Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Child Rapist Goes Free Because Court Can't Find Interpreter

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 06:02 PM
link   
I thought it was a good question
Why does one need the interpretor if they went to school here?
How did they survive all those years of schooling with out one?

They have proof he speaks english just from the schooling alone
make him go to trial.




posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilBat
I thought it was a good question
Why does one need the interpretor if they went to school here?
How did they survive all those years of schooling with out one?

They have proof he speaks english just from the schooling alone
make him go to trial.

I agree, and had mentioned it also. Maybe the school had Vai translators?


You definitely get a star for that observation, EvilBat.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 06:59 PM
link   
I agree

That sheds a whole new subject on the light.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 08:12 PM
link   
To play devils advocate, because as you all know, I'm not the one to place my faith in the system, but...

Shouldn't the prosecution have gone to court with an air tight case, and not relied on the judge to be sympathetic to the prosecution? If they're going to play a hand and gamble on a variable, they have to acknowledge that they may loose on a weak point. In this case, the judge. And it looks like the judge was completely justified (if not morally, legally) in her decision.

As for getting through HS and CC without speaking functional English, it's actually very possible, and happens more often than you'd think. As a matter of fact, something like 700,000 high school graduates can't read. Granted they are likely native English speakers, but I'm sure there's a percentage that are ESL students. And his CC courses could also have been ESL.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 08:17 PM
link   
This is like casting pearls before swine, I know, but here are the facts, like them or not:

The man was held for three years without a trial. The Court determined that 3 years was long enough for the State to come up with a case.

The COURT appointed adviser said that he did not comprehend English well enough for a LEGAL PROCEEDING. there is a big difference between speaking a language well enough to order food and make change, and being able to understand legal terminologies, testimonial procedures, etc.

WHY could they not find a translator? Who knows, but if they could not find one in 3 years then they are not going to find one, maybe they did not want to find one as their case may be weaker than they portray.

All of the whining about a miscarriage of justice is simply elementary and not taking into account the big picture. Some people just cannot see the harm in locking people away for long periods with no trial, etc.

All I can say is, I hope that every one of you who want to do away with the due process rights of citizens, may you be the next one to be accused. May YOU be thrwon in a cell and calaled names and accused without a trial for years. THEN let's see how willing you are to let the next guy have the same fate. Last post for me, the ignorace of some people is too irritating, read some law and the constitution and try and se past your emotions for a change.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
As for getting through HS and CC without speaking functional English, it's actually very possible, and happens more often than you'd think. As a matter of fact, something like 700,000 high school graduates can't read. Granted they are likely native English speakers, but I'm sure there's a percentage that are ESL students. And his CC courses could also have been ESL.



In the language of Vai, which they apperantly couldn't find an interpreter for in 3 years?


C'mon man, give the Devil his due.


I work with a guy from Columbia. He's been here for just over 3 years and his English is damn good. I'll grant you that Spanish is closer to English than an obscure African dialect but c'mon.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
All I can say is, I hope that every one of you who want to do away with the due process rights of citizens, may you be the next one to be accused. May YOU be thrwon in a cell and calaled names and accused without a trial for years. THEN let's see how willing you are to let the next guy have the same fate. Last post for me, the ignorace of some people is too irritating, read some law and the constitution and try and se past your emotions for a change.


The death knell of an argument lost. Thanks for playing eyewitness. Next time I recommend actually reading what's going on rather than being holier-than-thou.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Sickening, just sickening. This goes to show what kind of justice system we have. I cant begin to imagin how the parents feel...



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
The man was held for three years without a trial. The Court determined that 3 years was long enough for the State to come up with a case.


I think this is what it comes down to. That's the way the system works. And I don't think any of us really wants to change this, do they?



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Why would they prosecute up a kindred spirit?


That majority of men who hold power in this country and around the world a sexual deviants and perverts.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Shouldn't the prosecution have gone to court with an air tight case, and not relied on the judge to be sympathetic to the prosecution? If they're going to play a hand and gamble on a variable, they have to acknowledge that they may loose on a weak point. In this case, the judge. And it looks like the judge was completely justified (if not morally, legally) in her decision.

What do you mean, air tight case? DNA evidence and witnesses were ready to go to trial. This was not a ssituation where there was lack of evidence. Someone failed in their duty to find a translator for the malingering defendant.


As for getting through HS and CC without speaking functional English, it's actually very possible, and happens more often than you'd think. As a matter of fact, something like 700,000 high school graduates can't read. Granted they are likely native English speakers, but I'm sure there's a percentage that are ESL students. And his CC courses could also have been ESL.

Totally irrelevant on the this-child-left-behind point. And it is not necessary for the defendant to have near perfect English, nor to understand the legal fine points. That's why he has counsel and an interpreter.




Originally posted by eyewitness86
This is like casting pearls before swine, I know, but here are the facts, like them or not:

Don't be so condescending. Your own understanding is somewhat superficial; you seem to be hung up on the fact that he was held for 3 years.


The man was held for three years without a trial. The Court determined that 3 years was long enough for the State to come up with a case.

They had a case ready, complete with DNA and witnesses. What was missing was a translator.



The COURT appointed adviser said that he did not comprehend English well enough for a LEGAL PROCEEDING. there is a big difference between speaking a language well enough to order food and make change, and being able to understand legal terminologies, testimonial procedures, etc.

The issue of whether or not he had a translator is secondary. The primary question is whether he could have received a fair trial without a translator:



Whether an interpreter is appointed for a defendant lies wholly within the discretion of the trial judge. While the law accords courts discretion in this area, it cannot be abused. Again, it is incumbent on the defense to preserve the record for appellate review.


The right to a court-appointed interpreter in criminal proceedings is squarely within the discretion of the trial judge. Only in limited circumstances have appellate courts held that the failure of trial courts to afford adequate interpreter services constituted an abuse of discretion or was clearly erroneous in violation of a defendant's federal or state constitutional or statutory rights.



www.e-archives.ky.gov...

That was authored by a couple of judges, btw.



All of the whining about a miscarriage of justice is simply elementary and not taking into account the big picture. Some people just cannot see the harm in locking people away for long periods with no trial, etc.

You are the one who cannot see the big picture. Read the sources provided to you and you will see that this judge abdicated responsibility.



All I can say is, I hope that every one of you who want to do away with the due process rights of citizens, may you be the next one to be accused.

Blah blah blah. Nobody wants to do away with due process, so don't go there. We want to see this pervert hung by his gonads. And there was a way to conduct this trial, but the judge was too stupid to realize it.



[edit on 22-7-2007 by jsobecky]



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 09:37 PM
link   
"We want to see this pervert hung by his gonads."

So you admit you want vengeance and not justice? How can you want to see someone hung, before a trial has ever been held? What happened to the "innocent until proven guilty" principle. You have already convicted this man before a trial has even happened. Doesn't sound very fair to me.

AncientMariner



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by AncientMariner
"We want to see this pervert hung by his gonads."

So you admit you want vengeance and not justice? How can you want to see someone hung, before a trial has ever been held? What happened to the "innocent until proven guilty" principle. You have already convicted this man before a trial has even happened. Doesn't sound very fair to me.

AncientMariner


And NOT what I was talking about. Let's seperate that now please.



posted on Jul, 22 2007 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by AncientMariner
"We want to see this pervert hung by his gonads."

So you admit you want vengeance and not justice? How can you want to see someone hung, before a trial has ever been held? What happened to the "innocent until proven guilty" principle. You have already convicted this man before a trial has even happened. Doesn't sound very fair to me.

AncientMariner

Yeah, I'm a vengeful vigilante


Is that all you got?

Of course I meant ..."if he is found guilty". The difference between you and me is that I don't want him to walk without a trial. You, otoh, have no problem with that.



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 12:01 AM
link   
Everyone is talking about the fairness of this person that has been accused, but what about the victim does she have a translator?

Who is speaking for her?

Where is her justice? Her innocence? Her normality of life as a child now, if this is the prosecutors errors they all need to be fired and dis-barred from all 50 states because there is no excuse for this kind of screw up.

I am all for Due Process, but if they have the evidence via DNA and it's a match 99.9% what the hell do you need a translator for? To tell him that he's guilty of sexuality devastating a child physically, mentally and emotionally for the rest of her life. And not to mention her parents.

Something is definitely F'd up here.

[edit on 23-7-2007 by Realtruth]



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Realtruth
I am all for Due Process, but if they have the evidence via DNA and it's a match 99.9% what the hell do you need a translator for?


For the 0.1% Chance that he might actually be innocent?

I have another scenario of what might've actually happened
But it's rather mockery than plausible (it's possible, but probably about 99,9% Unlikely).

However, on the daughters side.
Keep in mind, how much of a trauma does she actually have from this?
How did the girl experience this, and how did she feel when it happened?

Of course it's not ''fun'' if you get raped at age X, but you guys are acting as if her whole life is in ruin and she's about to be part of the apocalypse or something, fact remains, we don't know how much she'll be affected in the future, or how bad her trauma will be.

Though then again don't listen to me, I don't know how far the American educational system goes when it comes to Sex Ed. If they show condoms and cut-outs to 7 year old kids or what not.

Or her awareness about ''sex'' in general, or her ''awareness'' about the actual rape.
Since all I read in that article was "The girl stated that she had to stay in the appartment until she had sex with him".

Now that doesn't really sound like a bombardment of emotions and trauma,
so before anyone says, OMFG THAT CHILD IS SCARRED FOR LIFE, think about this think about that! I'd rather have someone get her side of the story, the damage done to her that affects her in everyday life, etc, when she's older.



[edit on 23/7/07 by -0mega-]



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by -0mega-
Now that doesn't really sound like a bombardment of emotions and trauma,
so before anyone says, OMFG THAT CHILD IS SCARRED FOR LIFE, think about this think about that! I'd rather have someone get her side of the story, the damage done to her that affects her in everyday life, etc, when she's older.
[edit on 23/7/07 by -0mega-]


That is a bit beside the point of what is being discussed here. Keep in mind it is not just the raping of children that is illegal, but any sexual conduct whatsoever. So the sentencing might be based on that in the end, but the issue for the time being is that entire case was thrown out.



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
WHY could they not find a translator? Who knows, but if they could not find one in 3 years then they are not going to find one,


Haha if they couldn't find one in 3 years then they clearly didn't want to find one. I mean come on, the Washington Post found 3 in one day, surely the courts aren't that crap at finding translators?

Hell, I could probably go and find a few right now



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
What do you mean, air tight case? DNA evidence and witnesses were ready to go to trial. This was not a ssituation where there was lack of evidence. Someone failed in their duty to find a translator for the malingering defendant.


What I mean is that if the prosecution was really intent on getting this case tried then they should have had all bases covered, including having a translator just in case. They were relying on having a sympathetic judge, and I don't think we want a system where the judge is sympathetic to the prosecution (or the defense for that matter).


As for getting through HS and CC without speaking functional English...
Totally irrelevant on the this-child-left-behind point. And it is not necessary for the defendant to have near perfect English, nor to understand the legal fine points. That's why he has counsel and an interpreter.


I was only making the point in regards to this observation made by EvilBat, to which you had an affirmative reply.

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by EvilBat
I thought it was a good question
Why does one need the interpretor if they went to school here?....

I agree, and had mentioned it also. Maybe the school had Vai translators?


You definitely get a star for that observation, EvilBat.


It seems like it was relevant to you then jso.

And he didn't have an interpreter jso, that's the point.

[edit on 23-7-2007 by Rasobasi420]



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 07:16 AM
link   
I've been banging on about this kind of thing happening in the UK for years, you can read it here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Seems as though it's not just the UK that has a problem meteing out justice for the victim, rather than consideration for the criminal.

Understanding of the criminal and the putting of their rights before those of the victim seems to be a symptom of our PC societies - something I believe is wholly wrong.





new topics




 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join