Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

About time ICE got serious

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by craven View Post
    oh both you and Arnold are right but when you actually have someone do the right thing and then get arrested it a wtf moment. better off to no hablo
    No hablo doesn't help anymore. Hasn't in years.

    Legal green card holders and native-born citizens don't like to get involved, either.

    For that matter, abused women seldom ask for help.

    There's no rule against handing someone the booklet on legal immigration before they shipped off. A lot of illegals are simply too uneducated to find the information on their own.

    Leave a comment:


  • jonny87kz
    replied
    Originally posted by craven View Post
    oh both you and Arnold are right but when you actually have someone do the right thing and then get arrested it a wtf moment. better off to no hablo
    No better off to immigrate legally

    Leave a comment:


  • craven
    replied
    Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
    That's the problem with America. We aren't willing to face Cold Hard Truth. We want to rainbows and unicorns our problems.

    Fact: Immigrants don't talk to the Police. On the street, getting information out of immigrant victims is like pulling teeth, only with more improvised sign language.

    Fact: They don't testify. They don't follow up. They cannot be found a second time to follow up with.

    Fact: The whole DV system (just talking about Domestic Violence mind you, not human trafficking or a whole host of other things) is already routinely strained to the breaking point. It's difficult enough to get native English speakers who aren't terrified of the Police (whether worried about ICE or simply thinking that like the Mexican Police we'll just shoot them and toss them in a ditch) to stay on track.

    Fact: There are not long-term prospects for a non-English speaker with no education or skillset. They don't fit into society, and if the Abuser is a part of their subset it is no simple matter to separate them long-term. Again, it's every problem that American Citizens have in the same situation.....only orders of magnitude more difficult to resolve.

    Fact: Deporting the victim back to their home town does remove them from the Abuser. If the Abuser happens to travel to their home town there are resources there to deal with it....called the local authorities who will know and be better aware of local situations.
    oh both you and Arnold are right but when you actually have someone do the right thing and then get arrested it a wtf moment. better off to no hablo

    Leave a comment:


  • Urban hermit
    replied
    To bad lady, if you ignore the law you shouldn't be a judge

    Stop 'Stalking' Courthouses, Top California Judge Tells ICE

    The chief justice of California's Supreme Court accused federal immigration authorities of "stalking" local courthouses on Thursday, joined a growing chorus of officials objecting to immigration detentions at courthouses.

    In a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, state Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye asked the federal government to immediately stop detaining suspected undocumented immigrants at courthouses in California.

    "Enforcement policies that include stalking courthouses and arresting undocumented immigrants, the vast majority of whom pose no risk to public safety, are neither safe nor fair," she wrote. "They not only compromise our core value of fairness but they undermine the judiciary's ability to provide equal access to justice."

    In recent weeks, state and local authorities in other jurisdictions, including Multnomah County, Oregon, and El Paso, Texas, have gone public with their objections to what they have called "raids" by agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement inside courthouses or on courthouse grounds.

    Virginia Kice, a spokeswoman for ICE's Western regional office, told NBC News on Thursday that the agency had no comment on Cantil-Sakauye's letter. But she confirmed and defended the practice of detaining undocumented immigrants at courthouses in general.

    "While ICE does arrest targets at courthouses, generally it's only after investigating officers have exhausted other options," she said, noting that many local law enforcement agencies refuse to honor ICE detainer requests.

    Kice said that many of those detained at or near courthouses have previous convictions and that they would have been turned over to ICE upon their releases from jail, anyway.

    "When criminal custody transfers occur inside the secure confines of a jail or prison, it's far safer for everyone involved, including our officers and the person who's being arrested," she said.

    A particularly high-profile detention occurred Feb. 9 at the El Paso County Courthouse, where security video recorded ICE agents arresting Irvin González, a transgender woman from Mexico, who was at the courthouse to seek a protective order against her alleged abuser.

    Rep. Beto O'Rourke, D-Texas, told NBC affiliate KTSM at the time that victims of crime should be able to feel safe inside a courthouse.

    In her letter Thursday, Cantil-Sakauye sounded a similar warning.

    "I am concerned about the impact on public trust and confidence in our state court system if the public feels that our state institutions are being used to facilitate other goals and objectives, no matter how expedient they may be," she wrote.

    The ICE policy mirrors promises President Donald Trump made during his campaign last year, but it doesn't appear to be in response to the president's urgings.

    Leave a comment:


  • TacCovert4
    replied
    Originally posted by craven View Post
    Cold Arnold just cold
    That's the problem with America. We aren't willing to face Cold Hard Truth. We want to rainbows and unicorns our problems.

    Fact: Immigrants don't talk to the Police. On the street, getting information out of immigrant victims is like pulling teeth, only with more improvised sign language.

    Fact: They don't testify. They don't follow up. They cannot be found a second time to follow up with.

    Fact: The whole DV system (just talking about Domestic Violence mind you, not human trafficking or a whole host of other things) is already routinely strained to the breaking point. It's difficult enough to get native English speakers who aren't terrified of the Police (whether worried about ICE or simply thinking that like the Mexican Police we'll just shoot them and toss them in a ditch) to stay on track.

    Fact: There are not long-term prospects for a non-English speaker with no education or skillset. They don't fit into society, and if the Abuser is a part of their subset it is no simple matter to separate them long-term. Again, it's every problem that American Citizens have in the same situation.....only orders of magnitude more difficult to resolve.

    Fact: Deporting the victim back to their home town does remove them from the Abuser. If the Abuser happens to travel to their home town there are resources there to deal with it....called the local authorities who will know and be better aware of local situations.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by craven View Post
    Cold Arnold just cold
    If reporting domestic abuse got you a green card, every illegal would be abused, and local LE would be shut down under a tidal wave of bogus paperwork.

    There is a system in place to emigrate legally.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by craven View Post
    Cold Arnold just cold
    More like hard but fair. Illegals do make poor witnesses. Most are poorly educated, many have drug or alcohol issues, and of course, they're criminals. That last makes them reluctant to come forward in any case. They don't want to get deported so they hide.

    As witnesses, how credible is someone with an sixth grade education who doesn't speak English and has priors? That's what you've got much of the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • craven
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
    The illegal woman should be deported. That will protect her from an abuser and solve her criminal status.

    Illegals make very poor witnesses, because they are, as the defense attorney will dwell upon at some length, criminals.

    Deporting illegals solves a great deal of crime.
    Cold Arnold just cold

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by craven View Post
    what I do find interesting in your guys discussion is skipping over the part of enforcement which is what if no one testifies or calls the cops because of ICE.

    It to early to tell what effect this will have but personally I would want the illegal woman who was abused to actually get protection and deal with a violent criminal than deport here.

    Will illegal immigrants testify against others. I am guessing it already hard to get them to.

    and yes in the main story they got a bad guy but once it known ICE is hanging out at court houses any smart illegal immigrant is going to be very helpful to law enforcement
    The illegal woman should be deported. That will protect her from an abuser and solve her criminal status.

    Illegals make very poor witnesses, because they are, as the defense attorney will dwell upon at some length, criminals.

    Deporting illegals solves a great deal of crime.

    Leave a comment:


  • craven
    replied
    what I do find interesting in your guys discussion is skipping over the part of enforcement which is what if no one testifies or calls the cops because of ICE.

    It to early to tell what effect this will have but personally I would want the illegal woman who was abused to actually get protection and deal with a violent criminal than deport here.

    Will illegal immigrants testify against others. I am guessing it already hard to get them to.

    and yes in the main story they got a bad guy but once it known ICE is hanging out at court houses any smart illegal immigrant is going to be very helpful to law enforcement

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
    SANTA CRUZ (CBS SF) – Ten alleged gang members arrested in Santa Cruz, Watsonville and Daly City on Monday have been charged with offenses including drug trafficking and conspiracy to commit extortion by force, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.
    A federal grand jury on Monday indicted seven of the men for conspiring to extort drug dealers and three for conspiring to traffic methamphetamine.
    The suspects are allegedly members of Santa Cruz Salvatrucha Locos 13, a subset of the Mara Salvatrucha 13 (MS-13) gang, according to court papers filed by the government Monday.
    After a five-year federal investigation, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security along with police from Santa Cruz, Watsonville, Santa Clara and Daly City arrested the alleged gang members at homes in Santa Cruz County and Daly City starting around 4 a.m. Monday.
    More than 200 local and federal law enforcement officers participated in the early morning arrests.
    Velarmino “Meduza” Escobar Ayala, Tomas “Profugo” or “Caballo” Rivera, Ismael “Casper” Alvarenga Rivera, Willfredo “Chino” Edgardo Ayala, Jose David “Largo” Abrego Galdamez, Melvin “Sharky” Lopez and Alexander “Pocar” Martinez Flores are facing extortion charges, prosecutors said.
    According to the indictment, the seven men had conspired to threaten Santa Cruz drug dealers and those close to them with violence in order to take their property.
    If convicted, the defendants face a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
    Gerber “Choco” Morales, Emilio “Diablo” Escobar Abarnga and Josue Alcedis “Penguino” Escobar Cerritos allegedly conspired to engage in drug trafficking, prosecutors said.
    Since March 2015, the three men conspired to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of a substance containing a detectable amount of meth.
    Members of Santa Cruz’s immigrant community expressed widespread alarm at the action, which involved Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, given recent ICE raids in Southern California and elsewhere around the country, according to University of California at Santa Cruz sociologist Paul Johnston.
    Santa Cruz police responded to the concerns by releasing a statement Monday evening emphasizing that the raids were part of the long-term investigation into the gang rather than any sort of immigration or deportation action.
    “The Santa Cruz Police Department is extraordinarily aware of the fear that exists in our community regarding immigration raids,” police said in the statement.
    “This operation was not associated with enforcement of federal immigration nor deportation investigations. The City of Santa Cruz and the Santa Cruz Police Department does not and will not participate in immigration enforcement or arrests,” police said. “The men arrested during today’s operation were all members of a violent criminal organization that has preyed upon and threatened the community.”
    All 10 defendants made appearances before U.S. Magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins on Monday.
    If convicted, the defendants accusing of conspiring to commit extortion face a maximum sentence of 20 years and prison and a $250,000 fine. Those convicted of conspiracy to possess 50 grams or more of methamphetamine with the intent to distribute it face a maximum of 40 years in prison and a $5 million fine, prosecutors said.


    The disturbing part for me is this- The City of Santa Cruz and the Santa Cruz Police Department does not and will not participate in immigration enforcement or arrests,” police said.


    Is this even legal? Can LEO's decide that they will not enforce the laws and publicly state that?
    California is very proud of its status as a sanctuary state, and has often excluded themselves from various laws, except for those that they use to their own advantage such as stopping an entire construction program to protect a useless little fish.

    Remember, though, Obama, Bush and many others picked and chose what laws they would enforce, so there is a very strong precedent.

    Governors, BTW, do it too.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Jose50 View Post
    I meant ICE's mandate - sorry I should've worded it better.

    Acknowledged that local LE has no reason to enforce federal law but mustn't it stop short of actually hindering federal agents who are legally serving out warrants/raids etc?
    Cases such as Trung Si described are rare, but not unheard of.

    Back in the 80-s there was a lot of ill-will between the Feds and local/state LE over the Feds gunning for civil rights violations. That has since ended, and until Bobo things had largely recovered. Over the last six years there had again been a decline in relationships due to Bobo's policy of harassing state/local LE.

    Hopefully the next eight years will mend the fences.

    Leave a comment:


  • TacCovert4
    replied
    Originally posted by Jose50 View Post
    I meant ICE's mandate - sorry I should've worded it better.

    Acknowledged that local LE has no reason to enforce federal law but mustn't it stop short of actually hindering federal agents who are legally serving out warrants/raids etc?
    Things get pretty dicey when it goes there. The feds in theory can wholly ignore local le. However, in practice the locals outnumber the feds on the ground by such a margin that they will typically go away rather than initiate a confrontation.

    A case of results not being worth resources.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jose50
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
    Keep in mind that local agencies cannot enforce the Federal Code. So there is no mandate involved.
    I meant ICE's mandate - sorry I should've worded it better.

    Acknowledged that local LE has no reason to enforce federal law but mustn't it stop short of actually hindering federal agents who are legally serving out warrants/raids etc?

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Jose50 View Post
    Is that true? Does local law enforcement take precedent over federal officials diligently pursuing criminals in violation of federal law? How is this legal?
    I know that there are so-called "sanctuary cities" where the local law enforcement community is discouraged from actively participating with or abetting immigration officials but stops short of actually hindering their ability to carry out their lawful mandate.
    Keep in mind that local agencies cannot enforce the Federal Code. So there is no mandate involved.

    It is a cooperation issue; ICE needs to house illegals in local jails until they can be transported to Federal facilities. If a Sheriff refuses to accept such inmates, there is no legal obligation to do so.

    Federal LE is carefully kept separate from local/State LE. That is why the 'Obama will declare martial law' theory was so funny: no POTUS has any control over state/local LE, which make up roughly 95% of LEOs in the USA.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X