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.

(NBC News)   The price for two years of being kept in a New Mexico prison in solitary without a trial? $15.5 million   (usnews.nbcnews.com) divider line 177
    More: Followup, New Mexico, first receiver, NBC News  
•       •       •

12873 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Mar 2013 at 3:37 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2013-03-06 08:14:22 PM
Why was he in solitary so long?
Who put him there?
Why are their heads still on their bodies?

22 months in solitary is some farked up shiat. It's worse than waterboarding or most physical tortures. It can easily break people you'd think are unbreakable.

The execution of those responsible is a good first step in a civilized society. Justice would be sending them to solitary for 22 months themselves, but I can't endorse such cruelty.
 
2013-03-06 08:20:58 PM
If I had any say in the matter this gentleman would have received a minimum of $30 million. There is absolutely no reason to do that to anyone.
 
2013-03-06 08:21:15 PM
Those who were responsible for this should be put on trial.

Simple as that.
 
2013-03-06 08:23:39 PM
Wow America, you're supposed to be better than that. There really should be a few punished here, start with the Warden in solitary for two years...
 
2013-03-06 08:42:30 PM

cman: Those who were responsible for this should be put on trial.

Simple as that.


Completely agree with you there. I'm stunned they kept a man in solitary without a trial for two years.
 
2013-03-06 08:44:19 PM

AirForceVet: cman: Those who were responsible for this should be put on trial.

Simple as that.

Completely agree with you there. I'm stunned they kept a man in solitary without a trial for two years.


Have you ever been falsely accused of something? Guilty until proven innocent, man.
 
2013-03-06 08:46:44 PM
Wow, you could put a hit on a third-world dictator with that kind of money.
 
2013-03-06 08:48:42 PM
The before and after photo is beyond sad (left to right it is after then before) They f*cked him up.

msnbcmedia.msn.com
 
2013-03-06 08:51:30 PM
Everyone at the jail who knew about this guy, or should have reasonably known about this guy, should be sentenced to a completely random amount of time in jail, ranging from 22 months to forever.  While in prison, they should be forced to work for twenty cents an hour, and every month they should be forced to sign their paycheck over to this guy's account.  For the rest of their lives.  And it should be mandatory viewing for every jail employee in the country, as an example of what they will experience if they intentionally violate an inmate's civil rights in this fashion.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-03-06 08:57:35 PM
the case was not about how much money he could make, his attorney said, but about getting recognition of how poorly he was treated and the scars he still has.

As a general rule, the court system should take lawyers' "it's not about the money" statements as binding and cut awards to $1 nominal damages with a maximum of 30 cents in attorney's fees.

According to the earlier article: Dona Ana County officials were tight-lipped about the case, refusing to answer questions about whether any jail employees were reprimanded or fired over Slevin's treatment.
 
2013-03-06 09:11:54 PM
"All the justice you can afford."
 
2013-03-06 09:21:03 PM
Privatize and SAVE!

Oopsie.

(just guessing)
 
2013-03-06 09:24:37 PM

AirForceVet: I'm stunned they kept a man in solitary without a trial for two years.


I'm not.  This kind of thing isn't that uncommon.  People with mental illnesses almost always end up in jails these days, thanks to the budget cutting mantra taking away mental institutions for the average person.  Those mentally unstable people almost always end up in solitary confinement for years.  They eventually get brain fried enough that they're taken to temp psych counseling and temporarily fixed, and then once they're good enough promptly thrown back in jail to cycle downwards again.

This is what you get when people only take the cheap route because stupid people think the solution to everything is tax cuts.
 
2013-03-06 09:38:00 PM
I say it all the time, but the wrongly imprisoned should get much better compensation than they do, and the people responsible should be financially burdened for some of that compensation. Not just all paid by the tax payers.

/but that just makes the ticks dig in more
//and work to keep things covered up
///and never discovered
 
2013-03-06 09:39:21 PM
The sad part (other than the infuriating way in which this man was treated) is that the taxpayers of NM are going to be on the hook for the money & more than likely nothing will happen to anyone involved in this whole affair (perhaps a low man on the totem pole sacrificial lamb, but nobody in authority).  The warden, the guards who worked his cell block, EVERYONE who had any sort of contact with him over the time he was there need to be help personally liable for the monetary damages.  Once they are personally bankrupt & in jail themselves then the taxpayers can make up the difference.

Such beyond the pale abuse of anyone's civil rights, in a just society, would come with capital punishment for those involved.
 
2013-03-06 09:49:25 PM
shiat. There are days I'd pay to be locked in solitary.
 
2013-03-06 09:56:00 PM
While the treatment he received was truly horrible, I don't get how it began in the first place.  How is it he was never processed through the system correctly?  How is it he never saw a judge?  Didn't the warden see his paperwork when he came in?  Didn't he tell someone "Hey, I never got my one phone call"?  Something??
 
2013-03-06 10:01:42 PM
My question would be what justification they had to keep him in prison for 22 months without trial. He was obviously denied access to a lawyer. I'm not generally in favor of budget buster lawsuits (especially when people say it's not about the money), but this one is completely deserved. I can't imagine the kind of hell he went through.

GAT_00: AirForceVet: I'm stunned they kept a man in solitary without a trial for two years.

I'm not.  This kind of thing isn't that uncommon.  People with mental illnesses almost always end up in jails these days, thanks to the budget cutting mantra taking away mental institutions for the average person.  Those mentally unstable people almost always end up in solitary confinement for years.  They eventually get brain fried enough that they're taken to temp psych counseling and temporarily fixed, and then once they're good enough promptly thrown back in jail to cycle downwards again.

This is what you get when people only take the cheap route because stupid people think the solution to everything is tax cuts.


Don't necessarily blame budget cuts for this, though those are a big part. During the late 70's and early 80's, there was a huge movement to reduce the amount of involuntary inpatient treatment for the severely mentally ill (commitment). This despite the fact that many of them need it. Nowadays it is far harder to do so, leaving prisons as the main place these people are confined to.
 
2013-03-06 10:12:01 PM

timujin: While the treatment he received was truly horrible, I don't get how it began in the first place.  How is it he was never processed through the system correctly?  How is it he never saw a judge?  Didn't the warden see his paperwork when he came in?  Didn't he tell someone "Hey, I never got my one phone call"?  Something??


You never dealt with cops on the business end, have you?

I had to deal with 100 days of breathalyzers, piss tests, and house arrest for the grand and despicable crime of being innocent of any crime.

I met a couple cops then. In their eyes, I was a crimnal. Crimnals ain't people. Sure accused citizens and even convicted criminals have legals rights, but you're not a criminal you're a crimnal. Crimnals go in the box, because they're crimnals. It was some Cool Hand Luke shiat. And that's without any evidence whatsoever except a false accusation.

I can imagine how much worse I'd have been treated if there'd actually been a prosecutor involved. 100 days of hell for me was just a tiny spark jumping randomly off the static around the legal system. This guy caught the full thunder.
 
2013-03-06 10:12:53 PM

dahmers love zombie: Everyone at the jail who knew about this guy, or should have reasonably known about this guy, should be sentenced to a completely random amount of time in jail, ranging from 22 months to forever.  While in prison, they should be forced to work for twenty cents an hour, and every month they should be forced to sign their paycheck over to this guy's account.  For the rest of their lives.  And it should be mandatory viewing for every jail employee in the country, as an example of what they will experience if they intentionally violate an inmate's civil rights in this fashion.


This. Until the people who actually perpetrate these things -- including the people who either actively cover it up or knew and say nothing -- are punished, nothing will change.
 
2013-03-06 10:22:49 PM

timujin: While the treatment he received was truly horrible, I don't get how it began in the first place.  How is it he was never processed through the system correctly?  How is it he never saw a judge?  Didn't the warden see his paperwork when he came in?  Didn't he tell someone "Hey, I never got my one phone call"?  Something??


I'm not saying it's true, but his mental illness could be a factor in not demanding an attorney or standing up for himself. But I can't imagine a reason that he would not have been arraigned and appointed a lawyer if the charge was auto theft. I also see no reason whatsoever for him to have been put in solitary in the first place.

I am appalled that anyone who knew he was there did nothing about it. That includes his "friends and his sister" although they might have been used to him disappearing for years at a time. What about the car that was supposed to stolen? I'm also not sure how much blame the guards deserve. The seldom know that details of any case, they just know that it was decided by people who are supposed to make those decisions. It's not necessarily something that they would know about. Of course that has nothing at all to do with him not getting his yard time or medical/dental care, not to mention basic hygiene issues like showers, haircuts, nails trimmed etc....
 
2013-03-06 10:25:46 PM
I recall a small building at BRCI that sat away from everything else with just a tiny parking lot.  I asked my dad about it and he said it was a prison consisting of nothing but 16 solitary confinement cells.  I asked why it was away from the other prisons.  He said those guys are put there permanently after proving they cannot be around any person for any amount of time.  Basically Hannibal Lecter types.  Atleast those guys had a trial and really got violent enough times while serving time in a regular prison.  I would hope they don't let their health get to be that bad like the guy in this story.

/for some reason, SC built over a half dozen prisons all close together then put a fence around all of them.
//after going through the main gate, you see a women's prison then you see minimum security men's prisons.  After a ways, you eventually come to the max. security facilities like Kirtland and then Broad River facility which the whole thing is named after.
///the max. sec. prisons do have their own fencing.
 
2013-03-06 10:32:39 PM

ArkAngel: Don't necessarily blame budget cuts for this, though those are a big part. During the late 70's and early 80's, there was a huge movement to reduce the amount of involuntary inpatient treatment for the severely mentally ill (commitment). This despite the fact that many of them need it. Nowadays it is far harder to do so, leaving prisons as the main place these people are confined to.


It's more that they'll eventually end up there I think.  I don't think that it was intentional to throw the mentally ill into prison, I simply think that nobody who thought cutting those budgets to pieces ever thought about the consequences of it other than "Woo hoo, we saved some money, now we can cut taxes and everything is better."  Nobody ever considered the consequences of all of this.  The mentally ill are far more likely to commit crimes simply because the actions they end up taking aren't rational and end up often in violation of the law.  We no longer can treat them anywhere except prison for far too many of them, so they're thrown in jail.  Sure they'll get some mental health there, but once they are released they have no way of keeping on their drugs.  None.  How are they supposed to pay for those drugs?  They can't.  So they eventually fall ill again, do something they don't realize is wrong, and end up back in jail.

It's an endless and completely breakable cycle of stupid.  But we won't do it.  Why not?  Because it'll cost money, and no matter how much better it will make the country as a whole - a year of mental health drugs and a now productive member of society FAR, FAR outweigh the cost of a year of prison care plus mental health drugs - because to pay for it we'd have to raise taxes, and then the stupid brigade throws a farking hissy fit because they don't understand that shiat needs to be paid for.  They just want their free stuff so they can call everyone else a socialist.

And that's just one of the many reason I farking loathe the libertarian, all taxes are bad bullshiat.  It completely disregards any consequences of their actions.
 
2013-03-06 10:34:04 PM

lack of warmth: Atleast those guys had a trial and really got violent enough times while serving time in a regular prison. I would hope they don't let their health get to be that bad like the guy in this story.


There are plenty of documentaries you can find that show that yes, they are exactly like this guy.

A Frontline many of you need to watch if you're outraged by this: The New Asylums.
 
2013-03-07 12:12:30 AM

doglover: Why was he in solitary so long?
Who put him there?
Why are their heads still on their bodies?

22 months in solitary is some farked up shiat. It's worse than waterboarding or most physical tortures. It can easily break people you'd think are unbreakable.

The execution of those responsible is a good first step in a civilized society. Justice would be sending them to solitary for 22 months themselves, but I can't endorse such cruelty.


THIS
FARKING THIS!
and yet no one was arrested? no one was charged with a felony?
kidnapping and attempted murder??

was the DA in on this? do the FEDS need to get involved??
/I hate these people with every once of my soul
/which admittedly, I sold to the devil
 
2013-03-07 12:35:20 AM
A standard trial. If they are found guilty, they get 24 hours to draft a last will and testament and say goodbye. Then they're given the option to be marched to the gallows.

If they refuse, they are taken to solitary somewhere, in a cell with no windows so they can't cpunt the days. Nutra loaf, water, and that's it. No visitors, no lawyers, no medical care. Secret length of time (22 months, but don't tell them that.)

Honestly, I think all the prison officials responsible would choose death over that.
 
2013-03-07 12:37:54 AM

Recoil Therapy: The sad part (other than the infuriating way in which this man was treated) is that the taxpayers of NM are going to be on the hook for the money & more than likely nothing will happen to anyone involved in this whole affair (perhaps a low man on the totem pole sacrificial lamb, but nobody in authority).  The warden, the guards who worked his cell block, EVERYONE who had any sort of contact with him over the time he was there need to be help personally liable for the monetary damages.  Once they are personally bankrupt & in jail themselves then the taxpayers can make up the difference.

Such beyond the pale abuse of anyone's civil rights, in a just society, would come with capital punishment for those involved.


the people holding this man illegally broke a large number of laws and should be charged with multiple felonies. period.
they should do some hard time.

anyone unclear on what laws were broken ... well ....sigh
start with the US constitution
then read about a speedy trial
 
2013-03-07 12:39:47 AM
I wish I expected to see the people that are pissed off about US citizens being assassinated in drone strikes also take up this guy's cause.
 
2013-03-07 12:51:02 AM
He should have taken up geology... and a big goddamn poster.

/pressure and time
 
2013-03-07 12:58:19 AM
 
2013-03-07 01:08:27 AM
22 months in solitary?

WITHOUT TRIAL, OR EVEN CHARGES???

It could happen to you.

ACLU:

"In December 2011, President Obama signed the 2012 NDAA, codifying indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history. The NDAA's dangerous detention provisions would authorize the president - and all future presidents - to order the military to pick up and indefinitely imprison people captured anywhere in the world, far from any battlefied."


Yes, that's it.
And it's all perfectly legal.
Citizen.


/God bless America
 
2013-03-07 01:23:23 AM
 
2013-03-07 01:38:48 AM
"Their policy is to then just put them in solitary" if they appear to have mental health issues, Coyte told NBC News.

not, you know, have them screened by a mental health worker?
 
2013-03-07 02:03:49 AM

log_jammin: "Their policy is to then just put them in solitary" if they appear to have mental health issues, Coyte told NBC News.

not, you know, have them screened by a mental health worker?


This is why the man who calls the legal system a "justice" system is a great fool. No justice there but by happy accident.
 
2013-03-07 02:06:48 AM

namatad: doglover: Why was he in solitary so long?
Who put him there?
Why are their heads still on their bodies?

22 months in solitary is some farked up shiat. It's worse than waterboarding or most physical tortures. It can easily break people you'd think are unbreakable.

The execution of those responsible is a good first step in a civilized society. Justice would be sending them to solitary for 22 months themselves, but I can't endorse such cruelty.

THIS
FARKING THIS!
and yet no one was arrested? no one was charged with a felony?
kidnapping and attempted murder??

was the DA in on this?
do the FEDS need to get involved??
/I hate these people with every once of my soul
/which admittedly, I sold to the devil


The DA at them time is the Gov now.
 
2013-03-07 02:36:30 AM

violentsalvation: The DA at them time is the Gov now.


Was he involved? That's the key.

brumshiretales.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-07 03:17:33 AM
Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.
 
2013-03-07 03:38:47 AM
Wait, there's a New Mexico?
 
2013-03-07 03:39:33 AM
New Mexico is giving Arizona a run for their own tag.
 
2013-03-07 03:52:44 AM

Recoil Therapy: The sad part (other than the infuriating way in which this man was treated) is that the taxpayers of NM are going to be on the hook for the money & more than likely nothing will happen to anyone involved in this whole affair (perhaps a low man on the totem pole sacrificial lamb, but nobody in authority).  The warden, the guards who worked his cell block, EVERYONE who had any sort of contact with him over the time he was there need to be help personally liable for the monetary damages.  Once they are personally bankrupt & in jail themselves then the taxpayers can make up the difference.

Such beyond the pale abuse of anyone's civil rights, in a just society, would come with capital punishment for those involved.


Yes - and we should start with their pension funds, they do not deserve them.
 
2013-03-07 03:54:57 AM
"...no jail personnel have been fired over Slevin's treatment."

That's what's wrong with the system. Elect me and people who pull this kind of crap will be put up against a wall and their brains blown out the back of their useless heads, on live TV.
 
2013-03-07 03:55:08 AM

L.D. Ablo: Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.


Thirty days with no idea whether you would ever be released would wreck you.
 
2013-03-07 03:57:24 AM

sno man: Wow America, you're supposed to be better than that.


But we ain't.  We've got as many lying bastards, slimewads and dick squeezing sadists as the Gestapo, the Kremlin or some banana farm dictator ever had.
 
2013-03-07 03:59:51 AM

L.D. Ablo: Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.


You say that now, but people have suffered psychological problems from as little as 3 days in solitary. We're social animals and we need some kind of mental stimulation or our brains start to fail.

This guy is probably never gonna be all there, mentally.
 
2013-03-07 04:05:53 AM

Gunther: L.D. Ablo: Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.

You say that now, but people have suffered psychological problems from as little as 3 days in solitary. We're social animals and we need some kind of mental stimulation or our brains start to fail.


Well, they give you Fark in jail, don't they?
 
2013-03-07 04:06:48 AM

L.D. Ablo: Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.


I wish I had the money to see just how badly you would regret that decision in two years. If you were even mentally capable of having regret, or any other emotion, afterwards.
 
2013-03-07 04:08:46 AM

BarkingUnicorn: Gunther: L.D. Ablo: Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.

You say that now, but people have suffered psychological problems from as little as 3 days in solitary. We're social animals and we need some kind of mental stimulation or our brains start to fail.

Well, they give you Fark in jail, don't they?


Not in solitary.
 
2013-03-07 04:26:57 AM

cman: Those who were responsible for this should be put on trial.

Simple as that.


No trials and no one was fired.
 
2013-03-07 04:27:06 AM
And no one responsible will suffer meaningful consequences.
 
2013-03-07 04:27:26 AM

BarkingUnicorn: Well, they give you Fark in jail, don't they?


Probably not the kind of fark you want.
 
2013-03-07 04:30:23 AM
At least they put him in a new prison.

Those old Mexican prisons were terrible.
 
2013-03-07 04:35:27 AM

mediablitz: cman: Those who were responsible for this should be put on trial.

Simple as that.

No trials and no one was fired.


.... none yet. For some reason, losing vast sums of money seems to get things moving far more effectively than mere documentation of the cruelty and injustice. Which is, of course, why such large monetary damages are awarded in the first place.
 
2013-03-07 04:37:38 AM

C18H27NO3: BarkingUnicorn: Well, they give you Fark in jail, don't they?

Probably not the kind of fark you want.


After a few weeks in solitary, that would be considered welcome social contact.
 
2013-03-07 04:46:54 AM

L.D. Ablo: Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.


Not really all that funny.  Humans are social animals.  While a few people can handle extended solitary confinement...most can't.

You lose your mental health, no amount of money will help you...you'll just rub it in your hair.
 
2013-03-07 04:47:58 AM
Huh...where's the tort reform crowd?

They should be protesting this frivolous lawsuit.
 
2013-03-07 04:48:59 AM

doglover: 22 months in solitary is some farked up shiat.


Bathia_Mapes: There is absolutely no reason to do that to anyone.


www.bradleymanning.org
"You don't say?"
 
2013-03-07 04:50:17 AM
Where do I sign up?
 
2013-03-07 04:51:14 AM

namatad: doglover: Why was he in solitary so long?
Who put him there?
Why are their heads still on their bodies?

22 months in solitary is some farked up shiat. It's worse than waterboarding or most physical tortures. It can easily break people you'd think are unbreakable.

The execution of those responsible is a good first step in a civilized society. Justice would be sending them to solitary for 22 months themselves, but I can't endorse such cruelty.

THIS
FARKING THIS!
and yet no one was arrested? no one was charged with a felony?
kidnapping and attempted murder??

was the DA in on this? do the FEDS need to get involved??
/I hate these people with every once of my soul
/which admittedly, I sold to the devil


If NM is like most states, odds are the DA never even heard of this guy.  He was in jail, not prison, so hadn't had a trial yet...probably not on the DA's radar.

Now, the sheriff?  he WAS probably responsible for the county jail.

Lock HIS ass up for 22 months in solitary with no medical treatment, exercise, or showers.

He doesn't really need a trial, either; reap as you sow.
 
2013-03-07 04:54:13 AM

brap: Privatize and SAVE!

Oopsie.

(just guessing)


No, in this case it was the County. Link

"The Doña Ana County Detention Center has a staff of 197 full-time positions, which include administrative, security, support and medical staff. In addition to county employees, there are 41 contract personnel and, at any given time, up to 67 volunteers." (emphasis mine)

Apparently CCA's lobbyists hadn't gotten their fingernails into that neck of the woods yet.
 
2013-03-07 04:58:21 AM

GAT_00: I'm not. This kind of thing isn't that uncommon. People with mental illnesses almost always end up in jails these days, thanks to the budget cutting mantra taking away mental institutions for the average person. Those mentally unstable people almost always end up in solitary confinement for years. They eventually get brain fried enough that they're taken to temp psych counseling and temporarily fixed, and then once they're good enough promptly thrown back in jail to cycle downwards again.

This is what you get when people only take the cheap route because stupid people think the solution to everything is tax cuts.


Does anyone else remember any other big news stories in the past few months about people with untreated mental illness that also had access to firearms?

Maybe when you stick a few people, organizations, or companies in the wallet they'll realize how important mental health care is. Sticking them in the heart with deaths of the innocent doesn't seem to be having much of an effect.
 
2013-03-07 05:00:40 AM

ArkAngel: Don't necessarily blame budget cuts for this, though those are a big part. During the late 70's and early 80's, there was a huge movement to reduce the amount of involuntary inpatient treatment for the severely mentally ill (commitment). This despite the fact that many of them need it. Nowadays it is far harder to do so, leaving prisons as the main place these people are confined to.


That rests solely at the feet of Ronald Reagan, the one President who you figure might want people with untreated mental illness to get help. Apparently he figured gun control was cheaper, hence his letter of support for the Brady Bill which specifically referenced his assassination attempt.
 
2013-03-07 05:02:29 AM
I hope we find out what crazy man is going to spend his money on! lol
 
2013-03-07 05:04:35 AM

PunGent: L.D. Ablo: Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.

Not really all that funny.  Humans are social animals.  While a few people can handle extended solitary confinement...most can't.

You lose your mental health, no amount of money will help you...you'll just rub it in your hair.


Hell, I spent 4 years on a submarine and wish I could have back the me that existed prior to dealing with that. Can't even imagine what this poor man has lost permanently.
 
2013-03-07 05:05:55 AM

ox45tallboy: doglover: 22 months in solitary is some farked up shiat.

Bathia_Mapes: There is absolutely no reason to do that to anyone.

[www.bradleymanning.org image 220x313]
"You don't say?"


not even close to what this dude went through.
 
2013-03-07 05:07:00 AM

Amos Quito: Yes, that's it.
And it's all perfectly legal.
Citizen.


/God bless America


I love how the ACLU acted like it's the President's fault for signing the National Defense Authorization Act, something every president does every year, and failed to include his signing statement specifically condemning the provisions relating to indefinite detention. Had he vetoed it, not only would it have been overridden, but Republicans would be shouting that the soldiers' checks were late because Obummer the Great Muslismo wanted to protect "the terrorists".

Why don't they point at Congress, who wrote the law?
 
2013-03-07 05:07:33 AM

log_jammin: ox45tallboy: doglover: 22 months in solitary is some farked up shiat.

Bathia_Mapes: There is absolutely no reason to do that to anyone.

[www.bradleymanning.org image 220x313]
"You don't say?"

not even close to what this dude went through.


Also this guy wasn't accused of a crime that was, historically, grounds for summary execution.


That treason you've posted has human rights groups monitoring him often. He's being as well treated as possible. The other guy was in "the hole"
 
m00
2013-03-07 05:12:05 AM

L.D. Ablo: Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.


"Dona Ana County had been appealing the verdict ever since, refusing to pay Slevin."
 
2013-03-07 05:15:53 AM

Amos Quito: Yes, that's it.
And it's all perfectly legal.
Citizen.


So he got a 15 million judgement for something that is "perfectly legal"? That's what you are going with?
 
2013-03-07 05:26:36 AM

ox45tallboy: Amos Quito: Yes, that's it.
And it's all perfectly legal.
Citizen.


/God bless America

I love how the ACLU acted like it's the President's fault for signing the National Defense Authorization Act, something every president does every year, and failed to include his signing statement specifically condemning the provisions relating to indefinite detention. Had he vetoed it, not only would it have been overridden, but Republicans would be shouting that the soldiers' checks were late because Obummer the Great Muslismo wanted to protect "the terrorists".

Why don't they point at Congress, who wrote the law?




I remember the Pre Clinton/Bush era when presidents took responsibility for their actions rather than making bad choices then casting all the blame on their pen.

What you do is explain to the nation why you aren't signing something, and if congress doesn't change the thing being signed then they'll have to ramrod it through without your consent. If its so important then they will, but you get to keep your honor and they get to eat the poll numbers.

When you sign something quickly and quietly you show tacit approval for everything in that bill.
So far Obama has signed several things that are constitutionally questionable. Where he should have stood on principle, he's opted to keep things like the patriot act without so much as a fuss.

Fact is that being a constitutional scholar doesn't mean you support any of its ideals.
 
2013-03-07 05:28:42 AM
What happened to criminal negligence??
Seriously.
Why haven't those directly involved been charged?

I've spoken to a guy who has done solitary, I think he mentioned that international laws bar solitary more than 22 days, but his words so not sure.
Anyways, he said by the 3rd day he was passing time by measuring the length/width of the cell using his hands.
Pretty soon after that he was talking to himself.
I think the human brain just needs the audio input.

This case on the other hand just sucks.
 
2013-03-07 05:31:36 AM

namatad: and yet no one was arrested? no one was charged with a felony?


Because Law Enforcement is above the law.  Worst case is they'd face "administrative charges" instead of criminal charges, and end up with a few weeks of unpaid leave.
 
2013-03-07 05:32:16 AM
Dona Ana County had been appealing the verdict ever since, refusing to pay Slevin.

I'm not really familiar with the process and what's involved but is it possible for the appeal to be denied and the award increased? eg., fark you, Dona Ana County, now it's $30 million?

If I was supreme ruler of the world I would pay the money out from taxes so the award is immediate but then fire everyone involved and sue for everything they have to recoup as much possible and then have them stand trial.

/That's what I'd do, anyway.
 
2013-03-07 05:35:18 AM

way south: I remember the Pre Clinton/Bush era when presidents took responsibility for their actions rather than making bad choices then casting all the blame on their pen.


like when we sold arms to iran so we could fund a war in central america and later when it was discovered Ronald Reagan stood up and on national TV said "the buck stops here!" and took full responsibility for it, and let the chips fall where they may. remember that?
 
2013-03-07 05:39:42 AM
The important thing is that no cops will go to jail for this and the taxpayer pays
 
2013-03-07 05:43:18 AM

C18H27NO3: If I was supreme ruler of the world I would pay the money out from taxes so the award is immediate but then fire everyone involved and sue for everything they have to recoup as much possible and then have them stand trial.


If I was supreme ruler, no large rewards would be issued like that.

Instead, people winning judgements would get the assets of those who wronged them. So, for example, a police officer is brutal to you. You are awarded 30% of his money and pension, not X million of tax dollars. The cop feels the burn. You don't get overpaid. All is right with the world.

This guy was kept in solitary for years. That's a hanging offense on the part of the responsible party, IMO, so after that person is hung their assets, including property titles and money and investments, would be handed off to you 100%. Joint assets from their spouse or business partners would be split based on the perp's level of ownership unless it can be proven the family member was part of the offense somehow.
 
2013-03-07 05:45:25 AM
I went through a period while at residence at university, voluntarily, where I didn't see or speak or to anyone or leave my room for about three or four days. It was winter and my sleep cycle was entirely messed up, such that I'd fall asleep a few hours before dawn and wake up at almost sunset. I did have access to a computer and an internet connection but I didn't communicate with anyone through it either. I also had a window facing an intersection. By I think, the third day, my ability to distinguish the real world from my dreams was comprised. Even though I like being alone and had a good degree of stimuli available, I still saw my sanity slipping.

Two whole years of almost complete isolation? I'd be long gone and likely, utterly broken.

The folks responsible for this deserve a special kind of hell made just for them.
 
2013-03-07 05:46:58 AM

log_jammin: not even close to what this dude went through.


It wouldn't be silly to compare the two. There are differences, yes; one had regular showers, one didn't. One had bedclothes, hell, even clothes period, one didn't. One has at least been arraigned, and knew why he was in jail and has contact with his attorney, one didn't.

However, the design of the cells isn't all that different; see the link I provided above to the jail's website. I'm not trying to say it's the same thing, but I think the main thing most people are horrified by is the psychological torture from solitary confinement. That is very similar to Manning's case. That sort of thing will drive sane man nuts so that he'll never be in shape for a trial.
 
2013-03-07 05:47:01 AM

timujin: While the treatment he received was truly horrible, I don't get how it began in the first place.  How is it he was never processed through the system correctly?  How is it he never saw a judge?  Didn't the warden see his paperwork when he came in?  Didn't he tell someone "Hey, I never got my one phone call"?  Something??


It has to do with the minimal amount of "mental health care" given to prisoners in jails. Once he was determined by some random guard to be a "mental health patient" and assigned to solitary for his own protection, then he'd have gotten periodic visits from the doctor and/or psychiatric nurse. Even if these professionals really do care about their patients--and often they do--their "visits" are on the order of 90 seconds long maximum. They may only be something like the doctor looking through the food slot and saying "Hey, John, how are you feeling today? Still suicidal? Have you been taking your meds?" If John can't or won't reply, the doctor asks the guards how he's been doing, and then it's off to monitor the 795 other patients and inmates in the jail.

Even assuming the guards are not viciously hostile (and some of them aren't), they're not mental health professionals. They don't get the difference between someone who is really sick, and someone who is working the system (and there are plenty of those); so they can't or won't differentiate between John who is genuinely depressed and confused, and Steve who is malingering so he can get a few days out of GP and work detail. If Steve biatches about how his feet hurt, he gets scoffed at because they know he's faking; when John says the same thing--he gets scoffed at because all those nutjobs complain, right?

Throw in the awful record-keeping in  any government agency, let the regular jail doctor go off on vacation or quit because he can't take the stress in the middle of the month; and next thing you know, our man John has been hiding under his blanket for two years without anyone really noticing. What's worse is that it wasn't really done maliciously, it was pure neglect and disregard for psychos in our system. (The refusal to pay, that was malicious) Nobody went out of their way to target this guy, and it happens, to a greater or lesser degree, to everyone who's mentally ill in the prison system.

And on that happy note, I'm off to bed.
 
2013-03-07 05:52:52 AM

Gyrfalcon: Nobody went out of their way to target this guy, and it happens, to a greater or lesser degree, to everyone who's mentally ill in the prison system.


Thing is, he never even saw a judge, so shouldn't really have been in the system for that long anyway.

Does your jail's policy say that mental illness trumps the right to arraignment?
 
2013-03-07 05:56:45 AM

doglover: That treason you've posted has human rights groups monitoring him often. He's being as well treated as possible. The other guy was in "the hole"


I see you're not familiar with what Manning was going through before he got transferred to Ft. Leavenworth. The human rights groups finally being made aware of the conditions he was held in for nearly a year was what finally got him transferred.

I can't decide based on the descriptions of the conditions of both incarcerations which would be worse. I'd probably go with the guy from TFA as worse, since Manning got better treatment a year after his arrest, and this guy endured some horrible sh*t for 22 months.

The measure of a society is how it treats its worst. Because if the sort of treatment either of these guys received is found to be okay based on the nature of their wrongdoing, it won't be long until lesser offenses are deemed worthy of that sort of treatment. I mean, hell, neither one of them have even been found guilty of a crime, right?
 
2013-03-07 06:02:10 AM
This is just unfathomable.  I can't believe the jailers are acting like it had been a question of money, and somehow more funds will solve the problem.  It doesn't take money for one person to have the common decency to give a call a judge and say "dude, we've got someone who should be in a mental health facility, not solitary."  Or how about just giving him his constitutional right to a trial?!  Why are none of those guards or wardens now incarcerated or even charged?  How is this not kidnapping?  farking fark.  Unreal.

I wonder how he finally got out.  Did one of the guards finally take pity on him and give him a phone call?  Hook him up with a lawyer?

And why is the story about an attack on a ballet director in Moscow on the front page of the New York Times site, while there is nothing about this guy?  This kind of seems like the more important issue...

Sorry, I'm just freaking out here.
 
2013-03-07 06:04:37 AM
I'm so pissed I can barely see straight.  And the reason I'm pissed is because I realize this crap happens more often than any of us realize.  I've got a few relatives that dropped out of sight in the past, and something like this could be the explanation.  This guy sounds like most of us, a loner, maybe some temporary emotional upheaval, so he decides to make a change.  He gets a helping hand from a friend, tries to relocate to make a better life, and then suddenly, his life got a change like nothing he ever expected.

And no amount of money can fix this.  And the wrong people are on the hook to pay.

Just damn.
 
2013-03-07 06:05:05 AM
Hell on Earth.
 
2013-03-07 06:09:01 AM
Several jail administrators need some extended vacation time at the Graybar Hotel.
 
2013-03-07 06:10:02 AM

fnordfocus: Gyrfalcon: Nobody went out of their way to target this guy, and it happens, to a greater or lesser degree, to everyone who's mentally ill in the prison system.

Thing is, he never even saw a judge, so shouldn't really have been in the system for that long anyway.

Does your jail's policy say that mental illness trumps the right to arraignment?


It can.

There's a case of a Florida woman who was "on the bus" for three years and never received an arraignment. Similar to this guy, but not quite as horrific. I'd need to dig up the source, but it went something like this: She was arrested for some minor crime, and was Baker Acted for two weeks, so off she went to the mental ward. They bussed her up to the court, and during the interim between her arriving there and seeing the judge for her arraignment, she was off her meds long enough to destabilize. So back she went to the psych ward. They had her for six months (the maximum time someone can be held without seeing a judge) and back she went: Same situation. Back to the hospital again. Every time the hospital got her stable enough to see the judge and shipped her back, there was enough of a delay in her getting from the holding facility to the courtroom for her to go crazy again.

For three years. And she never even had an arraignment for the original crime. The three-year bus trip was going back and forth on the Baker Act committment to get her sane and stable enough to be brought to court for that. Finally I think someone caught on to what was happening and tried to intervene, but I don't know what happened next.

So yeah: If you're not mentally able to appear for the arraignment, they can keep you in confinement until you're able to appear. For as long as that takes. Because once you're in the system, they are responsible for your "health and well-being" and if someone decides you're "gravely disabled or a danger to yourself or others" they won't let you out. It's one of those Catch-22s that keep crazy people in the system going around and around like that Florida woman on the bus.
 
2013-03-07 06:13:35 AM

Gyrfalcon: If you're not mentally able to appear for the arraignment, they can keep you in confinement until you're able to appear.


And that someone is a deputy rather than a judge or MD?

How often does this happen to someone just because you don't like then or they slept with a guards's ex-wife?
 
2013-03-07 06:15:01 AM

way south: I remember the Pre Clinton/Bush era when presidents took responsibility for their actions rather than making bad choices then casting all the blame on their pen.


I remember when people held Congress critters to the flames for passing bad legislation to begin with. Being in the Virgin Islands, I would think you would be more pissed at the Representative you can vote for instead of the President you can't. (And yes, I know, your Congress Critter only serves on committees and doesn't really vote anyhow.)

way south: What you do is explain to the nation why you aren't signing something


Well, he explained to the nation why he was.

way south: if congress doesn't change the thing being signed then they'll have to ramrod it through without your consent. If its so important then they will, but you get to keep your honor and they get to eat the poll numbers.


Honor and $2.75 will get you a cup of coffee in D.C. nowadays. Do you really think that Boehner would have taken the fall for the President failing to authorize military spending, thus placing our troops in harm's way, and delaying the paychecks of all of the servicemembers and their dependents? Really? He was given a crap choice to make. Republicans would have been crawling out of the woodwork to call him a terrorist sympathizer. On top of that, the plan was for Romney to win and when he was called out for using indefinite detention, they could lay the blame at the feet of Obama and the Democrats.

way south: When you sign something quickly and quietly you show tacit approval for everything in that bill.


Yes, and when you loudly proclaim that you're signing this under protest and you make a speech about what exactly you disagree with, the opposite is true.

way south: Where he should have stood on principle, he's opted to keep things like the patriot act without so much as a fuss.


On this I agree. More needs to be done to get rid of that crap. However, once again, it's hard to veto something that has already received enough votes to override your veto. It just makes you look ineffective. Congressional Democrats need to be hung out to dry for allowing that to come to his desk.

way south: Fact is that being a constitutional scholar doesn't mean you support any of its ideals.


Or it means you don't support a particular way it has been interpreted. I went to Bible school for a while; and I'd wager I know the Bible better than most people who call themselves Christian. However, that doesn't mean I agree with most people who believe it to be the unassailable literal word of God Almighty, although I do agree that we should be nice to each other and not murder and steal and lie to each other.

The Constitution is great on most principles, but it wasn't handed down from God Almighty, either. Check out the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms sometime for what seems to be a better way of doing things for a modern world with better communication. And by the way, I don't think the PATRIOT act would hold up under it, either.
 
2013-03-07 06:24:47 AM

log_jammin: way south: I remember the Pre Clinton/Bush era when presidents took responsibility for their actions rather than making bad choices then casting all the blame on their pen.

like when we sold arms to iran so we could fund a war in central america and later when it was discovered Ronald Reagan stood up and on national TV said "the buck stops here!" and took full responsibility for it, and let the chips fall where they may. remember that?




I remember it.
I also remember everyone shrugging off fast&furious (a similar program that began with noble goals but ran amuck under Obama's watch) as no big deal.

On top of wrongfully selling weapons, keeping prison camps open, and continuing the wars on terror and drugs, Obama has extended the drone strike campaign and expanded on the Bush era policies he railed against.

We're supposed to believe that his hands are tied on every damn front of his job?
That He was too inexperienced to know there were tough choices ahead?

/And he's still got the better part of four years to go.
/I hope FARK doesn't get bent out of shape running defense the whole time.
 
2013-03-07 06:27:29 AM
I got a little agitated the other day and the cops were called (actually I totally lost my shiat).  I got a 12 hr hold, charges dropped.  First time for me and I was shocked at how every single officer suddenly thinks they are 20 feet tall when you've got cuffs on.  Chests swell up, big crap-eating grins.  You are the toddler and they are the abusive parent.  And they don't listen to anything you say unless you act as if you're willing to lick their boots.  Even on the way out as they lined a bunch of us guys up for release, they were threatening, to put us back in till the next shift came on, cussing us out, being blatantly racist to the non-english speakers, just hell-bent on reducing you as a human being.I suspect that they believe they're performing a public service by making the experience so terrible that no one wants to come back, but that's pure bull.  They were getting off on treating people like garbage.
 
2013-03-07 06:30:53 AM

GAT_00: I'm not. This kind of thing isn't that uncommon. People with mental illnesses almost always end up in jails these days, thanks to the budget cutting mantra taking away mental institutions for the average person. Those mentally unstable people almost always end up in solitary confinement for years.


For somebody who's incurably skeptic that criminals obtain weapons illegally, you demonstrate a puzzling lack of supporting evidence.
 
2013-03-07 06:37:08 AM
Ric Romero reporting some jails, much like universities and hospitals, may seem like they're there to preform a public service but they are in fact there to make a profit.
 
2013-03-07 06:38:28 AM

chrylis: GAT_00: I'm not. This kind of thing isn't that uncommon. People with mental illnesses almost always end up in jails these days, thanks to the budget cutting mantra taking away mental institutions for the average person. Those mentally unstable people almost always end up in solitary confinement for years.

For somebody who's incurably skeptic that criminals obtain weapons illegally, you demonstrate a puzzling lack of supporting evidence.


Okay, chrylis: 1) grammatically your sentence made no sense, and 2) logically your first clause doesn't even come close to establishing a causal relationship with the second one.  Back up, breathe deep, and come back when you're ready to try again.
 
2013-03-07 06:45:26 AM

way south: I also remember everyone shrugging off fast&furious (a similar program that began with noble goals but ran amuck under Obama's watch) as no big deal.


you just compared Iran contra to fast&furious??? Hilarious!
 
2013-03-07 06:52:28 AM

lack of warmth: Broad River facility which the whole thing is named after.


I was actually in that jail for 3 days, and for stupid reason (on my end). I was a dumb kid and got a speeding ticket that I ignored paying, and when my license was suspended I had already moved to another address and failed to officially change it with DMV for notifications. So the next time I got pulled for speeding I was arrested.

Man, it was terrible. The tank they threw me in had feces and urine all over the floor, finally cleaned by another inmate from general population some 12 hours after me having been there. The toilet was in the middle of the damn room. One night, after I had finally managed to fall  asleep, an aging crackhead was thrown in and proceeded to take the foulest, liquid-est diarrhea bomb while singing a Ray Charles song. Sounds funny as a CSB but trust me, it wasn't. However, at least he used the toilet and not the floor.

You know how they make jokes about asking what you're in for and you reply, "I took the tag off the mattress"? Well, that's pretty much how it was. Accused rapists, hardcore dope dealers, everyone thrown in the same room awaiting a judge. And there I was for not paying a farking traffic ticket and being dumb enough to keep driving. Not a DUI, no wives beaten, no nothing except being a stupid kid. Now I'm being stared down by a redneck accused of attempted murder.

This was in the 90s (I went to USC and got the hell out Carolina as soon as I graduated), so maybe improvements have been made. But that tank was worse than any drunk tank you see in the movies. Oh, and it was three days because, despite being a first (and last)-time offender, for some reason the judge ordered a $9,000 bond. My dad wouldn't help me, thinking he was teaching me a valuable lesson. In some ways he did but in most ways the 3 days of living with alleged rapists just pissed me off. I never understood why they didn't send me to a regular cell.

Anyway, CSB.
 
2013-03-07 07:13:39 AM
Approves:

  i94.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-07 07:19:45 AM
Dude needs to now spent all that 15.5 million on a team of real attorneys and find a way to get about 100 million out of Dona Ana County.
 
2013-03-07 07:19:55 AM
img2.allvoices.com

"It's....."


/window seat, please....
 
2013-03-07 07:22:20 AM
blogs.amctv.com
 
2013-03-07 07:40:05 AM
i'll work at jail for $7 million a year
sign me up!!
 
2013-03-07 07:43:34 AM

Earl of Chives: Dude needs to now spent all that 15.5 million on a team of real attorneys and find a way to get about 100 million out of Dona Ana County.


and then buy a truck full of newports

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-03-07 07:58:16 AM

GAT_00: ArkAngel: Don't necessarily blame budget cuts for this, though those are a big part. During the late 70's and early 80's, there was a huge movement to reduce the amount of involuntary inpatient treatment for the severely mentally ill (commitment). This despite the fact that many of them need it. Nowadays it is far harder to do so, leaving prisons as the main place these people are confined to.

It's more that they'll eventually end up there I think.  I don't think that it was intentional to throw the mentally ill into prison, I simply think that nobody who thought cutting those budgets to pieces ever thought about the consequences of it other than "Woo hoo, we saved some money, now we can cut taxes and everything is better."  Nobody ever considered the consequences of all of this.  The mentally ill are far more likely to commit crimes simply because the actions they end up taking aren't rational and end up often in violation of the law.  We no longer can treat them anywhere except prison for far too many of them, so they're thrown in jail.  Sure they'll get some mental health there, but once they are released they have no way of keeping on their drugs.  None.  How are they supposed to pay for those drugs?  They can't.  So they eventually fall ill again, do something they don't realize is wrong, and end up back in jail.

It's an endless and completely breakable cycle of stupid.  But we won't do it.  Why not?  Because it'll cost money, and no matter how much better it will make the country as a whole - a year of mental health drugs and a now productive member of society FAR, FAR outweigh the cost of a year of prison care plus mental health drugs - because to pay for it we'd have to raise taxes, and then the stupid brigade throws a farking hissy fit because they don't understand that shiat needs to be paid for.  They just want their free stuff so they can call everyone else a socialist.

And that's just one of the many reason I farking loathe the libertarian, all taxes are bad bullshiat.  It completely disregards any consequences of their actions.


So cute of you to put a libertarian strawman argument up. The move away from funding mental institutions started under JFK. He was the king libertarian. Groups like ACLU fought the ability to commit against their will the mentally unstable. Truly the top libertarian institution.

Badically your ill informed need to blame political opponents is laughable.
 
2013-03-07 08:02:20 AM

ox45tallboy: ArkAngel: Don't necessarily blame budget cuts for this, though those are a big part. During the late 70's and early 80's, there was a huge movement to reduce the amount of involuntary inpatient treatment for the severely mentally ill (commitment). This despite the fact that many of them need it. Nowadays it is far harder to do so, leaving prisons as the main place these people are confined to.

That rests solely at the feet of Ronald Reagan, the one President who you figure might want people with untreated mental illness to get help. Apparently he figured gun control was cheaper, hence his letter of support for the Brady Bill which specifically referenced his assassination attempt.


Ill informed partisans make baby jesus cry. The change in funding started under JFK, the system was already a mess in 1980.
 
2013-03-07 08:02:59 AM
I came in here to say "worth it".... but solitary can really fark you up.

I'm a hermit by choice... but I still get the internet, so it isnt comparable.

Assuming you could keep your sanity, 2 years is nothing to pay for a shortcut on the road from labor to capital.
 
2013-03-07 08:09:03 AM
25.media.tumblr.com

Floyd: Was it worth two weeks in the hole?
Andy: Easiest time I ever did.
 
2013-03-07 08:11:54 AM
I came for the picture of Sr Jude. Leaving satisfied.
 
2013-03-07 08:16:20 AM

Earl of Chives: Dude needs to now spent all that 15.5 million on a team of real attorneys and find a way to get about 100 million out of Dona Ana County.


Then you're just punishing the taxpayers.

What should happen is everyone involved loses their jobs and is charged with a felony so the only job they can ever get in the future is one flipping burgers.  But that won't happen because it's been long established that law enforcement officers are immune from their crimes.
 
2013-03-07 08:21:18 AM
So I'm wondering what happens now, is he free? I would guess he's in a psych ward that he can finally afford. Truly screwed up story.
 
2013-03-07 08:23:05 AM
The budget at Dona Ana County Jail for medical care for inmates has nearly doubled since 2005, the year that Slevin was arrested, Williams said.

Let's see two times zero is zero. Well Done.
 
2013-03-07 08:31:33 AM
"Their policy is to then just put them in solitary" if they appear to have mental health issues

Welcome to today's America.  This is SOP across the entire country.

Contact your congresscritter and tell them to stop putting people in jail.  Legalizing all non-opiate based drugs would be a good start.
 
2013-03-07 08:36:41 AM

Marcus Aurelius: "Their policy is to then just put them in solitary" if they appear to have mental health issues

Welcome to today's America.  This is SOP across the entire country.

Contact your congresscritter and tell them to stop putting people in jail.  Legalizing all non-opiate based drugs would be a good start.


Why non-opiate based, poppies are a flower, and grow naturally?
 
2013-03-07 08:37:29 AM
dickfreckle:

My story was of Broad River Corrections Institution, the big state max. security prison.  Where SC has its death row, and only has convicted felons.  You were probably taken to Richland County's jail.  I been there once, a friend of my dad's (from the Bible college my dad alumned) got busted for pedophile charges.  My dad was in support, thinking it was a mistake until his friend pled guilty.  I found the prison to be more pleasant than the jail, but not pleasant enough to want to be there, just a little better.  Inmates bored and know they're going to be there for a while tends to take better care of the place.  BRCI always had a nice flower garden along the path for the visitors coming in for parole hearings and executions.
 
2013-03-07 08:37:36 AM
I came in her intending to ask if they at least gave him a ball and a glove, but then I thought, nah, this story is too sad for snark.

And if you ever find yourself talking to law enforcement, never ever EVER admit to feeling suicidal, depressed, or in fact melancholy in any way. You feel great, thanks. Never better.
 
2013-03-07 08:49:42 AM
The tax payers reelected the douchenozzles responsible for this because it's apparently more important to finance a government-sanctioned torture facility than fix their pot holes.
 
2013-03-07 08:59:25 AM

MyRandomName: Ill informed partisans make baby jesus cry.


Yes they do. Which is why you should study more before trying to call someone else out.

Here's a nice little article with citations and everything. It would be a good start for you.

The crux of what you're missing is that Vietnam and the Cold War (and its illegitimate love-child with science, the Space Race) took up so much of the budget that cuts were necessary elsewhere. Johnson tried to keep with Kennedy's policies, and Nixon and Ford weren't about to approve anything that didn't make craploads of money for someone. Carter, on the other hand, put together an amazingly well-done study on mental health, and convinced Congress to pass legislation that would have made the US the best in the world at taking care of the mentally ill. Reagan began de-funding it as soon as he took office, and by his second term, the Mental Health Systems Act of 1980 was about as actually effective at providing mental health as the Star Wars program was at shooting down missiles.

Now you know.

/and knowing is half the battle
 
2013-03-07 09:01:34 AM

tinfoil-hat maggie: So I'm wondering what happens now, is he free? I would guess he's in a psych ward that he can finally afford. Truly screwed up story.


From the other article, it appears he is on the right meds now and about as normal as could be expected. The guy didn't belong in a psych ward either, just regular visits to a mental health provider.
 
2013-03-07 09:06:54 AM

Taylor Mental: The tax payers reelected the douchenozzles responsible for this because it's apparently more important to finance a government-sanctioned torture facility than fix their pot holes.


thinkprogress.org
"That's my new campaign slogan!"
 
2013-03-07 09:13:13 AM

ox45tallboy: tinfoil-hat maggie: So I'm wondering what happens now, is he free? I would guess he's in a psych ward that he can finally afford. Truly screwed up story.

From the other article, it appears he is on the right meds now and about as normal as could be expected. The guy didn't belong in a psych ward either, just regular visits to a mental health provider.


Oh shiat, I don't know what to feel now. Glad the guy can function and ....
The right meds can make a difference and this story makes me so mad. I hope the guy ends up alright and not taken advantage of.
 
2013-03-07 09:18:55 AM

ox45tallboy: MyRandomName: Ill informed partisans make baby jesus cry.

Yes they do. Which is why you should study more before trying to call someone else out.


MyRandomName posting that in the general direction of anyone is cause for pointing and laughter.

Well, maybe not  Linux_Yes.
 
2013-03-07 09:19:56 AM

L.D. Ablo: Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.


You have no idea what that odes to you.  I don't know you but my guess is you would break before the first month.  It's torture.
 
2013-03-07 09:20:10 AM

generallyso: And no one responsible will suffer meaningful consequences.


As God intended. That's why we are a Christian nation.

Besides he is probably guilty of something.
 
2013-03-07 09:21:53 AM
I have trouble imagining what he went through when he pulled out his own tooth.  Who was watching his cell when he was doing that?
 
2013-03-07 09:23:08 AM

tinfoil-hat maggie: Oh shiat, I don't know what to feel now. Glad the guy can function and ....
The right meds can make a difference and this story makes me so mad. I hope the guy ends up alright and not taken advantage of


If you want to go back to 'depressed', he's also terminally ill with lung cancer, having outlived doctor's expectations. I'm betting he'll give most all of it away to a charity, but I hope he keeps some and to spend on himself and making his last bit of time very comfortable.
 
2013-03-07 09:24:28 AM

tdyak: I have trouble imagining what he went through when he pulled out his own tooth.  Who was watching his cell when he was doing that?


"Look at that f*cking psycho. He's so f*cking nuts, he's pulling his teeth out!"
 
2013-03-07 09:29:43 AM

tdyak: I have trouble imagining what he went through when he pulled out his own tooth.  Who was watching his cell when he was doing that?


That's a good question. From the Doña Ana County website:

Adult Detention Facility:
The adult detention facility differs from a traditional linear jail in that there are no bars separating officers and inmates. Instead, they are separated by glass partitions, which allow officers to maintain continuous observation of all inmates and to ensure that inmates are constantly aware that they are under observation.
(emphasis mine)

Which would be worse: going slowly crazy in solitary confinement in a room with bare walls, or going slowly crazy in a small room when you know you're being watched. but no one will help you?
 
2013-03-07 09:31:08 AM
I live in Dona Ana county, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies. It really is a decent place to live, but New Mexico politics are all manner of weird. They like building bigassed jails in this state too.

As for what happened to the DA that was in charge? She's no longer the DA. She's the Governor.
 
2013-03-07 09:31:43 AM

Bathia_Mapes: If I had any say in the matter this gentleman would have received a minimum of $30 million. There is absolutely no reason to do that to anyone.


There are plenty of people who deserve it, but not this guy.
 
2013-03-07 09:33:20 AM
So, the victim gets his life ruined, the taxpayers get to pony up the cash to pay the settlement, and the people responsible get to keep their jobs. Maybe it's just me, but that seems pretty farked up.
 
2013-03-07 09:45:14 AM

Farxist Marxist: There are more:

http://www.nationofchange.org/albert-woodfox-s-40-years-solitary-con fi nement-1362147066

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-02-25/justice/colorado.supermax.silvers te in.solitary_1_solitary-confinement-federal-prison-system-cell?_s=PM:CR IME


Goddam, this is horrible.  You watch Cool Hand Luke and Shawshank and are supposed to be horrified at two weeks or a month in solitary for the protagonist.  This guy wasn't right in the head to begin with and they put him there for 22 months - over 660 days in one room.

Find who's responsible - right farking now - and put them on trial publicly the same way we put Nazi's on trial in Nuremburg.

And just like then "I was only following orders" is not a valid response.  This man had rights and you ignored them and abused him.
 
2013-03-07 09:46:34 AM

Gyrfalcon: It has to do with the minimal amount of "mental health care" given to prisoners in jails. Once he was determined by some random guard to be a "mental health patient" and assigned to solitary for his own protection, then he'd have gotten periodic visits from the doctor and/or psychiatric nurse. Even if these professionals really do care about their patients--and often they do--their "visits" are on the order of 90 seconds long maximum. They may only be something like the doctor looking through the food slot and saying "Hey, John, how are you feeling today? Still suicidal? Have you been taking your meds?" If John can't or won't reply, the doctor asks the guards how he's been doing, and then it's off to monitor the 795 other patients and inmates in the jail.

Even assuming the guards are not viciously hostile (and some of them aren't), they're not mental health professionals. They don't get the difference between someone who is really sick, and someone who is working the system (and there are plenty of those); so they can't or won't differentiate between John who is genuinely depressed and confused, and Steve who is malingering so he can get a few days out of GP and work detail. If Steve biatches about how his feet hurt, he gets scoffed at because they know he's faking; when John says the same thing--he gets scoffed at because all those nutjobs complain, right?

Throw in the awful record-keeping in any government agency, let the regular jail doctor go off on vacation or quit because he can't take the stress in the middle of the month; and next thing you know, our man John has been hiding under his blanket for two years without anyone really noticing. What's worse is that it wasn't really done maliciously, it was pure neglect and disregard for psychos in our system. (The refusal to pay, that was malicious) Nobody went out of their way to target this guy, and it happens, to a greater or lesser degree, to everyone who's mentally ill in the prison system.


Unfortunately, I think you're right.

As for the guy's phone call--he probably didn't have the money for a lawyer.  He might not have remembered the phone number of a friend to call.

There is one big place to put blame, though--he should have gone before a judge and gotten a public defender.
 
2013-03-07 09:53:09 AM

ox45tallboy: tinfoil-hat maggie: Oh shiat, I don't know what to feel now. Glad the guy can function and ....
The right meds can make a difference and this story makes me so mad. I hope the guy ends up alright and not taken advantage of

If you want to go back to 'depressed', he's also terminally ill with lung cancer, having outlived doctor's expectations. I'm betting he'll give most all of it away to a charity, but I hope he keeps some and to spend on himself and making his last bit of time very comfortable.


Well thanks a lot I was already depressed, why yes my doctors changed my meds up and well, I'm not happy.
/Although I now know how much worse it could be.
 
2013-03-07 10:02:06 AM
Guess I'm adding New Mexico to the states that I will never visit.
 
2013-03-07 10:07:21 AM

doglover: Why was he in solitary so long?
Who put him there?
Why are their heads still on their bodies?

22 months in solitary is some farked up shiat. It's worse than waterboarding or most physical tortures. It can easily break people you'd think are unbreakable.

The execution of those responsible is a good first step in a civilized society. Justice would be sending them to solitary for 22 months themselves, but I can't endorse such cruelty.


I can.  Solitary for 22 months, followed by public torture for 22 months, then execution.  No appeals.  It's not like the prison staff are ever going to improve their behavior on their own.

The lack of spectacularly violent punishments to people who are spectacularly guilty is the reason that jail and fines don't work as deterrents.
 
2013-03-07 10:15:48 AM

PickledBoodah: L.D. Ablo: Sign me up!

I'll do two years of solitary for $15.5M.  Hell yes.

You have no idea what that odes to you.  I don't know you but my guess is you would break before the first month.  It's torture.


Could use that money and help others. Call it a sacrifice if that makes you feel better. Think of how many starving children you could save. Why do you hate the children?
 
2013-03-07 10:42:07 AM
Stick those farkers in general population of that prison, and then give the rest of the guards a vacation day.
 
2013-03-07 10:49:49 AM
The cop's plan was that he'd die of cancer while still in prison so that they'd never have to own up to any of it.

Didn't work out, I guess.  Now they'll just have to hunt him down and do it the old fashioned way - "suicide" to the back of the head.
 
2013-03-07 11:12:16 AM
Yet when the parents on the E-Trade commercial put the baby in solitary confinement and take away his IPad and IPhone, people laugh.
 
2013-03-07 11:15:46 AM
shiat id do it for just a millon.
 
2013-03-07 11:22:42 AM

ox45tallboy: doglover: That treason you've posted has human rights groups monitoring him often. He's being as well treated as possible. The other guy was in "the hole"

I see you're not familiar with what Manning was going through before he got transferred to Ft. Leavenworth. The human rights groups finally being made aware of the conditions he was held in for nearly a year was what finally got him transferred.

I can't decide based on the descriptions of the conditions of both incarcerations which would be worse. I'd probably go with the guy from TFA as worse, since Manning got better treatment a year after his arrest, and this guy endured some horrible sh*t for 22 months.

The measure of a society is how it treats its worst. Because if the sort of treatment either of these guys received is found to be okay based on the nature of their wrongdoing, it won't be long until lesser offenses are deemed worthy of that sort of treatment. I mean, hell, neither one of them have even been found guilty of a crime, right?


We give them hundreds of millions of dollars in golden parachutes when they retire from their boardroom positions.  If they happen to have committed any crimes, those are ignored (unless enough public outcry is raised to force a show trial) or outright forgiven.

How are we doin'?
 
2013-03-07 11:28:22 AM

PsyLord: Guess I'm adding New Mexico to the states that I will never visit.


It smells like fish.
 
2013-03-07 11:33:49 AM

over_and_done: public torture for 22 months


You don't even know what torture is. Even with modern medicine you'll be lucky to get 22 hours of decent torture in.

On top of that, you forget how power works. You are granted power by the public. A hanging lasts moments and is very dignified and the traditions ancient. People can really get behind them. On the other hand, torturing some in public for MONTHS? No one in the country will stick with you for that.
 
2013-03-07 11:39:25 AM
Don't kid yourself that this is an anomaly. This is the American prison system.
 
2013-03-07 11:46:50 AM

doglover: over_and_done: public torture for 22 months

You don't even know what torture is. Even with modern medicine you'll be lucky to get 22 hours of decent torture in.


I didn't say it was going to be nonstop continuous thumbscrews.  Modern medicine goes a long, long way in the hands of vindictive scientists.


On top of that, you forget how power works. You are granted power by the public. A hanging lasts moments and is very dignified and the traditions ancient. People can really get behind them. On the other hand, torturing some in public for MONTHS? No one in the country will stick with you for that.

That's how, and why, we have perfected the art of extrajudicial renditions.  "The public" won't bother to stop watching reality TV long enough to remember.

Besides, I can always distract them by hinting that I may possibly once have kissed a girl who was not the exact same race as me.  The teabaggers who don't instantly die of high blood pressure will be too busy being loudly shocked and offended to care about subhuman rights.

Really, the only ones I need to keep an eye on would be PETA.
 
2013-03-07 12:30:43 PM
I bet the car he 'stole' was released after 30 days.
That or crushed at the scrapyard.
 
2013-03-07 12:47:30 PM

over_and_done: We give them hundreds of millions of dollars in golden parachutes when they retire from their boardroom positions. If they happen to have committed any crimes, those are ignored (unless enough public outcry is raised to force a show trial) or outright forgiven.

How are we doin'?


That was excellent, my friend. Welcome to blue.
 
2013-03-07 12:48:43 PM
TFA:"he was forced to pull out his own tooth because he said he wasn't allowed to see a dentist"

Hell, I'm not sure I would do even just that for $15 million. That's seriously f'ed up.
 
2013-03-07 12:53:40 PM

evaned: TFA:"he was forced to pull out his own tooth because he said he wasn't allowed to see a dentist"

Hell, I'm not sure I would do even just that for $15 million. That's seriously f'ed up.


I foresee a movie starring James Franco.
 
2013-03-07 12:54:55 PM

evaned: TFA:"he was forced to pull out his own tooth because he said he wasn't allowed to see a dentist"

Hell, I'm not sure I would do even just that for $15 million. That's seriously f'ed up.


That's Freedom™, buddy. You should thank God that you live in a Christian nation.
 
2013-03-07 12:55:35 PM

evaned: TFA:"he was forced to pull out his own tooth because he said he wasn't allowed to see a dentist"

Hell, I'm not sure I would do even just that for $15 million. That's seriously f'ed up.


Actually, that's not even that uncommon.  I have a family member in the clink.  While being held for 18mos pre-trial he was denied eyeglasses, dental services, etc...  (not to mention having to buy their own toilet paper and toothpaste, which is a tax on families) My family member was actually happy when the verdict went the wrong way, simply because once in 'real' jail, bad teeth could be pulled pulled and could get eyeglasses.
 
2013-03-07 12:59:49 PM

DrPainMD: "...no jail personnel have been fired over Slevin's treatment."

That's what's wrong with the system. Elect me and people who pull this kind of crap will be put up against a wall and their brains blown out the back of their useless heads, on live TV.


At what point in your life did you decide that reacting to bad things by being stupid was a good idea?
 
2013-03-07 01:09:47 PM
I hope the people of that county rise up as one and do something about the obviously neglectful Sherriff they elected.

/who am I kidding, he'll probably get another term out of this
 
2013-03-07 01:12:17 PM

StoPPeRmobile: generallyso: And no one responsible will suffer meaningful consequences.

As God intended. That's why we are a Christian nation.

Besides he is probably guilty of something.


Whatever dude. He's WHITE.

That changes EVERYTHING.
 
2013-03-07 01:24:00 PM

mediablitz: Amos Quito: Yes, that's it.
And it's all perfectly legal.
Citizen.

So he got a 15 million judgement for something that is "perfectly legal"? That's what you are going with?



No, what this man went through was NOT perfectly legal.

My comparison to the draconian NDAA was intended to point to the VERY BAD direction "legality" is headed in recent years.

"America" is going down the shiatter - and it is not by accident or simple happenstance.

It is an intentional reshaping of society, culture, and the roles of the government and the rights of the governed.

This does not bode well for the latter.
 
2013-03-07 01:26:51 PM

BafflerMeal: evaned: TFA:"he was forced to pull out his own tooth because he said he wasn't allowed to see a dentist"

Hell, I'm not sure I would do even just that for $15 million. That's seriously f'ed up.

Actually, that's not even that uncommon.  I have a family member in the clink.  While being held for 18mos pre-trial he was denied eyeglasses, dental services, etc...  (not to mention having to buy their own toilet paper and toothpaste, which is a tax on families) My family member was actually happy when the verdict went the wrong way, simply because once in 'real' jail, bad teeth could be pulled pulled and could get eyeglasses.



Where did this happen?


/Sounds like a 3rd world prison
//Or possibly Arizona
///Same thing, I know
 
2013-03-07 01:33:23 PM

Amos Quito: BafflerMeal: evaned: TFA:"he was forced to pull out his own tooth because he said he wasn't allowed to see a dentist"

Hell, I'm not sure I would do even just that for $15 million. That's seriously f'ed up.

Actually, that's not even that uncommon.  I have a family member in the clink.  While being held for 18mos pre-trial he was denied eyeglasses, dental services, etc...  (not to mention having to buy their own toilet paper and toothpaste, which is a tax on families) My family member was actually happy when the verdict went the wrong way, simply because once in 'real' jail, bad teeth could be pulled pulled and could get eyeglasses.


Where did this happen?


/Sounds like a 3rd world prison
//Or possibly Arizona
///Same thing, I know



Close, Louisiana.

http://www.tpso.org/tangipahoa-parish-prison.html

"Built in 1984, the Tangipahoa Parish Prison can house a maximum capacity of 504 men and 22 women prisoners. A majority of the prisoners held at the jail are parish detainees awaiting court appearances."

http://www.npr.org/2012/06/05/154352977/how-louisiana-became-the-wor ld s-prison-capital
 
2013-03-07 01:51:50 PM

Amos Quito: No, what this man went through was NOT perfectly legal.

My comparison to the draconian NDAA was intended to point to the VERY BAD direction "legality" is headed in recent years.

"America" is going down the shiatter - and it is not by accident or simple happenstance.


Ah. So your comment had nothing to do with this story. You just wanted to rail, and yell at clouds.

Got it...
 
2013-03-07 02:21:09 PM

Amos Quito: mediablitz: Amos Quito: Yes, that's it.
And it's all perfectly legal.
Citizen.

So he got a 15 million judgement for something that is "perfectly legal"? That's what you are going with?


No, what this man went through was NOT perfectly legal.

My comparison to the draconian NDAA was intended to point to the VERY BAD direction "legality" is headed in recent years.

"America" is going down the shiatter - and it is not by accident or simple happenstance.

It is an intentional reshaping of society, culture, and the roles of the government and the rights of the governed.

This does not bode well for the latter.


I agree with you and it doesn't matter to me what letter you put in parens after a politician's name - I feel like they're almost all just fine with eroding our rights.

/But in happy news - I'm going to be a dad to a little boy in a few weeks
//I'll make sure he knows what his rights are, what priveleges are, and how to fight for the difference.
///The Fifth Amendment is not a privelege.
 
2013-03-07 02:23:34 PM

jpk_ks: Amos Quito: mediablitz: Amos Quito: Yes, that's it.
And it's all perfectly legal.
Citizen.

So he got a 15 million judgement for something that is "perfectly legal"? That's what you are going with?


No, what this man went through was NOT perfectly legal.

My comparison to the draconian NDAA was intended to point to the VERY BAD direction "legality" is headed in recent years.

"America" is going down the shiatter - and it is not by accident or simple happenstance.

It is an intentional reshaping of society, culture, and the roles of the government and the rights of the governed.

This does not bode well for the latter.

I agree with you and it doesn't matter to me what letter you put in parens after a politician's name - I feel like they're almost all just fine with eroding our rights.

/But in happy news - I'm going to be a dad to a little boy in a few weeks
//I'll make sure he knows what his rights are, what priveleges are, and how to fight for the difference.
///The Fifth Amendment is not a privelege.


Better have money for lawyers.
 
2013-03-07 02:44:51 PM
$21,000 per day?  Sounds like that place we stayed at on Grand Cayman.
 
2013-03-07 02:48:10 PM
i.imgur.com

Meh, this guy has been in solitary at Supermax since 1985
 
2013-03-07 03:03:09 PM

mediablitz: Amos Quito: No, what this man went through was NOT perfectly legal.

My comparison to the draconian NDAA was intended to point to the VERY BAD direction "legality" is headed in recent years.

"America" is going down the shiatter - and it is not by accident or simple happenstance.

Ah. So your comment had nothing to do with this story. You just wanted to rail, and yell at clouds.

Got it...



This guy's experience was something of an anomaly. These things should NEVER happen in the US, and in his case, the injustice was recognized as ILLEGAL. The settlement $ he received served as a token of said recognition.

Under NDAA (currently US law) any person can be held indefinitely without evidence being presented, without charges, without hearing, without bail, and without recourse - LEGALLY.

So my point was, if you like the injustice that was done to this guy, you're going to LOVE the "justice" under NDAA.


/You sound like a terrorist
 
2013-03-07 03:04:28 PM

BafflerMeal: Amos Quito: BafflerMeal: evaned: TFA:"he was forced to pull out his own tooth because he said he wasn't allowed to see a dentist"

Hell, I'm not sure I would do even just that for $15 million. That's seriously f'ed up.

Actually, that's not even that uncommon.  I have a family member in the clink.  While being held for 18mos pre-trial he was denied eyeglasses, dental services, etc...  (not to mention having to buy their own toilet paper and toothpaste, which is a tax on families) My family member was actually happy when the verdict went the wrong way, simply because once in 'real' jail, bad teeth could be pulled pulled and could get eyeglasses.


Where did this happen?


/Sounds like a 3rd world prison
//Or possibly Arizona
///Same thing, I know


Close, Louisiana.

http://www.tpso.org/tangipahoa-parish-prison.html

"Built in 1984, the Tangipahoa Parish Prison can house a maximum capacity of 504 men and 22 women prisoners. A majority of the prisoners held at the jail are parish detainees awaiting court appearances."

http://www.npr.org/2012/06/05/154352977/how-louisiana-became-the-wor ld s-prison-capital



LOL!

Louisiana would have been my second guess.
 
2013-03-07 03:29:35 PM
TFA: "the same people are running it"

It seems to me that it's a logical impossibility to have someone treated so horribly that they're awarded $15.5 million, yet have the people responsible for such treatment *not even lose their jobs*.
Personally, I would think they'd be up for some criminal charges.  But I guess we just have to make our peace with the political reality our for-profit prison industry and unlimited corporate lobbying has given us.
 
2013-03-07 04:09:45 PM

Amos Quito: Under NDAA (currently US law) any person can be held indefinitely without evidence being presented, without charges, without hearing, without bail, and without recourse - LEGALLY.


Just to make things clear, the NDAA, or National Defense Authorization Act, is signed into law EVERY YEAR by the President in order to authorize military spending, including payment of soldiers as well as defense contractors providing essential services to troops in the field who can legally withhold their services if they are not paid.. The President has no line item veto power, so he must either sign onto the whole bill or veto the whole bill. The President did not ask for this authority; it was amended into the bill whether he wanted it or not. Had he vetoed this bill, SOLDIERS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PAID UNTIL CONGRESS OVERRODE HIS VETO.

You are falling directly into the trap Congressional Republicans laid for him; he would have had to choose "sympathizing with the terrorists" over paying the troops, and it would still have been overridden.

Congressional Democrats who voted for this bill in that form are every bit as much at fault as the Republicans who sponsored it; however, they would be subject to being branded as "terrorist sympathizers" who chose the terrorists over American troops getting paid as well.

Obama didn't want this power, and he gave a speech saying what a bad idea it was. The plan was for Romney to take the White House and use the indefinite detention while saying, "but it was Obama's idea!".

Please don't play the Republicans' cards here. You can look at the facts and see who is really at fault for that bullsh*t being signed into law. You're better than this.
 
2013-03-07 04:14:27 PM

ringersol: Personally, I would think they'd be up for some criminal charges.


That would be nice, but the fact is that while his rights were clearly violated, they followed procedures. It is the procedures and regulations that are at fault here. Had those people refused to follow those procedures and regulations, they would have lost their jobs and the people in charge would have found someone else who would do what they were told.

It's these kinds of stupid regulations that were made with good intentions (the safety of the other inmates) but poor foresight - just like "zero tolerance" policies.
 
2013-03-07 06:46:58 PM

ox45tallboy: Amos Quito: Under NDAA (currently US law) any person can be held indefinitely without evidence being presented, without charges, without hearing, without bail, and without recourse - LEGALLY.

Just to make things clear, the NDAA, or National Defense Authorization Act, is signed into law EVERY YEAR by the President in order to authorize military spending, including payment of soldiers as well as defense contractors providing essential services to troops in the field who can legally withhold their services if they are not paid.. The President has no line item veto power, so he must either sign onto the whole bill or veto the whole bill. The President did not ask for this authority; it was amended into the bill whether he wanted it or not. Had he vetoed this bill, SOLDIERS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PAID UNTIL CONGRESS OVERRODE HIS VETO.



SO FARKING WHAT?

Are you claiming that the poor widdle pwesident's hands were tied? That he had no choice? Would he have signed it if it contained language stipulating that the President must conduct all press conferences in a clown suit, and be staked nude to a fire-ant mound for three hours on the second Tuesday of each month?

Give me a farking break!


ox45tallboy: You are falling directly into the trap Congressional Republicans laid for him; he would have had to choose "sympathizing with the terrorists" over paying the troops, and it would still have been overridden.



Ya think? The President has media access and political clout like no other person on the planet. All he had to do was point to the hideously draconian text buried in the bill, REFUSED to sign it, and let them override if necessary. He could have raised a stink that reverberated around the planet AND used it as political leverage that would have been so powerful that the anyone who supported it would have gone down in flames last November.

The moment he called a press conference and told the American People, IN PLAIN TERMS, what that cute little rider attached to the NDAA means, and how it shakes to the foundations the core of Western civilization, Democrats and Republicans alike would have lined up behind him like tin soldiers.

He would have come off looking like a hero, because NO rational person, Republican or Democrat, Left, Right or Center would accept this hatcheting of our most BASIC rights and liberties if Obama were to have stood his ground and made his case.

NO ONE.

This could not have been pulled off by either the Republicans or Democrats alone. It required COLLUSION between BOTH parties AND a President that fully supported the measure.

In my mind, this is nothing short of treason - against both the Constitution AND the American People.

Now, please tell me where I am mistaken, and why. Because I would REALLY LIKE to believe that our elected leaders are actually serving our best interests, but at the moment, I am finding that very hard to swallow.

Thanks.
 
2013-03-07 06:55:24 PM

dabbletech: $21,000 per day?  Sounds like that place we stayed at on Grand Cayman.


how many bitcoins is that? :)
 
2013-03-07 07:18:35 PM

ox45tallboy: Amos Quito: Under NDAA (currently US law) any person can be held indefinitely without evidence being presented, without charges, without hearing, without bail, and without recourse - LEGALLY.

Just to make things clear, the NDAA, or National Defense Authorization Act, is signed into law EVERY YEAR by the President in order to authorize military spending, including payment of soldiers as well as defense contractors providing essential services to troops in the field who can legally withhold their services if they are not paid.. The President has no line item veto power, so he must either sign onto the whole bill or veto the whole bill. The President did not ask for this authority; it was amended into the bill whether he wanted it or not. Had he vetoed this bill, SOLDIERS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PAID UNTIL CONGRESS OVERRODE HIS VETO.

You are falling directly into the trap Congressional Republicans laid for him; he would have had to choose "sympathizing with the terrorists" over paying the troops, and it would still have been overridden.



HEY!

I just thought of a better solution:

Obama should have signed the NDAA WITH the nasty rider, and then immediately ARRESTED every Republican AND Democrat in Congress who supported the measure as "suspected terrorists", and ordered them held WITHOUT evidence, trial or bail until the "end of hostilities - OR until hell freezes over - whichever comes first.

Brilliant, no?


/It's not too late, you know
//He could do it tomorrow
///Maybe a petition is in order?
 
2013-03-07 08:38:49 PM
Trials?  We don't need no stinking trials!
farm9.staticflickr.com
 
2013-03-08 01:48:56 AM

Amos Quito: ox45tallboy: Had he vetoed this bill, SOLDIERS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PAID UNTIL CONGRESS OVERRODE HIS VETO.

SO FARKING WHAT?


Hmmm. The fact that you have this sort of attitude is proof positive you don't have any family or friends in the armed service. I know damned well you would never say this in front of a service member.

How would you like it if someone told you, in relation to your paycheck that your mortgage and FOOD for your family, not to mention child support withdrawal that could put you in jail, relied upon, "So farking what?"

Amos Quito: The moment he called a press conference and told the American People, IN PLAIN TERMS, what that cute little rider attached to the NDAA means, and how it shakes to the foundations the core of Western civilization, Democrats and Republicans alike would have lined up behind him like tin soldiers.


You are so precious.

Amos Quito: NO ONE.


Not even the people who had already voted for it?

Amos Quito: Now, please tell me where I am mistaken, and why. Because I would REALLY LIKE to believe that our elected leaders are actually serving our best interests, but at the moment, I am finding that very hard to swallow.


You're at fault for blaming the President, instead of Congress. And yes, that includes Congressional Democrats who didn't want to face their own constituents for voting against soldiers getting their paychecks. The only way in which your point would be valid were if the President had a line item veto but chose not to use it.

Amos Quito: Thanks.


You're certainly welcome. Glad to have been of assistance.
 
2013-03-08 01:51:47 AM

Amos Quito: HEY!

I just thought of a better solution:

Obama should have signed the NDAA WITH the nasty rider, and then immediately ARRESTED every Republican AND Democrat in Congress who supported the measure as "suspected terrorists", and ordered them held WITHOUT evidence, trial or bail until the "end of hostilities - OR until hell freezes over - whichever comes first.

Brilliant, no?


Yes. That's a wonderful solution. You are truly the epitome of Republican ideology. If only people would listen to what you have to say, the whole world's problems could be solved so easily!

Damn, you are S-M-R-T Smrt!
 
2013-03-08 02:56:29 AM

ox45tallboy: Amos Quito: Under NDAA (currently US law) any person can be held indefinitely without evidence being presented, without charges, without hearing, without bail, and without recourse - LEGALLY.

Just to make things clear, the NDAA, or National Defense Authorization Act, is signed into law EVERY YEAR by the President in order to authorize military spending, including payment of soldiers as well as defense contractors providing essential services to troops in the field who can legally withhold their services if they are not paid.. The President has no line item veto power, so he must either sign onto the whole bill or veto the whole bill.

[snip]

And, like all presidents do, he made the wrong choice.
 
2013-03-08 06:31:00 AM

BafflerMeal: evaned: TFA:"he was forced to pull out his own tooth because he said he wasn't allowed to see a dentist"

Hell, I'm not sure I would do even just that for $15 million. That's seriously f'ed up.

Actually, that's not even that uncommon.  I have a family member in the clink.  While being held for 18mos pre-trial he was denied eyeglasses, dental services, etc...  (not to mention having to buy their own toilet paper and toothpaste, which is a tax on families) My family member was actually happy when the verdict went the wrong way, simply because once in 'real' jail, bad teeth could be pulled pulled and could get eyeglasses.


OK that story is almost as farked up as the main one.

Not being a great believer in the Good Book I still like some of the messages, surely any sane, rational (non-sociopathic) person can get behind Matthew 25:40 "The King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.' "

Or even the sentiment behind Corinthians 15:10 "But by the grace of G*d..."
 
2013-03-08 06:41:54 AM
jpk_ks:

/But in happy news - I'm going to be a dad to a little boy in a few weeks

Gratz :D

Happiest sentence in this thread - I'm getting another niece next week, so looking forward to seeing her non-comprehending, screwed up, old persons face before she becomes another star in my sky.
 
2013-03-08 06:43:51 AM
Maybe the 'non-comprehending' should have been 'fully comprehending' - I have never been sure....
 
2013-03-08 06:55:25 AM

ox45tallboy: Amos Quito: Under NDAA (currently US law) any person can be held indefinitely without evidence being presented, without charges, without hearing, without bail, and without recourse - LEGALLY.

Just to make things clear, the NDAA, or National Defense Authorization Act, is signed into law EVERY YEAR by the President in order to authorize military spending, including payment of soldiers as well as defense contractors providing essential services to troops in the field who can legally withhold their services if they are not paid.. The President has no line item veto power, so he must either sign onto the whole bill or veto the whole bill. The President did not ask for this authority; it was amended into the bill whether he wanted it or not. Had he vetoed this bill, SOLDIERS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PAID UNTIL CONGRESS OVERRODE HIS VETO.

You are falling directly into the trap Congressional Republicans laid for him; he would have had to choose "sympathizing with the terrorists" over paying the troops, and it would still have been overridden.

Congressional Democrats who voted for this bill in that form are every bit as much at fault as the Republicans who sponsored it; however, they would be subject to being branded as "terrorist sympathizers" who chose the terrorists over American troops getting paid as well.

Obama didn't want this power, and he gave a speech saying what a bad idea it was. The plan was for Romney to take the White House and use the indefinite detention while saying, "but it was Obama's idea!".

Please don't play the Republicans' cards here. You can look at the facts and see who is really at fault for that bullsh*t being signed into law. You're better than this.


dbrunker: Trials?  We don't need no stinking trials!
[farm9.staticflickr.com image 485x640]


Ya know I break that rule with comments all the time -

ox45tallboy: Amos Quito: ox45tallboy: Had he vetoed this bill, SOLDIERS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PAID UNTIL CONGRESS OVERRODE HIS VETO.

SO FARKING WHAT?

Hmmm. The fact that you have this sort of attitude is proof positive you don't have any family or friends in the armed service. I know damned well you would never say this in front of a service member.

How would you like it if someone told you, in relation to your paycheck that your mortgage and FOOD for your family, not to mention child support withdrawal that could put you in jail, relied upon, "So farking what?"

Amos Quito: The moment he called a press conference and told the American People, IN PLAIN TERMS, what that cute little rider attached to the NDAA means, and how it shakes to the foundations the core of Western civilization, Democrats and Republicans alike would have lined up behind him like tin soldiers.

You are so precious.

Amos Quito: NO ONE.

Not even the people who had already voted for it?

Amos Quito: Now, please tell me where I am mistaken, and why. Because I would REALLY LIKE to believe that our elected leaders are actually serving our best interests, but at the moment, I am finding that very hard to swallow.

You're at fault for blaming the President, instead of Congress. And yes, that includes Congressional Democrats who didn't want to face their own constituents for voting against soldiers getting their paychecks. The only way in which your point would be valid were if the President had a line item veto but chose not to use it.

Amos Quito: Thanks.

You're certainly welcome. Glad to have been of assistance.


Sounds like it would be the perfect way to get REAL CHANGE, the military not getting paid -> "No, I am not invading the country you say I have to".

Strikes me as if no one has the balls to truly change the system and each person you elect is just a face of the system - personally I would start with the monetary system and the banks (start with the most powerful and work down - because the banks make ALL other industries together look like children playing in a sand pit), take control of debt creation.

Thankfully I am not a politician or else that suggestion would probably result in me dying of natural (or violent) causes.
 
2013-03-08 01:05:13 PM

ox45tallboy: Amos Quito: ox45tallboy: Had he vetoed this bill, SOLDIERS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PAID UNTIL CONGRESS OVERRODE HIS VETO.

SO FARKING WHAT?

Hmmm. The fact that you have this sort of attitude is proof positive you don't have any family or friends in the armed service. I know damned well you would never say this in front of a service member.

How would you like it if someone told you, in relation to your paycheck that your mortgage and FOOD for your family, not to mention child support withdrawal that could put you in jail, relied upon, "So farking what?"



How many US soldiers have sacrifices their lives in the hopes of PRESERVING the freedoms that you are willing to throw in the trash for the sake of securing the next paycheck?

Is there no right, liberty or freedom that you would not allow to be held hostage by these treasonous bastards?

ox45tallboy: Amos Quito: The moment he called a press conference and told the American People, IN PLAIN TERMS, what that cute little rider attached to the NDAA means, and how it shakes to the foundations the core of Western civilization, Democrats and Republicans alike would have lined up behind him like tin soldiers.

You are so precious.

Amos Quito: NO ONE.

Not even the people who had already voted for it?



Not if the president had shown a backbone, and exposed this rider as the enemy of public liberty that it is. Every one of those politicians would be scrambling to save their political lives.

But he showed no backbone.


ox45tallboy: Amos Quito: Now, please tell me where I am mistaken, and why. Because I would REALLY LIKE to believe that our elected leaders are actually serving our best interests, but at the moment, I am finding that very hard to swallow.

You're at fault for blaming the President, instead of Congress. And yes, that includes Congressional Democrats who didn't want to face their own constituents for voting against soldiers getting their paychecks. The only way in which your point would be valid were if the President had a line item veto but chose not to use it.



Apparently you missed the part where I said: "This could not have been pulled off by either the Republicans or Democrats alone. It required COLLUSION between BOTH parties AND a President that fully supported the measure. In my mind, this is nothing short of treason - against both the Constitution AND the American People."


You know, ox45tallboy, when you selectively quote in your responses, intentionally ignoring and deleting material that directly contradicts that which you accuse me of, it makes you look disingenuous, dishonest, even.


I'll ask you again: Is there no right, liberty or freedom that you would not allow to be held hostage by these treasonous bastards?
 
2013-03-08 01:55:16 PM
Lose 50 lbs and grow a cool hipster beard? I'd do that for $15 mil.

Bonus: Being in solitary means no anal rape.
 
Displayed 177 of 177 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report