If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   Federal court ruling declared up to 3,000 North Carolina prisoners did not commit the crimes for which they were sentenced. Too bad nobody in the government has bothered to tell those prisoners   (usatoday.com) divider line 119
    More: Asinine, United States federal courts, Justice Department, ACLU, North Carolina, innocent, federal public defender, United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, Circuit Court of Appeals  
•       •       •

5369 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Aug 2012 at 3:47 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



119 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-08 10:03:25 PM
A shocking number of people aren't outraged over state human rights abuses like this. USA! USA!
 
2012-08-08 10:21:20 PM
dittybopper
"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats".

Every moment.
 
2012-08-08 10:24:22 PM

RanDomino: dittybopper
"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats".

Every moment.


Who has time to hoist flags while pinching a loaf?
 
2012-08-08 11:11:18 PM

Shaggy_C: frankly I don't give a shiat that a criminal who thinks it's a good idea to illegally own a gun isn't on the streets.


The point of the article is that these people didn't "illegally" possess/own a firearm. As far as "giving a shiat" goes, how about "giving a shiat" about reading comprehension, that'd go a long way towards solving your personal "giving a shiat" problems.
 
2012-08-08 11:13:47 PM

Sum Dum Gai: dittybopper: Often, Justice lawyers have acknowledged that inmates did not commit a federal crime by having a gun but have argued they can't be released because of laws that strictly limit how prisoners can challenge convictions.

This must be the sort of thing that motivated H. L. Mencken to write "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats".

This reminds me of a case I read about. Girl around 11 is upset about her mother dating again after a recent divorce, wants her mother to break up with the boyfriend. She claims he touched her inappropriately. Mother doesn't just dump the boyfriend, also calls the cops, girl is too scared to tell the truth so she sticks to the story. Guy gets sentenced to a long time in prison.

A year or so later, the girl admits the story was made up, tries to help get the man out of prison, but the state appeals procedures won't permit the guy to appeal his conviction, even though the only witness against the guy has changed her story, because the defense could in theory have called the girl as a defense witness originally (or some equally idiotic reason). Last I heard on that, the only hope was for a pardon.

Stuff like this and that are why I could never work in law. I follow processes in my own job, but never to the extent that I'd let doing the procedurally correct thing stop me from doing the right thing.


Brandy was 14 and said I should meet her maw.
I meet the mother and after a week, ask her out.
Drive over to the house and being a first date, had my hair cut and bought flowers, not beer.
Cops cars all up in the driveway.
Undaunted, I approach the domicile.
Cop stops me.
Seems Brandy was jealous of mom's date and cock blocked her with a carving knife.
/true, but sad story, bro.
 
2012-08-08 11:15:56 PM
Brandy's now 30 something, and still hotter than a matchhead.
Has a couple of kids.
Real cuisinart of emotions.


Don't stick your dick in a cuisinart of emotions.
 
2012-08-08 11:34:03 PM

ZAZ: Seems like they're screwed on procedural grounds. If they pleaded guilty without reserving the right to appeal the meaning of their criminal records, they admitted the fact that they had previously been convicted of a felony. If they pleaded not guilty or reserved the right to appeal, their convictions became final after the appeals court applied its old understanding of the law. Habeas petitions may not generally be used to make changes in the law retroactive.

Fark lawyers -- what would you do if you represented one of these prisoners, he had a final conviction more than a year old, and he had used up his first habeas petition on something frivolous?


Not much you can do unless and until the US Supreme Court takes up the issue and makes a ruling which would be classified as applying retroactively. The federal habeas statutes don't permit using Circuit Court opinions to do such a thing. It's really not all that uncommon to have people serving sentences due to rules/statutes/procedures that later were deemed unconstitutional, as many of the rulings doing so were never made retroactive.
 
2012-08-09 12:32:51 AM

randomjsa: The humor here is the people in this topic trying hard to overlook the fact that this is a federal screw up, not a state one.


Who cares?
 
2012-08-09 01:10:03 AM

stiletto_the_wise: randomjsa: The humor here is the people in this topic trying hard to overlook the fact that this is a federal screw up, not a state one.

Who cares?


Because if it's not the Gub'mint's fault, trolls don't care what the states do. CSA! CSA!
 
2012-08-09 01:19:16 AM
Well, that's obvious. 3000 prisoners. That's what, about $15 million in billable revenue for the private prison that likely run the prison.
 
2012-08-09 02:03:33 AM
This is a farking atrocity and abomination.
 
2012-08-09 04:22:32 AM

Goodfella: Well, that's obvious. 3000 prisoners. That's what, about $15 million in billable revenue for the private prison that likely run the prison.


(psst, private organizations don't handle FEDERAL prisons, moron)
 
2012-08-09 06:35:08 AM

doyner: 3000? By North Carolina math that's really 5000 people.


or 126. Certainly not 3000, to be sure.
 
2012-08-09 07:37:36 AM

RanDomino: dittybopper
"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats".

Every moment.


But you just can't tear yourself away from fark to start that revolution, can you?
 
2012-08-09 08:23:46 AM

wildcardjack: And I don't think the federal prisons are private.


Gyrfalcon: private organizations don't handle FEDERAL prisons


About 40 percent of CCA's business comes from the federal government
 
2012-08-09 09:21:56 AM

Kibbler: Run a poll in North Carolina (or pretty much anywhere) and ask them, should we:

1. Release them
2. Keep them in jail
3. Execute all of them, just to be sure

And you'll get more than 50% picking #3.

Most of the rest will pick #2.


To be fair, after these people have lived in prison and treated like animals they do have a difficult time reentering decent society. You can't just let them walk about freely after that now can you?
 
2012-08-09 01:14:48 PM

DoctorCal: wildcardjack: And I don't think the federal prisons are private.

Gyrfalcon: private organizations don't handle FEDERAL prisons

About 40 percent of CCA's business comes from the federal government



pwned
 
2012-08-09 04:30:31 PM

dittybopper: Why should that make you sad?


It is sad that we have prosecutors working hard to illegally keep innocent people locked up in prison.
The federal court should have gone much further and given the states 10 days to release the illegally held prisoners or be held in contempt of court. Lock the governors up in federal lockup until the innocent citizens are released. TADA

problem solved
instead, these poor people are still in prison.
cant wait until the class action suit is followed for compensation of unlawful imprisonment.
 
2012-08-09 04:34:05 PM

red5ish: If these prisoners are not guilty of the crime they were convicted of then I'm going to go out on a limb and say they should be released and their records should have their convictions expunged. Let the law suits commence!


this this MORE of this and ONLY this
and yet they are still being illegally held.

When will the DOJ issue a writ of habeas corpus, demanding that SC present all of the prisoners currently being held illegally.
Would be funny watching the judge react to the "we cant find them", "we need more time, because we are holding so my citizens illegally"

farkem
 
Displayed 19 of 119 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report