Apparently Joe Arpaio was innocent of the charges - after all

[TLK Valentine]

No but Hitler sure tried to get all the Jews didn't he? Arpaio didn't out stars on Hispanics chests kick down Hispanics doors or round them up enmasse off the streets. Not really the same thing at all.

Jeffery Dahmer didn't kill and eat every man and boy he met, did he? Nope, only 17. Guess he was innocent of the charges, after all.

 

[TLK Valentine]

He

Was brought to court for holding a citizen under suspicion for being illegal. I haven't read that court case. The court ordered him to stop holding suspected illegals. Which IS legal.

Actually, no, it wasn't. Arizona's SB1070 law was very clear -- if a person is arrested or detained for a separate crime, and there is reasonable suspicion that they are in the country illegally, then they can be detained until their legal status is determined.

Joe didn't always wait for the separate offense. He saw a brown person he could haul in, and he sprung into action.

You hold them and ICE checks them out. You don't have to prove they are illegal before holding.

No, but there does have to be a separate crime -- Joe seemed to think "Driving While Mexican" qualified.

Do you?

 

[rjs330]

You keep glossing over this salient point - they found out he was legal BEFORE they tossed in jail - which has notoriously abominable conditions - and held him there anyway, then turned him over to the FBI, even though he had his legal papers.

When a poor person gets arrested, he can get fired for not showing up at his job, then lose his lodgings being unable to pay rent because of losing his job. This is not a trivial matter.

Yes and that guy deserves to win a law suit.

 

[rjs330]

Jeffery Dahmer didn't kill and eat every man and boy he met, did he? Nope, only 17. Guess he was innocent of the charges, after all.

Well someone compaired.Arpio to Hitler. I think there needs to be some better reasoning to do so besides what happened. Jiminy Christmas we through Hitler around so often these days that we've lost sight of just how evil he was.

 

[rjs330]

Actually, no, it wasn't. Arizona's SB1070 law was very clear -- if a person is arrested or detained for a separate crime, and there is reasonable suspicion that they are in the country illegally, then they can be detained until their legal status is determined.

Joe didn't always wait for the separate offense. He saw a brown person he could haul in, and he sprung into action.




No, but there does have to be a separate crime -- Joe seemed to think "Driving While Mexican" qualified.

Do you?

No I don't. I read some of the documents but can't really find anyone who was hauled in for driving while Mexican. I also haven't seen any documents that people were just snatched off the street because their skin was brown. Do you have some actual cases where this happened. Just curious.

I am certainly willing to alter my stance with some actual evidence that happened.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No I don't. I read some of the documents but can't really find anyone who was hauled in for driving while Mexican. I also haven't seen any documents that people were just snatched off the street because their skin was brown.

I guess it would shock some people to learn that criminals don't always document their illegal activities.

Darn inconvenience, isn't it? If only there was some agency that could... investigate criminals and not be forced to rely on their paperwork to convict them.

Do you have some actual cases where this happened. Just curious.

I am certainly willing to alter my stance with some actual evidence that happened.

I'm sure the evidence you're looking for of Joe's illegal activities can be found in the records of the court that convicted him of illegal activities. Just a thought.

 

[loveofourlord]

As I understand it, there are other factors that contribute to civil liability. Criminal guilt doesn't always translate into civil damages. The relevant Supreme Court case on acceptance of a pardon equaling an admission of guilt (Burdick v. United States) is cited in this thread in post #16 as well as post #35.

yeah like I know not the least of wich he wasn't arrested for anything civily liable, he was arrested for contempt of court or such. Wich would be the goverment, and thats not a crime you can bring a civil lawsuit over.

 

[loveofourlord]

Can any of his victims seek compensation legally?

Not for this, this is admission of guilt to at best, contempt of court or what ever it would fall under for ignoring a ruling. This isn't admiting to guilt to harassing people or such things.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Well someone compaired.Arpio to Hitler. I think there needs to be some better reasoning to do so besides what happened.

Perhaps you should've provided some? I agree, the comparison is a stretch, because ol' Adolf wanted to exterminate a particular ethnic group, whereas ol' Joe only attempted to expel them.

 

[rjs330]

I guess it would shock some people to learn that criminals don't always document their illegal activities.

Darn inconvenience, isn't it? If only there was some agency that could... investigate criminals and not be forced to rely on their paperwork to convict them.



I'm sure the evidence you're looking for of Joe's illegal activities can be found in the records of the court that convicted him of illegal activities. Just a thought.

Ummm.... I looked at the court stuff but didn't see anything that hinted at picking up people for simply being brown skinned. The one particular case where the guy with the proper ID was the only specific case I found. And that one was definitely wrong. People need to be in trouble for that one.

 

[rjs330]

Perhaps you should've provided some? I agree, the comparison is a stretch, because ol' Adolf wanted to exterminate a particular ethnic group, whereas ol' Joe only attempted to expel them.

He wanted to expel CRIMINALS not a race of people. Just cause the criminals happen to be Mexicans is only a side point.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ummm.... I looked at the court stuff but didn't see anything that hinted at picking up people for simply being brown skinned. The one particular case where the guy with the proper ID was the only specific case I found. And that one was definitely wrong. People need to be in trouble for that one.

Keep looking. Nobody was ever in trouble because Donald demonstrated that his supporters don't answer to "courts."

 

[TLK Valentine]

He wanted to expel CRIMINALS not a race of people. Just cause the criminals happen to be Mexicans is only a side point.

Not for Joe -- it was the main point.

 

[variant]

yeah like I know not the least of wich he wasn't arrested for anything civily liable, he was arrested for contempt of court or such. Wich would be the goverment, and thats not a crime you can bring a civil lawsuit over.

He was arrested for contempt in continuing his illegal actions toward the populace.

 

[Maren]

Ummm.... I looked at the court stuff but didn't see anything that hinted at picking up people for simply being brown skinned. The one particular case where the guy with the proper ID was the only specific case I found. And that one was definitely wrong. People need to be in trouble for that one.

My recollection is that he had "raids" at areas where Hispanics were known to hang out; to a degree it would be more like a stop and frisk than a "raid," but it was aimed at Hispanics who were not breaking a law at the time. Additionally, police can typically find a reason to stop a person driving, either you forget to signal when you change lanes or make a turn or some other minor infraction.

I know one of our Maricopa county posters here has stated being worried about being stopped while driving in Hispanic areas at night because they know (and have friends) who have been stopped for no apparent reason, the stop was largely because they were suspected of being Hispanic (and by extension, illegal) while driving.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

An update:
Judge won't wipe out guilty verdict for Arpaio
Trump pardon ends criminal case but can't 'revise historical facts,' court says.

 

[wing2000]

Good.

I agree with this commentator:

"Seems to me there was an easy resolution here if Arpaio really wanted to wipe his record clean.

If he truly believed that he is innocent -- if he believed he was denied justice because he didn't get a jury trial -- then he had the absolute right, as does every American, to go to court to try to clear his name.

All he had to do is send back the pardon and file an appeal."

http://www.azcentral.com/story/opin...arpaios-criminal-conviction-stands/782754001/

 

[cow451]

Good.

I agree with this commentator:

"Seems to me there was an easy resolution here if Arpaio really wanted to wipe his record clean.

If he truly believed that he is innocent -- if he believed he was denied justice because he didn't get a jury trial -- then he had the absolute right, as does every American, to go to court to try to clear his name.

All he had to do is send back the pardon and file an appeal."

http://www.azcentral.com/story/opin...arpaios-criminal-conviction-stands/782754001/

Yeah, Joe. You don’t need no stinkin’ pardon!

 

[keith99]

Perhaps you should've provided some? I agree, the comparison is a stretch, because ol' Adolf wanted to exterminate a particular ethnic group, whereas ol' Joe only attempted to expel them.

Then you might want to actually look at history. Hitler started with expelling Jews. Extermination came later.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Then you might want to actually look at history. Hitler started with expelling Jews. Extermination came later.

I stand corrected -- the comparison's not much of a stretch after all...