Sure thing to get the terrorist, but then let him walk?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by 63dot, Jan 5, 2015.

  1. 63dot, Jan 5, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2015

    63dot macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #1
    Law school 101 will tell every 1L that the biggest gift is for a criminal to take a plea of life imprisonment for murder.

    http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/05/politics/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-trial-plea-deal-fails/index.html

    and below NBC news article that is critical of trial:

    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-c...hokhar-tsarnaev-begins-jury-selection-n277561

    But Uncle Sam (Justice Department) wants to take this to death penalty which may see the Boston bomber walk. There are too many instances of reasonable doubt that the defense could put up.

    The whole entirety of law school are cases of just how often the feds lost or got it wrong when they decided to go to trial or failed to take a plea. Trials almost overwhelmingly favor the defense. On Perry Mason the good fight and unlikely cases are won, but in the world of jurisprudence in the USA, it's a bit more tricky.

    Only in America.
     
  2. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #2
    *shrug*

    One thing I'm quite sure is that the political career of whoever had taken that plea would have been over in the rather shrill law&order climate of the US.


    Such will be the one of the prosecutor if he looses the case.
     
  3. 63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #3
    The thing is government slug lawyers here in the US could be completely awful but still keep their job, get raises, and a great pension. There is never any punishment for poor performance, and often punishment for work done either in a timely manner or with too much efficiency, but that's government slugs and its own thread.

    In America we have a system of government which, besides losing cases they have no business losing, has a great way of coming up with one democrat and one republican who end up running for president usually making the populace wonder if they are truly the best two representatives of their respective parties.

    But this doesn't surprise me coming from Eric Holder who has the amazing distinction of pissing off liberals like me and of course calling for every GOP member to oust him. Attorney generals don't exactly have a good track record in the USA, but Holder is exceptionally bad.
     
  4. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #4
    Walk? That's never ever ever ever never ever going to happen. ..... ever!!!

    Even if found not guilty or hung jury, he is going nowhere. They will go all the way to plan Z on this guy.
     
  5. 63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #5
    I wish I still had my Crim Law textbook here. It's amazing how bad the Justice Department is on getting the bad guys. During the Hoover years it was almost as if he lived up to the remark that he (our very own J. Edgar) was indeed the sixth Godfather. ;)

    When your opponent puts up a white flag and pleads guilty, then you go in and take it. If he gets life imprisonment, he won't get out and which of the defense attorney's past clients do you think will ever get out? Plead guilty to multiple murder and while not getting executed, they won't ever get out either. Put the damn terrorist away already.

    Anything Eric Holder related ends up being a huge mess and I thought I saw the epitome of incompetent in republican era Attorney Generals, but Holder takes the cake. Holder's absolute mishandling of Ferguson led to that getting out of hand and it's amazing that we kept Holder this long. This whole thing sickens me.

    Take the plea, lock up the terrorist, and call it a day and move on. We have ISIS to fight, Afghanistan to peacefully transfer over, and plenty of bad guys still yet to capture or kill.
     
  6. Gutwrench macrumors 65816

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
  7. 63dot, Jan 5, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2015

    63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #7
    That's kind of like saying because we won WWII and because Japan and Germany became lifelong allies of us that our incursions into Iraq and Afghanistan will turn into similar victories and lifelong partnerships.

    There's a bit of a difference in those cases and one success among many failures is not something to be proud about. Take the flag and get the terrorist while the chance is there.

    How do you get the little brother when even the prosecution isn't even sure he was in on it in the beginning and are telling that to CNN and Fox? How do you get him when many believe he was bullied or that he worshiped his brother in a sick way? There's so much the defense could pull out and it comes down to the letter of the law, not what feels right or feel fair to the rest of us. Justice rarely works that way, if ever. Do you want to place a bet that you can and will see to it that all 12 jurors will believe the conditions have been met to execute him and that they will go for death months from now? Do you want to take that chance when taking the monster off the grid for life is a sure thing right now?

    Anyway, from NBC:

    Quote:

    A former federal judge who now teaches at Harvard University said that she believes conducting a full trial is a mistake and that prosecutors should allow Tsarnaev to plead guilty and receive a sentence of life in prison.


    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-c...hokhar-tsarnaev-begins-jury-selection-n277561

    Additionally:

    Nancy Gertner argues that legal appeals would take years and that executions are on hold because of uncertainty about lethal drugs.

    "He's going to be on death row for decades. There will be multiple appeals," Gertner said. "Looking at it realistically, he's going to die in prison one way or the other if he's convicted. So this really is a ceremony that doesn't make sense."


    There is little to realistically compare this to Timothy McVeigh.
     
  8. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #8
    I highly doubt that Holder could have done anything to prevent what happened.

    Suggestions?

    While I personally agree with you, I believe there are some cases which require a public display intended to send a message to console the people and to intimidate those who would consider perpetrating such crimes.

    This would be one of those crimes.
     
  9. 63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #9
    When I saw the handling of Ferguson by Holder, which is a case some accused the AG of stoking racial tensions, I was a little bit confused and wanted to hear "something" from him that would help resolve the issue. I truly believed that he could redeem his already terrible image as AG by doing something positive in Ferguson.

    Many talking heads thought that either Holder's handling of Ferguson was the straw that broke the camel's back on his legacy or that Ferguson alone would be what he's remembered for.

    http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/09/...older-jumps-ship-resigns-as-attorney-general/

    I certainly hope Holder's successor will do a good job and redeem the position in the eyes of the overwhelmingly skeptical American populace. If things go really well, Obama can leave office less hated than George W Bush (who set a record for most hated president with a monthly approval rating that once hit just 19% percent).

    I give Obama a few extra points because he took in a broken American economy while Bush was handed the strongest economy in history, but if Obama ends up being as hated as much as Bush, then Eric Holder will come up on top of the list.
     
  10. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #10
    I have no idea what he could have said.

    "Something" is a bit vague.
     
  11. 63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #11
    It was one of those things which I can't place a finger on, but the whole mess just seemed to backfire on him. Don't you think so?

    I know the conservative talking heads would take any opportunity to talk against Holder and/or Obama, but I have a feeling Holder handed everyone who hated him just what they wanted to hear.

    To the left, like me, we wanted a strong liberal in Holder which we didn't get, but to the right, they wanted somebody they saw as soft on crime which they claim Holder is. Holder appeared too milk toast and even someone as lacking any convictions or passion, not unlike his commander in chief.

    Heading to a bigger picture, I hope the new AG can restore some confidence and that the democrats can somehow turn around the disaster that has become of the party. If we end up with another ineffective and controversial AG, that will give the idiots like Tea Party Cruz and (fake Libertarian) Paul more ammunition in a GOP bid for the white house.

    With a stronger stock market and an improving economy, it's key right now for the democrats to build a strong case for retaining the white house in 2016. My thought is if anything would put us right back into a recession, it would be the backward looking republicans similar to a George W Bush which the republican field right now reminds me of.
     
  12. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #12
    I just question how much could have been changed. When people are outraged, they act on that emotion. There is little that can be said to assuage them.
     
  13. 63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #13
    Sadly, we have faced one outrage after another and when we looked to a strong leader to guide us through a mess, Obama has been awful. All the polls will show you that even though his actions of saving our economy and putting a dent in the healthcare crisis shows success, something still leaves a bad taste in our mouths with the current administration. I don't question the president's positions, of which I agree, but his dedication to any stance he has.

    It could very well be his style, and where a calm and calculating approach makes a great NFL coach like Walsh or Belichick, but it just doesn't work well for president.

    This reminds me of the distant past. During the 1988 election, there was no doubt we needed to end eight years of a republican laissez-faire policy of voodoo economics, but the dull demeanor of Dukakis, even with the right positions on the popular stances, just didn't cut it come election time. Even a similarly dull George HW Bush was able to get past him and win it all.

    It's more than just getting it correct, and the PR part of the job is just as important. You can say you want to cut government spending and grow the economy, but then end up not doing it and still looking good because you are a good and convincing speaker. Ronald Reagan pulled this off and there has to be some level of emotional appeal. Obama had only enough to get in office but once in, he seemed to forget what made his image tick.
     
  14. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #14
    I agree. I'd give him a C- at best.

    But compared to the D- that came before him ...
     
  15. 63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #15
    You are being generous when it comes to Bush! :p
     
  16. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #16
    Well, the country still existed after his term, hence his half-grade above an "F".
     
  17. Huntn Suspended

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #17
    That's how you read it. These guys are on tape, I have believe they have a plenty strong case. It's not death penalty or walk.
     
  18. 63dot, Jan 5, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2015

    63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #18
    Nothing is stronger than a plea. Let's put the bastard away now, no lengthy appeals or costs and "maybe" a death sentence carried out in our lifetime?

    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-c...hokhar-tsarnaev-begins-jury-selection-n277561

    Every day he sits on death row, assuming we get that far, then leading to years and then decades will only be seen as some sort of victory for the terrorists. The great terrorist got to live another day and dodge execution and that will be the news to them if he gets the death penalty and we don't do good on our promise.

    Let's just be swift, let's put him out of the news, and put him away without possibility of parole right now. Don't drag the families through any more pain again.

    Toss the key. Done. But now move on and use resources and energy to get all the others out there whether it be by Justice dept, drones, or ground troops. This is in fact our quiet third world war (developed world versus terrorism) and the only way the terrorists get an upper hand is to launch small attacks, drag things out, and make martyrs out of monsters like Tsarvaev. By putting him away, he's off the streets forever, and by not executing him we take a high profile terrorist off the potential martyr list.

    These guys are animals and they want to die and be executed in the name of their cause. To them, not unlike kamikaze pilots, their highest calling is to die and become a martyr. Don't give them that opportunity lest we see more innocent civilians getting murdered in their name.

    If it was up to me, I would spent whatever it takes to put them all behind bars and linger until they are forgotten and reduced down to remnants of yesterday's news. They are common criminals and don't deserve any heroic rememberance of how they gave their lives for a cause. Their only cause should be to wake up, be unseen behind bars, and spent the rest of their lives in quiet anonymity. It's punishment enough and their biggest fear is to be forgotten and ignored.
     
  19. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #19
    It works well for me. I don't want a President who is a father/grandfather/king figure. In our system, the President is Chief Executive of the government. I want a President who can run the government well.

    You like the governmental structure in Britain better? A monarch to be the parental figure, a Prime Minister who isn't afraid to mix it up in a parliamentary debate? That isn't the structure the U.S. has. We could change it and elect a figurehead President.

    Reagan was good at playing the grandfather role. People who don't know anything about economics remember Reagan fondly. But, economics and worship of the super-rich aside, Reagan did have one shining moment.
     
  20. 63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #20

    I don't disagree with your points, however, that one shining moment was a "PR" president who stood on the shoulders of others.

    He's not the only one who fought against the communists even though Reagan fans want you to believe that, and it was actually Richard Nixon who dealt the biggest deathblow to them when he made an alliance with China. But people will probably remember Nixon for Watergate instead of the groundbreaking work with China, and ole Ronny will be remembered for being the one who took down the evil empire. It's really great revisioninst history.
     
  21. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #21
    And yet, for once, I think he was being truly sincere.

    I have a different take on it.

    "Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" really was hardly noticed in June of 1987 (although I did take note of it, and was surprised by it). I think it probably did give Gorbachev pause for thought. And, in October/November 1989, a pause, a little hesitation, was all that was needed to open the floodgate. 25 years later, it plays very differently than it did at the time, and, sometimes the story is relayed as if Reagan was a prophet. But, in this case, I'm guessing that Reagan said what he meant, and, that Gorbachev heard him. And, that is what I like about it.
     
  22. 63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #22
    It was a wonderful thing to see that wall come down. I didn't honestly think that it would come down in my lifetime and that East Germany would be more like a North Korea or Cuba and stubbornly hang onto communism. It was evident that the Soviet Union were bankrupting themselves with a military they couldn't maintain and it was just a matter of time.

    I do hope things get better with Cuba soon!
     
  23. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #23
    I think you are misreading this case.

    Just because the defendant didn't take a plea deal does not significantly change the odds of him being convicted. The evidence against the surviving Boston Bomber is overwhelming, and the chances of any sensible jury finding him innocent are minute.

    But more importantly, it is important for us as a society to have trials where innocent, or even those whose guilt is ambiguous or unproven, are acquitted. We aren't the sort of society where "justice" is meted out at show trials where the outcome has been predetermined by means of coerced confessions. (And I count plea bargains as at least a mild form of coercion.)

    If, as seems highly probable, the Boston Bomber is guilty then I'm convinced he'll be convicted and serve a long., long prison sentence.
     
  24. 63dot thread starter macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #24
    Yes, this is true but according to OP link from NBC, the whole thing is exactly a show trial. Either way, life imprisonment or death, he will die in prison.

    Just put him away now without trial by letting him do the plea, and save us the heartache of reliving this thing or giving that jerk any more attention. The guy is going to die in prison if plea is taken, and do you want this to cost us taxpayers additional millions if brought to trial and dragged through appeals after a death penalty? It's far, far cheaper to lock him away forever and I just want to never hear his name again as is the case with those who take a plea and are locked up forever.
     
  25. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #25
    Provided the media don't try and turn this into another OJ Simpson trial, that isn't going to happen.

    Since 9/11 there have been dozens of trials of individuals accused of terrorism, and almost without exception the Federal Court system has handled them efficiently, fairly, and without them turning into media circuses or giving the accused platforms to promote their ideology.
     

Share This Page