That was a really bad move b*tch.
A
Massachusetts judge and court officer accused of helping an illegal immigrant flee an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent waiting to take him into custody were indicted Thursday by a federal grand jury for obstruction of justice and three other counts, officials said.
Newton District Court Judge Shelley M. Richmond Joseph and the court officer, identified in court documents as Wesley MacGregor, face several charges stemming from an April 2, 2018 incident in which the pair allegedly helped Jose Medina-Perez get out of the courthouse via a back door in order to elude the ICE agent who sought Medina-Perez.
“This case is about the rule of law. The allegations in today’s indictment involve obstruction by a sitting judge, that is intentional interference with the enforcement of federal law, and that is a crime," U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts Andrew Lelling said Thursday.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/massachusetts...rities-say
Nice, how much jail time are they looking at?
(04-25-2019 01:46 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote: [ -> ]Nice, how much jail time are they looking at?
No idea, they only stated it was 4 counts. Obstruction of justice and 3 others. One of those is likely lying to investigators.
About damn time. Next move... Head to Sanctuary cities and start arresting Politicians.
I guarantee they start arresting politicians and this **** ends real quick.
Yeah...good luck with that this day and age!
Quote:"The people of this country deserve nothing less than to know that their appointed and elected representatives are working on their behalf, while adhering to and enforcing the rule of law, not a personal agenda," Fitzhugh said.
(04-25-2019 02:34 PM)q5sys Wrote: [ -> ]About damn time. Next move... Head to Sanctuary cities and start arresting Politicians.
I guarantee they start arresting politicians and this **** ends real quick.
I agree!
The scenario listed above is active participation in a crime. I think we should go a step further. I think judges and members of parole boards should conditionally be held accountable for crimes committed by others.
Let's say a guy is in court for domestic abuse -- he beat his girlfriend to a pulp. The judge decides to set his bail low or to reduce his sentence. Then the guy -- while he is out of prison when he would've been in prison -- starts beating his girlfriend again. Or worse, he kills her.
The judge should be held accountable for the harm done to the citizen given that the harm would NOT have occurred if the defendant had still be incarcerated.
Or let's say a parole board let's a murderer out of prison early and then the released inmate attacks or kills another person. The parole board members who voted for early release should be held accountable.
In both instances, if the criminal commits a follow-up crime the judge or parole board members should receive a sentence based on the type of crime.
If a guy is release early, he kills somebody, and his sentence is 30 years, the judge or parole board members responsible for letting him out early should get 10%, or 3 years, in prison.
Our system today allows judges and parole boards to release criminals and essentially place the general public in harm's way without having any responsibility to the public they chose to endanger. They should be held accountable for their decisions.
(04-25-2019 02:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:52 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:34 PM)q5sys Wrote: [ -> ]About damn time. Next move... Head to Sanctuary cities and start arresting Politicians.
I guarantee they start arresting politicians and this **** ends real quick.
I think judges and members of parole boards should conditionally be held accountable for crimes committed by others.
Preposterous.
It will never happen, but I still think it's a good idea.
If a hardened criminal is granted conditional or early release then the one who grants that early release might just need to have some skin in the game. Their foremost responsibility is to protect the public from these criminals. If they fail in that responsibility they should pay a price.
(04-25-2019 03:40 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:52 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ]I think judges and members of parole boards should conditionally be held accountable for crimes committed by others.
Preposterous.
It will never happen, but I still think it's a good idea.
If a hardened criminal is granted conditional or early release then the one who grants that early release might just need to have some skin in the game. Their foremost responsibility is to protect the public from these criminals. If they fail in that responsibility they should pay a price.
Except what you think will happen isnt what will happen. You do something like what you're suggestion and no one gets paroled. No one gets bail. No one gets Probation.
Why... because judges, parole officers, etc will refuse to take the risk.
So what you'll get is people who get ****** even more by the system because no one is willing to give them a break. You missed child support. Lock him up, no bail, no probation. Full term sentence. **** his life over to the maximum amount allowed by law.
Someone got a speeding ticket. Maximum Fine, Maximum Points, Pull his license. The Judge wont want to be held accountable if the person breaks a traffic law again. They wont want to be responsible if the person gets in a wreck and kills someone in an accident.
If you make Judges responsible for the actions of criminals... you'll soon have a justice system with zero flexibility and every sentence will be punished to the maximum extent allowed.
The system is supposed to have flexibility so that the Justice system can make a decision and try to make the best decision. But they can't be perfect.
And the moment you try to hold them accountable for the actions of others... the whole system breaks.
The end result would be more people getting completely ****** by the Justice System improperly than what we already have.
Our problem is not enough justice... its the fact that we are crazy about 'locking people up'. You can't legislate morality. Every time we try, it backfires.
Also.. FWIW... a judges job is NOT to protect society, its to make sure the law is upheld. Its the police's job to protect, its the Judges job to make sure the justice system/process functions the way it should.
If you dont like a Law that a judge is enforcing... tell your politician to change the law. Judges can only do what the Legislature allows them to do.
(04-25-2019 03:40 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:52 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ]I think judges and members of parole boards should conditionally be held accountable for crimes committed by others.
Preposterous.
It will never happen, but I still think it's a good idea.
If a hardened criminal is granted conditional or early release then the one who grants that early release might just need to have some skin in the game. Their foremost responsibility is to protect the public from these criminals. If they fail in that responsibility they should pay a price.
If by conditionally UMBG means that some proof of guilt is required, not that it just happens automatically, I think it might be an avenue worth exploring. If the judge's conduct demonstrated reckless (or more culpable) disregard of the law (and in some cases it does) I see no problem.
(04-25-2019 03:40 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:52 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:34 PM)q5sys Wrote: [ -> ]About damn time. Next move... Head to Sanctuary cities and start arresting Politicians.
I guarantee they start arresting politicians and this **** ends real quick.
I think judges and members of parole boards should conditionally be held accountable for crimes committed by others.
Preposterous.
It will never happen, but I still think it's a good idea.
If a hardened criminal is granted conditional or early release then the one who grants that early release might just need to have some skin in the game. Their foremost responsibility is to protect the public from these criminals. If they fail in that responsibility they should pay a price.
That's a bit much, but on something like that they could become subject to recall.
(04-25-2019 04:35 PM)q5sys Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 03:40 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:52 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ]I think judges and members of parole boards should conditionally be held accountable for crimes committed by others.
Preposterous.
It will never happen, but I still think it's a good idea.
If a hardened criminal is granted conditional or early release then the one who grants that early release might just need to have some skin in the game. Their foremost responsibility is to protect the public from these criminals. If they fail in that responsibility they should pay a price.
Except what you think will happen isnt what will happen. You do something like what you're suggestion and no one gets paroled. No one gets bail. No one gets Probation.
Why... because judges, parole officers, etc will refuse to take the risk.
So what you'll get is people who get ****** even more by the system because no one is willing to give them a break. You missed child support. Lock him up, no bail, no probation. Full term sentence. **** his life over to the maximum amount allowed by law.
Someone got a speeding ticket. Maximum Fine, Maximum Points, Pull his license. The Judge wont want to be held accountable if the person breaks a traffic law again. They wont want to be responsible if the person gets in a wreck and kills someone in an accident.
If you make Judges responsible for the actions of criminals... you'll soon have a justice system with zero flexibility and every sentence will be punished to the maximum extent allowed.
The system is supposed to have flexibility so that the Justice system can make a decision and try to make the best decision. But they can't be perfect.
And the moment you try to hold them accountable for the actions of others... the whole system breaks.
The end result would be more people getting completely ****** by the Justice System improperly than what we already have.
Our problem is not enough justice... its the fact that we are crazy about 'locking people up'. You can't legislate morality. Every time we try, it backfires.
