It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: Supreme Court Justice Assaulted, But 'Fine'

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 1 2004 @ 12:21 PM

US Supreme Court Justice David Souter sustained minor injuries as he was assaulted by several men while jogging on friday.

He said Souter, 64, was taken to a local hospital after being attacked by several men late on Friday. He was released after an examination and was now "feeling fine," the spokesman said. He gave no details on the assault.

Souter, who was appointed by President George Bush, has served on the Supreme Court since 1990.

Supreme Court Justice Assaulted, But 'Fine'

[Edited on 1-5-2004 by Ocelot]

posted on May, 1 2004 @ 12:22 PM
Was it a gang of liberal thugs or something?

posted on May, 1 2004 @ 12:23 PM
May 1 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter was assaulted by several men while jogging late yesterday, a court spokesman said. Souter was treated and released from a hospital, the spokesman said.

``He sustained minor injuries and is feeling fine,'' said court spokesman Ed Turner.

Souter, 64, was jogging shortly after 9 p.m. Washington time when several men attacked him, Turner said. He was taken to Washington Hospital Center by court police, where he was examined. He was released at about 1:30 a.m. today, Turner said.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Souter Attacked During Jog

posted on May, 1 2004 @ 12:24 PM
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter was assaulted by several men Friday night and taken to a hospital with minor injuries, according to a court spokeswoman.

The incident occurred while he was jogging at about 9 p.m. Friday, said Kathy Arberg, a court spokeswoman.

Another source told CNN the incident happened near his home.

Arberg said Supreme Court police escorted the justice to Washington Hospital Center. He was examined and released at about 1:30 a.m. Saturday morning.

He sustained "minor injuries" and is "feeling fine," Arberg said.

Justice Souter assaulted during jog

posted on May, 1 2004 @ 12:27 PM

WASHINGTON (AP) - Supreme Court Justice David Souter suffered minor injuries when a group of young men assaulted him as he jogged on a city street, a court spokeswoman said Saturday.

The attack occurred about 9 p.m. Friday, court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said.

Supreme Court police took Souter, 64, to a Washington hospital, where he was examined and released about 1 a.m. Saturday, Arberg said. She did not detail his injuries except to say they were minor.

Souter was not robbed, Arberg said.

Supreme Court Justice Assaulted During Jog

posted on May, 1 2004 @ 04:40 PM
The report said "Supreme Court Police" escorted him to the hospital. I wonder how many police are attached to a justice and I also wonder why no one was apprehended. You've got to believe that in the current environment they would be armed close to Secret Service level. If they're not - "What We're They Thinking?"

posted on May, 2 2004 @ 12:34 AM
64 and jogging!

Have they captured the guys who did this yet?

If so I can't help but wonder what would happen if the case goes all the way to the supreme court....hmmm

I hope I am stll able to go jogging when I am 64.. wow!


posted on May, 2 2004 @ 12:48 AM

Originally posted by Ocelot
Souter was not robbed, Arberg said.

Was he not robbed because of his security detail or because someone was trying to make a point?

posted on May, 2 2004 @ 02:49 PM
Why isn't anyone reporting on the culprits? Did they get away? Don't justices get security detail? Who whacked the judge? Witnesses?

This is probably some political ploy...


posted on May, 2 2004 @ 03:12 PM
It was probably Kerry and the untraliberal belway boyz. They weren't arrested because Kerry now has secret service protection and that must outrank Supreme Court police.

posted on May, 3 2004 @ 10:17 PM
Souter may have been appointed by Herbert but he tends to allign himself with the more liberal side of the court.

posted on May, 4 2004 @ 04:13 AM
Why should the Supreme Court have any sides, and why would this be condoned by any intelligent American?

Nice name scottsquared.

posted on May, 4 2004 @ 07:48 AM
Supreme court justices are appointed by the President. Their duty is to interpret the constitution as it pertains to particular issues or cases before the court. Interpretation is by nature a biased enterprise. Presidents select justices who they think will most closely align themselves with thier way if interpreting the Constitution.

Once appointed, justices serve for life. Often times, judges tend to be somewhat more complicated people than most, also the huge responsability of the position may influence a generaly centrist alignment, hence; many justices tend to move away from the more polarized platform of the president who appointed them.

Hope this helps to explain the relative biases of the court.

posted on May, 4 2004 @ 08:28 AM
Right on target scottsquared. I'm still interested, what happened with the attackers?

posted on May, 4 2004 @ 09:17 AM
Ditto Scottsquared! Also, presidents tend to appoint more winged justices.

I think Presidents display their true political stance when picking justices. For elections, they have to stay more mainstream to win. However, when picking a justice, they have a little more freedom to put their true values in public.

A presidency only lasts 8 years, but a Supreme Court slot could be decades! How's that for power to shape the nation?

posted on May, 4 2004 @ 01:12 PM
'gang of liberal thugs'
what fascist traits some people seem to exhibit.

something tells me that these thugs may have had something to do with the scalia case, but I could be wrong. it's just a hunch anyway.

new topics

top topics


log in