August 17, 2010
— Gabriel Malor The Navy brought these six guys back to Virginia in April after they fired on the USS Ashland, in what was probably a case of mistaken identity (I mean, who thinks piracy against the US Navy is a good idea?!?). They were charged with a bunch of things, but the most important and obvious of the charges was piracy, which carries a mandatory life sentence.
The defense raised a troubling argument: "piracy" is not defined in statute, but rather by Supreme Court case law. In particular, an 1820 case: "We have, therefore, no hesitation in declaring that piracy, by the law of nations, is robbery upon the sea," Justice Joseph Story wrote for the majority in United States v. Smith. The defendanst argued that they did not complete their act of piracy (they didn't actually rob the USS Ashland because it blew their little raft to smithereens) and so cannot be properly charged as pirates. This would be distinct from an attempted piracy charge, which I guess wasn't or couldn't be (?) made.
A judge on Tuesday dismissed piracy charges against six Somali nationals accused of attacking a Navy ship off the coast of Africa, concluding the U.S. government failed to make the case their alleged actions amounted to piracy.The dismissal of the piracy count by U.S. District Judge Raymond A. Jackson tosses the most serious charge against the men, but leaves intact seven other charges related to the alleged April 10 attack on the USS Ashland in the Gulf of Aden. A piracy conviction carries a mandatory life term.
"The court finds that the government has failed to establish that any unauthorized acts of violence or aggression committed on the high seas constitutes piracy as defined by the law of nations," Jackson wrote in granting the defense motion to dismiss.
Five other Somalis are before a different district court judge and making the same argument. One Somali pleaded guilty. Bet he feels like an idiot.
Much more on the background of the piracy issue was in the Wall Street Journal over the weekend.
More:
This grates so much, like many court decisions these days, because it bugs our common sense. Just see the Stolen Valor post below. Most of the commenters noted quite correctly that obviously these jerks aren't lying about having military medals just for the sake of lying. They're doing it to get stuff: attention, donations, political support, free drinks, whatever. That's freakin' obvious.
And that's part of what makes lying about having service medals objectionable in the first place. These guys are taking recognition that rightfully belongs to actual service medal winners. So they're harming the good guys and they're harming the public at large. Obvious.
So why didn't Congress put that in the Stolen Valor Act? Courts these days demand that every little thing be spelled out in triplicate, so it doesn't matter that this is obvious to everybody. If it doesn't appear in the statute, the courts aren't going to go out of their way to interpret it in. Particularly in a case that runs smack up against the First Amendment.
Same thing happens in this piracy case. In a criminal conviction, particularly one involving a mandatory life sentence, the starting point is: what is "piracy." Because it seems so obvious, Congress never defined it. And now the courts are sitting there wondering if piracy includes failed acts of robbery on the high seas. Oy.
Obvious. But law doesn't work that way. You want to put somebody away for life, you better be sure to get the charges right. Again, that runs smack up against the Fifth and Eighth Amendments. And courts are going to tend to err away from fudging that kind of thing, just because it's "common sense" that they're pirates. Due process and "beyond a reasonable doubt" and all that.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
11:59 AM
| Comments (215)
Post contains 666 words, total size 4 kb.
Nadil Hassan Case Thrown Out Because Judge Rules Nadil Hassan "A Swell Guy When You Get To Know Him"
Posted by: certoirari refused at August 17, 2010 12:03 PM (uFokq)
Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at August 17, 2010 12:05 PM (6RVP+)
Posted by: runningrn at August 17, 2010 12:05 PM (CfmlF)
So if they aren't "pirate-pirates", what does it take to constitute "piratey pirate-pirates"?
A parrot, parrot?
Posted by: runningrn at August 17, 2010 12:06 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at August 17, 2010 12:06 PM (8lCJT)
Posted by: Judge Whoopi Goldberg at August 17, 2010 12:06 PM (YVZlY)
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 17, 2010 12:07 PM (WZFkG)
For clarification, the difference between Whoopi-Goldberg-ian "rape-rape" vs. "rape-ity rape-rape".
Posted by: Hoss Fuentes at August 17, 2010 12:07 PM (6RVP+)
And then set adrift in a skiff off the Somali coast.
Where the hell do these people come from?
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at August 17, 2010 12:07 PM (NvFZs)
Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at August 17, 2010 12:07 PM (8lCJT)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at August 17, 2010 04:06 PM
Fixed.
I sense the fine hand of Eric Shabazz Holder in here somewhere.
Posted by: MrScribbler at August 17, 2010 12:08 PM (Ulu3i)
In the middle of the Gulf of Aden.
I'm sure that USS Ashland has the GPS coordinates recorded in the ship's log.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at August 17, 2010 12:09 PM (P9+0W)
Following that logic, they could get Blago on corruption, but not on corruption-corruption.
Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at August 17, 2010 12:09 PM (8lCJT)
let me get this straight...
I'm a pirate if I download Iron Man II but if I get on a boat on the high seas and seize another boat by gunpoint and rob the boat's cargo I'm not a pirate?
Posted by: certoirari refused at August 17, 2010 12:10 PM (uFokq)
Posted by: davod at August 17, 2010 12:10 PM (GUZAT)
Posted by: ChicagoJedi at August 17, 2010 12:10 PM (WZFkG)
Posted by: Penfold at August 17, 2010 12:10 PM (1PeEC)
Posted by: Goddess Justice at August 17, 2010 12:10 PM (wRH1k)
Posted by: George Orwell at August 17, 2010 12:11 PM (AZGON)
In the middle of the Gulf of Aden.
I'm sure that USS Ashland has the GPS coordinates recorded in the ship's log.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur
Via air mail. Nothing but the best.
Posted by: Blue Hen at August 17, 2010 12:11 PM (R2fpr)
Posted by: runningrn at August 17, 2010 04:05 PM (CfmlF)
Surprise surprise surpise!
Jackson was nominated by President Bill Clinton on September 24, 1993
Posted by: Hedgehog at August 17, 2010 12:11 PM (oQIfB)
Posted by: Khalid Shaikh Mohammed at August 17, 2010 12:12 PM (YVZlY)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 17, 2010 12:13 PM (0GFWk)
Posted by: ChiTown Jerry at August 17, 2010 12:13 PM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Idiot on the View at August 17, 2010 12:13 PM (ulV3f)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 17, 2010 12:14 PM (0GFWk)
Posted by: Penfold at August 17, 2010 12:14 PM (1PeEC)
Judge: They don't talk like pirates. Case dismissed!
(September 19 is International Talk Like A Pirate Day)
Posted by: Speller at August 17, 2010 12:14 PM (qaOKJ)
Posted by: Soona at August 17, 2010 12:14 PM (+5voc)
Surprise surprise surpise!
Jackson was nominated by President Bill Clinton on September 24, 1993
I had a feeling that was going to be the case! Thanks for putting me the knowledge!
So when BJ splooged all over Monica's dress, was that blue on blue violence?
Posted by: runningrn at August 17, 2010 12:14 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: Sideshow Bob at August 17, 2010 12:15 PM (wRH1k)
TEL AVIV, Israel - Security guards captured a Palestinian who broke into the Turkish Embassy in Israel Tuesday trying to take hostages and demanding asylum, the Turkish Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
The attacker, wounded by gunfire, was still inside the building six hours after he broke in, with Israeli police and rescue services kept outside by Turkish officials.
Injaz said he admired Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
"I love him and I respect him," he said. The Turkish leader "should give me political asylum against these murderers the Zionists, the murdering Jews," he added, linking the incident indirectly to recent tensions between Israel and Turkey.
I can't wait for Barry's comment on this. Something tells me it will be along the lines that the Israelis acted stupidly
Posted by: TheQuietMan at August 17, 2010 12:15 PM (1Jaio)
let me get this straight...
I'm a pirate if I download Iron Man II but if I get on a boat on the high seas and seize another boat by gunpoint and rob the boat's cargo I'm not a pirate?
Posted by: certoirari refused at August 17, 2010 04:10 PM (uFokq)
Correct. Any more questions?
Posted by: Eric Holder at August 17, 2010 12:16 PM (YVZlY)
"One of the alleged pirates was sporting a hook, granted; however, he did not have a peg leg."
--from the judge's ruling
Posted by: rdbrewer at August 17, 2010 12:16 PM (VNdDa)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at August 17, 2010 12:17 PM (LlRt2)
Posted by: Judge's Ruling at August 17, 2010 12:17 PM (wRH1k)
I'm a pirate if I download Iron Man II but if I get on a boat on the high seas and seize another boat by gunpoint and rob the boat's cargo I'm not a pirate?
Posted by: certoirari refused at August 17, 2010 04:10 PM (uFokq)
Correct. Any more questions?
Hold on a second, not so fast! First question, "Do you qualify as a member of a victim class?" What's that? No mercy! Take Whitey to the chair pronto!
Posted by: runningrn at August 17, 2010 12:18 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: Dr. Spank at August 17, 2010 12:18 PM (xO+6C)
Remember well, wingnut, you have to wait 'til it's passed before you know how any of our bills are going to work!
Posted by: Nancy Pelosi at August 17, 2010 12:19 PM (U5bLY)
I can't wait for Barry's comment on this. Something tells me it will be along the lines that the Israelis acted stupidly
Cool! (rubbing hands in glee) I'm up for another Beer Summit!
Posted by: Sherrif Joe F'N Biden at August 17, 2010 12:19 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: joeindc44 at August 17, 2010 12:19 PM (QxSug)
I'm a pirate if I download Iron Man II but if I get on a boat on the high seas and seize another boat by gunpoint and rob the boat's cargo I'm not a pirate?
Posted by: certoirari refused"Not quite - if you (say) were idiotic enough to attack a US Naval ship, and were captured before you managed to steal anything, then you're not a pirate.
And yes, I think this is beyond idiotic and verging on sub-moronic.
Posted by: Dianna at August 17, 2010 12:20 PM (mKMj1)
The defendanst argued that they did not complete their act of piracy (they didn't actually rob the USS Ashland) and so cannot be properly charged as pirates. This would be distinct from an attempted piracy charge, which I guess wasn't or couldn't be (?) made.
This is the same reasoning that is going to set Blago free.
Posted by: dananjcon at August 17, 2010 12:20 PM (pr+up)
The judge is a left-winger who, I believe, has a problem with the sentencing guidelines for drug cases (disparity between crack and powder).
Butt, you digress!
Posted by: Sherrif Joe F'N Biden at August 17, 2010 12:20 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: Vergeltung at August 17, 2010 04:09 PM (jttPx)
That's the most salient point. Opening fire on a US Navy ship of war should be a case of Darwin in action. The only thing that should be left after it's over is roiled water, an oil slick and shark bait.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at August 17, 2010 12:20 PM (P9+0W)
Posted by: Judge's Ruling at August 17, 2010 12:21 PM (wRH1k)
**Based upon the one episode I watched. That was the one where the bat-boat was sliced in two. That was a great show!
I saw that one. I lol'd. Those jackasses deserved it, they tried to tangle up the whaling boats propeller with a line. I got a warm fuzzy feeling when that expensive carbon fiber boat got hit.
Posted by: Sherrif Joe F'N Biden at August 17, 2010 12:22 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: Dr. Spank at August 17, 2010 04:18 PM (xO+6C)
Once you go crack, you never go back...just sayin'
Posted by: Barry Soetoro Obama - ignore that white powder around my nostrils at August 17, 2010 12:23 PM (YVZlY)
Posted by: judge Raymond Jackson at August 17, 2010 12:23 PM (xO+6C)
Posted by: Judge Inaction Jackson at August 17, 2010 12:23 PM (U5bLY)
Posted by: Dr. Carvorkian at August 17, 2010 12:23 PM (FKW5r)
Posted by: The RIAA at August 17, 2010 12:24 PM (QKKT0)
Posted by: Judge's Ruling at August 17, 2010 12:24 PM (wRH1k)
"The record clearly shows that none of the green parrots on the defendants' right shoulders can squawk 'ahoy, matey; give us a kiss.' On the contrary, the parrots are clearly saying 'shit, bro, I'm outta khat. You got any?' This does not rise to the level of piracy."
--the judge
Posted by: rdbrewer at August 17, 2010 12:24 PM (VNdDa)
Posted by: Judge's Ruling at August 17, 2010 04:21 PM (wRH1k)
--Don't forget: all pirates speak English.
Posted by: logprof at August 17, 2010 12:24 PM (BP6Z1)
Posted by: Asshole Judge at August 17, 2010 12:25 PM (WZFkG)
Posted by: Footnote, United States vs. Smith at August 17, 2010 12:26 PM (BP6Z1)
I think this is beyond idiotic and verging on sub-moronic.
Ah yes, the Judge is a jurist of uncommonly refined reasoning, truly a new theoretition of sub-moronic articles.
Posted by: Speller at August 17, 2010 12:26 PM (qaOKJ)
This is absolute BS and smacks of a behind the door deal by the DOJ who does not want to prosecute. