• 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!

Boston-area judge charged with helping undocumented immigrant escape courthouse to elude ICE

dcsports said:
Then you could go to jail too!

Keep in mind that this wasn't even the 'usual' controversy of ICE asking police to hold a defendant once they're done with him. Federal officers were in the building seeking the man, and these people actively worked to help him escape.
Click to expand...

No he wouldn't. Warrants not signed by a judge are not judicial warrants and therefore do not have the force of law.
 
Chomsky said:
That's a tough one, because while I'd like to consider myself a righteous man, I am aghast at defying the legal system. If there's a problem with the law, I believe it should be changed - not violated.
Click to expand...

I have little doubt that there these charges were motivated out of politics rather than out of concern of the rule, If this administration was truly concerned with upholding the rule of law they wouldn't allow ICE to use some of the tactics that it uses. To me this constitutes a remarkable intrusion into the internal affairs of a state judiciary and possible retaliation against Massachusetts’ “sanctuary” policies. Pure and simple.

And actually I'm not sure that the judge violated any law. This all stems from an incident on April 2, 2018, when Joseph held an arraignment hearing for Jose Medina-Perez, who has resided in the United States unlawfully. Medina-Perez had been arrested on drug charges by police in Newton, Massachusetts, where Joseph presides. Prosecutors initially believed he also had an outstanding warrant for drunk driving. But on April 2, Assistant District Attorney Shannon Jurgens concluded that Medina-Perez was not the individual named in the warrant. She also declined to request that the state hold him the drug charges. So Joseph ordered him released.
 
Atomic Kid said:
No he wouldn't. Warrants not signed by a judge are not judicial warrants and therefore do not have the force of law.
Click to expand...

The person had an outstanding fugitive warrant... signed by a judge.

And again... there were actual federal agents in the building there to take custody of the man. It wasn't even a warrant issue.
 
dcsports said:
The person had an outstanding fugitive warrant... signed by a judge.

And again... there were actual federal agents in the building there to take custody of the man. It wasn't even a warrant issue.
Click to expand...

If they did then why did they not present it to the court instead of lingering outside of it. The Assistant District Attorney concluded they had the wrong man. So the judge had no reason to hold him.
 
Atomic Kid said:
I have little doubt that there these charges were motivated out of politics rather than out of concern of the rule, If this administration was truly concerned with upholding the rule of law they wouldn't allow ICE to use some of the tactics that it uses. To me this constitutes a remarkable intrusion into the internal affairs of a state judiciary and possible retaliation against Massachusetts’ “sanctuary” policies. Pure and simple.

And actually I'm not sure that the judge violated any law. This all stems from an incident on April 2, 2018, when Joseph held an arraignment hearing for Jose Medina-Perez, who has resided in the United States unlawfully. Medina-Perez had been arrested on drug charges by police in Newton, Massachusetts, where Joseph presides. Prosecutors initially believed he also had an outstanding warrant for drunk driving. But on April 2, Assistant District Attorney Shannon Jurgens concluded that Medina-Perez was not the individual named in the warrant. She also declined to request that the state hold him the drug charges. So Joseph ordered him released.
Click to expand...


Yeah, let go of someone who is here illegally (after being deported 2x) who is into drugs and driving drunk. First class citizen for sure. Anyone defending this guy being allowed to evade ICE is pathetic. Hope it isn't anybody's loved one here, that gets killed when the guy decides to drink and drive again. Send your thanks to ADA Jurgens.
 
holbritter said:
Yeah, let go of someone who is here illegally (after being deported 2x) who is into drugs and driving drunk. First class citizen for sure. Anyone defending this guy being allowed to evade ICE is pathetic. Hope it isn't anybody's loved one here, that gets killed when the guy decides to drink and drive again. Send your thanks to ADA Jurgens.
Click to expand...

You know what? Maybe deporting Americans who are into drugs and driving drunk would be good way of cutting into Trump's base.
 
dcsports said:
The person had an outstanding fugitive warrant... signed by a judge.

And again... there were actual federal agents in the building there to take custody of the man. It wasn't even a warrant issue.
Click to expand...

This is typically how ICE operates.

 
Atomic Kid said:
If they did then why did they not present it to the court instead of lingering outside of it. The Assistant District Attorney concluded they had the wrong man. So the judge had no reason to hold him.
Click to expand...

Why didn't they interrupt the proceedings? Seriously? They probably assumed the court and DA weren't going to help a wanted fugitive escape.

And again, the ADA and judge knew they had the right man. The ADA's comment, for the record, was made after a discussion with the recording turned off. It was a lie. And even if the court had no reason to hold him at the state level, they still had a duty to turn him over to the federal agents.
 
Atomic Kid said:
You know what? Maybe deporting Americans who are into drugs and driving drunk would be good way of cutting into Trump's base.
Click to expand...

You're obviously anti-American.

Americans go to jail. Apparently, illegals get let go with help from the judge. :shrug:
 
dcsports said:
Why didn't they interrupt the proceedings? Seriously? They probably assumed the court and DA weren't going to help a wanted fugitive escape.

And again, the ADA and judge knew they had the right man. The ADA's comment, for the record, was made after a discussion with the recording turned off. It was a lie. And even if the court had no reason to hold him at the state level, they still had a duty to turn him over to the federal agents.
Click to expand...

No. More likely that what they actually had was a Homeland Security Order and not a warrant and that's why they didn't present it to the court.
 
dcsports said:
Professional and courteous?
Click to expand...

You want to call someone who is deliberately misrepresenting an order as a constitutionally valid warrant a professional? At best he's a courteous liar.
 
holbritter said:
You're obviously anti-American.

Americans go to jail. Apparently, illegals get let go with help from the judge. :shrug:
Click to expand...

just saying what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
 
Atomic Kid said:
No. More likely that what they actually had was a Homeland Security Order and not a warrant and that's why they didn't present it to the court.
Click to expand...

lol -- that silliness is a distraction.

They had no business before the court. It was an unrelated matter. There's also been no dispute that they had a valid reason to take the person into custody.
 
holbritter said:
You're obviously anti-American.

Americans go to jail. Apparently, illegals get let go with help from the judge. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Theres always room for more. Even for judges, now.

Terror is the order of the day.

The charge of obstruction of justice is especially ironic.
 
Last edited:
dcsports said:
lol -- that silliness is a distraction.

They had no business before the court. It was an unrelated matter. There's also been no dispute that they had a valid reason to take the person into custody.
Click to expand...

Constitutional rights are silly to you? If you have a valid reason then you really shouldn't have too much of a problem getting a judge to sign a warrant, right?
 
AmNat said:
The only downside here is that it's not a federal judge being prosecuted.
Click to expand...
You are nothing but a useless troll
 
holbritter said:
You're obviously anti-American.

Americans go to jail. Apparently, illegals get let go with help from the judge. :shrug:
Click to expand...

And we are putting children and their families into cages and detention centers for having committed no crime other than seek to seek asylum. And plenty of Americans, especially white Americans, get released by judges for committing those same kind of offenses everyday. Not saying that this guy is a great example of immigrants. But he's much more the exception than the rule and he has rights too. You're obviously anti-immigrant. Which nearly all of us here in this country either once were and have descended from and that would seem pretty un-American to me.
 
Atomic Kid said:
If they did then why did they not present it to the court instead of lingering outside of it. The Assistant District Attorney concluded they had the wrong man. So the judge had no reason to hold him.
Click to expand...
They tried but the judge ordered the ice agent to wait outside of her courtroom. She instructed to the agent to wait in the lobby and told them that the defendent would exit through that lobby if she did not order the defendent be taken into custody.

That is what the charging document of that jidge alleges.

She will have an opprotunity to explain why she is not guilty of breaking any laws in a courtroom at her trial.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Atomic Kid said:
And we are putting children and their families into cages and detention centers for having committed no crime other than seek to seek asylum. And plenty of Americans, especially white Americans, get released by judges for committing those same kind of offenses everyday. Not saying that this guy is a great example of immigrants. But he's much more the exception than the rule and he has rights too. You're obviously anti-immigrant. Which nearly all of us here in this country either once were and have descended from and that would seem pretty un-American to me.
Click to expand...

Deflection.png
 
Atomic Kid said:
Constitutional rights are silly to you? If you have a valid reason then you really shouldn't have too much of a problem getting a judge to sign a warrant, right?
Click to expand...

Oh. Now a straw man?

They didn't need one. Note that none of the court representatives disputed their authority to take the man into custody.
 
She broke down and cried at her arraignment. Seems like she knows she is in big trouble.
 
Chomsky said:
I'm not concluding that legal obstruction necessarily took place here, and even if it did I would rather it initially be examined in a judicial review situation, rather than initially by a law-enforcement warrant. I have strong concerns about protecting the independence of the judiciary.
Click to expand...

The branches of government aren't and shouldn't be 'independent'.

Were they so, they could not effectively serve as checks on one another.

Judicial misconduct should not be handled by judicial review but by the other branches stepping in to do their jobs. The alternative - letting branches effectively police themselves - pretty much negates the benefits of separate branches to begin with. Giving the insiders first crack at it stinks just as bad.
 
JMaximus said:
The branches of government aren't and shouldn't be 'independent'.

Were they so, they could not effectively serve as checks on one another.

Judicial misconduct should not be handled by judicial review but by the other branches stepping in to do their jobs. The alternative - letting branches effectively police themselves - pretty much negates the benefits of separate branches to begin with. Giving the insiders first crack at it stinks just as bad.
Click to expand...
Despite their interdependence, if we consider the judiciary in the same Constitutional terms as SCOTUS, I believe there needs to be relative independence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom