FW: [ai news updates] Digest Number 1958
Dianne Tramutola-Lawson
From: aicap...@yahoogroups.ca [mailto:aicap...@yahoogroups.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 2:05 AM
To: aicap...@yahoogroups.ca
Subject: [ai news updates] Digest Number 1958
4 Messages
Digest #1958
Messages
1.1
Extradition
Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:19 pm (EST) . Posted by:
"invo...@loggos.com.br"
Gary McKinnon makes plea to stop hacker's US extradition saying 'fragile' Asperger's sufferer will not survive the country's prison system
McKinnon has called for government to prevent extradition of Lauri Love
Mr Love, 31, faces up to 99 years in US jail and fine of $9m if convicted
His family and supporters argue he would take his own life if extradited
By Claire Ellicot For The Daily Mail
: 00:22 GMT, 13 October 2016 |
Updated: 00:22 GMT, 13 October 2016
Gary McKinnon has called on the Government to prevent the extradition of fellow computer hacker and Asperger’s sufferer Lauri Love
Gary McKinnon has called on the Government to prevent the extradition of fellow computer hacker and Asperger’s sufferer Lauri Love.
He warned that the ‘fragile’ vicar’s son would not survive the US prison system and urged the Home Secretary to halt the case
.
Mr Love, 31, faces up to 99 years in a US jail and a fine of $9million if convicted, but his family and supporters argue he would take his own life if extradited.
Describing his own experience as ‘corrosive’ and a ‘nightmare’, Mr McKinnon revealed he planned to take his own life rather than face trial in the US.
‘Speaking from my own experience, the incessant worrying eats away at your nerves. The possibility of spending decades, possibly the rest of your life, in a foreign jail always haunts you,’ he said.
‘You develop your own form of madness. It’s a nightmare that wages a war of attrition on your already damaged mental health. And one of the worst things is watching the destructive effect it has on your family.
I made up my mind that I couldn’t go to the US if I lost the case. I bought enough potassium chloride – the third chemical in the trio of lethal injections used in US executions – to stop my heart.’Mr McKinnon’s extradition was halted after then Home Secretary Theresa May intervened in his case following a campaign by the Mail. But the law has since changed and the decision to extradite an accused person to the States now rests with the courts.
University student Mr Love is alleged to have stolen huge amounts of data from US agencies including the Federal Reserve, the US Army, the Department of Defence, Nasa and the FBI using his home computer.
Mr Love, 31, faces up to 99 years in a US jail and a fine of $9million if convicted, but his family and supporters argue he would take his own life if extradited
But the US government are yet to produce any evidence against him, despite requesting his arrest which was carried out in 2013. Since then, the Asperger’s sufferer has faced a three-year legal battle against extradition.
Last month, a judge agreed that Mr Love should be extradited. It is expected that Home Secretary Amber Rudd will rubber-stamp the agreement imminently. But his legal team plan to appeal the decision.
Mr Love’s campaign has attracted the support of politicians including Mr McKinnon’s MP David Burrowes who raised the issue at Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday.
Mr McKinnon, whose case was described as ‘almost identical’ to Mr Love’s, also pledged his backing and urged the Government to prevent the case going ahead.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3835446/Gary-McKinnon-makes-plea-stop-hacker-s-extradition-saying-fragile-Asperger-s-sufferer-not-survive-country-s-prison-system.html
Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:25 pm (EST) . Posted by:
Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey renews attacks on sanctuary cities
Posted By Ryan Deto on Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 6:15 PM
CP Photo by Ryan Deto
Toomey at a campaign stop in Pittsburgh
This summer, Senator Pat Toomey (R-Pennsylvania) introduced a bill that would cut federal funding to cities that institute sanctuary-city policies. These policies prevent local law enforcement from communicating with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement or holding undocumented immigrants for extended periods without a federal warrant.
In July, Toomey’s bill failed to obtain the majority vote necessary to clear the Senate. But at an Oct. 12 campaign stop in Pittsburgh, he reiterated his support for defunding and ending sanctuary cities.
“We did not succeed that day, but I am not giving up,” said Toomey. “I am going to continue in this effort because we have to end sanctuary cities.”
Toomey held his campaign stop at Lodge 1 of the Pittsburgh Fraternal Order of Police, where he held a roundtable discussion with local law-enforcement leaders and Republican officials. Toomey discussed legislation he has introduced that he says is law-enforcement-friendly, including allowing local police access to military-style gear, exempting police and firefighters from pension offsets related to Social Security, and creating a rule that would weigh in favor of the death penalty for people who kill an officer serving in the line of duty.
The Pittsburgh Fraternal Order of Police has endorsed Toomey in his re-election bid, but FOP Lodge 1 PAC chairman Anthony Beatty said the group has not done any work with the senator on his sanctuary-city bill. The FOP did not issue a comment on whether it supports the bill.
Toomey called sanctuary policies “madness.”
“The fact that a person is here illegally in these sanctuary cities, confers a special legal protection that makes it impossible for the police to cooperate,” said Toomey. “This endangers all of us; the city of Philadelphia is arguably the most radical sanctuary city in America, and it’s gotta end.”
However, a 2015 study by the American Immigration Council shows that immigrants commit crimes at lower rates than native-born populations, and data from Syracuse University shows that the majority of undocumented immigrants detained have no local criminal record. When asked if he has any plans to address the millions of law-abiding undocumented immigrants, Toomey said that that is a “controversial” but “separate issue.”
“That is like saying what do we do about the flaws in our tax code," said Toomey. "It's another issue, it's important, but it's unrelated to the dangerous security issue that arise from sanctuary cities.”
Immigrant-rights advocates disagree with that notion. Sundrop Carter, of the Pennsylvania Immigration and Citizenship Coalition, told City Paper last month that politicians attacking sanctuary policies are merely attacking cities that have implemented welcoming strategies for immigrants. Carter adds that deportations are occurring in every county in Pennsylvania, even those with sanctuary policies.
Additionally, as CP reported in July, advocates say sanctuary policies can protect undocumented immigrants who are charged with minor crimes from falling into the hands of immigration officers. Helen Gym, a city councilor from Philadelphia, attended the People’s Convention in July and said that sanctuary policies can actually increase trust between undocumented immigrants and local law enforcement
“We don’t want people to be afraid to call the police to report crimes like burglary, etc.,” said Gym. “It is not the responsibility of local police departments to enforce immigration laws, since they are federal laws.”
Toomey also said at the press conference that he does not support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and that creating one would be “problematic.”
Toomey is in a neck-and-neck race with Democrat Katie McGinty in his bid for re-election. Real Clear Politics, which averages out poll data, has Toomey with razor-thin .04 percent lead over McGinty.
http://www.pghcitypaper.com/PolitiCrap/archives/2016/10/12/pennsylvania-senator-pat-toomey-renews-attacks-on-sanctuary-cities
Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:30 pm (EST) . Posted by:
"knickenberg katharina"
October 12, 2016
Contrast of Justice: Sheriff Joe won’t get the Hillary Treatment
By James Longstreet
The Department of Justice is taking Sheriff Joe Arpaio to court. He will be asked to provide computers and hard drives. He will be accused of breaking the law for attempting to enforce a law, a federal law.
He is going to court because he was instructed by authorities to not enforce or attempt to enforce federal law. From azcentral.com:
“Federal prosecutors said Tuesday they will pursue a criminal-contempt charge against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for defying orders to halt the immigration-enforcement operations ….”
“Arpaio’s charge stems from a December 2011 federal-court order that barred his agency from enforcing federal immigration law.”
Protestors of Arpaio became elated when the decision was announced. They chanted slogans in a foreign language to display their joy. The irony is thick.
It is noted that this move is lacking precedent and is out of the ordinary.
“As rare as it is to have a federal judge refer the head of a law-enforcement agency for prosecution, it is even rarer that the Department of Justice would pick up that gauntlet and move forward with the charge,” said Paul Charlton, a former U.S. attorney for the District of Arizona. “It’s unheard of.”
Sheriff Joe is up for reelection in November.
Compare and contrast.
Isn’t this why Hillary wasn’t taken to court, because to do so would have been to pursue without precedent and would be to proceed in a fashion “unheard of”? To proceed would have been to politically interfere with an election?
Hillary Clinton was not taken to court. She broke, did not attempt to enforce but broke federal law. She destroyed official documents. She had been ordered to preserve and present those documents, computers and hard drives. She did not.
In fact, the Department of Justice, according to reports, held her hand, tipped her off, dished out immunities and destroyed computers and hard drives. The head of the DOJ met in private with her spouse who was that person’s former boss.
Sheriff Joe’s wife won’t be meeting with Loretta Lynch. There will be no communication secretly held between the DOJ and the Sheriff. The DOJ won’t be giving out immunities or smashing Joe’s computers. Apparently under this bifurcated justice system some win, some lose. The patriot stands where?
The Department of Justice is taking Sheriff Joe Arpaio to court. He will be asked to provide computers and hard drives. He will be accused of breaking the law for attempting to enforce a law, a federal law.
He is going to court because he was instructed by authorities to not enforce or attempt to enforce federal law. From azcentral.com:
“Federal prosecutors said Tuesday they will pursue a criminal-contempt charge against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for defying orders to halt the immigration-enforcement operations ….”
