Author: michael_wessels

 

Today I learned various terms including ECP plans and the process of Export Authorization. Heres, what I learned. The Elements of an Effective Emergency Communications Plan (ECP) are a set of guidelines to help organizations prepare for and respond to emergency situations. The ECP should include an organizational structure that outlines roles and responsibilities for both internal and external stakeholders, methods of communication and collaboration, and a comprehensive plan for responding to emergencies. The plan should also include detailed procedures for notifying the public, coordinating resources, and developing an emergency response plan. Additionally, the ECP should provide guidance on how to assess risks, develop emergency protocols, and track response activities. Finally, the ECP should provide guidelines on how to evaluate the effectiveness of the plan and make any necessary changes.

Export Authorization: 

Export authorization is the process of obtaining permission from the appropriate governmental or other regulatory authorities in order to legally move goods across international borders. The process of obtaining an export authorization usually involves completing an application, submitting the appropriate documents and fees, and waiting for the approval from the relevant government agency. Depending on the type of goods being exported, the process may also involve obtaining a license from other organizations or obtaining the approval of relevant foreign governments. Export authorization typically requires companies to provide detailed information about the goods they plan to export, including the quantity, value, and destination of the goods.

 

Today I reviewed the following

1. PowerPoint deck on export controls. This gave an overview of how export controls work in the United States.
2. A Link to the Department of Commerce guidance on Exporting:  LINK
3. A letter from the Department of Commerce on updates it is making to exports to China.
4. Summary- What I went over today gave me  valuable insight to many different areas of compliance. I learned that export Controls in the United States are implemented by the Department of Commerce‘s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) and the Department of State‘s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC). These two agencies are responsible for regulating the export and re–export of commercial goods and technology, as well as the import, transfer, and retransfer of defense articles and services. The Export Administration Regulations (EAR) administered by BIS regulates the export of commercial goods and technology, as well as dual–use technology that can have both commercial and military applications. The EAR requires exporters to obtain licenses for exports, reexports, and transfers to certain countries, persons, and entities, depending on the type of goods, services, and technologies being exported. The International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) administered by DDTC regulates the export and import of defense articles and services. ITAR requires that defense articles and services be registered with DDTC and that a license or other approval be obtained prior to export or import. Export controls in the United States are designed to protect national security and foreign policy interests by preventing the transfer of sensitive goods, technology, and services to foreign countries, persons, or entities. It is important for exporters to be aware of the regulations and obtain the necessary licenses to ensure that they are in compliance with the regulations.

I began my day researching the Chandra Levy trial in prep for the trial review.

A brief summary of the case-

Chandra Levy disappeared in 2001. Initially, attention was drawn toward a man in congress who was having an affair with her- Gary Condit. The media essentially ruined his life with the accusations.  However, he had a very solid alibi on the day of her disappearance. It wasn’t until a year later her body was discovered in a park. A man named Ingar Guandique was the latest suspect after this. He had attacked two women in the park previously. All evidence was circumstantial and not concrete enough for a conviction. At the time of the trial, he was already serving time in prison for previous robberies. A man in prison claimed that Guandique had admitted to the killing of Chandra Levy. This witness was later ruled as inadmissible evidence due to bias: him wanting to join the witness protection program.

Now, due to the timing of this trial (2001), the world was amidst chaos from the tragic 9/11 attacks the case ended up being lost news.

Cassidy law is tasked with the review of the ethics behind the case.

I delved into what truly went wrong with the Chandra Levy case

Here are my takeaways,

• All the evidence is circumstantial for both suspects.
• DNA was not recoverable at the crime scene because the body had been left for over a year.
• The media destroyed this case-  putting the attention on the blame of the crime on Gary Condit was not the correct approach. This essentially botched the case from the beginning putting immediate prejudice on potential Jurors.
• 9/11 and other factors delayed this case
• Without delay, it is very possible the DNA swipes would have worked and the killer would be behind bars today

Conclusions,

This gave me great insight into the parameters behind a proper conviction. Circumstantial evidence leads nowhere in murder cases. All fingers can point at one person; however, if there is no physical evidence they can not and will not be convicted.