The Bonus Army

From Wikipedia:

The self-named Bonus Expeditionary Force was an assemblage of some 43,000 marchers — 17,000 World War I veterans, their families, and affiliated groups, who protested in Washington, D.C., in spring and summer of 1932. Called the Bonus March by the news media, the Bonus Marchers were more popularly known as the Bonus Army. The war veterans sought immediate, cash payment of Service Certificates granted them eight years earlier via the Adjusted Service Certificate Law of 1924. Each Service Certificate, issued to a qualified veteran soldier, bore a face value equal to the soldier’s promised payment, plus compound interest. The problem was that the certificates (like bonds), matured twenty years from the date of original issuance, thus, under extant law, the Service Certificates were un-redeemable until 1945.

The Bonus Army was led by Walter W. Waters, a former Army sergeant, and were encouraged in their demand for immediate cash-payment redemption of their service certificates by retired U.S.M.C. Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler, a most popular military man of the time.

On the 28th of July 1932, Attorney General Mitchell ordered the police evacuation of the Bonus Army veterans, who resisted; the police shot at them, and killed two. When told of the killings, President Hoover ordered the U.S. Army to effect the evacuation of the Bonus Army from Washington, D.C.

At 4:45 p.m., commanded by Gen. Douglas MacArthur, the 12th Infantry Regiment, Fort Howard, Maryland, and the 3rd Cavalry Regiment, supported with six battle tanks commanded by Maj. George S. Patton, Fort Myer, Virginia, formed in Pennsylvania Avenue while thousands of Civil Service employees left work to line the street and watch the U.S. Army attack its own veterans. The Bonus Marchers, believing the display was in their honour, cheered the troops until Maj. Patton charged the cavalry against them — to which action the Civil Service employee spectators yelled: “Shame! Shame!” against the charging cavalry.

Dissenting Judge’s Suggestion That Police Video Introduced Into Evidence Be Published Leads to Video’s YouTube Upload

From Law Librarian Blog:

When federal judge Beverly Martin (N.D. Ga.) could not convince her colleagues in Buckley v. Haddock (11th Cir. 2008)(unpublished opinion) to agree with her view that “the Fourth Amendment forbids an officer from discharging repeated bursts of electricity into an already handcuffed misdemeanant — who is sitting still beside a rural road and unwilling to move — simply to goad him into standing up” she suggested in her dissent that the court publish the opinion and the video of the taser incident to make the facts of the case more widely known. The court refused but the implied suggestion prompted someone to post the video to YouTube

Question of the Day

What’s the best Halloween costume you’ve worn?

I don’t have a good answer for this one. I think all of the costumes I’ve worn were unimaginative or came out of a box. (I was Darth Vader once from one of those lame plastic costumes that came out of a box that had a mask but the costume was a picture of who you were supposed to be. And no, that’s not me but some pic I found on the net)