A Thread for Democrats Being Useless

[theprestige]

Criminal charges are supposed to precede arrest.

Haha no. Criminal charges aren't even brought until after the preliminary hearing, which happens after the arrest.

Preliminary hearing - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not to mention people get arrested for DUI/OVI, trespassing, domestic violence, shoplifting, and a myriad of other misdeeds, all the time, without a prosecutor being anywhere near the encounter or filing a single iota of criminal charges.

 

[I Am The Scum]

Notice that Prestige completely ignored the "he isn't supporting terrorism" part of your post.
Prestige, how did this person support terrorism?

Modern right-wing values demands that the government is trusted implicitly. The government said he supports terrorism, so he supports terrorism. That's it.

 

[Donal]

but they are required to do so within 24 hours. At least in New York. Otherwise, you end up with another Kalief Browder

 

[theprestige]

he's not with his family,

typical of incarceration; doesn't count as "disappeared".

there have been no formal charges,

formal charges take some time, and typically don't happen until after probable cause has been adjudicated at a preliminary hearing.

the apprehending agency has no jurisdiction,

this could have legs, but is also subject to formal hearings and adjudication, before the jurisdiction is established (or not)

and his lawyer's writ of habeas corpus has not been executed.

needs a hearing and adjudication; a writ from the lawer is not automatically a court order

Again, you quibble about the word "disappear"

If you didn't mean "disappear", then you shouldn't have used the word

 

[theprestige]

but they are required to do so within 24 hours. At least in New York. Otherwise, you end up with another Kalief Browder

Not true. It's a lot more nuanced than that.

Kind of like how the Miranda warning doesn't entitle you to everything some people think it does, and doesn't automatically apply in a lot of situations people assume it does.

 

[Donal]

Haha no. Criminal charges aren't even brought until after the preliminary hearing, which happens after the arrest.

Cops are supposed to tell you the charge. Even if not formal, government enforcers aren't supposed to just grab you up and figure it out later. The ICE agents had no business at Khalil's door.

Preliminary hearing - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not to mention people get arrested for DUI/OVI, trespassing, domestic violence, shoplifting, and a myriad of other misdeeds, all the time, without a prosecutor being anywhere near the encounter or filing a single iota of criminal charges.

but they are required to do so within 24 hours. At least in New York. Otherwise, you end up with another Kalief Browder

 

[Ziggurat]

he's not with his family, there have been no formal charges, the apprehending agency has no jurisdiction, and his lawyer's writ of habeas corpus has not been executed. Again, you quibble about the word "disappear" because you are too morally and intellectually bankrupt to actually discuss this.

It's not a quibble. It's a major distinction. Unjustified arrests happen all the time, and there's a process to deal with them when they happen. The whole point of disappearing someone is that when it happens, there is no process to deal with it. When you actually disappear someone, process becomes irrelevant.

But that obviously hasn't happened here. He isn't disappeared, and the fact that he isn't is actually very, very relevant. His case will be heard before the court, and the court will examine the legal issues. I'm not too interested in getting into the weeds on that, in no small part because so far we've got basically no idea what the case against him is. Until we know that, we can't really conclude anything about its validity. But when you say ridiculous ◊◊◊◊ like he's been disappeared when it's so obvious he hasn't, you aren't addressing any of the actual legal issues either. So you're in absolutely no position to lecture me about not addressing the issues, when you're just making ◊◊◊◊ up.

 

[Donal]

typical of incarceration; doesn't count as "disappeared".

Typical to ship them across the country with no formal charges and threatening to deport a permanent resident?

formal charges take some time, and typically don't happen until after probable cause has been adjudicated at a preliminary hearing.

Its been 4 days

this could have legs, but is also subject to formal hearings and adjudication, before the jurisdiction is established (or not)

Then he shouldn't be detained in an ICE facility in Louisiana.

needs a hearing and adjudication; a writ from the lawer is not automatically a court order

then get his ass out of there and at least to a facility in the area where his 8-month-pregnant wife can see him. And maybe present some formal charges. ICE agents claimed they had a warrant, they should have formal charges ready.

If you didn't mean "disappear", then you shouldn't have used the word

He was effectively disappeared. Again, you can't discuss the merit, so you need to cry about language.

I get it, the Constitution doesn't apply to brown people or people who disagree with you.

 

[I Am The Scum]

If Mahmoud had a warrant for his arrest from New Jersey, it would have taken more work to extradite him than it did to ship him off to Louisiana. It is still unclear why he was moved to Louisiana in the first place (outside the obvious nefarious reasons), but I'm not gonna hold out hope that the resident Republicans will be able to make sense of this obvious government overreach.

 

[Ziggurat]

ICE agents claimed they had a warrant

If they had a warrant, then that means that a judge thought they had evidence and probable cause. That's how warrants work.

He was effectively disappeared.

No, he wasn't. Again, do you not know what "disappeared" even means?

Again, you can't discuss the merit

Don't even try to talk about the merits when you keep just making ◊◊◊◊ up.

 

[Ziggurat]

If Mahmoud had a warrant for his arrest from New Jersey, it would have taken more work to extradite him than it did to ship him off to Louisiana.

If it's a federal warrant, why would extradition even be relevant?

 

[Donal]

If they had a warrant, then that means that a judge thought they had evidence and probable cause. That's how warrants work.

But they wouldn't present a copy to Khalil's wife and when his lawyer asked for it, they hung up on her. They seemed surprised to find out Khalil was not on a student visa but has a green card. Hence I said "claimed". And they whole "had probable cause" things is why I harp on there being no formal charges.

No, he wasn't. Again, do you not know what "disappeared" even means?

Great, where can we see him?

Don't even try to talk about the merits when you keep just making ◊◊◊◊ up.

there's no merit, that's why you need this nonsense.

 

[I Am The Scum]

If it's a federal warrant, why would extradition even be relevant?

What federal warrant? What federal or interstate crime has he conceivably committed?

 

[theprestige]

Cops are supposed to tell you the charge.

No, that's what the arraignment hearing is for: to tell you what you're being charged with, so that you can mount a proper defense.

That said, the police will typically explain to you what they're arresting you for - often after they've effected the arrest itself. And of course their articulation of the circumstances, their suspicions, and their probable cause is in the police report, to which you are entitled a copy.

But no, the matter of probable cause and the charges to be filed is not resolved instantaneously at the time of arrest. It's usually a multi-day process at best, from the time of arrest, to the probable cause and arraignment hearings.

 

[theprestige]

What federal warrant? What federal or interstate crime has he conceivably committed?

Promoting terrorism or terrorist organizations.

 

[Ziggurat]

Great, where can we see him?

"We"? His lawyers can see him in prison. You don't get to.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Promoting terrorism or terrorist organizations.

there was no warrant - or even accusation.
The claim was that he was in the country illegally - which he wasn't.
A judge made it clear that there is something fishy going on - so what makes you think you know better?

As always, Republicans rest easy in the knowledge that Democrats would never do to them what they are doing.

 

[I Am The Scum]

Promoting terrorism or terrorist organizations.

And I will (while expecting an identical result) ask the question that you have ignored several times: What did he do to promote terrorism?

 

[Donal]

"We"? His lawyers can see him in prison. You don't get to.

Which hasn't happened

 

[thaiboxerken]

I think you have a very mistaken idea of what due process entails. Like you probably aren't aware that an arrest is followed by a preliminary hearing, where among other things the court determines whether there is probable cause for the arrest. Formal charges don't even get filed until after probable cause has been found at this hearing.

So, yes, I do think the police can legally arrest people long before the question of cause is even examined.

You are wrong. It is a violation of the 4th amendment to arrest a person without probable cause or a warrant.