laughingliberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Apr-23-10 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
| - Illegal alien wins defamation case for being called a 'criminal' – set back for 1st Amendment |
The Northerner |
Apr-23-10 03:34 PM |
#0 |
 -
What do you think about this? |
blm |
Apr-23-10 03:42 PM |
#1 |
| -
A Proper Verdict, Sir: Hardly a 'Set-Back For The First Amendment' |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 03:45 PM |
#2 |
  -
If I were to sneak into Mexico, I could not accurately be described there as a criminal? n/t |
lumberjack_jeff |
Apr-23-10 03:51 PM |
#7 |
| -
My Ignorance Of Mexican Law, Sir, Is Complete |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 03:56 PM |
#10 |
| -
in mexico, it's a two year felony to enter unlawfully fwiw |
paulsby |
Apr-23-10 05:08 PM |
#65 |
| -
Thank You For The Fact, Sir, But Of Course It Is Irrelevant To This Discussion |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 05:12 PM |
#68 |
| -
i agree. but u claimed ignorance on this matter |
paulsby |
Apr-23-10 05:19 PM |
#75 |
| -
No Problem, Sir |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 05:23 PM |
#79 |
| -
Of course |
notesdev |
Apr-23-10 04:03 PM |
#16 |
| -
And What, Sir, Is My Agenda? |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 04:06 PM |
#18 |
| -
Why don't you tell us? |
notesdev |
Apr-23-10 04:09 PM |
#22 |
| -
Have You Read The Article, Sir? Poor Tripe As It Is, It Makes What the Verdict Actually Concerned |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 04:12 PM |
#26 |
| -
I suspect His Honor is a sleeper for the Mexican Government, |
EFerrari |
Apr-23-10 04:13 PM |
#27 |
| -
ROFLMAO! |
laughingliberal |
Apr-23-10 04:15 PM |
#30 |
| -
What does the Mexican side of the equation half to do with the price of beans in China? |
MattBaggins |
Apr-23-10 04:20 PM |
#33 |
| -
NEWSFLASH: the US Constitution & your civil rights end at the border |
WolverineDG |
Apr-23-10 05:02 PM |
#59 |
| -
Sure and that's why your government is a criminal for sneaking into Mexico |
EFerrari |
Apr-23-10 04:09 PM |
#21 |
| -
If you had been tried in a court of law and found to be a criminal |
MattBaggins |
Apr-23-10 04:15 PM |
#29 |
| -
So you think emails should be held to the same standard as TV news? n/t |
lumberjack_jeff |
Apr-23-10 05:38 PM |
#87 |
| -
Absolutely |
MattBaggins |
Apr-23-10 07:01 PM |
#103 |
| -
Then DU's days are numbered. n/t |
lumberjack_jeff |
Apr-23-10 07:05 PM |
#104 |
| -
The 1st amendment doesn't protect defamation. |
HiFructosePronSyrup |
Apr-23-10 03:46 PM |
#3 |
| -
'set back (sic) for 1st Amendment'? - dramatic! |
Bluebear |
Apr-23-10 03:47 PM |
#4 |
| -
Their copy editors are utterly hopeless |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 04:32 PM |
#38 |
| -
I'm not sure what the set back is to the First Amendment |
DefenseLawyer |
Apr-23-10 03:47 PM |
#5 |
| -
Apparently, Sir, A White Racist was Held To Account In Court By A Brown Person For Lawbreaking |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 03:50 PM |
#6 |
| -
Well after all, the man just wants his country back. |
DefenseLawyer |
Apr-23-10 03:57 PM |
#11 |
| -
Do Not Forget Hitler, Sir! He Did Just The Same Thing, Too! |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 04:01 PM |
#14 |
| -
What else should we be able to call a Mexican? |
county worker |
Apr-23-10 05:34 PM |
#85 |
| -
Um, I was being facetious |
DefenseLawyer |
Apr-23-10 06:36 PM |
#100 |
| -
Some People, Sir, Should Not Play Cards For Money.... |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 06:40 PM |
#101 |
| -
+1000 nt |
laughingliberal |
Apr-23-10 04:06 PM |
#19 |
| -
i heart you. |
BlooInBloo |
Apr-23-10 07:24 PM |
#106 |
| -
reinforcement of 1st amendment |
spanone |
Apr-23-10 03:54 PM |
#8 |
| -
One can certainly hope the law-breaking non-criminal can now |
Obamanaut |
Apr-23-10 03:54 PM |
#9 |
| -
Umm, since he was here illegally, then by default wouldn't he be a criminal? |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 03:59 PM |
#12 |
| -
It is not a crime to be in the country without documentation |
DefenseLawyer |
Apr-23-10 04:02 PM |
#15 |
| -
Let's see, |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 04:10 PM |
#23 |
| -
English...but a very exact and specific form of it. |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 04:46 PM |
#48 |
| -
I think that you're misreading a lot, including the law |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:26 PM |
#81 |
| -
In Any Case, Sir, the Defamation Was Not Concerned With Immigration Violations |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 04:05 PM |
#17 |
| -
Thanks so much for your posts on this thread. |
redqueen |
Apr-23-10 04:12 PM |
#25 |
| -
The ruling by the judge was because the defendant called the plaintiff a criminal |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 04:15 PM |
#28 |
| -
Not So, Sir: He Said the Man Was Wanted For Robbery, Assault, And Battery |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 04:17 PM |
#32 |
| -
But that is not what the judged ruled on, |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 04:23 PM |
#34 |
| -
That, Sir, Is Simply Sloppy Reporting |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 04:28 PM |
#36 |
| -
Maybe, maybe not, I would like to see the original case record |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 04:39 PM |
#43 |
| -
Circulation Of the 'Wanted Poster', Sir, Is What the Case Concerned |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 04:54 PM |
#52 |
| -
Well, apparently a police department did seek him out, |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:02 PM |
#60 |
| -
Not Sure Where You Get That, Sir |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 05:06 PM |
#63 |
| -
Next paragraph down, apparently there was a criminal trial regarding this assault |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:10 PM |
#67 |
| -
It Does Not Say That Concerned This Assault, Sir |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 05:22 PM |
#77 |
| -
Hmm, you don't think that a criminal trial in '07 has nothing to do with the Monti assault |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:29 PM |
#82 |
| -
Clearly, Sir, It Had Nothing To Do With A Charge Of Assaulting Or Robbing Monti |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 05:34 PM |
#86 |
| -
It does not |
treestar |
Apr-23-10 05:51 PM |
#94 |
| -
Broadcast? |
lumberjack_jeff |
Apr-23-10 05:40 PM |
#88 |
| -
Several Points, Sir |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 05:54 PM |
#97 |
| -
No. He'd be subject to administrative law, not criminal law. |
EFerrari |
Apr-23-10 04:11 PM |
#24 |
| -
Yet by entering illegally he is still breaking the law, |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 04:16 PM |
#31 |
| -
Overstaying a parking meter is against the law |
DefenseLawyer |
Apr-23-10 04:25 PM |
#35 |
| -
Really? I think you've got it wrong |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 04:36 PM |
#41 |
| -
Let me put it another way, when I translated these cases |
EFerrari |
Apr-23-10 04:39 PM |
#44 |
| -
But there is a criminal penalty |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 04:44 PM |
#47 |
| -
you are misreading the article |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 04:56 PM |
#55 |
| -
No, Sir, He Claims Defamation Because He Was Said To Be Wanted For Robbery And Assault And Battery |
The Magistrate |
Apr-23-10 04:57 PM |
#57 |
| -
oops - made a mistake |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 05:03 PM |
#61 |
| -
Umm, being here illegally is a crime |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:04 PM |
#62 |
| -
No it is not |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 05:10 PM |
#66 |
| -
But that's not what Mr. Jimenez did |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:13 PM |
#69 |
| -
I'm not seeing anything about illegal entry there |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 05:20 PM |
#76 |
| -
So you are opting for which, spontaneous materialization or virgin birth? |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:25 PM |
#80 |
| -
Damn, why is it so hard for you to admit you were wrong? |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 05:44 PM |
#90 |
| -
third base.. |
frylock |
Apr-23-10 06:40 PM |
#102 |
| -
No, illegal *entry* is actually a criminal offense. |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 07:23 PM |
#105 |
| -
It's a civil offense; it's no more illegal than speeding or running a stop sign |
proud2BlibKansan |
Apr-23-10 07:28 PM |
#107 |
| -
That is someone who is in the act of entering the country |
DefenseLawyer |
Apr-23-10 04:56 PM |
#54 |
| -
Umm, more law, read it |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:08 PM |
#64 |
| -
don't go into the detective business |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 05:16 PM |
#71 |
| -
Don't go into the lawyer business, |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:17 PM |
#73 |
| -
I understand it a hell of a lot better than you. |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 05:23 PM |
#78 |
| -
No, I'm basing it on Mr. Jimenez's own statements in court |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:31 PM |
#83 |
| -
...which don't say what you think they say. |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 05:53 PM |
#96 |
| -
You are wrong. |
DefenseLawyer |
Apr-23-10 06:28 PM |
#99 |
| -
But ignoring the court summons CAN subject you to that |
WolverineDG |
Apr-23-10 04:55 PM |
#53 |
| -
WRONG |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 04:53 PM |
#51 |
| -
And by his own testimony, Mr. Jimenez entered illegally |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:15 PM |
#70 |
| -
his testimony says nothing at all about his entry into the US |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 05:31 PM |
#84 |
| -
No. There are civil laws, too |
treestar |
Apr-23-10 05:53 PM |
#95 |
| -
It's a matter of civil law, not criminal law. |
HiFructosePronSyrup |
Apr-23-10 04:36 PM |
#40 |
| -
Actually it is a matter of criminal law |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 04:43 PM |
#46 |
| -
No. That is not a crime, it is an administrative violation. |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 04:39 PM |
#45 |
| -
But you can be sent to prison for illegally crossing the border |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 04:48 PM |
#49 |
| -
That's correct, but is there any proof he did so? No. |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 05:00 PM |
#58 |
| -
Mr. Jimenez's own words. |
MadHound |
Apr-23-10 05:16 PM |
#72 |
| -
And? This is the 3rd time. They say NOTHING about how he entered. |
anigbrowl |
Apr-23-10 06:01 PM |
#98 |
| -
What the hell? |
blogslut |
Apr-23-10 04:00 PM |
#13 |
| -
Apparently. nt |
laughingliberal |
Apr-23-10 04:08 PM |
#20 |
| -
It took electing Obama to flush out the racists in the right wing and now the new |
county worker |
Apr-23-10 05:44 PM |
#91 |
| -
Is it a day ending in "y"? |
Iggo |
Apr-23-10 07:53 PM |
#108 |
| -
A person is not a criminal unless they've been convicted. |
TexasObserver |
Apr-23-10 04:29 PM |
#37 |
| -
Much like George Bush, Dick Cheney and OJ Simpson. |
lumberjack_jeff |
Apr-23-10 04:35 PM |
#39 |
| -
Not at all like any of those three. |
TexasObserver |
Apr-23-10 04:38 PM |
#42 |
| -
Because writing that George Bush is a war criminal is so totally not defamatory. |
lumberjack_jeff |
Apr-23-10 05:43 PM |
#89 |
| -
Because he's a public figure, because it's pejorative, because ... |
TexasObserver |
Apr-23-10 05:48 PM |
#92 |
| -
Actually it's established law |
WolverineDG |
Apr-23-10 04:48 PM |
#50 |
| -
Thought I was on the wrong website for a second. Then I remembered what DUers are like. |
BlooInBloo |
Apr-23-10 04:56 PM |
#56 |
| -
wow, examiner does it again |
kgnu_fan |
Apr-23-10 05:17 PM |
#74 |
| -
Defamation cases are not set backs to the First Amendment |
treestar |
Apr-23-10 05:49 PM |
#93 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread