The director of ICE (Thomas Homan) just reported that California refused to hold the illegal alien for ICE pickup for deportation to Mexico. This is a well known fact.
California turned the illegal alien loose on the streets. California's violation of Federal Law facilitated Kate Steinle's murder.
Oh, I’m sorry. When you say “facts”, are you referring to that nonsensical garbage that you presented in the form of opinion/editorial in your prior message? This stuff...Originally Posted by ths61
Originally Posted by ths61...
”Do you really think this was a fair trial (and not a political statement/coverup) in a sanctuary state court system, in a sanctuary state, in a sanctuary city with a liberal defense, liberal judge, liberal prosecution, suppression of evidence, coverup of failed sanctuary polices and liberal agencies that allowed the perp to murder and failure of the liberal prosecutor to present unbiased documented laboratory evidence to debunk the fabricated testimony?”
Apparently you have trouble distinguishing fact from opinion. Just because something spews across your keyboard from the depths of your brain doesn’t make it factual, no matter how many times you regurgitate it.
If you’re really interested in debating the issues, I’ll go there with you. I could use the entertainment. Bring your substantiated points and cite your sources and lets see what happens.
"1.21 gigawatts?! 1.21 GIGAWATTS??! Great Scott!!"
I've sat on a jury before, and completely understand the limitations placed upon what can be introduced as evidence and what may not be considered when rendering a verdict.
21 years Army (retired)
...been everywhere, seen everything, done almost everything.
IBA 80537
ICE tried to pull this crap in Arizona earlier this year, requesting that local law enforcement agencies hold individuals illegally until such time that ICE officers could take custody. Unfortunately for them, it is unconstitutional for a person to be held beyond a specified period of time without being criminally charged. Local law enforcement gave ICE notification for the pending release of detainees, however ICE officials could not be troubled to appear in a timely manner to re-apprehend these individuals.
The Constitutionality of law exists for a reason. No Police State for me, yet...thank you very much.
So you can appreciate the rules of law. They’re not just these arbitrary rules that change on a case to case basis. Obviously we aren’t going to agree with all the rules every time, especially when a case goes the way this one did. But to claim that the rules are unjust and advocate for throwing them out because they don’t suit your purpose today is to risk breaking a system that is meant to serve all, as fairly as possible. If change is required and demanded, the process for change is in place and prescribed... by the Constitution.I've sat on a jury before, and completely understand the limitations placed upon what can be introduced as evidence and what may not be considered when rendering a verdict.
I really hate having discussions like this. The rules are the rules, like em or not. Following the rules of law is generally a good thing. As far as I’m concerned, anyone who advocates for the wild west doesn’t truly appreciate the depth and meaning of the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights...nor fully grasps the meaning of the freedoms that those documents guarantee in American society.
And that’s all I have to say about that.
Ride safe. Ride free.
I do wish the rule of law was followed by all regarding illegal immigration. Sanctuary Cities do purposely impede Federal immigration enforcement by openly declaring they will not work with such.
Not all follow the rules.
21 years Army (retired)
...been everywhere, seen everything, done almost everything.
IBA 80537
Again, you ignored all of the facts including suppression of priors (probably eligible for the 3 strikes law), suppression of evidence, failure of the prosecution to have the gun tested, failure to charge for a plethora of applicable associated violations, violating federal immigration laws by both the illegal alien and the state, etc., etc. etc.. Those are all facts, not opinions. Nice obfuscation though.
BTW, the DOJ just unsealed an arrest warrant for the POS.
Jose Ines Garcia Zarate stated he specifically went to SF because he knew the sanctuary city would protect him. Sanctuary policies are an open invitation for lawlessness and crime and the illegal aliens know it.
Okay, since you insist, I’ll play.
I do believe it was a fair trial. Your opinion may differ.
I do not believe it was a political statement or coverup. Your opinion may differ.
Suppression of priors is a lawful defense tactic. Fact.
“Probably eligible for the 3 strikes law”. Sounds like your opinion or guess.
Suppression of evidence is a lawful defense tactic. Fact.
Failure to test the gun was poor prosecution. Fact.
Failure to charge for a plethora... How many? What specifications?
Violation of Federal immigration laws by defendant. Apparently factual.
Violation of Federal immigration laws by State. Alleged by you.
Etc., etc., etc. ... padding? Or do you just like to see yourself type? You do understand how debate works, right? Point/counterpoint?
Yeah, you know, on second thought this really does sound like it was a political statement or coverup.
..
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
