the 1930s. Paul Cantrell had been Sheriff from 1936 -1940 and in 1942 was elected to the State Senate. His chief deputy, Paul Mansfield, was subsequently elected to two terms as Sheriff. In 1946 returning WWII veterans put up a popular candidate for Sheriff. On August 1 Sheriff Mansfield and 200 “deputies” stormed the post office polling place to take control of the ballot boxes wounding an objecting observer in the process. The veterans bearing military style weapons, laid siege to the Sheriff’s office demanding return of the ballot boxes for public counting of the votes as prescribed in Tennessee law. After exchange of gun fire and blowing open the locked doors, the veterans secured the ballot boxes thereby protecting the integrity of the election. And this is precisely why all Americans should be concerned about protecting all of our right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment!

Throughout history, disarming the populace has always preceded tyrants’ accession of power. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all disarmed their citizens prior to installing their murderous regimes. At the beginning of our own nation’s revolution, one of the first moves made by the British government was an attempt to disarm our citizens. When our Founding Fathers ensured that the 2nd Amendment was made a part of our Constitution, they were not just wasting ink. They were acting to ensure our present security was never forcibly endangered by tyrants, foreign or domestic.

If there is a staggering legal precedent to protect our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms and if stricter gun control laws are not likely to reduce gun related crime, why are we having this debate? Other than making us and our elected representatives feel better because we think that we are doing something to protect our children, these actions will have no effect and will only provide us with a false sense of security.

So, what do we believe will be effective? First, it is important that we recognize that this is not a gun control problem; it is a complex sociological problem. No single course of action will solve the problem. Therefore, it is our recommendation that a series of diverse steps be undertaken, the implementation of which will require patience and diligence to realize an effect. These are as follows:

1. First and foremost we support our Second Amendment right in that “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.

2. We support State and Local School Boards in their efforts to establish security protocols in whatever manner and form that they deem necessary and adequate. One of the great strengths of our Republic is that State and Local governments can be creative in solving problems. Things that work can be shared. Our point is that no one knows what will work and there is no one single solution, so let’s allow the State and Local governments with the input of the citizens to make the decisions. Most recently the Cleburne Independent School District will become the first district in North Texas to consider allowing some teachers to carry concealed guns. We do not opine as to the appropriateness of this decision, but we do support their right to make this decision for themselves.

3. We recommend that Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) laws be passed in every State. AOT is formerly known as Involuntary Outpatient Commitment (IOC) and allows the courts to order certain individuals with mental disorders to comply with treatment while living in the community. In each of the mass shooting incidents the perpetrator was mentally unstable. We also believe that people who have been adjudicated as incompetent should be simultaneously examined to determine whether they should be allowed the right to retain/purchase firearms.

4. We support the return of firearm safety programs to schools along the lines of the successful "Eddie the Eagle" program, which can be taught in schools by Peace Officers or other trained professionals.

5. Recent social psychology research clearly indicates that there is a direct relationship between gratuitously violent movies/video games and desensitization to real violence and increased aggressive behavior particularly in children and young adults (See Nicholas L. Carnagey, et al. 2007. “The effect of video game violence on physiological desensitization to real-life violence” and the references therein. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43:489-496). Therefore, we strongly recommend that gratuitous violence in movies and video games be discouraged. War and war-like behavior should not be glorified. Hollywood and video game producers are exploiting something they know nothing about. General Sherman famously said “War is Hell!” Leave war to the Professionals. War is not a game and should not be "sold" as entertainment to our children.

6. We support repeal of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. This may sound counter-intuitive, but it obviously isn’t working. It is our opinion that “Gun-Free Zones” anywhere are too tempting of an environment for the mentally disturbed individual to inflict their brand of horror with little fear of interference. While governmental and non-governmental organizations, businesses, and individuals should be free to implement a Gun-Free Zone if they so choose, they should also assume Tort liability for that decision.

7. We believe that border states should take responsibility for implementation of border control laws to prevent illegal shipments of firearms and drugs. Drugs have been illegal in this country for a long, long time yet the Federal Government manages to seize only an estimated 10% of this contraband at our borders. Given this dismal performance record that is misguided and inept (“Fast and Furious”), we believe that border States will be far more competent at this mission.

8. This is our country, these are our rights. We believe that it is time that we take personal responsibility for our choices and actions rather than abdicate that responsibility to someone else under the illusion that we have done something that will make us all safer. We have a responsibility to stand by our principles and act in accordance with them. Our children are watching and they will follow the example we set.

The undersigned Quiet Professionals hereby humbly stand ever present, ever ready, and ever vigilant.

1100 Green Berets Signed this Letter

We have a list of all their names and unlike any MSM outlets we can confirm that over 1100 Green Berets did sign. The list includes Special Forces Major Generals & Special Forces Command Sergeants Major down to the lowest ranking "Green Beret".
The letter stands for itself.