Also.. FWIW... a judges job is NOT to protect society, its to make sure the law is upheld. Its the police's job to protect, its the Judges job to make sure the justice system/process functions the way it should.
If you dont like a Law that a judge is enforcing... tell your politician to change the law. Judges can only do what the Legislature allows them to do.
BS.
Judges are letting people with 10-20 open cases go free on limited or no bail. Those people account for most of the crime in the Atlanta area.
(04-25-2019 01:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ]That was a really bad move b*tch.
A Massachusetts judge and court officer accused of helping an illegal immigrant flee an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent waiting to take him into custody were indicted Thursday by a federal grand jury for obstruction of justice and three other counts, officials said.
Newton District Court Judge Shelley M. Richmond Joseph and the court officer, identified in court documents as Wesley MacGregor, face several charges stemming from an April 2, 2018 incident in which the pair allegedly helped Jose Medina-Perez get out of the courthouse via a back door in order to elude the ICE agent who sought Medina-Perez.
“This case is about the rule of law. The allegations in today’s indictment involve obstruction by a sitting judge, that is intentional interference with the enforcement of federal law, and that is a crime," U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts Andrew Lelling said Thursday.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/massachusetts...rities-say
Ive always wondered how this wasnt obstruction of justice. If you in any way knowingly aid a fugitive, its considered a crime. Yet, sanctuary cities do exactly that. How is that at the very minimum not obstruction of justice?
(04-25-2019 07:23 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 04:35 PM)q5sys Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 03:40 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote: [ -> ] (04-25-2019 02:52 PM)umbluegray Wrote: [ -> ]I think judges and members of parole boards should conditionally be held accountable for crimes committed by others.
Preposterous.
It will never happen, but I still think it's a good idea.
If a hardened criminal is granted conditional or early release then the one who grants that early release might just need to have some skin in the game. Their foremost responsibility is to protect the public from these criminals. If they fail in that responsibility they should pay a price.
Except what you think will happen isnt what will happen. You do something like what you're suggestion and no one gets paroled. No one gets bail. No one gets Probation.
Why... because judges, parole officers, etc will refuse to take the risk.
So what you'll get is people who get ****** even more by the system because no one is willing to give them a break. You missed child support. Lock him up, no bail, no probation. Full term sentence. **** his life over to the maximum amount allowed by law.
Someone got a speeding ticket. Maximum Fine, Maximum Points, Pull his license. The Judge wont want to be held accountable if the person breaks a traffic law again. They wont want to be responsible if the person gets in a wreck and kills someone in an accident.
If you make Judges responsible for the actions of criminals... you'll soon have a justice system with zero flexibility and every sentence will be punished to the maximum extent allowed.
The system is supposed to have flexibility so that the Justice system can make a decision and try to make the best decision. But they can't be perfect.
And the moment you try to hold them accountable for the actions of others... the whole system breaks.
The end result would be more people getting completely ****** by the Justice System improperly than what we already have.
Our problem is not enough justice... its the fact that we are crazy about 'locking people up'. You can't legislate morality. Every time we try, it backfires.
Also.. FWIW... a judges job is NOT to protect society, its to make sure the law is upheld. Its the police's job to protect, its the Judges job to make sure the justice system/process functions the way it should.
If you dont like a Law that a judge is enforcing... tell your politician to change the law. Judges can only do what the Legislature allows them to do.
BS.
Judges are letting people with 10-20 open cases go free on limited or no bail. Those people account for most of the crime in the Atlanta area.
Why is the DAs office not raising complaints? Why haven't the police unions raised a complaint. Why do these Judges still have their jobs. How are they getting re-elected?
Why have the legislature eliminated the option for Bail on violent offenses?
Dont blame it 100% on the judges.
So this lady was a judge of the “Newton District Court”... is that an elected position? Appointed by the Governor? Also curious what is the jurisdiction of NDC.
Anyway if these accusations are true then she needs to be disbarred and forbidden to hold any judicial office.