 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Bobert Date: 30 Oct 02 - 01:38 PM Well, danged. All that good will and cooperation between various jurisdictions while trying to catch the snipers (shooters) has gone out the window. Now theres a good old fashion scrum going on as the battling goes on as to who gonna get to try them *first*! Even John Ashcroft has jumped into the fray! And Virginia has been making it's pitch at the "execution state* telling folks to "just step aside and we'll show you all how we do in down here in Virginia!" Looking to me like Alabama gonna get left out in the cold on this one with this many big dogs all ready entered into the race. I'm pullin' for Maryland myself. What are others thoughts? Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: greg stephens Date: 30 Oct 02 - 01:47 PM As Europe moves gingerly and slowly towards becoming some sort of "United States of Europe", with some extreme backsliders digging their heels in hard(dont you just love mixed metaphors?): the USA provides us with a wonderful opportunity to study an earlier experiment in this direction. We can see how some of the problems have been solved (or not as the case may be). This sniper trial venue debate is a fascinating example of what might exercise our Euro-minds in 20/50/1000 years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Willie-O Date: 30 Oct 02 - 01:47 PM Don't think they've got their counter-terrorism plans completely in order if this happens right away. Isn't there any overriding federal jurisdiction? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Don Firth Date: 30 Oct 02 - 01:50 PM I'm a bit mystified that murder is not a Federal crime. Isn't that the ultimate in depriving someone of their human rights? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Clinton Hammond Date: 30 Oct 02 - 01:55 PM Does it really matter WHO, just as long as he's tried... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: katlaughing Date: 30 Oct 02 - 01:56 PM I think for it to be Federal, Don, they would have to have transported a victim across state lines, as they did the weapon which is how they came to be charged by the Feds. At least, that is the way I understand it. One of those states' sovereignty issues, I think. I also don't think they can expect any kind of fair trial, there has been so much of it already carried out in the media. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: NicoleC Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:01 PM I'd be too hard to prosecute at a federal level, because the investigation needs to happen locally. Imagine the federal workforce required to travel around and investigate ever murder that happens! If they decide to call him a terrorist (true or not), the feds won't have to prove it, they can step in, whisk him off to a secret military trial, and execute him even if all the judges think he's not guilty. Personally, I'm in favor of public justice instead of secret courts; but I'm not in favor of people being tried in the media instead of a court of law. Sad thing is, if the guy happens to not be guilty -- or not be guilty of ALL of the attacks -- he'll still get sent up the river in the haste to catch and convict the bad guy. Meanwhile, we may have another baddie out there snickering that he didn't get caught and ready to go again once the present furor dies down. So let's just hope all the guilty parties are behind bars already. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Amos Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:01 PM How fair does it have to be, assuming the single fact of participation is satisfactorily demonstrated (which ballistic tests have already established, I would think, beyond reasonable doubt?)? What's been in the media, particularly, that would slant the outcome? You think there are mitigating circumstances that might rationalize some sort of leniency for cold-blooded, deliberate, pre-meditated, serial murder? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Jon W. Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:02 PM Plenty of people have been tried on federal charges for murder. There was a case here in Utah in the early 80's where a man was tried and convicted of depriving two black men of their civil rights by killing them - Joseph Paul Franklin was the killer, he "sniped" the two guys because they were jogging in the park with two white women. Since the feds didn't have the death penalty at the time, I believe he is still rotting in prison somewhere. The SLC black community was understandably in an uproar, and insisted that the FBI get involved in the investigation, which they did. So they had to bring federal charges against the guy. If the Utah police had been able to solve the crime (always a question mark) and he had been charged locally, he might be on death row now. Or maybe not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: alanabit Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:02 PM I'm afraid it does matter Clinton. The fact is, there is political kudos in this for the square jawed DA who prosecutes and the Governor who signs the execution warrant. I fear very much that the judicial killing of two (probably seriously mentally ill) men is going to do a whole heap of good for somebody's career. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: MMario Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:06 PM What I'd like to see is them working some sort of job for life, but restricted to the most basic of living conditions - and all the money they earn going to their victims families - but that wouldn't be allowed - because it would be classed as "cruel and unusual punishment" so would tieing them up and putting them alone with the victims families for a couple hours |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: katlaughing Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:12 PM Remember innocent until proven guilty? It is supposed to be a precept of our judicial system and includes everyone no matter what we've seen or heard in the media. JonW, thanks, I knew there must be other times when it would be federal, couldn't think of any at the time. I agree with alanabit as for political kudos. I also agree with MMario about punishment being locked up, etc. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:23 PM Ballistic tests can show which weapon was used in a shooting. That's not exactly the same as proving who fired that weapon. Trials are supposed to sort out that kind of thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Midchuck Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:37 PM Sooner or later a suspect, accused of a really horrible crime which got nationwide publicity, is going to walk away free, on the basis that he cannot be given a fair trial, because you can't find 12 people in the country, of close enough to average intelligence to serve on a jury, who haven't already been convinced of the suspect's guilt, by the national publicity that "the bad guy has now been caught." Maybe this will be the one. I hope not. Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: GUEST,Don Meixner Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:45 PM I am amazed that there is discussion in this case at all. Absent the witness to actually seeing these men hiding in the trunk of the car and squeezing of the round the evidence to indict is clear. I believe that precedent to indict in the jurisdiction where captured first. Then the varous jurisdictions negotiate between them as to who follows next. In a case like this I imagine the autorities will decide who gets to try them first based on who has the best chance to win a conviction. Then the others will follow insome sort of order. There are federal charges enough here I believe. Crossing statelines to commit a capitol crime, Taking a gun across a state line to commit a crime, crossing state lines to avoid prosecution, conspiracy to commit a felony, ransome, probably more. If ever there is a case that needs the death penalty this is it. But I'd be just as happy to have them jailed in solitary for life with cable television that only gets the news and every news paper in the state where they are jailed. But I'd like to have no mention ever again about the snipers ever again in the media. And then they could see every day that remains to them that teir sorry lives had no purpose what so ever beyond the murder of innocent people. I'd like to further add to their sentence that there be no means to kill themselves at hand beyond thirst and starvation. Don |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: NicoleC Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:45 PM Amos, I don't know if there are mitigating circumstances or conditions, although I doubt it. And I don't know if he's guilty -- and neither do you. The media says the bad guy is captured, but the media doesn't know all the evidence either. I trust that law enforcement *thinks* they have the right guy, but I also know they make mistakes. That's why we have trials. There have been many cases where people have been on the fast track to prosecution because it's a media darling, and years later we find out they weren't guilty and they're cleared with DNA evidence -- whoops, sorry about that 19 years you spend behind bars! I really hope they have the right guy and he did everything he is accused of. If not, in the haste to put someone away -- anyone away -- we could leave another murderous maniac out there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Amos Date: 30 Oct 02 - 02:57 PM Nicople: Sorry if I was premature -- you are right that due procedure and correct evidentiary process is vital. I assumed when they matched the rifle found in their car with the ammo used to blow those unsuspecting bystanders away, that a case was made. I can imagine some gaps in that assumption, but I would hate to see artificial gaps generated by foxy defense counsel come into play. You are completely right. It seems clear that the sniping operation stopped the same day they arrested the alleged perpetrators, does it not? Not even any copycats in the area that I have heard of.... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Bobert Date: 30 Oct 02 - 03:16 PM Midchuck (Peter) touched on an interesting aspect of the trial and that is of fainess. A jury of "peers" would be a difficult order in that there just aren't a lot of folks around as deranged, should these two be the guilty persons, as the shooters. But, I wouldn't spend too much time concerned that they are gonna beat the rap based on that defense tactic. And I'm with you, Don. Life with 24 hour cable TV... though it could be argued that the death penalty is less "cruel and unusual". My money is still on Maryland getting first shot and then Virginia. I think after those jurisdictions finish with their trials and sentencing there won't be a lot left for the Feds to chew on. Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Oct 02 - 03:22 PM <"Not even any copycats in the area that I have heard of.... " That's a bit strange really - we've even had one here, though fortunately no serious harm seems to have been done so far - MP shot in face by copycat sniper. Police are hunting a sniper who shot a Labour MP in the face in what detectives fear was a copycat attack inspired by the random murders in Washington. Bradford North MP Terry Rooney was hit in the face by an airgun pellet as he walked to work in south London, one of six people who were struck in a four-day period in the middle of the panic in America. Rules are still pretty srict here on it being illegal to publish details and speculations after a suspect has been charged. Even so there've been cases where papers have caused mistrials. From what I've seen of the way the US media deal with this kind of thing I can't understand how a high-profile accused can ever have a fair trial. I suspect there will already have been cases where guilty people have walked free because of that kind of thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Oct 02 - 03:24 PM "Not even any copycats in the area that I have heard of...." That's a bit strange really - we've even had one here, though fortunately no serious harm seems to have been done so far - MP shot in face by copycat sniper. Police are hunting a sniper who shot a Labour MP in the face in what detectives fear was a copycat attack inspired by the random murders in Washington. Bradford North MP Terry Rooney was hit in the face by an airgun pellet as he walked to work in south London, one of six people who were struck in a four-day period in the middle of the panic in America. Rules are still pretty strict here on it being illegal to publish details and speculations after a suspect has been charged. Even so there've been cases where papers have caused mistrials. From what I've seen of the way the US media deal with this kind of thing I can't understand how a high-profile accused can ever have a fair trial. I suspect there will already have been cases where guilty people have walked free because of that kind of thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Amos Date: 30 Oct 02 - 05:00 PM Sorry, Kevin -- I don't check the UK news very often. Anyway it is a fairly safe bet that the bloke who shot the MP is not the Maryland perp, is it not? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: katlaughing Date: 30 Oct 02 - 05:02 PM Interesting note on copycats...these ones are not even going to be charged. While it doesn't even come close to murder, the lack of judgement on the part of the kids and follow-through by the authorities, as well as the influence of movies, is a bit chilling: C L E A R W A T E R, Fla. — Police came scrambling to respond to a reported drive-by shooting, but it turned out it was only a bunch of Jackass wannabes. "When we first got the call it was for a drive-by shooting," said Clearwater Police spokesman Wayne Shelor, describing the Saturday, Oct. 26, incident. Instead they found a car full of teens with a paintball gun and video camera, who had decided to imitate the stunts in Jackass, the new movie of outrageous pranks and stunts that topped the box office rankings last week. "One of them had seen the movie with other friends," Shelor said. "They just said, 'Hey let's do the same thing.'" The teens — four boys and a girl — shot a 42-year-old man in the leg with a paintball pellet as he walked down the street. Panicked, the man called police. "They decided, we've got a video camera, we'll do some stupid antics and vulgar stuff, and proceeded to do just that," said Shelor. Police found the teens' silver Nissan, detained them, and reviewed their videotape, which showed them shooting the paintball gun. They admitted being inspired by Jackass. The cassette also featured other amateur stunts, but Shelor declined to describe them. "They videotaped themselves in some vulgar situations," he said. "I don't want to elaborate." After consulting with the man who was hit with the paintball and the youths' parents, they decided not to press charges. "We felt the parents would handle the discipline," explained Shelor. "Neither alcohol nor drugs were involved, just a momentary lack of reason." Crime Blotter, a weekly feature of ABCNEWS.com, is compiled by Oliver Libaw. (The same guy who had the radioactive cat poop story online, today.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: DougR Date: 30 Oct 02 - 05:17 PM I vote for Virginia. If found guilty, they could both could be executed. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Bill D Date: 30 Oct 02 - 06:15 PM with all this publicity, some are afraid they might not get a fair trial anywhere!....Why, we might even have to release them!......maybe in Aspen Hill, MD., in a shopping center...about noon... (for those who take everything literally, no...I'm NOT serious....but...) I just hate to see this excess of wrangling and bickering...it could lead to the powers that be messing up the prosecution. I'm SURE many lawmen, as well as many members of the public, sort of wished they'd been caught awake and tried to shoot it out.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Gareth Date: 30 Oct 02 - 06:50 PM Hold on a moment Folks. Kevin McGrath has only provided part of the information as a direct quote - There have been a number of vicytims of the Air Gun Sniper in that part of London. It was only newsworthy when a member of Parliament got hit. ( Sorry Kevin but were only interested in the facts - the full facts) Now the fist thing that comes to mind is thank God I or any other UK cattter can not go into Walmart and by a hunting rifle. NRA members may have a different view !) Secondly I am old fashioned - a Jury trial is to test the evidence. Without any preconceptions. I fear that this USA pair may not recieve a fair trial - And if they don't thst creates further problems. I am not against the death penalty in principle, but what is more important is a fair trial. I doubt wether these two will recieve one, and that is bad. Gareth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Amos Date: 30 Oct 02 - 06:51 PM Oh...dear. I do hope they get a fair trial and the evidence is well presented and reasonably conclusive. It would be quite unfair otherwise. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Murray MacLeod Date: 30 Oct 02 - 07:05 PM The one thing that astonished me most during my stay in America was the intense media coverage of arrests of suspects in high-profile crimes, and the pre-trial dissemination of information. This was totally different to what I had been used to in Britain. It always seemed blindingly obvious to me that there was no possible way the arrested suspect could ever hope to receive a fair trial by jury. Murray |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: NicoleC Date: 30 Oct 02 - 07:52 PM I agree, Murray, but part of the rights of free press and a suspects right to a public trial conflicts. It's an interesting conundrum that certainly could be handled much better. It's one of the reasons why I applauded Chief Whatshisname of Maryland for going of TV and berating the staff that were leaking info to the press. It makes the police's job harder and makes a fair trial LESS likely, not more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Oct 02 - 08:11 PM There's no reason a free press can't stand back until a trial has been held. Staff leaking to the press in circumstances like this shouldn't be "berated", they should be dismissed, just for starters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Grab Date: 31 Oct 02 - 08:51 AM Nicole, that's why one of those rights has to come first. Like "right to travel freely" is trumped by the law against crossing State lines to commit a crime. In the UK, judges have already thrown out cases on the grounds that an unbiased jury could not be found. The police and CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) are accordingly cautious with the information they provide these days. Staff leaking information are guilty of gross misconduct and should be sacked immediately. They may also be tried for "perverting the course of justice" or "contempt of court", both of which you can be jailed for. Graham. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Troll Date: 31 Oct 02 - 10:33 AM "I fear very much that the judicial killing of two (probably seriously mentally ill) men is going to do a whole heap of good for somebody's career." Well, there you have it folks. The perfect 90's answer. It's not their fault. It is the fault of 1)society, 2)their mother/father or lack of same, 3)racism, 4) anti-Islamism,5) childhood abuse and/or deprivation, 6)...well, I think you get the idea. They should recieve counseling so they can understand that what they did was wrong but not in such a way as to assign guilt. They can then write a letter to the families of those who got in the way of the bullets that were fired as a protest against whatever it is decided was being protested, telling them that they bear the said families no animus for what has happened to them. They can then be released to work on whatever the issues they had were. Naturally, they would receive Federal aid. Yessiree, we gotta be sensitive. These obviously disturbed men need our aid and sympathy, not our negativism and blame. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: NicoleC Date: 31 Oct 02 - 11:39 AM Graham, I agree. It's utterly negligent -- it can potentially endanger officers and the public. But I don't think they knew who was leaking the info in this case. LOL, Troll, I don't think anyone is sugesting that! Unfortunately, manufacturing evidence and railroading is not as rare as we'd like to think. But instead of serving the public, look at a case like the Rampart scandal. A bunch of officers got to gung-ho and decided to end run the system by planting evidence and lying on the stand when it came to people they were "sure" were guilty of something -- instead of putting bad guys away they put away both guilty and innocent. Now even most of the bad guys are going to go free. Fair trials are not just about keeping innocent people out of jail, they're about taking the real criminals off the street. I gotta agree -- I think that the media is interfering in the fair pursuit of justice. I also think the media can be a big help -- by publicizing composite photos and such. But the talking heads who judge guilt before the facts are in... it's a detriment to the system, not a boon. The only protection law enforcement has is by not telling, but the suspects have even less protection. Even if eventually fond innocent, the media circus can ruin their lives. Isn't the guy that was charged with (and was innocent of) planting bombs at the Atlanta Olympics suing some of the media companies for saying he was guilty before he was even arrested? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 31 Oct 02 - 12:01 PM A couple of comments: 1. The Maryland prosecutor, Gansler, started this whole mess when he unilaterally announced that the group of prosecutors had agreed to start the prosecutions in Maryland. This was a lie. There was no agreement, and the discussions were ongoing at that time. 2. Since Maryland had possession of the two sniper suspects, the other states would normally not get them until Maryland was done with them. 3. The Feds realized how Maryland had co-opted the issue and decided to put the ball back in play by citing Federal statutes, and demanding custody, which they got. 4. Maryland started some rumors that the suspects were getting ready to confess (lie two, since the preliminary questioning was done on video) when the Feds intervened. 5. Maryland has a long history of botched prosecutions, corrupt politicians and the like (think Agnew, Mandel, etc) 6. Virginia on the other hand has literally no such history, electing a Black Democrat as Governor with scarcely a ripple, and is second in the nation in death penalties with a higher percentage actually getting executed than Texas. 7. Virginia does not have the equivalent of a conspiracy statute, and has a strict double jeopardy statute, so my guess is that the Feds will defer to Virginia, delivering the suspects for State death penalty prosecutions on both suspects. Once Virginia is done, the Feds will step in, and then Maryland will get a taste. And since Virginia has very restrictive "discovery laws", the Feds can risk Virginia prosecutions without "giving the store away" to the defense. 8. It appears that Gansler and Moose have so angered the rest of the Task Force, that rather than make an issue of it in public, they are simply going to take their ball and go home. 9. I suspect that it wasn't "staff leaking", but rather Task Force leaking after their discovery that Moose had withheld the information that the suspects were most likely black for PC reasons, and let Virginia continue to search for white guys in white vans, during the Virginia shootings. 10. And it has been my experience with juries that even though they may have heard or read extensively about the snipers, in a death penalty case they will give the appropriate weight to the evidence presented. Remember, that they have far more than the rifle to present as evidence. These include written communications, the tarot card, the tape recorded tips and threats, a paper trail of credit card slips and other receipts, and a myriad of other information such as reviewing all of the security cameras again for sightings of the correct vehicle and occupants, etc. I doubt seriously there will be a question as to guilt or innocence when the time comes… then its needle time in the Old Dominion… |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 Oct 02 - 01:51 PM The sick thing is, it's pretty certain that they are tooling up to produce movies based on all this. And probably computer games as well. In the full knowledge that one effect of that will be to feed the fantasies of some future copycat killers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Dave the Gnome Date: 31 Oct 02 - 02:57 PM Well, if Mad Scramble is going to prosecute him, who is going to be pleading the case for the defence? Is it fair to have someone with that reputation prosecuting? Will Corporal Punishment administer the sentence? Oh dear, take me away someone... DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: DougR Date: 02 Nov 02 - 01:50 AM Troll: After reading your post of 31 October, 10:33 P.M., I have changed my whole perspective on the two poor underpriviledged alleged snipers. I'm convinced that they never had a chance in life. They are two mistreated, misunderstood individuals who should be given special consideration. I suppose the fair thing to do would be to just turn them loose. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: alanabit Date: 02 Nov 02 - 07:29 AM I am what is frequently referred to in the US - and occasionally in Britain - "a bleeding heart Liberal". So on behalf of myself and most likely other like minded people, I would like to clear up a few misconceptions. Had the perpatrator/perpetrators of these appalling crimes been killed in a car crash on the way to a shooting, or perhaps missed the target and been gunned down by law officers themselves, believe me Doug, I would not have sent flowers to the funeral either. On a personal level, their well being ranks low on my list of concerns. To my knowledge, there is no country which has successfully eliminated murder - or even serial murder. There are however some countries which have reduced the frequency with which it happens. To the best of my knowledge, America is not among them. In the countries which have reduced serial killings, you would be unlikely to meet many people who assumed that a multiple killer was sane. The prospect of death rarely deters psychopaths - a fact recognised by William Shakespeare when he wrote "MacBeth". I am afraid that unless we make a bigger effort to understand what unhinges these people, we will be doomed to see similar tragedies in the near future. We should send in the shrinks and the social workers (actually much cheaper than imprisonment - or after all the legal processes - judicial killing) and try to detect potentially dangerous people before they cause this sort of carnage. I used to be on the side of capital punishment. It has its attractions. Shaw recognised this when he said, (excuse the inexact quotation),"To reform a man is long and uncertain process. To hang him is the sure work of a minute". Yes, killing the prisoners reduces the rate of repeat offences dramatically and it appears to be a satisfying punishment for murder. It is a hollow satisfaction to have to recognise later that it has done nothing to prevent future tragedies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Mad Scramble to Prosecute Sniper From: Celtic Soul Date: 02 Nov 02 - 01:15 PM Well, from what I have been reading there has been some co-operation. It's not all scrambling on the mats. Frankly, as I live here, I could really care less who tries them (and it is a them, not a him). I'm just happy the killing is over for now. |