Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Always Above the Law

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

  • Always Above the Law

    The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Fresno police officers accused of stealing more than $225,000 while executing a search warrant are protected by qualified immunity and thus cannot be sued over the incident.

    While the unanimous panel acknowledged that "the City Officers ought to have recognized that the alleged theft was morally wrong," it concluded that they "did not have clear notice that it violated the Fourth Amendment." In other words, the cops weren't equipped with enough information to deduce that robbing people is a violation of their constitutional rights against unreasonable searches and seizures—a bizarre interpretation of the law, to say the least.

    In 2013, the Fresno Police Department carried out a raid on Micah Jessop and Brittan Ashjian, who were suspected of operating illegal gambling machines. (Neither man was ever charged.) Upon completing the search, officers provided both with a ledger maintaining that they'd seized $50,000; Jessop and Ashjian allege that, in reality, the cops made off with $151,380 in cash and $125,000 in rare coins. Both men contend that the officers pocketed the difference between the funds reported with the warrant and the total amount they took, amounting to a $226,380 theft.
    https://reason.com/2019/09/20/court-...rth-amendment/
    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
    - Benjamin Franklin

    The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

  • #2
    Only in Cuckoo California!

    Of course, the criminals' word can be taken as fact...
    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

    Comment


    • #3
      Typical of the 9th Circuit's statist sentiments. Their ruling in US v Pineda (2012) was such a heinous miscarriage that both liberals and conservatives on the Supreme Court joined together to overturn it.
      I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

        Only in Cuckoo California!

        Of course, the criminals' word can be taken as fact...
        What only in CA?

        We saw a similar type of thinking with the president's immunity from prosecution. Replace the cop with Trump doing the same thing, and you will have Mueller and the DOJ tell you that they cannot conclude if the president violated the law or not.
        My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by pamak View Post

          What only in CA?

          We saw a similar type of thinking with the president's immunity from prosecution. Replace the cop with Trump doing the same thing, and you will have Mueller and the DOJ tell you that they cannot conclude if the president violated the law or not.
          You mean the immunity of people like Norton, the Clintons, Obama, Omar, Cortez and the rest of the criminal Democratic Rat Pack? Try not to let your TDS run away with you. It makes you look prejudiced.
          Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

          Comment


          • #6
            "It's good to be king." - Harvey Korman in Mel Brooks' HISTORY of the WORLD PART II
            ARRRR! International Talk Like A Pirate Day - September 19th
            IN MARE IN COELO

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Jose50 View Post
              "It's good to be king." - Harvey Korman in Mel Brooks' HISTORY of the WORLD PART II
              Funny...that's what BoBo and Michelle are saying as they spend their many millions.
              Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

              Comment


              • #8
                https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local...164875612.html

                The original article appears to be misleading. The search and seizure were legal what happened afterwards is a separate issue.
                We hunt the hunters

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
                  https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local...164875612.html

                  The original article appears to be misleading. The search and seizure were legal what happened afterwards is a separate issue.
                  This gives a bigger picture which makes more sense.

                  I noticed that first the police officer was arrested on unrelated charges and convicted, so the theory that the DA somehow protects crooked police officers falls apart

                  Then you have the issue that this is a civil case, and it is quite possible that the argument was that EVEN if the officers stole such money (which seems that it was a claim by the plaintiffs and we do not know if it is true or not), the plaintiffs still do not have a right to sue and ask for restitution.

                  Then at some point the article mentions that the police officers DID find illegal gambling machines. So, the fact that there were no charges was perhaps a result of a deal where the DA dropped charges and the people involved agreed to the confiscation of the cash?

                  If that is a case, then I do not see how the plaintiffs can claim that the constitution protects their confiscated wealth.
                  Last edited by pamak; 23 Sep 19, 18:55.
                  My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I don't like forfeiture laws because they lead to abuse. In this case the DA should have pursued the criminal charges or returned the evidence. It is a lot like plea bargains in so far as they should be the exception not the rule. If the courts are overburdened them charges should be dropped without prejudice and any evidence collected turned over to "ambulance chasers" . You cannot be innocent until proven guilty if the process is the punishment. Unequal justice is not just cases like Clinton where who you are determines how your case is handled but also how those with less financial resources cannot receive equal representation and accept forfeiture or plead guilty to crimes they did not commit.

                    Very few people seem to actually agree that it is better that 9 guilty individuals go free rather than 1 innocent person be falsely convicted. We have become weak and we constantly trade freedom for security. People must accept responsibility for their own security because relying on the government always turns into tyranny of one sort or the other. In the above case over regulation by the government made criminals out of people who operated unlicensed gambling. It should be the responsibility of individuals to avoid such unsecured operations. If people are too stupid to care for themselves we are doomed anyway.
                    We hunt the hunters

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Jose50 View Post
                      "It's good to be king." - Harvey Korman in Mel Brooks' HISTORY of the WORLD PART II
                      That was Mel Brooks.



                      You're thinking of the Count De Monet.



                      Never gets old . . . .
                      I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        ...I stand corrected...
                        ARRRR! International Talk Like A Pirate Day - September 19th
                        IN MARE IN COELO

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
                          I don't like forfeiture laws because they lead to abuse. In this case the DA should have pursued the criminal charges or returned the evidence. It is a lot like plea bargains in so far as they should be the exception not the rule. If the courts are overburdened them charges should be dropped without prejudice and any evidence collected turned over to "ambulance chasers" . You cannot be innocent until proven guilty if the process is the punishment. Unequal justice is not just cases like Clinton where who you are determines how your case is handled but also how those with less financial resources cannot receive equal representation and accept forfeiture or plead guilty to crimes they did not commit.

                          Very few people seem to actually agree that it is better that 9 guilty individuals go free rather than 1 innocent person be falsely convicted. We have become weak and we constantly trade freedom for security. People must accept responsibility for their own security because relying on the government always turns into tyranny of one sort or the other. In the above case over regulation by the government made criminals out of people who operated unlicensed gambling. It should be the responsibility of individuals to avoid such unsecured operations. If people are too stupid to care for themselves we are doomed anyway.
                          I agree up to a point, especially concerning the forfeiture business.

                          As for protecting the single innocent party, I'm not so convinced having seen a lot of the inside workings of the so-called "justice system" and its Machiavellian approach to the law. And out here in Colorado back country, the political machinations of the County Sherriff's department have to be seen to be believed.

                          It's pretty hard these days to truly define the term "innocent" in any realistic and relevant sense.

                          That being said, I would not to be that "innocent" party myself.
                          Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by pamak View Post

                            What only in CA?

                            We saw a similar type of thinking with the president's immunity from prosecution. Replace the cop with Trump doing the same thing, and you will have Mueller and the DOJ tell you that they cannot conclude if the president violated the law or not.
                            There is a valid reason why presidents have immunity, and there is a legal process to follow if they actual break the laws. Ask Nixon.

                            Of curse, you avoided mentioning any of Obama's rimes against the Constitution which he swore an oath to uphold and defend, or his dirty dealings with foreign nations like Iran, or anything at all about the Clinton's against whom there is a mountain of evidence, so... if you won't prosecute your won, you can't prosecute anyone else, either. The precedents have been set by the Democrats, who steadfastly refuse to even deal with crimes within their own ranks.

                            "As ye sow, so shall ye reap."
                            Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
                              https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local...164875612.html

                              The original article appears to be misleading. The search and seizure were legal what happened afterwards is a separate issue.
                              What happened afterwards is the point of the original article.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X