• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cop Killer was pardoned from a life sentence by Mike Huckabee 9 years ago

texmaster said:
The focus is on him because it started with him.
Click to expand...

No, it started with the guy that committed the crime.

It arguably could next be placed on the person or persons that handed out a sentence that was years upon years more than is likely appropriate for the initial crime.

Then it could be put on Huckabee for agreeing to Commute his sentence.

That commutation would've meant nothing if the Parole board decided not to give him a parole.

Which may've not happened if not for the judge thinking it was the right call.

Which still wouldn't have mattered had a prosecutor in washington filed papers in a timely fashion.

And on and on.

Huckabee was one in a long line that, no, did not start with Huckabee but started with the person committing the acts.

Every step along the way someone had made a choice that lead to him being free to do these things and its absolutely idiotic to make one of those in that long line out to be the spawn of devil and hitler themselves, but the others are just completely ignored...especially when its being done for nothing but political grudges.
 
Zyphlin said:
No, it started with the guy that committed the crime.

It arguably could next be placed on the person or persons that handed out a sentence that was years upon years more than is likely appropriate for the initial crime.

Then it could be put on Huckabee for agreeing to Commute his sentence.

That commutation would've meant nothing if the Parole board decided not to give him a parole.

Which may've not happened if not for the judge thinking it was the right call.

Which still wouldn't have mattered had a prosecutor in washington filed papers in a timely fashion.

And on and on.
Click to expand...

You want to go that route? Then it started with his mother giving birth to him.

The focus is on his sentence being commuted allowing him to get out early. That began with Huckabee.

Huckabee was one in a long line that, no, did not start with Huckabee but started with the person committing the acts.

Every step along the way someone had made a choice that lead to him being free to do these things and its absolutely idiotic to make one of those in that long line out to be the spawn of devil and hitler themselves, but the others are just completely ignored...especially when its being done for nothing but political grudges.
Click to expand...

No. It started with Huckabee because he inserted himself into the process and commuted a lawful prison sentence.

Why are you trying to dodge that fact? Thats where it began, period.
 
texmaster said:
No. It started with Huckabee because he inserted himself into the process and commuted a lawful prison sentence.

.
Click to expand...


Huckabee commuting the sentence was perfectly legal and ethical.

Face it, the guy should not have been sentenced to a 100 years give or take for crimes that apparently involved no violence or injuries.

The sentence was excessive. Why else would the trial judge agree with the parole board about letting him out.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I didn't read this whole thread, but, Huckabee commuted a 105 year life sentence to something else I think 46 years. It was the parole board that released him...


two questions.


1. what did he origionally get the 105 years for?

2. What did others get for the same thing?
Click to expand...

1) several counts of burglary.

2) Generally, a fraction of that.
 
Dayton3 said:
Huckabee commuting the sentence was perfectly legal and ethical.

Face it, the guy should not have been sentenced to a 100 years give or take for crimes that apparently involved no violence or injuries.

The sentence was excessive. Why else would the trial judge agree with the parole board about letting him out.
Click to expand...

I disagree, one or two crimes maybe, but he was a one man crime wave.....;)
 
Partisan said:
I disagree, one or two crimes maybe, but he was a one man crime wave.....;)
Click to expand...

None violent that we know of.

I guess it would be pointless to most here that at least up until a few years ago the AVERAGE TIME SERVED for a convicted murderer in the United States was just over EIGHT years.
 
Dayton3 said:
None violent that we know of.

I guess it would be pointless to most here that at least up until a few years ago the AVERAGE TIME SERVED for a convicted murderer in the United States was just over EIGHT years.
Click to expand...

So what?.....:confused:
People get lengthy terms for drug stuff all of the time....;)
His continued crime spree should have been enough to keep him locked up....;)
 
texmaster said:
You want to go that route? Then it started with his mother giving birth to him.
Click to expand...

Giving birth to someone is a reach for placing fault.

Actually COMMITTING THE CRIME isn't a reach for placing fault.

The entire justice system situation began upon the point where this individual broke a law. That's when the justice system begins.

Had the sentence that was given to him not been exceedingly and grossly larger than it should have been then who knows what would've happened in regards to the commutation.

Yet you don't want to acknowledge that.

You want to say that Huckabee overturned a "lawful punishment" while ignoring the fact that what Huckabee did was ALSO lawful.

Why was one lawful, but possibly negligent thing (a grossly over the top jail sentence), something you'll happily ignore, forgive, and not even mention but another lawful but possibly negligent thing (commuting his sentence), something you want to crucify a man for?

The focus is on his sentence being commuted allowing him to get out early. That began with Huckabee.
Click to expand...

That's the focus YOU want because it fits your little hatchet job against a politician you don't like because you don't view him as "conservative enough" (which is funny, cause others are going at him because he's a "extreme right winger").

You're right, the commutation was done by Huckabee, that falls on him.

That doesn't mean the entire justice cycle started with him, nor does that place the blame squarely on his shoulders by any stretch.

If a horrible, crippling, just constitution trashing bill just got passed who would you blame? The President for signing it into law? The congress for voting it forward? The Committe for voting it to the floor? The person that sponsored it? The firm that lobbied and wrote it? All of the above?

I'm going to guess you'd place the blame all of the above despite the fact it "started" at the lobbying firm. I'm sure you wouldn't be giving Obama and Pelosi a pass because sure, they were wrong for passing it on, but if it wasn't there in the first place it wouldn't have happened.

Yet here you want to essentially ignore EVERYONE else in line, even the criminal it seems, to squarely and largely place it singularly on Huckabee's shoulders.

It started with the Criminal doing a crime. Huckabee was one person in a long line of people that made a bad decision which led to this person having the oppertunity to do his latest crime.
 
Dayton3 said:
Face it, the guy should not have been sentenced to a 100 years give or take for crimes that apparently involved no violence or injuries.

The sentence was excessive. Why else would the trial judge agree with the parole board about letting him out.
Click to expand...

I think, at the time Clemmons was sentenced, said sentence was excessive, BUT Arkansas enacted the three strikes law in 1995.

The Three Strikes law significantly increases the prison sentences of persons convicted of felonies who have been previously convicted of a violent crime or serious felony, and limits the ability of these offenders to receive a punishment other than a prison sentence. Violent and serious felonies are specifically listed in state laws. Violent offenses include murder, robbery of a residence in which a deadly or dangerous weapon is used, rape and other sex offenses; serious offenses include the same offenses defined as violent offenses, but also include other crimes such as burglary of a residence and assault with intent to commit a robbery or rape and murder. --Wiki
Click to expand...

So, years AFTER Arkansas instituted the three strikes law, along comes Mr. Huckabee who commutes the sentence and Clemmons is set free. Now, here's where the rubber meets the road...

Clemmons returned to prison for a July 13, 2001 conviction for robbery in Ouachita County, for which he received a 10-year sentence. He was paroled March 18, 2004.
Click to expand...

So, the big question here is, if Clemmons had piled up more than three convictions (he did) as of July 2001, and if Arkansas law dictates that the three strikes law is valid as of 1995 (it does), why did Huckabee recommend clemency and why did the parole board follow Huckabee's recommendation when it directly contradicts Arkansas law?

Looks like the three strikes thing directs some pretty hard to ignore questions to Huckabee and his parole board pals.
 
It appears to be an instance of a politician disagreeing with a set law, or the scope of a set law, and rather than trying to over turn said law is using others laws and abilities to circumvent said law in a legal manner.

This is akin to having a federal ban on marijuana but using an executive order or executive powers to keep federal agencies from taking legal action against those that grow or distribute marijuana or pardoning people who clearly were found guilty of shooting a fleeing person in the back.
 
Dayton3 said:
Given the death penalty for BURGLARY?

And I thought I was tough on criminals.

And Mike Huckabee left office due to term limits in January 2007 so at least get your facts straight.
Click to expand...

Hehehe...asking a lot from that one, huh? :2wave:
 
Glinda said:
I think, at the time Clemmons was sentenced, said sentence was excessive, BUT Arkansas enacted the three strikes law in 1995.



So, years AFTER Arkansas instituted the three strikes law, along comes Mr. Huckabee who commutes the sentence and Clemmons is set free. Now, here's where the rubber meets the road...




So, the big question here is, if Clemmons had piled up more than three convictions (he did) as of July 2001, and if Arkansas law dictates that the three strikes law is valid as of 1995 (it does), why did Huckabee recommend clemency and why did the parole board follow Huckabee's recommendation when it directly contradicts Arkansas law?

Looks like the three strikes thing directs some pretty hard to ignore questions to Huckabee and his parole board pals.
Click to expand...

Clemmons was never convicted of any crime in Arkansas after 1989.

He was returned to prison on a parole violation but prosecutors failed to charge him in a timely manner and then dropped the charges against him.

He then moved to Washington state.

And given that IIRC, the majority of the parole board were not Huckabee appointees, I doubt you could call them his "pals".
 
