|
Post by FormerlyAnon on Aug 8, 2003 1:02:02 GMT -5
...then you could go down w/each other as you said you would... Would you mind telling us what state you work in? We need to notify the authorities so they know that they have an aspiring criminal-wanna be CONVICT in their midst...
|
|
|
Post by FormerlyAnon on Aug 8, 2003 1:21:10 GMT -5
Stagetec: I know & understand the charges, but, thanks. He is not my boy. I just believe in a FAIR & impartial trial system where the accused is allowed to confront his accusers & view ALL the evidence. This has NOT occurred. From what TheTruth, Sherry, et al have researched & reported here, a REAL trial is warrented NOW if not sooner...
|
|
|
Post by ----- on Aug 8, 2003 8:30:31 GMT -5
Constitutionally, you have a right to face your accuser.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
6. Any grade-school child knows that when you have been accused of a crime, you have a right to confront your accusers. But with drugs it's different. Unlike most felonies that involve a criminal and a victim, drug sales involve two willing participants. So to find out about such transactions, the police rely on inside information, effectively deputizing a posse of faceless informants. Because many snitches are employed more than once, the Supreme Court eliminated the right to face your accuser in a notorious 1983 ruling, Illinois v. Gates, which sanctioned the use of anonymous informants. Moreover, any defendant choosing to go to trial risks infuriating the judge by clogging his schedule. Most suspects, innocent or not, plead guilty and then cop a lesser sentence by becoming snitches themselves. Faceless informants are often paid by the police, and many of them continue their drug habits, now subsidized by taxpayers. In effect, the drug war has reduced our justice system to a tournament of snitches and golddiggers.
|
|
|
Post by missshasta2000 on Aug 25, 2003 8:01:49 GMT -5
The Dog is still awesome.. He puts criminals where they belong..
|
|
|
Post by FormerlyAnon on Aug 26, 2003 0:45:22 GMT -5
...You've got it ALL wrong, Missy! He IS a criminal, a CONVICT!!! who is presently a fugitive on the run. He belongs in prison. What part is the most awesome? Is it his mullet?; his muscles?; certainly not his intelligence?; his jailhouse tatoos?; his lies & deceptions?; his self- proclaimed status (legend in his own mind)?; his share of the $1 mil cash bail (ooopps, he didn't win that fraud)?; his criminal history?; his involvement in a drug related murder? I'm confused. He just doesn't seem to have any real redeeming qualities, now does he? He thinks he is GOD spelled backwards (let's see, could that be S A T A N ? ? ?) Best get your wires uncrossed, Mt. Girl...
|
|
|
Post by TheTruth on Aug 27, 2003 13:14:08 GMT -5
LOL. Maybe they will transfer all that misplaced hero worship and infatuation to the priest killer now. After all, he killed a pedophile, right? Let's just forget that the youthful indescretion of murder, not to mention the Anthrax hoax.
|
|
|
Post by FormerlyAnon on Aug 27, 2003 22:47:53 GMT -5
Several stories out of MA re: the priest killer. He wanted to kill someone in a prison so he could be transferred to a federal facility--won't happen as he will be charged by the state, not the feds. He knew he was safe from the death penalty as MA has no such punishment. He killed the man who the state of MA had already tried, convicted, & sentenced because he hated "gays" & believed he may have been approached by 'one of them' at some time in his past. Bill O'Reilly, even tho you may not like him/his positions on certain issues, suggested that rapists, molesters, murderers, large scale drug pushers should all be rounded up & isolated in facilities specifically designed to house such trash (I'm curious if that would include our favorite CONVICT, you know who, as I think it should!!!). This Druse idiot should not be given one more second of publicity or fame; but, rather, should be planted deep w/in a hole in the prison system forever...
|
|
|
Post by TheTruth on Aug 27, 2003 22:55:54 GMT -5
I think there was more to it. The vatican or the diocese had a lot to gain by his death and risked serious "exposure" (legal term) due to his testimony in the civil and criminal trials. They needed him out of the way. He was sentenced to 10 yr.-life for a 69 yr old. He had nothing to lose and was probably going to sing. I'm gonna start another thread about the state of LA applying the death penalty to rape cases. Look how many innocent people have been exonerrated in the last few years-300 that we KNOW of. Does Louisiana still have the electric chair? How many innocents will die in that redneck good ol' boy network now?
|
|
|
Post by FormerlyAnon on Aug 28, 2003 3:45:07 GMT -5
...not real sure of all the methods of carrying out the death sentence in LA. I believe you are correct w/the chair & the other is injection. LA being the SPORTSMANS PARADISE, firing squad might be an option (NOT). That was in bad taste, wasn't it? I believe the Fed Courts have already decided that the death penalty for the case you are talking about (rape of a child under age of 12?) would not apply, nor would they allow it as constitutional. The man was JUST convicted. Appeals galore now await him & his future. He won't be put to death on this conviction, but he will never see a free day again...
|
|
|
Post by Sherry on Aug 30, 2003 20:34:33 GMT -5
All those people found to be innocent after all those years and they're still trying to not only keep the death penalty but impose it on less serious offenders. Where is their conscience?
|
|
|
Post by bailball on Oct 5, 2004 14:54:35 GMT -5
I'm a Colorado Bail Bondsman & BEA. I never herd of "DOG" until he he got arrested in Mexico. Any professional recovery agent should know the laws in the states they plan to apprehend in. ALL PROFESSIONAL recovery agents KNOW better than to arrest a skip in Mexico. Dog saw his chance, and had the media attention fueling his ego., and thought for sure he'd get a percentage of Lustor's 1 million dollar bond. He should be careful, a licensed BEA could get written authority from Mexico, and arrest him and take him back to Mexico to face the charges he fled from. Colorado, where Dogs from, requires ALL "bounty hunters" to submit a fingerprint card for a background check, to the CBI. Once you show you don't have a criminal history, you must then complete a 16 hour training course. THEN, you can apprehend bail jumpers in Colorado. Has Dog met these requirements?? We'll find out shortly.
|
|