RE: Jose Padilla convicted

RE: Jose Padilla convicted (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

farglebargle -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:35:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 Farg his case got before a judge long before 1300 days. Perhaps some REMEDIAL MATH is in order. Padilla was arrested on May 8, 2002 Padilla was indicted on November 22, 2005 May 8 2002 to May 8 2003 = 365 days. May 8 2003 to May 8 2004 = 365 days. May 8 2004 to May 8 2005 = 365 days. May 8, 2005 - Nov 22, 2005 = 180 + 14 = 194 365 + 365 + 365 + 194 = 1289 days. With trial beginning on May 15, 2007, FIVE YEARS after being arrested, and a year and a half after indictment.

farglebargle -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:38:15 AM)
quote: For someone whose witnesses are CIA agnets and foriegn assets, this can't happen. Happened in the Padilla case. The CIA undercover rat testified in disguise.

Alumbrado -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:39:15 AM)
quote: Any lawyer skilled enough can manipulate the jury with circumstantial evidence. He was convicted under federal conspiracy statutes. The burden for the judge to tell the jurors they must convict is so low, it is scary. No skill required, and ripe for abuse. There doesn't have to be any evidence that a crime even occured... all that is needed is for two or more people to conspire, and for 'any act in furtherance' to take place...and that act can be a phone call, an ATM withdrawal, a trip to the library...practically anything. With the gimmick of allowing the prosecution to decide which words are 'code' and what they actually meant, the most innocent person on the planet wouldn't stand a chance. Whether Padilla is innocent or guilty is impossible to determine from a newspaper article, but the process used reeks, from start to finish. Getting convictions by 'any means neccessary' is not a good foundation for a justice system. It is dandy for a prison-industrial complex, or a burgeoning dictatorship though.

farglebargle -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:40:50 AM)
Reminds me of the Soviet Union's "Show Trials".

mnottertail -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:47:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote: Any lawyer skilled enough can manipulate the jury with circumstantial evidence. He was convicted under federal conspiracy statutes. The burden for the judge to tell the jurors they must convict is so low, it is scary. No skill required, and ripe for abuse. There doesn't have to be any evidence that a crime even occured... all that is needed is for two or more people to conspire, and for 'any act in furtherance' to take place...and that act can be a phone call, an ATM withdrawal, a trip to the library...practically anything. With the gimmick of allowing the prosecution to decide which words are 'code' and what they actually meant, the most innocent person on the planet wouldn't stand a chance. Whether Padilla is innocent or guilty is impossible to determine from a newspaper article, but the process used reeks, from start to finish. Getting convictions by 'any means neccessary' is not a good foundation for a justice system. It is dandy for a prison-industrial complex, or a burgeoning dictatorship though. What disturbs me about this the most, is that now the administration will run around saying of all the others, see? I told you they was guilty....holding this shamanistic conviction up as some lodestone into their righteous intelligentia, intimating that this nullifies the need for open and considered justice. Sickening, just fuckin' sickening. Ron

farglebargle -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:55:02 AM)
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person* be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. * Jose Padilla was not serving in the land/naval or Militia forces.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 6:06:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado Whether Padilla is innocent or guilty is impossible to determine from a newspaper article... Yeah, exactly right. I wasn't a juror. I didn't hear the evidence presented. Maybe this guy IS a piece of shit terrorist. If that's true then he certainly deserves everything he's gotten and is going to get. The thing is, if it's true then why did they have to violate the Constitution to obtain a conviction? Why didn't they respect this U.S. citizen's rights in court? Why couldn't they follow the letter of the law and nail the son of a bitch anyway? Why is it so hard for them to do their jobs in the right way? If the guy really is a terrorist I can't think of a case in which I would really prefer they had him dead to rights rather than leave open the door to a reversal of his conviction on the basis that they violated his civil and Constitutional rights. As it is I can't co-sign was is so obviously a junk case in which they make up the law as they go along. That's not how we do things in this country. No can do. As I think Farglebargle has already pointed out, if they can't do these things correctly then we have already lost the things that make this country worth defending in the first place. Personally, I think we are on the downhill side of a post-Constitutional era. Too many things add up to a whole slew of lost rights during the last few years. Just a heads up - these rights once taken do not just "automagically" return to you. They will most likely have to be paid for in blood a century after we are all dead and another generation looks back upon our time with disdain.

Alumbrado -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 6:15:36 AM)
quote: Why is it so hard for them to do their jobs in the right way? Because the 'right way' (as in following the intent of a justice system for zealous defenses and restrained prosecutions) , makes for more losses, which look bad on an ambitious prosecutor's resume, and impedes their run for a political career. Using 'special' laws designed to get at the most difficult to convict organized crime types, against poor schmoes, boosts the ratings as it were, and voters don't look at quality of convictions, just quantity. Politics ruins everything.

luckydog1 -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 10:19:15 AM)
Yes remedial math is indeed in order Farg. From may 8 02 to Dec. 18, 2003: The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York orders Padilla released from military custody within 30 days and, if the government chooses, tried in civilian courts. That ruling is suspended after the Bush administration appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. That is closer to 500 days not 1300, which is what I said, when he first got his case before a judge.

luckydog1 -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 10:25:24 AM)
Petronius, you love to throw around the word "delusion" , but the main delusion in your post is that Bush does not go after Abortion bombers. The KKK and such groups which you are naming hate Republicans and Bush. They are represented on here by Real and Termyn8r, they hate Bush with a passion, and are in agreement with you in general, perhaps not on the subject of Jews.

Alumbrado -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 12:56:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 Yes remedial math is indeed in order Farg. From may 8 02 to Dec. 18, 2003: The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York orders Padilla released from military custody within 30 days and, if the government chooses, tried in civilian courts. That ruling is suspended after the Bush administration appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. That is closer to 500 days not 1300, which is what I said, when he first got his case before a judge. I'm not sure that I get your distinction here. Hearings on habeas corpus issues, and changes of venue/jurisdiction are procedural maneuvers, they are not trials on the charges. 1300 days in custody is 1300 days in custody. Was Padilla free to go at anytime during this?

philosophy -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 1:40:49 PM)
1300 or 500 days? Surely either number is too big? Justice delayed is justice denied.

farglebargle -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 4:27:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 Yes remedial math is indeed in order Farg. From may 8 02 to Dec. 18, 2003: The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York orders Padilla released from military custody within 30 days and, if the government chooses, tried in civilian courts. That ruling is suspended after the Bush administration appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. That is closer to 500 days not 1300, which is what I said, when he first got his case before a judge. So, You choose to go by the arrest -> hearing date. Ok, let's go with your numbers. By your calculation, he was tortured and deprived Due Process for a Year and a half. YOU THINK THAT'S ACCEPTABLE? Your making apologies for the traitorous pieces of shit who held him? I know that if I am arrested in NY, and not arraigned within 72 hours, then it's a prima-facie case of deprivation of Due Process, and you walk.

Sinergy -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:09:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle YOU THINK THAT'S ACCEPTABLE? Your making apologies for the traitorous pieces of shit who held him? I got $50 that says if it happens to him, he will be a ranting whiner about how his civil rights were denied. Probably use his phone call to phone the ACLU and pretend he is a die-hard supporter. Sienrgy

luckydog1 -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:10:26 PM)
I am not comfortable with 500 days, quicker would be better. However, why do you want to pretend it was 1300. This is new shit to deal with, and it takes time. The procedures have not been figured out yet. It would have been better to just hit him with the small charges, quicker, Congress needs to set up a system to deal with non state, non Geneva covered people making war on the USA. the USSC supreme court is not traitorous, in my opinion. Farg you have made it clear you consider the entire Gov and Constituion to be illigitimate. Farg in your quote from the Constitution, it does mention that it does not apply in times of public danger. This will be an issue in the election, and the chips will fall where they do. Philosophy, he is locked in a cell, Justice had not been denied.

Sinergy -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:15:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 I am not comfortable with 500 days, quicker would be better. However, why do you want to pretend it was 1300. This is new shit to deal with, and it takes time. The procedures have not been figured out yet. It would have been better to just hit him with the small charges, quicker, Congress needs to set up a system to deal with non state, non Geneva covered people making war on the USA. the USSC supreme court is not traitorous, in my opinion. Farg you have made it clear you consider the entire Gov and Constituion to be illigitimate. Farg in your quote from the Constitution, it does mention that it does not apply in times of public danger. This will be an issue in the election, and the chips will fall where they do. Philosophy, he is locked in a cell, Justice had not been denied. A year and a half in jail without being charged is DENYING him the right to a speedy trial, no matter how much you wish to argue about the specific numbers. Please keep on topic with the thread, which is about an American citizen denied the constitutionally guaranteed rights, which the Framers of the US Constitution thought was important to put into the Bill Of Rights in order to specifically prevent what the current administration have egregiously and repeatedly inflicted on the people in the United States. I dont care whether Bush thinks he is a danger or not. Timothy McVeigh as considered dangerous, as are any number of people, yet the Bill of Rights says what it says. Might want to read up on Constitutional Law, rather than simply assuming that talk radio checks their facts. Sinergy

farglebargle -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:38:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 I am not comfortable with 500 days, quicker would be better. However, why do you want to pretend it was 1300. The acceptable standard should be EXACTLY the same as in NY State. 72 hours from Arrest to Arraignment. Isn't that what "Equal Protection" means? When was Padilla arrested? ( 2002 ) When was Padilla arraigned? ( 2005 ) Doesn't sound very "Equal". quote: This is new shit to deal with, and it takes time. The procedures have not been figured out yet. That's the biggest load of horseshit I've heard. We have a fully functional Criminal Procedure, and in this exact case, it worked exactly as it should have, excepting Bush's UNCONSTITUTIONAL ( Bush needs to obey the Constitution, he took an oath ) deprivation of a speedy trial. There's noting magical or confusing about a Federal Conspiracy trial. That's just YOUR EXCUSE. And it's a pretty fucking shitty excuse. quote: It would have been better to just hit him with the small charges, quicker, Congress needs to set up a system to deal with non state, non Geneva covered people making war on the USA. The CONSTITUTION tells the Feds what they are PERMITTED to do. If you want to throw out Due Process, and Equal Protection, you will have to repeal both the 5th and 14th Amendments. Get cracking on that right away, if you think it's so important. UNTIL THEM. "ANY PERSON" means "ANY PERSON". And if you're not mentally competent to understand that, then that's another issue. First they came for those they arbitrarily considered UNWORTHY of Constitutionally Guaranteed Rights...

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:52:41 PM)
More evidence of a post-Constitutional era: the people haven't a clue, not even an inkling, not even a single spark of brain activity. Sad.

farglebargle -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:54:32 PM)
"Freedom is a State of Mind"

Sinergy -> RE: Jose Padilla convicted (8/17/2007 5:56:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle "Freedom is a State of Mind" I thought it was just another word for nothing left to lose. Sinergy

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875