This is for topical issues effecting our fair world... you can quit snickering anytime. Note: It is the desire of the leadership of SFDebris Conglomerate that all posters maintain a civil and polite bearing in this forum, regardless of how you feel about any particular issue. Violators will be turned over to Captain Janeway for experimentation.
Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Sat Jun 23, 2018 5:06 am
My core is...even law-breakers still have rights. That's part of the process. When you're arrested, you don't lose all your rights. The way ICE treats the people in their custody is not humane. The way they go about their business is not in accordance with the rule of law.
THAT is the crux of the issue. THAT is what we are protesting over.
You say that the way ICE treats people in custody is not humane. As far as I know, their conditions are similar to conditions in any prison.
This is the issue.
When a judge sends you to prison for a crime, they say "you will serve one week in prison" or "you will stay five years in prison" or "you have a life sentence in prison."
When ICE gets somebody, they say "You will stay in this cage as long as we want you to, and if you don't sign this you might never be able to find your child again."
There is a due process involved in the prosecution of crime. ICE has no due process. ICE has powers above and beyond what is needed, and above and beyond what would be acceptable under the Rule of Law.
Oh, that! Sorry. What you're talking about is when someone is convicted of a crime. In this case, they haven't been convicted of anything.
Huh. If I just leave it at that it sounds worse, doesn't it? But people are jailed for an unspecified time before the trial. That's what this is.
Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Sun Jun 24, 2018 7:46 am
So you don't see anything wrong with indefinite pre-trial detainment?
"Indefinite" means "lasting for an unknown or unstated length of time," so my most exact answer would be that I don't see a problem with that. Indefinite and lengthy together are a problem, but lengthy is relative. The run to a trial can last years, and trials themselves may be lengthy, and it's allowable for the government to keep someone detained for that time if there is a valid reason. With the huge influx of illegal immigrants, and with their habit of not turning up for their hearings, I'm OK with it a lengthy detention for illegal immigrants.
Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:53 am
Are they jailed indefinitely and without trial?
They can be. As long as you are in contempt of court of a Grand Jury hearing, possibly longer if they have to convene a new session and you changed your mind and will answer any questions put to you by the DA.
Last edited by Robovski on Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Admiral X wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:51 pm
Wasn't there a guy who was in jail for contempt until he told the judge what his name was or something like that?
That's civil contempt. Don't mix it up with criminal contempt, where you can't get around it by complying with the court.
From Wikipedia:
The imposed party is said to "hold the keys" to his or her own cell, thus conventional due process is not required.
"I know what you’re thinking now. You’re thinking 'Oh my god, that’s treating other people with respect gone mad!'" When I am writing in this font, I am writing in my moderator voice.
Spam-desu
Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Mon Jun 25, 2018 3:53 am
Are they jailed indefinitely and without trial?
They can be. As long as you are in contempt of court of a Grand Jury hearing, possibly longer if they have to convene a new session and you changed your mind and will answer any questions put to you by the DA.
Then that law should also be changed.
"Believe me, there’s nothing so terrible that someone won’t support it."
— Un Lun Dun, China Mieville
