Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Jury acquits illegal immigrant


aztek

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Essan said:

Whether he was in the country illegally is as relevant to the case as his pant size, his star sign and when he last cut his toenails

Do you convict people on the colour of their eyes?  Or empirical evidence?   And if not the latter, you live in a country I never want to visit

 

It's relevant. Kate would be alive if he wasn't able to find "sanctuary" in a corrupt city. He was deported six times. Kate's family and friends know that's damn relevant.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, third_eye said:

This here is exactly what I'm talking about ... finger pointing at its worse ... just sayin' Michele ... you know I loves ya ...

 

It's not exactly finger pointing. I'm still in amazement people were so silent for eight years. Riots and billions of dollars worth of damage all over the country, after Obama put his two cents in about a couple of cases before all of the facts were out.

Of course, that is the only kind of government a lot of people were raised with.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like the illegal immigrant noticed a cloth-covered item, picked it up whilst the item was still covered, and inadvertently hit the hair trigger, discharging the bullet in an accidental direction and circumstance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Michelle said:

It's not exactly finger pointing. I'm still in amazement people were so silent for eight years. Riots and billions of dollars worth of damage all over the country, after Obama put his two cents in about a couple of cases before all of the facts were out.

Of course, that is the only kind of government a lot of people were raised with.

Obama was dragged through the stink and hell just because a small minority of very vocal Power Brokers wanted to put him back in his 'place'

Sparky was and is still is among them ... payback Michelle ... its been that same tiresome game since Bill and Dubya ... anyways ... its all in the past now

Or at least, it should be ... I'm not that optimistic though ... bring on the New Year ...

~

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone enjoys the PC until it becomes time that you may have to accept the consequences. Then it's all bs. Why do I fear we will be hearing more of this. Are these cities paying attention to who they are filling themselves up with?

Edited by susieice
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

True, but it should be noted that he was a non-violent offender.

He's obviously a victim. You should take him into your house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Paranormal Panther said:

He's obviously a victim. You should take him into your house.

That's a bit 'over the top'. Take what I said in that post in context of the conversation that was going on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Likely Guy said:

That's a bit 'over the top'. Take what I said in that post in context of the conversation that was going on.

It was meant to be over the top. Seriously, what should they do with him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Obama was dragged through the stink and hell just because a small minority of very vocal Power Brokers wanted to put him back in his 'place'

 

I've been seriously interested in politics since Nixon. I have never seen a president handled with such kid gloves in my life. :P

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Setton said:

For God's sake, they were straight forward enough for people in the 13th century to grasp but some Americans still have difficulty.

Again with the gratuitous slap at Americans. It's something of a pastime on this forum.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

It was meant to be over the top. Seriously, what should they do with him?

If found guilty, keep him in jail for the 3 years for "felon in possession of a firearm" and then deport him again. Yes, he might come back but I don't think the Wall is going to do a damn bit of good though, one way or the other, which was Trump's point.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

If found guilty, keep him in jail for the 3 years for "felon in possession of a firearm" and then deport him again. Yes, he might come back but I don't think the Wall is going to do a damn bit of good though, one way or the other, which was Trump's point.

When he is sentenced for the felony possession of a firearm, he will probably be credited for the 2 years served awaiting trial. Immigration is ready to pick him up. It's up to San Francisco to turn him over. I'm sure he'll be back. Then he'll be a six time deportee and an 8 time felon. We haven't heard the last of him.

Edited by susieice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

If found guilty, keep him in jail for the 3 years for "felon in possession of a firearm" and then deport him again. Yes, he might come back but I don't think the Wall is going to do a damn bit of good though, one way or the other, which was Trump's point.

If I'm not mistaken, we agreed the prison time for such an offence and it was much longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somehow, all this, the jury, the unimportant evidence of the acused past life....reminds me on Zimmerman.

Only that those who want to lynch this mexican guy now were cheering on Zimmi back then.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, odas said:

Somehow, all this, the jury, the unimportant evidence of the acused past life....reminds me on Zimmerman.

Only that those who want to lynch this mexican guy now were cheering on Zimmi back then.

I don't want to lynch him. I just want him to be deported again, which probably won't work anyway, and I want the sanctuary cities to understand their responsibilities to their citizens when they harbor someone like that. There is no sanctuary outside of the city limits so unless you live in one, it really wouldn't affect you. I would think Americans with legal problems could seek sanctuary also but I don't know for sure.

Edited by susieice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, susieice said:

When he is sentenced for the felony possession of a firearm, he will probably be credited for the 2 years served awaiting trial. Immigration is ready to pick him up. It's up to San Francisco to turn him over. I'm sure he'll be back. Then he'll be a six time deportee and an 8 time felon. We haven't heard the last of him.

I'm not sure you can be credited time served for a separate offense. I may be wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

I'm not sure you can be credited time served for a separate offense. I may be wrong.

I think I read in one of the links that he would be credited with time served when he is sentenced. That hasn't happened yet. The three years is what is being reported as what the sentence will most likely be. It does sound as though San Francisco will release him to Immigration this time.

Edited by susieice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Michelle said:

If I'm not mistaken, we agreed the prison time for such an offence and it was much longer.

I read the 3 year thing on a different news source. Don't remember where but I don't recall that being discussed here. Again, I may be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, susieice said:

I don't want to lynch him. I just want him to be deported again, which probably won't work anyway, and I want the sanctuary cities to understand their responsibilities to their citizens when they harbor someone like that. 

Just curious Susi, do you think the Wall will do any good?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Likely Guy said:

I read the 3 year thing on a different news source. Don't remember where but I don't recall that being discussed here. Again, I may be wrong.

That is what news sources are saying. That charge was included in the trial that took place. That's why it's just the sentencing now. There won't be another trial for it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, susieice said:

Here's a map of the sanctuary cities in the US. If you can click on the clusters of markers, most will turn over someone who has been charged with a felony.

https://cis.org/Map-Sanctuary-Cities-Counties-and-States

great map, CC are where gangs are, that is the result of CC, then local gvmnt should not complain about crime. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, susieice said:

That is what news sources are saying. That charge was included in the trial that took place. That's why it's just the sentencing now. There won't be another trial for it.

Didn't catch that part before, thanks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Likely Guy said:

Just curious Susi, do you think the Wall will do any good?

In all honesty, no. You can't totally seal off an entire border. Especially if someone is determined. They will find a way. You can probably imagine what a nightmare the logistics would be if the US and Canada decided to totally seal the border. I've lived in northern Maine and I know there are logging roads, even in Arcadia National Park, or the Allagash Wilderness Waterway where you need to be careful that you don't cross the border accidentally without even knowing it. I'm sure it's the same all the way to the western states and provinces. It's impossible to guard every inch. We don't really have an illegal problem. At least not until I get fed up enough to go hell for broke trying to get into Ontario. :lol:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, aztek said:

great map, CC are where gangs are, that is the result of CC, then local gvmnt should not complain about crime. 

Those local governments need to accept the fact that protecting their citizens from the people they give sanction to is up to them. I thought it would be possible for an American to also seek sanction. Gangs would be an example. And, no, they can't complain if they knowingly allow people seeking asylum from law enforcement in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.