What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
156 Comments
- chumprock, on 01/09/2009, -1/+185It's not just Civil cases. My father spent over 2 years in federal prison because he wouldn't admit to something he didn't do.
The reason they gave for holding him so long (he wasn't even arraigned) was an assumption from the judge that he was "mentally unfit" to comprehend the charges placed against him. Even after he passed three separate mental evaluations.
When they finally let him out, they basically told him "don't even think about complaining or we'll put you right back in here" - lazycat, on 01/09/2009, -2/+17014 years without being charged... I didn't know it's even possible.
- AlaskaLoneWolf, on 01/09/2009, -14/+113Nice. Dumb bitch can say pretty much anything and the judge will spoon it up like a f***ing crackhead. I say that he should be released, immediately. If he's hardcore enough to "hide" his own money for this long, y'all should give the f*** up at this point. We need to use the bedspace for the rapists, murderers, arsonists, and y'know, the other actually dangerous people who keep getting out on bail.
- mrwynd, on 01/09/2009, -0/+80Too much power for judges? Our system allows one person to put you in jail for years, something obviously needs changing.
What happens when a judge gets in a deal with a private company that owns the prisons? The more he gets locked up, the happier these private companies are. USA incarcerates a larger percentage of it's population than any other industrialized nation (China would beat us, but they kill a lot of their "troublemakers")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisons_in_the_United ...
There's obviously a LOT of money to be made in locking up felons and they're doing a great job at growing their market. - EdDiggEd, on 01/09/2009, -3/+81Free Kevin!
- FredFredrickson, on 01/09/2009, -2/+76Constitutionally speaking, it's not.
- Benno, on 01/09/2009, -0/+73You can also murder someone and spend no time in jail. weird.
- Andy.D, on 01/09/2009, -4/+63More proof that the justice/corrections racket in the US is as corrupt and unprincipled as ever.
- UnpossibIe, on 01/09/2009, -0/+55The guy in this article could have killed his wife, call it manslaughter and he probably would have been out by now.
Justice system working as intended with idiot judges who hold too much power. - ldkronos, on 01/09/2009, -1/+54******************
"As a matter of due process, I think 18 months is enough in most cases," says Thomas Sjoblom, the lawyer for Martin Armstrong. Mr. Sjoblom argued unsuccessfully that the 1970 law should have extended to the situation involving his client, who failed to produce $15 million in gold and antiquities in a civil suit alleging securities fraud. "After that, let the government prove a criminal case." Mr. Armstrong is currently serving a five-year sentence for criminal conspiracy.
Of course, such a limit might give contemnors an incentive to wait, knowing that eventually they will be reunited with their riches.
******************
Wow...someone might get away with lying to the court, so we should jail them indefinitely just in case? Well, in that case, shouldn't we also start jailing everyone we think is guilty and can't prove is innocent? After all, if we don't, then someone guilty might go free, so lets lock them up just in case. - AriaStar, on 01/09/2009, -0/+38An ex of mine was held for three months without being arraigned (prior to us meeting). Then he was forced to plead guilty. How?
He had sole custody of his daughter. The mother kept leaving the child in the care of a registered child molester who had victimized the child. Yeah, bitch didn't care her brother was touching a 3yo. She got an ex-parte hearing (that is when the other party doesn't get legal notification of the hearing), and made up some allegations. Since he wasn't there to defend himself against her false allegations, the judge found in her favor and ordered custody turned over to her immediately. Now you'd think that my ex would be notified at this point and given time to comply. (Judge's name is Robin Appel - she was the judge in another highly publicized case, Debbie Schmidt and Manuel Saavedra, and put a son with the mother whose negligence resulted in a horrific death of the younger sister with the brother watching - I know the boy's father.)
Nope.
He was instead found immediately in violation of an order he didn't know existed. With this came arrest, and being held for three months without arraignment. When he was finally arraigned, the charge was child abduction, and bail was $1.2 MILLION. He and his family didn't have the 10% for a bail bonds place. He was given this bargain: Plead guilty and get out immediately, but with a felony conviction, or plead innocent, but a trial could take a couple years. While behind bars he could do nothing to protect his daughter. So he took the deal.
When he got out, guess where the child was. Back in the care of her molester.
And because he'd been out of her life three months, his rights were all but gone. He ended up losing his parental rights completely. I was in court that day. Hell broke loose. - inactive, on 01/09/2009, -0/+35I commend the guy who has been in there for 4 years for refusing to pay his ex $800,000!
What did she possibly do to think she deserves $800,000? The alimony and child support laws in this country are so backwards, that I think these guys are actually martyrs and might shed some light on the extremely f-ed up situation. - jlungu, on 01/09/2009, -1/+34You can murder 10's of thousands and never be charged. Shameful.
- serif69, on 01/09/2009, -4/+36Another example of the husband in a divorce trial getting royally ***** due to his chromosomes. Divorce needs serious reform.
- maximilen, on 01/09/2009, -7/+38Speedy trial fail
- bushout, on 01/09/2009, -0/+29Wow, 14 yr game of chicken that you can't win.
- inactive, on 01/09/2009, -2/+30***ALERT ALERT***
LEVEL 5 TROLL BAIT
***ALERT ALERT*** - Solkre, on 01/09/2009, -0/+28And kept his money.
- ScottMitchell, on 01/09/2009, -0/+27Yes, but most of those people are charged with a crime and have an opportunity to defend themselves.
- jehan60188, on 01/09/2009, -2/+29"Civil contempt charges, on the other hand, are meant to be coercive, issued to force behavior ... Because civil "contemnors" hold the key to their own freedom -- after all, complying will spring them -- they aren't given the same due-process rights as criminal defendants...
If someone held for civil contempt can't meet the judge's order, theoretically, the confinement should end. And while long-term civil confinements are unusual, problems arise when a court doesn't believe the person. "
change "civil contempt" to torture, and "contemnors" to "suspected terrorist" and one can see how this is clearly unconstitutional... - nesagwa, on 01/09/2009, -0/+26Most of them got convicted of a crime first though...
- chumprock, on 01/09/2009, -0/+23Right. He was never charged, never entered a plea, nothing.
- Tomholius, on 01/09/2009, -1/+23This is why we can't have anything nice.
- inactive, on 01/09/2009, -1/+22Wrong Kevin.
- Cojafoji, on 01/09/2009, -0/+21That is *****. I can't believe that this ***** actually happens...
- Ne007, on 01/09/2009, -1/+20Good thing this didn't happen in Lebanon or Pakistan or we would be condemning them to hell for something like this.
- twiztidsinz, on 01/09/2009, -3/+22But he's a POWER USER!!!
Also, sarcasm aside, your attitude is what allows Power Users to maintain their power. Digg or bury based on the content NOT the submitter. - AriaStar, on 01/09/2009, -3/+21I'm a woman, and I agree, and this is why I am a men's rights advocate and serve on the board of directors of one international organization. The feminists who fought for equal rights and instead wanted 100% need to look up the definition of "equal". If women are as capable of doing everything the exact same as men, then women can get jobs and support themselves. If a man is a stay-at-home dad and he couple breaks up, the judge won't order huge alimony payments and custody to the primary care giver. Oh no, mom will her custody and dad will be slapped with a support order. It's ***** bull *****. I'm ashamed of the many, many members of my gender who actually believe we should get MORE just because we're women. When men want more, they're slapped down and called sexist and sued. When women do it, it's okay? I DON'T ***** THINK SO!!
GREAT message being sent to the sons of today, that their only value is to give women money and visit their kids every other weekend, and that if they want to be full-time dads, they'd better marry a single mom and parent another man's children who only gets to see them every other weekend. - inactive, on 01/09/2009, -0/+18Got habeas corpus?
- CaptOblivious, on 01/09/2009, -3/+21Frnnkdlxx
Nope sorry, that's an entirely different problem and has NOTHING TO DO with this particular story.
Please RTFA before you post? - djbon2112, on 01/09/2009, -3/+20Someone clearly didn't RTFA... He's been in jail since 1994. A full 7 years before the PATRIOT act. Get your head out of your ass.
- erik22h, on 01/09/2009, -0/+17Dear Ms. Chadwick, He clearly doesn't have your* $2.5M. If, in the .01% chance he actually does have the $2.5M, after 14 years of jail time, I think it's quite evident he's not giving it to you. Either way, stop being a bitch and let you ex-husband out of jail. Then, instead of spending his time making sure he doesn't get shanked by Jose or become Adolf Jr.'s girlfriend, he can write a book about what a bitch you are and you can finally get your* money.
- cl2yp71c, on 01/09/2009, -0/+16A friend of mine has been in jail with charges pending for over 2 years, and waiting.
- Whorebane, on 01/09/2009, -1/+17FTA: "For some, including Albert Momjian, the lawyer for Mr. Chadwick's ex-wife, the theory still holds. "There's no doubt in my mind that he has the money and could walk out of jail next week if he wanted to," says Mr. Momjian."
Either he really must be enjoying his time in jail, or his wife is a hardcore bitch. - plainOldFool, on 01/09/2009, -2/+18Maybe he's Texan. Don't be hatin'
- cubicledrone, on 01/09/2009, -0/+16"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense."
Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States - JoshReflek, on 01/09/2009, -0/+16if the bitch is causing the guy to be in jail for YEARS without being properly charged or processed, some hate for the chick who put him there, is in order.
unless, bluezinc, you blindly think women are above responsibility, then your comment makes complete sense - serendipitously, on 01/09/2009, -0/+16The justice system wrongly punishes persons convicted of crimes for not showing remorse. In many cases, people are wrongly convicted, and cannot show remorse. For those who are innocent and falsely show remorse, they fare much better in front of parole boards.
I don't think that Judges should automatically accept expert evidence, however the law states that they are able to reject it, and rely on their own judgement, where they can arrive at that judgement without relying on expert evidence. However, in the mental health field with three experts testifying that someone is not mentally unfit to stand trial, it is pretty scarey that a Judge has chosen to disregard that.
Often those who are judged mentally unfit, whether to stand trial or to have committed a trial are disproportionately punished compared to the comparator (sane) 'criminal'.
It is outrageous. - EricSchC1, on 01/09/2009, -0/+15Nevermind the fact that it also costs more to incarcerate a person for one year than it does to send them to school. If prison time was proven to be effective as a punishment/rehabilitation, I wouldn't mind this, but it doesn't. It infuriates me to hear so many people hold the attitude of "lock them up and keep them away from me and my family" when its horribly ineffective and costly to the taxpayer.
(This also punches giant gaping holes in the fiscally-conservative arguments in favor of stricter punishments over "socialized" education. Personally, I'd rather have socialized education that might actually work than socialized rehabilitation methods that have been proven not to work.) - thecatcantalk, on 01/09/2009, -0/+14Tell that to the guy who's been sitting on a metal bunk eating bad food in a 6' x 8' cell...I'm sure he'll agree that the Wall Street Journal is a sensationalist rag staffed by lousy writers.
- EricSchC1, on 01/09/2009, -1/+15"Well, if you don't get yourself in a situation like this to begin with, you have nothing to worry about. I feel no pity for this man."
I'll be sure to write you a letter, telling you the exact same thing, if you ever become falsely imprisoned or imprisoned w/out being charged any crime...y'know, assuming the violence and ass-raping doesn't get the best of you first. - radu79, on 01/09/2009, -0/+14Wow..
That's really ***** up.
IANAL, but I think your boyfriend had two of his rights guaranteed by the cosntitution violated:
1. You have the right to confront the accuser.
2. You have the right to a fast trial (if you chose so).
Can't he contact ACLU or something and sue that *****? - seventhc, on 01/09/2009, -1/+15If he murdered someone he would have at least been charged and released by now but to hold anyone this long without any criminal charges is a clear indication of how the system abuses its power and spits on the very constitution so many people have died to protect. It's a real tragedy that this can happen in this day and age, and it scares me.
- JokersSmile, on 01/09/2009, -1/+15I'm pretty sure he's referring to Kevin Mitnick.
- inactive, on 01/09/2009, -0/+13And Madoff still gets house arrest with an ankle bracelet in fancy NYC accomodations. Sigh. No wonder we all "respect" the "justice" system so much.
- cambob76, on 01/09/2009, -4/+16Free Hat!
- Cojafoji, on 01/09/2009, -4/+16You're a ***** idiot blue. Dugg for a good point lonewolf.
- cubicledrone, on 01/09/2009, -0/+12"they aren't given the same due-process rights as criminal defendants"
That's a rather alarming sentence. Beyond the simple fact that nobody is "given" rights, if person A and person B are treated differently under the law, that would be a black-letter violation of the 14th amendment.
I've always found the whole idea of people being locked up for contempt of court somewhat confusing.
First of all, depriving someone of their freedom without due process is a violation of a number of Constitutional amendments, among them the fourth, fifth, sixth and eighth.
There is also the seperation of powers issue, in that the judiciary "charging" someone with a crime usurps the authority of both the executive and the grand jury, and of course the first amendment issue that the government cannot sanction the free exercise of speech and the press. - EricSchC1, on 01/09/2009, -0/+12Sad as it may be, that sounds damn near identical to our treatment of people who've ended up in Guantanamo too. This beast (the justice system and the general disregard by the "haves" for the "have-nots") is ill, from the head down and needs to be put down already.
- AriaStar, on 01/09/2009, -0/+11Well, not only did chump's father not get a trial, but not everyone in jail is actually guilty. There are plenty of people found guilty who are later cleared of charges. Sucks when your only alibi is that you were home sick that night watching TV by yourself.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 159 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is