PDA

View Full Version : The regime has blood on it's hands. Again.



LWW
01-23-2012, 04:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When burglar Kesler Dufrene became a twice-convicted felon in 2006, a Bradenton judge shipped him to prison for five years. And because of his convictions, an immigration judge ordered Dufrene deported to his native Haiti.

That never happened.

Instead, when Dufrene’s state prison term was up, Miami immigration authorities in October 2010 released him from custody. Two months later, North Miami police say, he slaughtered three people, including a 15-year-old girl in a murder case that remains as baffling today as it did the afternoon the bodies were discovered.

DNA on a rifle found inside the house and cellphone tracking technology later linked Dufrene to the Jan. 2, 2011, slayings.

But North Miami detectives never got to interrogate him. Just 18 days after the murders, Dufrene shot and killed himself when he was cornered by Manatee County sheriff’s deputies in Bradenton after an unrelated break-in and shooting there.

The episode is a black eye for U.S. authorities, who by law could not detain Dufrene indefinitely after the Obama administration ordered a temporary halt of deportations to the island nation. The deportations were halted because of the carnage wrought by Haiti’s January 2010 earthquake. </div></div>

DEATH BY THUGOCRACY (http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/22/2602909/immigration-authorities-released.html)

Qtec
01-23-2012, 04:31 AM
PATHETIC.

LWW
01-23-2012, 04:35 AM
And despicable as well.

Soflasnapper
01-23-2012, 03:51 PM
Quite right, if the regime you have in mind is the SCOTUS in the George W. Bush terms.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> “Under binding Supreme Court precedent, ICE’s authority to detain any individual is limited when the removal of that individual is not likely in the reasonably foreseeable future,” the immigration agency’s statement said.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2001 and 2005 that foreign nationals who cannot be deported may not be held in detention longer than six months. Deportations resumed in mid-January 2011 — three months after Dufrene was released from custody under ICE supervision. The agency did not specify what that supervision entailed.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/22/2602909_p2/immigration-authorities-released.html#storylink=cpy</div></div>

Even though the US can indefinitely detain US CITIZENS WITHOUT CHARGE, or even without counsel?

This case smells funny, as even the police admit, thinking there are likely additional perps (which is to say, different parties) involved.

LWW
01-23-2012, 04:27 PM
You are aware that you just reinforced my position?

Soflasnapper
01-23-2012, 05:26 PM
Yes, if, as I said, by 'regime' you meant the SCOTUS.

I don't think you did, though, so reinforced it, not so much.

LWW
01-24-2012, 03:32 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes, if, as I said, by 'regime' you meant the SCOTUS.

I don't think you did, though, so reinforced it, not so much. </div></div>

Can you cite for us where it was the SCOTUS that barred his deportation?

What's that?You can't?

You made it up?

Of course you did ... dear leader demands no less of you.

Soflasnapper
01-24-2012, 01:04 PM
No, the SCOTUS barred his detainment (past a 6 month period of time). Just 3 months too little.

Not sure what huge jurisprudential difference there would be between allowing 6 months detention, but not 9 months, but in their august majesty, so the SCOTUS ruled. Twice, evidently.

LWW
01-24-2012, 04:45 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When burglar Kesler Dufrene became a twice-convicted felon in 2006, a Bradenton judge shipped him to prison for five years. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>And because of his convictions, an immigration judge ordered Dufrene deported to his native Haiti.

That never happened.</span>

Instead, when Dufrene’s state prison term was up, Miami immigration authorities in October 2010 released him from custody. Two months later, North Miami police say, he slaughtered three people, including a 15-year-old girl in a murder case that remains as baffling today as it did the afternoon the bodies were discovered.

DNA on a rifle found inside the house and cellphone tracking technology later linked Dufrene to the Jan. 2, 2011, slayings.

But North Miami detectives never got to interrogate him. Just 18 days after the murders, Dufrene shot and killed himself when he was cornered by Manatee County sheriff’s deputies in Bradenton after an unrelated break-in and shooting there.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The episode is a black eye for U.S. authorities, who by law could not detain Dufrene indefinitely after the Obama administration ordered a temporary halt of deportations to the island nation. The deportations were halted because of the carnage wrought by Haiti’s January 2010 earthquake.</span> </div></div>

DEATH BY THUGOCRACY (http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/22/2602909/immigration-authorities-released.html)[/quote]

Seriously ... what part of this is confusing to you?

WTF does the SCOTUS have to do with it?

What's that?

You simply must defend dear leader, no matter how ridiculous that defense might be?

Soflasnapper
01-24-2012, 05:38 PM
It's pretty simple.

As a twice convicted felon, the man was deportable.

I have no idea why he wasn't IMMEDIATELY deported THEN, but I guess in such cases they put them in for the jail term first, and then deport them.

Once he got out, he was still deportable, but deportation had been temporarily halted because of the huge disaster in Haiti.

So then he was properly kept in confinement, pending the reopening of deportation to his country, Haiti.

Somehow, the SCOTUS drew a bright line on confinement-- 6 months ok, 9 months a gross violation of something or another. (Pointy headed ivory tower intellectuals that they are.)

So, while the authorities would have been fine with keeping him as long as it took for his deportation to be allowed, and had already kept him in custody for 6 months after his jail sentence, THEN they HAD to release him. Not a choice. HAD TO RELEASE HIM, over some arbitrary timeline propounded by the SCOTUS.

So, do we hear you call for this decision to be revisited by the high court, after it caused such a tragedy (albeit in unusual circumstances)?

No, instead you blame the entirely sensible and precedented action of not sending deportees back into civil disaster zones. Which was the right decision, and that emergency stay of deportations to Haiti was lifted in a couple of months.

Why isn't the SCOTUS as much or more to blame in this case? What is the difference between 6 and 9 months that the authorities may hold such persons for 6, but not 9, months? A high Constitutional principle, or entirely arbitary rulemaking from the court?

LWW
01-25-2012, 04:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's pretty simple.

As a twice convicted felon, the man was deportable.

I have no idea why he wasn't IMMEDIATELY deported THEN, but I guess in such cases they put them in for the jail term first, and then deport them.

Once he got out, he was still deportable, but deportation had been temporarily halted because of the huge disaster in Haiti.

So then he was properly kept in confinement, pending the reopening of deportation to his country, Haiti.

Somehow, the SCOTUS drew a bright line on confinement-- 6 months ok, 9 months a gross violation of something or another. (Pointy headed ivory tower intellectuals that they are.)</div></div>

Back up the excuse truck ... had his deportation not been blocked by the regime, none of the rest of your jibba jabba makes any difference.

Soflasnapper
01-25-2012, 02:46 PM
Both are true, but Obama's action seems more defensible than this arbitrary timeline for detention put in place by the SCOTUS for no apparent reason. The reason for Obama's decision is obvious, and correct, in my view.

LWW
01-26-2012, 05:17 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Both are true, but Obama's action seems more defensible than this arbitrary timeline for detention put in place by the SCOTUS for no apparent reason. The reason for Obama's decision is obvious, and correct, in my view. </div></div>

So you support not deporting convicted felons as a judge had ordered?

Of course you do ... dear leader demands no less of you.