Read it and send it everywhere.

 Team Sergeant



 

Arizona Attorney Mark Hummels Known For Helping Others

By Catherine Reagor and Ryan Randazzo, AZCentral.com 

Rich Robertson received a phone call from Mark Hummels at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday.

Hummels wanted a favor. He was calling to ask Robertson, a private investigator, to assist one of Hummels’ former clients, for whom he had provided free legal aid. Hummels was concerned the person needed more help, Robertson said.

“Mark was always willing to help,” Robertson said.

Although Hummels had been an attorney for less than 10 years, he was already the president of a federal Bar group, had spent hundreds of hours providing free legal aid and had garnered the respect of many of Arizona’s most prominent lawyers.

An hour later, at 9:30 a.m., Hummels was representing the chief executive of a call-center company at an arbitration meeting at a north-central Phoenix law office. Steven D. Singer, CEO of Fusion Contact Centers, was the defendant in a lawsuit. After the meeting broke up an hour later, both men were shot in front of the building. Singer died Wednesday.

Hummels, 43, was hit by bullets in the neck and back. He died Thursday night.

“We are devastated at this news about our beloved friend,” according to a statement from Osborn Maledon on Thursday.

Hummels was low-key, with a sense of humor. The judge for whom Hummels served as a law clerk remembered him as a gentle, decent person with a ferocious intellect and a “goofy” side.

Hummels had worked with Singer for several months. The shooter, Arthur Douglas Harmon, 70, had been in a nearly year-long legal battle with Singer over a business deal. Harmon was found dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound Thursday morning.

Praise and respect for Hummels came from every corner, from those who knew him in Arizona legal circles to those who remembered him fondly from years before.

“He wasn’t full of bluster. He would go out of his way for people,” Robertson said.

Hummels worked as a journalist before becoming a lawyer. After receiving a bachelor’s degree from Colorado College, Hummels earned a master’s degree in journalism from the University of California-Berkeley in 1997. His first job was as a reporting — intern in Santa Fe for the New Mexican.

“The best thing about Mark was his attitude. He was a serious journalist but made what we do fun,” said Steve Terrell, a reporter with the paper. He and Hummels covered the New Mexico Capitol beat together. “When he became an attorney, we all teased Mark about how serious he looked in his work photo. We have a picture from his going-away party when he was wearing a Hawaiian shirt, smoking a fake cigar and crossing his eyes.”

Terrell checked his e-mails Wednesday night after hearing about the shooting to see when he last connected with Hummels.

“It was in 2005, after the birth of one of his sons,” he said. “He was so happy to be father. He and (his wife) Dana were a great couple.”

Geoff Grammer, a sports reporter with the Albuquerque Journal, worked as an intern at the New Mexican when Hummels was there.

“Mark treated people, his sources, with respect. He made me want to become a reporter,” Grammer said.

Hummels left the New Mexican in 2001 to attend law school at the University of Arizona. He graduated summa cum laude in 2004 and earned the highest score on the Arizona Bar exam that year.
Judge Andrew Hurwitz of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals gave Hummels a job as a clerk when Hurwitz served on the Arizona Supreme Court in 2004.

“Everyone I know in Arizona told me I must hire him immediately because he was the smartest guy they had ever met,” Hurwitz said outside the U.S. Courthouse in downtown Phoenix on Thursday. “They were all right, but they also forgot to tell me he was also the nicest guy.” He said that he and Hummels “became fast and dear friends.”

“This is a day of unspeakable sorrow,” he said. “We all feel so helpless.”

Hurwitz described Hummels as a gentle, intelligent, decent person who was an avid swimmer and had a “goofy” side that included riding a unicycle.

After working for Hurwitz, Hummels joined Osborn Maledon in 2005. His practice focused on business disputes, real-estate litigation and legal-malpractice defense. He was arbitrating a business dispute with real-estate ties before he was shot.

“It was a catch for our firm to get someone like Mark Hummels to come and join us,” Bill Maledon said. “We are devastated by this senseless, tragic loss of our friend and partner. It is a tragic loss, not just for our firm but for our community.”

Hummels volunteered with the Arizona Justice Project, a group that helps inmates try to overturn wrongful convictions.

“Mark spent hours and hours preparing an educational presentation on the Ray Krone case,” said Lindsay Herf, DNA project manager for the legal non-profit. “We have used his work to educate hundreds of attorneys and law students.”

Ray Krone was convicted of murder in 1991 and spent a decade in prison. He was exonerated based on DNA evidence.

Hummels also served as president of the Phoenix chapter of the Federal Bar Association.

He lived with his wife and elementary school-age sons in Phoenix’s Arcadia neighborhood.