Dayton3 said:
Clemmons was never convicted of any crime in Arkansas after 1989.
Click to expand...

You are entirely incorrect.

In March 2001, Clemmons violated parole by committing aggravated robbery and theft again in Ouachita County. He was returned to prison for that robbery (conviction date July 13, 2001), for which he received a 10-year sentence. He was paroled March 18, 2004.

What happened to that three strikes law, Mr. Huckabee? :confused:
 
It's nice to see that people around here would never dream of using a tragedy to further their own personal agenda's, and instead talk about how to prevent future incidents like this.
 
Redress said:
It's nice to see that people around here would never dream of using a tragedy to further their own personal agenda's
Click to expand...

I have no political issues with Mr. Huckabee. I did believe, and continue to believe, that he is a nothing - not presidential material and certainly not worth my political input.

My concern regarding Mr. Huckabee is limited to his penchant for releasing violent criminals for (a) questionable reasons, and/or (b) in direct violation of his state's laws.

As for my personal agenda? Maybe I'm crazy, but I just don't like the idea of my life being endangered by violent felons who've been paroled YEARS before their sentence has been completed.

Redress said:
and instead talk about how to prevent future incidents like this.
Click to expand...

The way to prevent future incidents like this is to keep violent repeat offenders IN prison for their full sentences.
 
Glinda said:
You are entirely incorrect.

In March 2001, Clemmons violated parole by committing aggravated robbery and theft again in Ouachita County. He was returned to prison for that robbery (conviction date July 13, 2001), for which he received a 10-year sentence. He was paroled March 18, 2004.

What happened to that three strikes law, Mr. Huckabee? :confused:
Click to expand...

The three strikes rule is a sentencing guide for judges, not a restriction on pardons by the governor.
 
I don't trust this huckabee character, I wouldn't vote for him.
 
Redress said:
It's nice to see that people around here would never dream of using a tragedy to further their own personal agenda's, and instead talk about how to prevent future incidents like this.
Click to expand...
The best way to prevent this is to make sure that Huckabee never holds a public office again. If he's willing to release convicted rapists and felons as long as they say the "J" word (Jeebus), then he doesn't belong anywhere near a public office.
 
Sounds like Huckabee's "Willie Horton" end to any future Presidential asspirations to me.
 
I honestly don't think he truly had a shot anyways. He had to much other baggage already to likely win out
 
Dayton3 said:
Once again Governor Mike Huckabee DID NOT PARDON Clemmons.

He reduced his sentence to 47 years which meant that the guy was eligible for parole in 11 years.

The parole board voted 5-0 to grant him parole (he was a nonviolent offender) and the judge in his original trial agreed with the recommendation.

Eleven years is way above average for what a person who committed a similar crime would serve.

This thread is nothing more than pointless Mike Huckabee bashing.

He must have the Democrats really worried for 2012.
Click to expand...

You say tomato. I say tomato. ****... that doesn't work so well.
 
Toothpicvic said:
The best way to prevent this is to make sure that Huckabee never holds a public office again. If he's willing to release convicted rapists and felons as long as they say the "J" word (Jeebus), then he doesn't belong anywhere near a public office.
Click to expand...

I guess this "fact checking" thing is too tough for some people. The fact that at the time Huck did this the guy hadn't raped anyone doesn't really matter does it? The guy went on later, years later, and did it, so by golley, it must be Hucks fault!! Huck didn't release an over-sentenced burglar, he released a future rapist!! Damn that Huckabee!!!

Some people on this forum really scare me. Their vote is worth as much as mine at the polls and they don't bother to ensure accuracy of information. They blindly believe. Wow. Scary stuff.
 
Last edited:
Dayton3 said:
Huckabee commuting the sentence was perfectly legal and ethical.
Click to expand...

It was legal but it was far from ethical.

Face it, the guy should not have been sentenced to a 100 years give or take for crimes that apparently involved no violence or injuries.

The sentence was excessive. Why else would the trial judge agree with the parole board about letting him out.
Click to expand...

Face it, the guy killed 4 cops and if Huckabee had not commuted his sentence he wouldn't be out now.
 
Let me ask you this, Tex. What if Huck would have done whatever it is he did, commuted the sentence or whatever, and this guy go on to run a successful business employing dozens, if not hundreds, of people giving people jobs and chances at life? Who would you have given credit to? This guy, or Huck? If not Huck, then you can't blame Huck if the guy fails.
 
Last edited:
It's hillarious to see Libbos suddenly become hard on crime...LOL!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom