In the news from this great, old state. A blind man was sexually assaulted and robbed. By the way, he is also dying of cancer. The police caught the suspect, dna proved his guilt, and the judge threw it out of court. This was due to the fact it was a Somalian who could not speak Engish, so the judge said he didn't understand what the dna sample was for. My poll is, how many of you here think that it was a fair call by the judge?
In the news from great old Minnesota
04/21/2011
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Not at all surprised - Obama will be appointing many more liberal-hack judges. To these liberal hacks, the poor criminals are the victims of society - not the other way around. Hopefully someone will appeal the reversal and get it reinstated.
04/22/2011
I am still in shock after hearing this story on the news, I mean who wouldn't be. Think about the poor soul who not only is blind, was robbed, AND sexually assulted, He has to be told that the person responsible (PROVEN by DNA) is going to be let go because he "played no comprende eeeenglisha" crap!!
Please no judge or person in their right mind is going to get me to believe that this f***ing idiot didn't know what he was doing. The world is basically dead to me at this point. I know for a fact if I tried that "no understand english" crap - my ass would be in jail faster than I could blink. As a matter of fact all I have to do is say "I want to hurt or kill someone" and I am on trial for felony terroristic threats.
WTF?
Please no judge or person in their right mind is going to get me to believe that this f***ing idiot didn't know what he was doing. The world is basically dead to me at this point. I know for a fact if I tried that "no understand english" crap - my ass would be in jail faster than I could blink. As a matter of fact all I have to do is say "I want to hurt or kill someone" and I am on trial for felony terroristic threats.
WTF?
04/22/2011
Quote:
Just because someone doesn't speak English doesn't mean that s/he does not understand what a DNA sample was. The fact that the victim was blind and dying of cancer is irrelevant to the fact that they should have hired a translator. This is nothing to do with liberalism. I am a die-hard liberal but this is not an example of liberalism, it's an example of stupidity.
Originally posted by
markeagleone
In the news from this great, old state. A blind man was sexually assaulted and robbed. By the way, he is also dying of cancer. The police caught the suspect, dna proved his guilt, and the judge threw it out of court. This was due to the fact it was a
...
more
In the news from this great, old state. A blind man was sexually assaulted and robbed. By the way, he is also dying of cancer. The police caught the suspect, dna proved his guilt, and the judge threw it out of court. This was due to the fact it was a Somalian who could not speak Engish, so the judge said he didn't understand what the dna sample was for. My poll is, how many of you here think that it was a fair call by the judge?
less
I was unable to find the case in any articles, so could you please provide a link? If the person was Somalian and could not speak English well, he was probably not a U.S. citizen, as English proficiency is required for citizenship tests. This has nothing to do with making English the national language.
04/22/2011
You wanted the link so here it is--link
04/22/2011
For a state that has a budget crisis, police being laid off and services being cut, it makes sense for them to have to hire a translator for everyone they arrest. I'm sure the people who are being cut from aid for food and housing would love to know why they go hungry at night! I'm also pretty certain the blind man dying of cancer didn't consider it to be irrelevant. He could not see the attacker, so what was left.
04/23/2011
But I have to look at it this way, they arrested him for an earlier charge. If he gets off on that, maybe he will move to a different state. Maybe yours--feel safe, and proud of our government yet?
04/23/2011
Quote:
So you are saying that you would be just fine if it happened to you or someone you love???? You would be "honky dorey" with them telling you that his DNA matched but now he has decided to play dumb and chose not to speak english. Notice the article says he speaks "rudimentary English as well as a language known as Oromo"
Originally posted by
Eden C.
Just because someone doesn't speak English doesn't mean that s/he does not understand what a DNA sample was. The fact that the victim was blind and dying of cancer is irrelevant to the fact that they should have hired a translator. This is
...
more
Just because someone doesn't speak English doesn't mean that s/he does not understand what a DNA sample was. The fact that the victim was blind and dying of cancer is irrelevant to the fact that they should have hired a translator. This is nothing to do with liberalism. I am a die-hard liberal but this is not an example of liberalism, it's an example of stupidity.
I was unable to find the case in any articles, so could you please provide a link? If the person was Somalian and could not speak English well, he was probably not a U.S. citizen, as English proficiency is required for citizenship tests. This has nothing to do with making English the national language. less
I was unable to find the case in any articles, so could you please provide a link? If the person was Somalian and could not speak English well, he was probably not a U.S. citizen, as English proficiency is required for citizenship tests. This has nothing to do with making English the national language. less
I am sorry to say that most people in the US who get in trouble and are from another country say they can not understand or speak english, when most of us know that it is not true.
I refuse to sit back and sugar coat this with "he might not be a US citizen" or he might not be this or that. Statements like that are just what you said "irrelevant". And the fact that a blind dying man that was attacked in his own home has no justice at all.
I highly doubt that he is sitting there even giving a crap if he lives through his cancer at this point, so it does make his condition relevent. We are no longer even attempting to protect those that need the help with protection. That is relevant!! Everything but the guy that did it is relevant.
I wonder what ideas the sickos are going to have now? Now that they have their way out.
04/23/2011
Quote:
Thanks for sharing the link.
Originally posted by
danellejohns
So you are saying that you would be just fine if it happened to you or someone you love???? You would be "honky dorey" with them telling you that his DNA matched but now he has decided to play dumb and chose not to speak english. Notice the
...
more
So you are saying that you would be just fine if it happened to you or someone you love???? You would be "honky dorey" with them telling you that his DNA matched but now he has decided to play dumb and chose not to speak english. Notice the article says he speaks "rudimentary English as well as a language known as Oromo"
I am sorry to say that most people in the US who get in trouble and are from another country say they can not understand or speak english, when most of us know that it is not true.
I refuse to sit back and sugar coat this with "he might not be a US citizen" or he might not be this or that. Statements like that are just what you said "irrelevant". And the fact that a blind dying man that was attacked in his own home has no justice at all.
I highly doubt that he is sitting there even giving a crap if he lives through his cancer at this point, so it does make his condition relevent. We are no longer even attempting to protect those that need the help with protection. That is relevant!! Everything but the guy that did it is relevant.
I wonder what ideas the sickos are going to have now? Now that they have their way out. less
I am sorry to say that most people in the US who get in trouble and are from another country say they can not understand or speak english, when most of us know that it is not true.
I refuse to sit back and sugar coat this with "he might not be a US citizen" or he might not be this or that. Statements like that are just what you said "irrelevant". And the fact that a blind dying man that was attacked in his own home has no justice at all.
I highly doubt that he is sitting there even giving a crap if he lives through his cancer at this point, so it does make his condition relevent. We are no longer even attempting to protect those that need the help with protection. That is relevant!! Everything but the guy that did it is relevant.
I wonder what ideas the sickos are going to have now? Now that they have their way out. less
I'm looking at this objectively. Of course it is a moral and emotional outrage that the victim had to go through this, but I'm looking at the facts. In 2002, 62.6% of federal offenders were US citizens. I also think it's incredibly racist that the judge assumed that because the person did not speak English, he did not understand what a DNA sample was. To me, the core of the issue is that the judge let him go because he believed that the rapist did not know about DNA testing, and DID NOT KNOW HE COULD GET CAUGHT. I'm not sure when "I'm sorry, I didn't know I would get caught" became a legitimate legal defense.
It has nothing to do with English being an official language as far as I'm concerned; it's about justice. Hiring a translator has nothing to do with cutting welfare; yes, we are in debt, but when U.S. citizens offend overseas, we expect English translators, and we should do citizens of other countries the same courtesy. I do not think that this would have been a problem if the Somalian embassy had not been discontinued in 1991, as they would certainly have provided translation services and other assistance to ensure justice.
04/23/2011
Quote:
Funny thing is, there are translators sitting at the social security offices and welfare offices. I would also suppose, if he hadn't spoke to them in any English manner, they would have gotten him a translator, but as the article stated, he did speak some English.
