Tag Archives: Appeal

Amanda Knox Could Still Be In (Double) Jeopardy

Yesterday, Amanda Knox was acquitted of murder.  If that had happened in the United States, she would be a completely free woman.  In our country, you cannot be tried for the same crime twice.  This protection is afforded under the Fifth Amendment and is known as Double Jeopardy.  Once you’ve been found "not guilty" or once you’ve been acquitted, the alleged crime is behind you.  Under this protection, O.J. Simpson could potentially go onto live television and tell everyone that he really did murder his wife, and there is no way he could be criminally prosecuted for it.  He would not go back to jail.  That’s how the justice system works in the United States.

But that is not how the justice system works in Italy.  Amanda Knox was acquitted of murder on Monday, but by Tuesday, Italian prosecutor, Giuliano Mignini, had already told the media that he was going to try to appeal Knox’s acquittal.  Maybe you need a second to wrap your head around that…  Amanda Knox was acquitted of murder and is on her way home to the United States as I type this, but she is not 100% free yet.  The Italian prosecutors intend to take this to their country’s highest appeals court, the Court of Cassation.  Once there, that court can decide whether the original sentence where Amanda Knox was found guilty is the one that will stick, or if the recent acquittal which just set her free is the one that will stick.  Her final destiny has not yet been determined.

So while Amanda Knox is on her way home today, depending on how things shake out, she could be making a return trip to Italy in the future, and it wouldn’t be for tourism.  Say what you will about the American justice system, but double jeopardy is at least one thing our citizens don’t have to fear.  We’ll be keeping an eye on this one.

 

A Win For Medical Marijuana in California

LAKE ELSINORE, Calif., Aug. 30, 2011 — After a lengthy court battle, the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division Two ruled against the city of Lake Elsinore in its efforts to prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries within its boundaries.

In December of 2009, the City Council members of Lake Elsinore voted to ban medical marijuana operations in the city, which included the collective called R Side Medical among other names, owned by Luis “Carlos” Stahl and his son Eric. Because the state law conflicts with the federal law on the legality of marijuana, the constitutionality of such bans are being challenged across California. Many lawyers, such as the Stahls’ attorney, Christopher M. Glew of the Law Offices of Glew & Kim, contend that the ban presents a serious legal quandary that may eventually reach the Supreme Court.

The Stahls’ collective operated under a city-issued business license in Lake Elsinore, and Carlos Stahl insists that his license did not prohibit him from distributing marijuana to its members. In March, after a four-month investigation, the city formally disagreed, serving search warrants and arresting three people, including Carlos Stahl’s wife, Carol Stahl.

“The Stahls had been a victim of police harassment for months, which showed blatant bias against the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes,” explains Glew. “We are happy that the Court of Appeal saw the legality of our case and ruled in favor of our client, the Stahls. This is a victory for not just the Stahls, but for the people who depend on these dispensaries for relief from illnesses.”

The Stahls will waste no time in reopening their business at its most recent location on Casino Drive, yet will be required to strictly follow all city codes, according to Lake Elsinore Code Enforcement Manager Robin Chipman.

Another Federal Court Declares Obamacare Mandate Unconstitutional

The 11th Circuit court of appeals in Atlanta has dealt another blow to Obama’s health care law ruling it unconstitutional to require Americans to purchase health insurance.

The majority stated in its opinion that the mandate ” represents a wholly novel and potentially unbounded assertion of congressional authority: the ability to compel Americans to purchase an expensive health insurance product they have elected not to buy, and to make them re-purchase that insurance product every month for their entire lives”.

According to Betsy McCaughey of Defend Your Healthcare the effects of this ruling might be visible almost immediately.

The impact of the 11th circuit ruling is likely to be substantial and immediate:

  1. State governments will slow down or halt their preparations to implement state insurance exchanges as required under the law.
  2. Pressure will build on the administration to scale back or repeal its two costly new health entitlements, which have not gone into effect yet: (1) a costly expansion of Medicaid eligibility and Medicaid benefits and (2) subsidies for middle income people to pay for private health plans on state exchanges. The decision today blew a hole in a major source of revenue to pay for these new entitlements: the penalties on individuals who fail to enroll and employers who fail to provide it to their workers. Without this revenue, the remaining provisions of the law create a large budget deficit.
  3. This is good news for employers who have held off on hiring because of concerns about future mandatory health insurance requirements on employers. If this decision is confirmed by the United States Supreme Court next term, it will remove a barrier to job growth.

While dealing the controversial law a blow, the court also struck down a lower court’s ruling that the entire law is unconstitutional despite the lack of a severability clause.

This court marks the last stop before the Supreme Court for the law suit that was filed by the Attorney Generals of 26 states who want the law repealed. The highest court in the land is expected to take the case in October 2011 when they convene, but a decision may come as late as next Summer which would put it right in the middle of the 2012 Presidential election.

In an effort to downplay yet another negative ruling against the Affordable Care Act, a statement from an Obama aid said, “Today’s ruling is one of many decisions on the Affordable Care Act that we will see in the weeks and months ahead. In the end, we are confident the Act will ultimately be upheld as constitutional”.

The single dissenting opinion was held by a Clinton appointee on the panel and expresses the typical progressive stance that the commerce clause has grown to let Congress do just about anything and should continue to be interpreted that way. Judge Stanley Marcus said that this ruling ignores “the undeniable fact that Congress’ commerce power has grown exponentially over the past two centuries and is now generally accepted as having afforded Congress the authority to create rules regulating large areas of our national economy”.

Should the law be struck down by the Supreme Court, President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid may well see the only major accomplishment of their political careers erased.

 

Activist Judges: A Closer look.

    Last week, when  Florida’s Judge Vinson shredded President Obama’s vaunted Socialized Medicine Healthcare Law, he was called an “Activist Judge.”  The Obama administration was caught in a shell game when they originally campaigned to create Obamacare, as it is widely known. They called the mandated fees for Obamacare taxes at one point, and later on argued that it wasn’t a tax. Tax or no tax, fees or mandated charges, you cannot, and never will be allowed to force the American people to buy a service or product, especially one cooked up by Rule of law/Constitution- ignoring Liberals. At the root of it all is the Unconstitutionality of  forcing Americans to purchase any product, whether it be the favored Che and Mao t-shirts the radical leftists are so proud to wear, or Healthcare insurance. Judge Vinson did his homework, before this ruling and did it well. He  did not take this responsibility lightly as he stated after his ruling that said the individual mandate in Obamacare is illegal , and since that becomes null and void, the whole Socialized Medicine house of cards comes tumbling down with it. Here is his Judge Vinson’s statement:

““Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void. This has been a difficult decision to reach, and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications,” Vinson writes.

   As many expected this will go to the Supreme Court of the United States to be decided. Judge Vinson made a very calculated and clear ruling on forcing Americans to buy Government run healthcare insurance: It is against The Rule of Law. While Judge Vinson has a very long  history of fair and just interpretations of U.S  laws and our Constitutional rights and protections, parts of our society, and even our very own President came out and labeled this honorable protector of  all Americans and our freedoms as a “Political Activist Judge.”  That tactic is right out of Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals,” the companion booklet of  “The Communist Manifesto,” which teaches radicals how to overthrow a government to insert Socialism/Communism. Labeling Judge Vinson an Activist Judge right away to further promote Obamacare and Socialism in  America falls right under rule 13* from Mr. Alinsky:

“13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and ‘frozen.’…

     “…any target can always say, ‘Why do you center on me when there are others to blame as well?’ When your ‘freeze the target,’ you disregard these [rational but distracting] arguments…. Then, as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the ‘others’ come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target…’
     “One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other.” (pps.127-134)”

 

  So there we see the true reason Liberal Democrats, agenda-serving Leftits Media puppets, and even our very own President Barack Hussein Obama deemed it important to label this honorable Judge Vinson as some kind of extreme activist unworthy of the bench. Herr Goebbels, the Propaganda Minister of another era would be proud of this tactic. I find it disgusting and a serious offense to America and The Rule of law. Judge Vinson has no history of Judicial activism what-so-ever ! 

When looking for actual Activist Judges today, we need to look no further than the very controversial and radical 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court just slapped down five of their misguided, illegal, radical activist-laden rulings in a row recently. As reported in an article over at FoxNews.com,** we see actual proof of Judicial activism:

“The Supreme Court may be sending a message to one of the country’s most liberal appeals courts, unanimously overturning five consecutive cases out of the 9th Circuit in less than a week”

“That’s an indication this court is way out of the mainstream,” said Kent Scheidegger, legal director for the California-based Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. “They’re getting impatient with them. They just keep coming back with this stuff.” 

In a Jan. 19 reversal, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that the 9th Circuit committed a “clear error” by overturning the murder conviction in the case of a Sacramento man. The Supreme Court accused the circuit of having “failed to accord the required deference” to the state court’s decision — in other words, the 9th Circuit horned in on the state’s business when it shouldn’t have.  Kennedy accused the circuit of demonstrating “judicial disregard” for “sound and established principles.” (emphasis mine)

  With this very important information showing the activist Judges within the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals malfeasance, people should be asking why our President and Liberal Democrats refuse to label  them as Judicial Activists ? Oh, wait, could that be because they support their Liberal agenda? As Sarah Palin would say: “You betcha! ”  How about the so-called Mainstream Media here ? If the MSM doesn’t want Americans calling them leftist puppets, why do they refuse to call out the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ? The following networks need to answer that question: MSNBC, CNN , CBS, ABC, NBC. I won’t hold my breath waiting for that answer, but until I get one, the before-mentioned groups willl be referred to as Liberal Puppets, Obama-sheep, and all around  dangerous propagandists lacking any form of unbiased Journalistic integrity they show themselves to be today! Clear enough ? Lay off of Honorable American Judges like Roger Vinson and do some real reporting on the true “Activist Judges” in America today.  As far as President Obama and his leftist propaganda minions trying to label Judge Vinson as an activist with exactly zero basis for it, save your breath, as we no longer believe you any more than we desire your Socialized medicine that you are trying to force upon us using the Alinsky tactics mentioned above.

      In 2012, lets remember that every Democratic Senator just voted against the stated demands of the American people that Obamacare be repealed. If that doesn’t tell people who needs to be fired for ignoring the true wishes of the people, I don’t know what does ! That isn’t the actions of true representatives of the people, that is the action of self-serving Tyrants. Remember them in 2012.

 

*http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm

** http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/02/hint-supreme-court-rejects-rulings-row-west-coast-bench/