Hal Turner Denied Bail!!! -- Constitution tossed out window

reply to post by Make Speed Limit 45

It's not an excuse, it's just a possible motivation. As I said in my first post in this thread, I think he should have made bail.

I'm just saying that I can see the judge's motivation for denying him bail.

Let me know when you get him removed from the bench.

I'm all for the Constitution, but idiots like Hal Turner are not helping our cause. Threatening judges, and of all places, in Chicago, is the last thing anyone should do who wants to see gun rights returned to the citizens in Chicago. I am from Illinois, I know. Thankfully, I don't live in Chicago, but Illinois is still the worst state for the 2nd Amendment right now. We are the last state left that does not allow it's citizens the right to defend themselves with a firearm. And our crime rates here show that quite nicely.

[i

Bail is not a right, by the way, a speedy trial is a right, but bail is a privilege and it is often denied in cases of violence or flight risk!

The constitution says excessive bail shall not be required. Since this guy ws convicted of a crime with a max penalty of only 10 years, he absolutely should have gotten bail. You talk about violence and flight risk but where is that? The guy is just a blogger.

And once again i ask why Michael Reagan was not thrown in jail last year when he called for the murder of 911 truther Mark Dice. Hell - the law did nothing to him and he didn't even lose his job!! Only difference is reagan is a govt shill and turner is a govt hater.

Originally posted by Oreyeon
I'm all for the Constitution, but idiots like Hal Turner are not helping our cause.

He'd be helping our cause if people would support him. I'm just amazed at all the posters here at ATS, of all places, who back the govt on what they're doing to turner!!!!. This judge is absolutely wrong and we should call for his removal from the bench.

reply to post by Make Speed Limit 45


Please point out the part of the Constitution that states that. If you are going to make such a claim, providing a source would be nice. I don't think you'll find it.

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


en.wikipedia.org...

He's correct, my bad! Eighth amendment. I didn't research any further, because the courts have obviously found loopholes to this amendment which also bans excessive fines!

It is fairly common to be denied bail, so it will take some more digging to see how they get away with this!!

reply to post by getreadyalready


I stand corrected. But to say that this amendment is ambiguous is an understatement. It states:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Source.

The real point is that some here are defending this obvious douchebag. I also think that 10 years is not enough.

A little digging however, clears up why he was denied bail:

White Supremacist Hal Turner was denied bail in a federal court hearing in New Jersey on Thursday, by U.S. Magistrate Michael Shipp, after considering the seriousness of the charges and the discovery of weapons and ammunition in Turner’s home.

Neo-Nazi, white supremacist and all around purveyor of hate, blogger and Internet radio host, Hal Turner is charged with inciting violence with the publishing of threatening blog posts and faces charges of threatening to assault or murder three Chicago area federal appellate judges.

Source.

So, he apparently threatened to personally assault or murder these judges, and had the weapons in his home to carry out this threat. No one can deny that he knows people who would happily rearm him should he be released, so the judge was well within his perview to deny bail.

Originally posted by getreadyalready


It is fairly common to be denied bail, so it will take some more digging to see how they get away with this!!

No it isn't common. You see it when the accused is facing life in prison but Turner is only looking at 10 years. He's no flight risk.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
[
So, he apparently threatened to personally assault or murder these judges, and had the weapons in his home to carry out this threat.

Personally??? What he said is these judges deserve to be killed. He never said he planned on doing it.

I dunno, I have to agree with the judge on this one. Well, actually with the charges.

The man said they "deserved to be killed" then placed photos and addresses of them on the site. had he just made the comment I think the case would be a bit foggier, but to ensure that those who were willing to carry out such a task knew what they looked like an where they lived? That's a whole new level.

Do I think this guy would have done anything? Hell, no. That's why he put up the photos. He was hoping someone else would do it. And it looks like this has worked for him in the past.

But this is disturbing:

Turner allegedly posted the work addresses of the judges as well as their photos with a note that home addresses would follow. Also included was a map of Chicago's federal courthouse highlighting its "anti-truck-bomb" pylons.

Turner is no stranger to law enforcement. Just this month, he was charged in Connecticut with making threats against legislators. He came to attention of authorities in Chicago after the killings of the husband and mother of U.S. District Judge Joan Lefkow in 2005.

Turner posted the work addresses of appeals court judges who had ruled against white supremacist Matthew Hale in a civil case presided over by Lefkow.

It looks like he's already gotten at least one judge killed. He is obviously a danger.

As for the bail situation? He was JUST CHARGED THIS MONTH with the same type of activity and released on bond. They let him out (his trial was schedule for July) and he went and did the SAME EXACT THING, thereby proving that he can't be trusted if set free without a proper trial.

ATS Thread

(Pay attention to this post)

There is no reason for the judge to take his word for it that he won't then get on a website and threaten yet more judges/legislatures. He's already established a pattern of behavior.

It really doesn't look good for this guy.

Hal is gonna get off people dont want to lose free speech on the net , I know a lot of kids that will go to jail on face book and my space if this is the case , Are they exempt from the law , I think some people deserve to be killed too will I go to jail for thinking it on the net , what a slippery slope

[edit on 043030p://pmvpm by yenko13]

Hal is a easy target , let them go after the mexican mafia that are killing people in america , La eme and MS 13 run rampant killing thousands and they go after a threat , what a joke

[edit on 043030p://pmvpm by yenko13]

Originally posted by Lilitu
Funny how that if a muslim American made terroristic threats, most right-wingnuts would be okay with hanging the guy without a trial but when one of their own WHITE wingnuts makes terroristic threats they think he should get bail. Simply Amazing.

What's simply amazing is your bigotry. You assume all conservatives are white and that all Muslims are non-white.

And that we hang people.

I'm rather right-wing and this Hal Turner dude is definitely NOT "one of my own." See, you've decided that being right-wing is synonymous with racist, which is a logical fallacy. You probably assume we're all Christians, too.

Hal Turner is a creep and got what he had coming to him.

Originally posted by Make Speed Limit 45

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
[
So, he apparently threatened to personally assault or murder these judges, and had the weapons in his home to carry out this threat.

Personally??? What he said is these judges deserve to be killed. He never said he planned on doing it.

The court makes a distinction between "mere advocacy" of an idea or opinion and statements "directed to incite or produce imminent lawless action." The Supreme Court made this clear in Brandenburg v Ohio 1969. What Hal Turner did was definitely beyond mere advocacy.

As far as bond goes it is at the Judges discretion whether to allow or deny bail. You have a constitutional right to not have excessive bail, say a $1 million for shoplifting ect. But in this case the Judge probably feels that Turner poses a threat to the public if he is released, I agree with him.

some other cases where bail has been denied:
Hawaii beauty queen charged with identity theft
An actor in the film "The Wrestler" for dealing steroids
The "Jena 6" accused of beating a white classmate

The list goes on and on. However you would have to take a break from internet porn and making uneducated rants in order to search for them.

The judge that denied him bail should be killed.

This isn't the first time I've heard of a judge denying bail, but typically judges will set the bail way to high to pay it. I don't really consider this a big deal, the way the idiot threatened judges to the extent that he did pretty much sealed his own fate. Does he have a right to bail, yes, but if you want to argue the constitution being tossed out the window then it's stating the obvious. It has been tossed out the window for years.

reply to post by Make Speed Limit 45


AHA!!! You do read his blog!!! I just knew you were one of them!!! Otherwise how would you know what he said and what he didn't????

In other words, source your claims, or step out of the way and let the adults talk!

He's a racist anyway. Good riddens.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by Make Speed Limit 45

 

The difference is that the government doesn't also add: These people need to be killed. BIG, HUGE, GIGANTIC DIFFERENCE!!! Don't confuse public safety with inciting radicalism. I have three grandsons, and you bet your gluteous maximus that I and my daughter want to KNOW if a pedophile lives near them. I and my daughter want to KNOW who not to let around those innocent kids.

Oh I get it now, as long as you "just post someones pic and address" then its all fine and dandy. So if someone makes a site that lists all Judges,cops,senators, congressmen/women, and any federal worker, with pics and address' then everything is fine. It's just a "list", if they have nothing to hide they should be fine. Who doesn't love government workers, its how people will send them gifts for doing wonderful jobs.

reply to post by LordBaskettIV


I cannot for the life of me understand how so many people here are defending child molesters!!! THEY GAVE UP THE RIGHT TO ANINIMOTY THE DAY THE RAPED A CHILD!!! PERIOD!!! To compare the two is just plain sick!! CONVICTED SEX OFFENDERS ARE FELONS!!! The only reason I can think of to defend these sick bastards is if you are one yourself!!!!