Petition for border Control guys wrongly convicted

[Lagardo]

I am talking about cases where there is absolute proof that the person convicted committed the crime.

How is getting a murderer, rapist, drug dealer, kidnapper, etc. out of jail on a technicality justice for anyone?

The problem is this: define absolute proof.

Keep in mind, anything you use to define proof will bring a host of "technicalities."

Sometimes the technicalities involved in interpreting our bill of rights is a little bothersome, but it is important to remember that we have never faced the kind of oppression that was faced by our founding fathers.

 

[Bro. James Reed]

The obvious case that I am most familiar with, which is a leading cause for claiming amnesty by many groups, is the case of Gary Graham. There was one eyewitness to him running out of the crime scene, and she has never waivered in her claim. The murder was part of a week long crime spree by Graham in which he raped and shot numerous other people, leaving many for dead.

Graham even said, when he was being escorted from the court room following his conviction, that next time, he wouldn't leave any witnesses. This was heard and reported by the bailiff escorting him.

He even bragged to his victims which lived that he had killed other people.

When you have 5 or 6 people, all witnessing different aspects of his criminal acts and attempts at murder within one week, and then a woman who is absolutely certain that she saw him running from the crime scene of the murder, that, to me, is absolute proof. Yet, there were so many activists who were rallying to his side trying to get him out of jail and calling his execution a lynching; a hate crime.

There is, in my opinion, absolute proof that John Couey kidnapped, raped, and murdered Jessica Lynch, yet his confession was thrown out on a technicality. If he escapes any penalty for his crimes based on his confession being thrown out, who is justice served to?

When you catch someone on camera kidnapping a child, and a few days later, that child turns up dead, that to me is ample proof that the person is guilty of murder.

A little common sense can go a long way.

 

[Lagardo]

A little common sense can go a long way.

I certainly agree with that. Although I have seen what can happen when police are more interested in closing a case than finding the truth, and for that, I am grateful for the "technicalities" that hold our law enforcement accountable.

 

[Terry_Herrington]

I certainly agree with that. Although I have seen what can happen when police are more interested in closing a case than finding the truth, and for that, I am grateful for the "technicalities" that hold our law enforcement accountable.

Thank you!

 

[LadyEagle]

3-page warning: This thread will be closed no sooner than 4:00 a.m. ET by one of the moderators.

Lady Eagle

 

[Bro. James Reed]

I certainly agree with that. Although I have seen what can happen when police are more interested in closing a case than finding the truth, and for that, I am grateful for the "technicalities" that hold our law enforcement accountable.

Technicalities should be used to punish overeager investigators, I am not saying differently. If a cop can't investigate properly, using all the correct steps, then they shouldn't be there in the first place.

But, how does releasing a criminal on a technicality punish an investigator?

It punishes only the victims, their families, and future victims of the one who was released.

 

[LadyEagle]

Closed, per previous warning. Have a great week!

LE