Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 108

Thread: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

  1. #81
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    I'll take that as a yes, that's what you thought this was all about.

    But it wasn't.

    The issue is, the Justice Department had already won the case. It was over. Nothing left to do but the punishment phase. But then, for some reason, the Justice Department dismissed the case it had already won and then entered into a voluntary injunction, the equivalent of a plea bargain, which was extremely light considering the charge. This would be like convicting a criminal in a court of law, where sentencing would have been for years in prison, and THEN making a deal with them for probation only. It's inexplicable. Why would they kick a case that they already won?

    An explanation was sought. The Justice Department won't provide documentation of its decision-making process, nor who was involved in making that call. Was it done by political appointees? They won't say. They simply won't explain.

    That's the issue. It's not about "evidence." That's already been decided. That's over. It's not about "racism." That, too, is over. It's about the Justice Department voluntarily refusing to take a conviction it had already secured.
    Too many words for a lib (he's not a centrist) to understand.... try this, it's about law and order.
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  2. #82
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:34 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,560

    Re: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

    Almost no one on this board who uses the "Centrist" tag is anything other than a highly-rabid lefty. Not sure why they bother.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  3. #83
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Almost no one on this board who uses the "Centrist" tag is anything other than a highly-rabid lefty. Not sure why they bother.
    Shame?.....
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  4. #84
    Student The Dane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    08-01-10 @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    253

    Re: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    I'll take that as a yes, that's what you thought this was all about.

    But it wasn't.

    The issue is, the Justice Department had already won the case. It was over. Nothing left to do but the punishment phase. But then, for some reason, the Justice Department dismissed the case it had already won and then entered into a voluntary injunction, the equivalent of a plea bargain, which was extremely light considering the charge. This would be like convicting a criminal in a court of law, where sentencing would have been for years in prison, and THEN making a deal with them for probation only. It's inexplicable. Why would they kick a case that they already won?

    An explanation was sought. The Justice Department won't provide documentation of its decision-making process, nor who was involved in making that call. Was it done by political appointees? They won't say. They simply won't explain.

    That's the issue. It's not about "evidence." That's already been decided. That's over. It's not about "racism." That, too, is over. It's about the Justice Department voluntarily refusing to take a conviction it had already secured.
    The case arose after two members of the New Black Panther Party stood outside a polling place in a majority-black precinct in Philadelphia on Election Day in 2008. A video of the men, posted online, showed them dressed in paramilitary clothing, and one carried a billy club.

    In January 2009, less than two weeks before the Bush administration left office, the civil rights division invoked a rarely used section of the Voting Rights Act to file a civil lawsuit alleging voter intimidation by both men, the party chairman and the party.

    In April 2009, the division seemed to win the case by default because the New Black Panthers failed to show up in court. But the following month, a longtime Justice official, Loretta King — who was then the acting head of the division — decided to reduce the scope of the case.

    The department dropped the charges against the party, its chairman and the man who was not carrying a club. It pressed forward with the lawsuit against the man with the club, obtaining an injunction that forbids him from carrying a weapon near an open polling place in Philadelphia through 2012.

    The case became a cause célèbre in the conservative media world, and the Civil Rights Commission opened an investigation. The eight-member panel, which has the power to issue subpoenas and issue reports, is controlled by a six-member conservative bloc appointed during the Bush administration.

    In testimony before the panel in May, Tom Perez, who became the assistant attorney general for the civil rights division in October 2009, said that “reasonable minds can differ” about the case, but that the acting supervisors had concluded that the case had been over-charged.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/us/07rights.html?_r=1

    They won the case, BY DEFAULT, because they didn't show up, not because they argued a legal case of voter intimidation. They continued to charge the man who carried the baton, and dropped the case against the other men who were hired AS SECURITY at the polling station because they had no evidence to adequately charge the men and thus the WIN BY DEFAULT was dropped.

    The issues are racism, and the issues are EVIDENCE.
    Last edited by The Dane; 07-27-10 at 05:38 PM.
    Ever have to dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?
    Scales in the grass but the scales don't move right?

  5. #85
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:34 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,560

    Re: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

    Quote Originally Posted by The Dane View Post
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/us/07rights.html?_r=1

    They won the case, BY DEFAULT, because they didn't show up, not because they argued a legal case of voter intimidation. They continued to charge the man who carried the baton, and dropped the case against the other men who were hired AS SECURITY at the polling station because they had no evidence to adequately charge the men and thus the WIN BY DEFAULT was dropped.
    A conviction by default is still a conviction. It was a win. There was no reason to kick it.

    The question was, who made the decision, and why? That's the issue.

    By the way, you note that your NYT article confirms that the issues are not what you thought they were.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  6. #86
    Hippie Hater
    texmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Dallas TEXAS
    Last Seen
    08-20-15 @ 01:17 AM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    3,969

    Re: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

    Quote Originally Posted by The Dane View Post
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/us/07rights.html?_r=1

    They won the case, BY DEFAULT, because they didn't show up, not because they argued a legal case of voter intimidation. They continued to charge the man who carried the baton, and dropped the case against the other men who were hired AS SECURITY at the polling station because they had no evidence to adequately charge the men and thus the WIN BY DEFAULT was dropped.

    The issues are racism, and the issues are EVIDENCE.
    Security? Where did you get that BS from? Source?
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

    John Adams

  7. #87
    Student The Dane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    08-01-10 @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    253

    Re: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    A conviction by default is still a conviction. It was a win. There was no reason to kick it.

    The question was, who made the decision, and why? That's the issue.

    By the way, you note that your NYT article confirms that the issues are not what you thought they were.
    Oh really so that's what this is about? The right is furious over dropping a win by default conviction? They drop those all the time, that's my point its a manufactured conflict?
    Ever have to dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?
    Scales in the grass but the scales don't move right?

  8. #88
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:34 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,560

    Re: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

    Quote Originally Posted by The Dane View Post
    Oh really so that's what this is about? The right is furious over dropping a win by default conviction? They drop those all the time, that's my point its a manufactured conflict?
    "All the time," are they? Cite a few. Back up what you say. It should be really easy if it happens "all the time."

    But yes, that's really what this about -- and the Justice Departments refusal to be forthcoming on its decision-making process. You didn't have the faintest clue, did you?
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  9. #89
    Student The Dane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    08-01-10 @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    253

    Re: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    Security? Where did you get that BS from? Source?
    Fox 29 spoke with one man, Jerry Jackson, on Tuesday afternoon who said he was a locally elected committee man and entitled to be at the polling place.
    Philly DA: No Complaints About Black Panthers At Polls
    Ever have to dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?
    Scales in the grass but the scales don't move right?

  10. #90
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: No Proof in New Black Panther Case: Official

    This is the funny part of the article that Dane posted.

    The department dropped the charges against the party, its chairman and the man who was not carrying a club. It pressed forward with the lawsuit against the man with the club, obtaining an injunction that forbids him from carrying a weapon near an open polling place in Philadelphia through 2012.
    Now here is federal law....

    SEC. 11. (a) No person acting under color of law shall fail or refuse to permit any person to vote who is entitled to vote under any provision of this Act or is otherwise qualified to vote, or willfully fail or refuse to tabulate, count, and report such person's vote.

    (b) No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for voting or attempting to vote, or intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for urging or aiding any person to vote or attempt to vote, or intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for exercising any powers or duties under section 3(a), 6, 8, 9, 10, or 12(e).

    Our Documents - Transcript of Voting Rights Act (1965)

    So in essence they got an injunction that says he has to obey Federal law until 2012 in Philadelphia..... it's what is known as being tough on crime.

    And what is the Federal penalty for violation of the above law? (hint, it ain't an injunction asking you to obey the law)

    SEC. 12. (a) Whoever shall deprive or attempt to deprive any person of any right secured by section 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, or 10 or shall violate section 11(a) or (b), shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
    Same link

    Funny.... I don't see anything about injuctions in there......
    Last edited by Crunch; 07-27-10 at 06:05 PM.
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •