They are letting them go

a reply to: YouSir

As far as I'm aware there the coroner has not identified cause of death. Considering the boy in question suffered from some serious medical conditions the defense could easily argue that the boy died due to complications from these conditions. As I said before, if the investigators had evidence that the child died due to actions taken by the accused they would have charged them with a more serious crime.

Instead the only evidence they have supports the charges of child abuse. The judge can only make a decision based on the evidence presented. That evidence currently only supports the charge of child abuse. Thus the judge can only set bail based off the charge of child abuse.

Why is this so hard for people to understand? The judge did her job properly. If anyone dropped the ball it is investigators and the prosecutor who failed to make their case at this point in time.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

What part of this was confusing?

Muslim Extremist Arrested at New Mexico Compound Is the Son of Terror-Linked NYC Imam

It's not confusing. You made a claim about a handler and the bond.

When asked about that, you deflect.

As always, you're dishonest Neo.

Did you expect anything less from him?
That's all he does

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

What part of this was confusing?

Muslim Extremist Arrested at New Mexico Compound Is the Son of Terror-Linked NYC Imam

It's not confusing. You made a claim about a handler and the bond.

When asked about that, you deflect.

As always, you're dishonest Neo.

Did you expect anything less from him?
That's all he does

No. That was exactly what I expected.

ATS has become a hotspot for dishonest Right Wing tactics.

a reply to: introvert

Yup.
They all eat it up and circle jerk each other too. It's amusing and sad at the same time.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Until one pops and starts a gunfight

originally posted by: TinySickTears
They all eat it up and circle jerk each other too.

Circular jerking is what politics is all about.

Speaking of circle jerks, you weren't in this one.

The sheriff's department "failed to articulate a specific threat"? Are you kidding me?
What is going on here? It is obvious to me that those people should not be able to walk free. I'm shocked, to be honest.
The fact that there were 11 children in the "compound" that were "emaciated" is proof enough that they shouldn't be allowed to walk free. Child abuse doesn't constitute a crime in New Mexico anymore?
Baffling.


Yes, I realize they're out on bond and have to wear ankle monitors. Whoopee.
I think that was the wrong decision. I disagree wholeheartedly.

a reply to: Slinki

Of course it's a crime. That's why they're being charged with it. At the same time though they're innocent until proven guilty. The prosecution was not able to provide sufficient evidence that they would pose a threat to the community if granted bail.

As a result the judge set bail at an amount that is what one would expect from charges of child abuse.

Seriously people. This is not that hard a concept to grasp.

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: introvert

Yes and it is still crazy.
If you're involved in something where the remains of a kid is involved I say negative to the bond.

I don't know # though

Not just that but the whole damn thing of child endangerment for the others too, training kids to be school shooters etc and even though that all has not proven yet one must think they are serious flight risks....

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: KansasGirl

Their handler did.

That's a cell.

Interesting.

Who posted the bonds?

Do you have those details? Please post them.

Really you gonna ask for details?

Have you been paying attention?

kids guns body muslim = terrorist cell = gitmo

any questions?

toatal sarc!

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Right. And who paid that bail? What about the accusations of training children for school shootings? Muslim extremism?
The fact that they found the remains of a child buried near the property?
Don't talk to me like I'm an idiot.

originally posted by: Slinki
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Right. And who paid that bail? What about the accusations of training children for school shootings? Muslim extremism?
The fact that they found the remains of a child buried near the property?
Don't talk to me like I'm an idiot.

The bail was set.

They have not reported if the bail was made by anyone or if they are out...

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: introvert

Yup.
They all eat it up and circle jerk each other too. It's amusing and sad at the same time.

And yet you two seem to love being in the middle of said circle jerk.

a reply to: Slinki

You want socialism because you want free stuff someone else has to pay for.

As of right now, no one. Bail has only been set. Not paid.

What about the accusations of training children for school shootings? Muslim extremism?

What about them? If the prosecution couldn't back those accusations up with evidence then the judge should not take them in to consideration.

The fact that they found the remains of a child buried near the property?

Once again, it comes down to the prosecution to prove that the child died from something other than natural causes. I don't even think the coroner has provided a cause of death at this point. So while the child's death is tragic it has no bearing on the trial at this point.

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: galaga

That's #in crazy. 20k bond and an ankle bracelet.
Insanity.

The 20K is only if they break the rules while out on bond.
They are free on their own word.

a reply to: introvert

I understand what you're saying...

However, an ankle monitor, for what will be, I assume, a capital case? No.

A simple "snip" on the anklet, and out to the car, and they're gone. A day later, across the border, even more gone.

They should have been held for trial as a flight risk.

a reply to: seagull

They should have been held for trial as a flight risk.

According to the judge the prosecution did not provide that level of evidence.

Are you thinking that all of them committed murder?

This is disgusting. They are a clear danger to the community - kidnapping across state lines, child abuse, alleged threats, weapons. Lucky for them they happen to be brown adherents to the 'religion of peace' instead of white, Christian, Trump-voting nationalists. Oh yeah, being the son of a prominent Imam doesn't hurt either.

This judge just gave the GOP and Trump ammo for the upcoming midterms.

a reply to: wills120

Lucky for them they happen to be brown adherents to the religion of peace instead of white, Christian, nationalists.

I seem to remember some armed good-ole-boys taking over federal land. After that they tried to run over federal agents. They still managed to get off scot free.

a reply to: howtonhawky

No, I'm thinking they're a flight risk.

The judge sided with the defense on that issue. I'd dearly love to see the transcript, who knows, I might even agree with the judge.

But, as an outsider who only knows what's suspected? I'd have held without bond. Guilt plays no part in that decision.