Originally posted by
Eden C.
Thanks for sharing the link.
I'm looking at this objectively. Of course it is a moral and emotional outrage that the victim had to go through this, but I'm looking at the facts. In 2002, 62.6% of federal offenders were US ... more
I'm looking at this objectively. Of course it is a moral and emotional outrage that the victim had to go through this, but I'm looking at the facts. In 2002, 62.6% of federal offenders were US ... more
Thanks for sharing the link.
I'm looking at this objectively. Of course it is a moral and emotional outrage that the victim had to go through this, but I'm looking at the facts. In 2002, 62.6% of federal offenders were US citizens. I also think it's incredibly racist that the judge assumed that because the person did not speak English, he did not understand what a DNA sample was. To me, the core of the issue is that the judge let him go because he believed that the rapist did not know about DNA testing, and DID NOT KNOW HE COULD GET CAUGHT. I'm not sure when "I'm sorry, I didn't know I would get caught" became a legitimate legal defense.
It has nothing to do with English being an official language as far as I'm concerned; it's about justice. Hiring a translator has nothing to do with cutting welfare; yes, we are in debt, but when U.S. citizens offend overseas, we expect English translators, and we should do citizens of other countries the same courtesy. I do not think that this would have been a problem if the Somalian embassy had not been discontinued in 1991, as they would certainly have provided translation services and other assistance to ensure justice. less
I'm looking at this objectively. Of course it is a moral and emotional outrage that the victim had to go through this, but I'm looking at the facts. In 2002, 62.6% of federal offenders were US citizens. I also think it's incredibly racist that the judge assumed that because the person did not speak English, he did not understand what a DNA sample was. To me, the core of the issue is that the judge let him go because he believed that the rapist did not know about DNA testing, and DID NOT KNOW HE COULD GET CAUGHT. I'm not sure when "I'm sorry, I didn't know I would get caught" became a legitimate legal defense.
It has nothing to do with English being an official language as far as I'm concerned; it's about justice. Hiring a translator has nothing to do with cutting welfare; yes, we are in debt, but when U.S. citizens offend overseas, we expect English translators, and we should do citizens of other countries the same courtesy. I do not think that this would have been a problem if the Somalian embassy had not been discontinued in 1991, as they would certainly have provided translation services and other assistance to ensure justice. less
I wonder if anyone has done a study to find out how many Americans overseas actually commit crimes. Seems to me that out of all the people that are citizens here, the percentage rate seems quite a bit low. I would think it would be around 90 or better. If over 30 percent don't even belong here, and it's our burden to house, feed and put them on trial, not including the one's that haven't commited crimes getting benefits that our citizens have worked for, maybe it's time to change the rules of the game. I wonder how many citizens here go overseas to collect benefits, rob, rape and kill their people.
I can see why the embassy closed. There's actually no need for it. We give all immigrants our food, money, and now we hand them our defenseless citizens on a platter. To me, it makes me sad that once, such a great country, has now taken such a great fall.
Now, I am in no way stating that we should not accept immigrants. I am stating that we should accept them as we did in the past. My grandparents immigrated here, learned the language and customs and also worked. There has to be a way to stop the criminals from coming in. Thirty percent is way to high of a number. I wonder what the actual number is considering many commit crimes and hop the boarders to freedom. I would also like to know how many bimmigrants became citizens and commited crimes against the natural citizens.
04/23/2011
I would also like to know why, when my grandparents came here, they didn't have translators or even a written work in their native Swedish. They had to learn English. Today, you have written in so many different languages, phone calls in different languages, interpetors for all forms of government for different languages. What the hell? Tell me why when this country formed, the immigrants had to and now we have to provide for them. You don't think all that costs the working people to pay for all that? No wonder why we are broke. The united we stand, divided we fall stood for a truth - get it. Right now our country is divided in how many different ways.
04/23/2011
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I support welfare programs and I support more open immigration, and you won't convince me otherwise, and I can't change your opinion.
To me, this is a simple case of someone using not knowing that he could get caught as a defense, which is ridiculous. I know that you are concerned about the economic, societal, and cultural implications and it's understandable. I didn't come to EF to fight about anything. You posted a story, your poll didn't cover my opinion (it's difficult to write a poll that includes everybody) so I decided to share mine. That is all.
To me, this is a simple case of someone using not knowing that he could get caught as a defense, which is ridiculous. I know that you are concerned about the economic, societal, and cultural implications and it's understandable. I didn't come to EF to fight about anything. You posted a story, your poll didn't cover my opinion (it's difficult to write a poll that includes everybody) so I decided to share mine. That is all.
04/23/2011
Quote:
I'm not willing to fight either. It just makes me sad that things are getting this bad and will only get worse. in retro, Rome fell to a similar problem.
Originally posted by
Eden C.
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I support welfare programs and I support more open immigration, and you won't convince me otherwise, and I can't change your opinion.
To me, this is a simple ... more
To me, this is a simple ... more
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I support welfare programs and I support more open immigration, and you won't convince me otherwise, and I can't change your opinion.
To me, this is a simple case of someone using not knowing that he could get caught as a defense, which is ridiculous. I know that you are concerned about the economic, societal, and cultural implications and it's understandable. I didn't come to EF to fight about anything. You posted a story, your poll didn't cover my opinion (it's difficult to write a poll that includes everybody) so I decided to share mine. That is all. less
To me, this is a simple case of someone using not knowing that he could get caught as a defense, which is ridiculous. I know that you are concerned about the economic, societal, and cultural implications and it's understandable. I didn't come to EF to fight about anything. You posted a story, your poll didn't cover my opinion (it's difficult to write a poll that includes everybody) so I decided to share mine. That is all. less
04/23/2011
I feel awful for this old guy, and it's too bad the dude didn't get convicted, but this actually is not the judge's fault. It's a constitutional right for defendants to have adequate translators in their trials so that they can understand what they're being tried for, what the evidence is against them, and subsequently advise their lawyers on how they would like to proceed, plead, argue, etc. If someone is thrown into a trial with no way of understanding what is happening to them, it's considered and unfair trial, and constitutionally must be thrown out. The judge is not at fault here, the lawyers are.
Say what you want about it, and call me a liberal hack or whatever, but I respect the judge for upholding the law of the land. How we adhere to our own laws and treat our criminals is one of the key factors separating us from countries like Iran and China.
As for the criminal in question, I hope this was enough to set him straight, and our prayers should go out to the blind man.
Say what you want about it, and call me a liberal hack or whatever, but I respect the judge for upholding the law of the land. How we adhere to our own laws and treat our criminals is one of the key factors separating us from countries like Iran and China.
As for the criminal in question, I hope this was enough to set him straight, and our prayers should go out to the blind man.
04/23/2011
Whatever happened to "you do the crime, you do the time"? Why would the perpetrator be required to have a full understanding of DNA testing for the charges to be upheld? If any of us are suspected of committing a crime against another human being, we do not have the leisure to decline testing—at least we SHOULDN'T have the leisure of declining testing because, as you can well imagine, how many guilty individuals would willingly submit their DNA for testing? So what the hell does this guy's grasp of English even have to do with his guilt and deserved punishment? Do some people automatically have more rights to hurt others however the heck they please just because they don't speak English? If so, that means they can victimize others to their hearts' content, and then whine and complain that they don't understand the consequences, the charges, the testing, the legal system, whatever.
You can't convince me he did not know that his victimization of another human being was wrong. Whether he speaks English or not, it is understood on the most basic human level that it is wrong to violate another person's physical being—that is an understanding that transcends language barriers and cultural differences. What a complete travesty of justice.
My heart goes out to this poor, elderly man. He had enough on his plate dealing with his terminal illness. Too bad his last days on this earth could not be marked by recollections of happy memories. Instead, he gets the joy of being plagued by PTSD in his last days, suffering from what must be the most horrible ruminations. On top of that, imagine how he felt when he learned that the court didn't find the wrongful violation of his most basic rights egregious enough to punish his tormentor.
My heart also goes out to the future victims of the perpetrator. Yes, you can count on there being more victims. This guy was basically handed a golden ticket to do as he pleases.
You can't convince me he did not know that his victimization of another human being was wrong. Whether he speaks English or not, it is understood on the most basic human level that it is wrong to violate another person's physical being—that is an understanding that transcends language barriers and cultural differences. What a complete travesty of justice.
My heart goes out to this poor, elderly man. He had enough on his plate dealing with his terminal illness. Too bad his last days on this earth could not be marked by recollections of happy memories. Instead, he gets the joy of being plagued by PTSD in his last days, suffering from what must be the most horrible ruminations. On top of that, imagine how he felt when he learned that the court didn't find the wrongful violation of his most basic rights egregious enough to punish his tormentor.
My heart also goes out to the future victims of the perpetrator. Yes, you can count on there being more victims. This guy was basically handed a golden ticket to do as he pleases.
04/23/2011
I think that is fucked up!
04/23/2011
Quote:
I am unclear about one of the voting options. Was the Somalian a dual-citizen?
Originally posted by
markeagleone
In the news from this great, old state. A blind man was sexually assaulted and robbed. By the way, he is also dying of cancer. The police caught the suspect, dna proved his guilt, and the judge threw it out of court. This was due to the fact it was a
...
more
In the news from this great, old state. A blind man was sexually assaulted and robbed. By the way, he is also dying of cancer. The police caught the suspect, dna proved his guilt, and the judge threw it out of court. This was due to the fact it was a Somalian who could not speak Engish, so the judge said he didn't understand what the dna sample was for. My poll is, how many of you here think that it was a fair call by the judge?
less
Also, shocking as it may be, the USA does not have an official language at the Federal level. This is probably just as well, given the quality of written and spoken information in this country these days.
That said, I wonder when the blind man will seek out his attacker, break into his house under cover of darkness, sexually assault and rob him, and then claim that, as he (the blind man) doesn't speak Somalian, he should go free.
Sure, they say that "an eye for an eye, and the whole world goes blind," but I think this would at least put victim and attacker on equal footing--figuratively and literally.
04/23/2011
While I am shocked and appalled, I can see why the judge chose to throw out the DNA results. Obviously, he could have ruled and then the suspect would have had grounds for mistrial.
Anyway, if he did it and DNA proved it, then I am absolutely sure that they could have come up with other legitimate evidence to put the suspect behind bars.
Did the blind man recognize his voice? Or perhaps something else that could be admissible in court? Were there fingerprints left at the crime scene? How did he break in..? Did the suspect have an airtight alibi? There are lots of holes in a crime if you take a really close look.
It's not the judge, it's the officers who didn't make DAMN sure the man understood what a DNA sample was. Follow procedure, and travesties like this won't happen.
It's sad to me that men who do such awful things don't get reprimanded appropriately, while our prisons are filled with people who have minor drug offenses. -sigh-
Anyway, if he did it and DNA proved it, then I am absolutely sure that they could have come up with other legitimate evidence to put the suspect behind bars.
Did the blind man recognize his voice? Or perhaps something else that could be admissible in court? Were there fingerprints left at the crime scene? How did he break in..? Did the suspect have an airtight alibi? There are lots of holes in a crime if you take a really close look.
It's not the judge, it's the officers who didn't make DAMN sure the man understood what a DNA sample was. Follow procedure, and travesties like this won't happen.
It's sad to me that men who do such awful things don't get reprimanded appropriately, while our prisons are filled with people who have minor drug offenses. -sigh-
04/23/2011
Quote:
Guilty is guilty - stop with the technicalities. Do I have to pretend I don't speak English so I can get away with a serious crime? We're not talking trespassing here - this guy committed a very serious VIOLENT crime. PLEASE NO TECHNICALITIES.
Originally posted by
tigerkate
While I am shocked and appalled, I can see why the judge chose to throw out the DNA results. Obviously, he could have ruled and then the suspect would have had grounds for mistrial.
Anyway, if he did it and DNA proved it, then I am ... more
Anyway, if he did it and DNA proved it, then I am ... more
While I am shocked and appalled, I can see why the judge chose to throw out the DNA results. Obviously, he could have ruled and then the suspect would have had grounds for mistrial.
Anyway, if he did it and DNA proved it, then I am absolutely sure that they could have come up with other legitimate evidence to put the suspect behind bars.
Did the blind man recognize his voice? Or perhaps something else that could be admissible in court? Were there fingerprints left at the crime scene? How did he break in..? Did the suspect have an airtight alibi? There are lots of holes in a crime if you take a really close look.
It's not the judge, it's the officers who didn't make DAMN sure the man understood what a DNA sample was. Follow procedure, and travesties like this won't happen.
It's sad to me that men who do such awful things don't get reprimanded appropriately, while our prisons are filled with people who have minor drug offenses. -sigh- less
Anyway, if he did it and DNA proved it, then I am absolutely sure that they could have come up with other legitimate evidence to put the suspect behind bars.
Did the blind man recognize his voice? Or perhaps something else that could be admissible in court? Were there fingerprints left at the crime scene? How did he break in..? Did the suspect have an airtight alibi? There are lots of holes in a crime if you take a really close look.
It's not the judge, it's the officers who didn't make DAMN sure the man understood what a DNA sample was. Follow procedure, and travesties like this won't happen.
It's sad to me that men who do such awful things don't get reprimanded appropriately, while our prisons are filled with people who have minor drug offenses. -sigh- less
The rights we have are to protect the innocent - not to provide a venue for criminals to game the system.
04/23/2011
Yes, I agree. When someone commits a crime, we should send them to college so they have a grasp of how they are proven to be guilty. The system makes sense. Protect the guilty, fuck the victim. No, what other evidence would have been left. A shoe print is nothing, he could not visually see the guy and the guy took what he wanted. I would have thought that the semen left behind from the sexual assult would have been enough, but I guess it's a law now that a criminal has to be educated enough to know why he is guilty. It said he spoke some Engish, and since dna is worldwide, he used the good old-prove that I know what you were saying(you know, prove that I knew what I did was wrong and that I knew it at the time). What a double edged sword. The poor man's tax money went to the interpeters and lawyer, needed or not, to get his attacker off. He literally paid to get fucked!
04/24/2011
I think it was really messed up, all around.
If the person doesn't fully consent to a DNA test, then it can't be used. They should've used the person's native language to obtain consent. If it would've went through, then it could've had a mistrial (costing the gov. MORE money). It's a technicality, but it's also how out justice system runs.
I am surprised they didn't come up with something else to get him there.
If the person doesn't fully consent to a DNA test, then it can't be used. They should've used the person's native language to obtain consent. If it would've went through, then it could've had a mistrial (costing the gov. MORE money). It's a technicality, but it's also how out justice system runs.
I am surprised they didn't come up with something else to get him there.
04/25/2011
Quote:
In many states you do not have to consent to DNA testing. Simply being arrested for a serious crime is enough. They take a minimally invasive cheek swab.
Originally posted by
El-Jaro
I think it was really messed up, all around.
If the person doesn't fully consent to a DNA test, then it can't be used. They should've used the person's native language to obtain consent. If it would've went ... more
If the person doesn't fully consent to a DNA test, then it can't be used. They should've used the person's native language to obtain consent. If it would've went ... more
I think it was really messed up, all around.
If the person doesn't fully consent to a DNA test, then it can't be used. They should've used the person's native language to obtain consent. If it would've went through, then it could've had a mistrial (costing the gov. MORE money). It's a technicality, but it's also how out justice system runs.
I am surprised they didn't come up with something else to get him there. less
If the person doesn't fully consent to a DNA test, then it can't be used. They should've used the person's native language to obtain consent. If it would've went through, then it could've had a mistrial (costing the gov. MORE money). It's a technicality, but it's also how out justice system runs.
I am surprised they didn't come up with something else to get him there. less
We just need common sense, we should not allow the guilty to hide behind technicalities.
It's s different topic - but there are too many innocent people who get convicted because of false (not usually intentional) eye witness testimony. For me the connection is that if the DNA says you did it. Not only does it keep violent people off the streets - the use of DNA evidence can minimize false imprisonment.
04/25/2011
It depends on the state if DNA can be used without consent. In many places it certainly can be.
Ignorance of the law (I would think this encompasses "understanding" DNA testing, because most people don't understand it anyway) it no excuse.
However, I found a report of a case on a MUCH less exploitative site than FOX (I NEVER believe what I hear from FOX, mostly because I refuse to watch or listen to their drivel) it has been stated that Sule (the perp) is still in custody and WILL Be recharged.
Hopefully, this poor old man will get justice.
Ignorance of the law (I would think this encompasses "understanding" DNA testing, because most people don't understand it anyway) it no excuse.
However, I found a report of a case on a MUCH less exploitative site than FOX (I NEVER believe what I hear from FOX, mostly because I refuse to watch or listen to their drivel) it has been stated that Sule (the perp) is still in custody and WILL Be recharged.
Hopefully, this poor old man will get justice.
04/25/2011
Quote:
There was NO "semen." The "sexual assault" (that the FOX report conveniently left out) was the perp attempting to kiss and fondle the victim and telling him he "loved" him, bruising his ribs in the process. There was no rape, no penetration.
Originally posted by
markeagleone
Yes, I agree. When someone commits a crime, we should send them to college so they have a grasp of how they are proven to be guilty. The system makes sense. Protect the guilty, fuck the victim. No, what other evidence would have been left. A shoe
...
more
Yes, I agree. When someone commits a crime, we should send them to college so they have a grasp of how they are proven to be guilty. The system makes sense. Protect the guilty, fuck the victim. No, what other evidence would have been left. A shoe print is nothing, he could not visually see the guy and the guy took what he wanted. I would have thought that the semen left behind from the sexual assult would have been enough, but I guess it's a law now that a criminal has to be educated enough to know why he is guilty. It said he spoke some Engish, and since dna is worldwide, he used the good old-prove that I know what you were saying(you know, prove that I knew what I did was wrong and that I knew it at the time). What a double edged sword. The poor man's tax money went to the interpeters and lawyer, needed or not, to get his attacker off. He literally paid to get fucked!
less
Still, an awful crime, but not the much more horrid image FOX left people with.
No one should assault anyone, especially sick old people. But, the news should be reported properly. FOX didn't do that. They sensationalized this case. That makes me almost as sick as what Sule did.
04/25/2011
Quote:
I agree. If there is enough evidence to lead to your arrest for a serious crime against another person, you should not have the ability to refuse a minimally invasive DNA test. If I am not mistaken, it is a matter of routine to take fingerprints, and no one should have the right to "refuse" this either. If you are innocent, you have nothing to hide; the DNA tests would back this up. Giving a suspect a choice to refuse DNA testing only protects the guilty.
Originally posted by
Gunsmoke
In many states you do not have to consent to DNA testing. Simply being arrested for a serious crime is enough. They take a minimally invasive cheek swab.
We just need common sense, we should not allow the guilty to hide behind ... more
We just need common sense, we should not allow the guilty to hide behind ... more
In many states you do not have to consent to DNA testing. Simply being arrested for a serious crime is enough. They take a minimally invasive cheek swab.
We just need common sense, we should not allow the guilty to hide behind technicalities.
It's s different topic - but there are too many innocent people who get convicted because of false (not usually intentional) eye witness testimony. For me the connection is that if the DNA says you did it. Not only does it keep violent people off the streets - the use of DNA evidence can minimize false imprisonment. less
We just need common sense, we should not allow the guilty to hide behind technicalities.
It's s different topic - but there are too many innocent people who get convicted because of false (not usually intentional) eye witness testimony. For me the connection is that if the DNA says you did it. Not only does it keep violent people off the streets - the use of DNA evidence can minimize false imprisonment. less
Besides, in this guy's case, he spoke rudimentary English. If he indicated to the officers at the time that he understood, they were not at fault. How hard would it be for him to later claim he did not understand? And, again, even if he DIDN'T understand, why is it so important that each criminal clearly understands the science behind how he was caught? Do we want to make sure we educate our criminals enough so that they CANNOT be caught? Do violent perpetrators have the right to expect the government to help them become smarter criminals to evade future capture?
04/25/2011
Quote:
Good! I am glad he will be recharged. I also hope this elderly, ill man receives justice.
Originally posted by
P'Gell
It depends on the state if DNA can be used without consent. In many places it certainly can be.
Ignorance of the law (I would think this encompasses "understanding" DNA testing, because most people don't understand it ... more
Ignorance of the law (I would think this encompasses "understanding" DNA testing, because most people don't understand it ... more
It depends on the state if DNA can be used without consent. In many places it certainly can be.
Ignorance of the law (I would think this encompasses "understanding" DNA testing, because most people don't understand it anyway) it no excuse.
However, I found a report of a case on a MUCH less exploitative site than FOX (I NEVER believe what I hear from FOX, mostly because I refuse to watch or listen to their drivel) it has been stated that Sule (the perp) is still in custody and WILL Be recharged.
Hopefully, this poor old man will get justice. less
Ignorance of the law (I would think this encompasses "understanding" DNA testing, because most people don't understand it anyway) it no excuse.
However, I found a report of a case on a MUCH less exploitative site than FOX (I NEVER believe what I hear from FOX, mostly because I refuse to watch or listen to their drivel) it has been stated that Sule (the perp) is still in custody and WILL Be recharged.
Hopefully, this poor old man will get justice. less
(I've had this page open for the past 20 minutes, so I just saw your posts.)
04/25/2011
Quote:
I hope he does, too. It makes me so sad that anyone would treat an old sick man in such a way.
Originally posted by
Selective Sensualist
Good! I am glad he will be recharged. I also hope this elderly, ill man receives justice.
(I've had this page open for the past 20 minutes, so I just saw your posts.)
(I've had this page open for the past 20 minutes, so I just saw your posts.)
Most places do not allow someone accused of a crime from refusing to submit DNA. In this case, it would probably something left from the break in, not semen. I'm not sure what DNA would be used in this case, none of the reports said what kind of DNA was used to charge and prosecute this case.
There are a lot of other types of DNA used in the law than sexual fluids.
04/25/2011
Quote:
Immigrants NEVER had to learn the language. My husband has a number of relatives who arrived here between 1880 and 1900 who never learned English. Learning the language was NEVER part of being "allowed into the country."
Originally posted by
markeagleone
I would also like to know why, when my grandparents came here, they didn't have translators or even a written work in their native Swedish. They had to learn English. Today, you have written in so many different languages, phone calls in
...
more
I would also like to know why, when my grandparents came here, they didn't have translators or even a written work in their native Swedish. They had to learn English. Today, you have written in so many different languages, phone calls in different languages, interpetors for all forms of government for different languages. What the hell? Tell me why when this country formed, the immigrants had to and now we have to provide for them. You don't think all that costs the working people to pay for all that? No wonder why we are broke. The united we stand, divided we fall stood for a truth - get it. Right now our country is divided in how many different ways.
less
I can assure you Ellis Island had Swedish translators, if your ancestors came through there. I know they had Italian, Polish, German, Irish, Czech, etc when our ancestors came through around the turn of the last century.
There is NO reason to turn this into yet an other "this is what's wrong with this country" rant. I think we've had quite enough of these on the site in recent days.
A BAD thing happened to this poor old man. That is no reason to make every single immigrant who has come into this country since your people did seem like bad people. Most are NOT. Was that your point? To disrespect "immigrants" or to simply report a story? I hope it was the latter.
04/25/2011
I hate reading things like this in the paper and online. I don't understand why people don't have more respect for one another and themselves. So disappointing.
04/25/2011
Total posts: 29
Unique posters: 12