“Arpaio’s charge stems from a December 2011 federal-court order that barred his agency from enforcing federal immigration law.”
Protestors of Arpaio became elated when the decision was announced. They chanted slogans in a foreign language to display their joy. The irony is thick.
It is noted that this move is lacking precedent and is out of the ordinary.
“As rare as it is to have a federal judge refer the head of a law-enforcement agency for prosecution, it is even rarer that the Department of Justice would pick up that gauntlet and move forward with the charge,” said Paul Charlton, a former U.S. attorney for the District of Arizona. “It’s unheard of.”
Sheriff Joe is up for reelection in November.
Compare and contrast.
Isn’t this why Hillary wasn’t taken to court, because to do so would have been to pursue without precedent and would be to proceed in a fashion “unheard of”? To proceed would have been to politically interfere with an election?
Hillary Clinton was not taken to court. She broke, did not attempt to enforce but broke federal law. She destroyed official documents. She had been ordered to preserve and present those documents, computers and hard drives. She did not.
In fact, the Department of Justice, according to reports, held her hand, tipped her off, dished out immunities and destroyed computers and hard drives. The head of the DOJ met in private with her spouse who was that person’s former boss.
Sheriff Joe’s wife won’t be meeting with Loretta Lynch. There will be no communication secretly held between the DOJ and the Sheriff. The DOJ won’t be giving out immunities or smashing Joe’s computers. Apparently under this bifurcated justice system some win, some lose. The patriot stands where?
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/10/a_contrast_of_justice_sheriff_joe_wont_get_the_hillary_treatment.html#ixzz4NNss6ZXA
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/10/a_contrast_of_justice_sheriff_joe_wont_get_the_hillary_treatment.html
3.1
U.S.
Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:37 pm (EST) . Posted by:
Court's immigration ruling could affect Texas "sanctuary city" debate
An Illinois judge ruled that federal officials can't ask local jails to hold on to possible criminal immigrants without a warrant.
by Julián Aguilar Oct. 13, 2016 12:01 AM
H. Michael Karshis
A decision last month by a federal judge in Illinois undercutting a major tool the federal government uses to deport criminal immigrants could ripple across the country, changing how local jails hold people thought to be in the country illegally.
On September 30, U.S. District Judge John Z. Lee ruled that the Department of Homeland Security’s use of detainers — formal requests from federal immigration authorities for a local jail to hold non-citizen inmates — exceeds its legal authority.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement generally issues the requests when it thinks someone being held on local or state charges might also be deportable for violating the country’s immigration law. When it receives a detainer on one of its inmates, a local jail typically holds that person beyond the time it ordinarily would, usually 48 hours, giving federal authorities a chance to come get them.
Lee ruled that the detainers were “void” because “immigration detainers issued under ICE’s detention program seek to detain subjects without a warrant — even in the absence of a determination by ICE that the subjects are likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained.”
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/10/13/courts-ruling-immigration-detainers-could-have-rip/
A Guide For Canadians Imprisoned Abroad
http://www.voyage.gc.ca/publications/imprisonment-emprisonnement-eng
Registration of Canadians Abroad
http://www.voyage.gc.ca/register
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963
http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_2_1963.pdf
International Transfer of Offenders Application
http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/frmlrs/pdf/0308E.pdf
DATABASE of Canadians/Foreigners Detained in U.S.
http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/aicap-aifap/database
Civil Rights for Offender Transfers
http://www.angelfire.com/mi3/transferofoffenders/index.html
Bill C-15: International Transfer of Offenders Act
May 13, 2004
http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_ls.asp?Parl=37&Ses=3&ls=c15
Prison lottery: Canadian inmates in U.S. often barred from transferring home
http://www.metronews.ca/news/canada/2016/06/23/prison-lottery-canadian-inmates-in-u-s-often-barred-from-transferring-home.html
AICAP AIFAP Legal News Listgroup
https://ca.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/aicap-aifap/info
[Set to DAILY DIGEST]
AICAP Legal Notice
http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/aicap-aifap/conversations/messages
http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/aicap-aifap/links/all ~
http://www.angelfire.com/trek/deptofcorruption ~
http://www.realcostofprisons.org/coalition.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The information provided herein is not legal advice.
Transmission of this information is not intended to create,
and receipt by you does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.
~In commemoration of Al FedriGucci estate, founder of AICAP/AIFAP
(Alliance of Incarcerated Canadians/Foreigners in American Prisons)~ http://www.angelfire.com/mi2/aicap
PEACE MEDALLION NOMINEE ~
http://www.angelfire.com/clone/ucoc/mensa-workout.html
-------------------------------------------------------
• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use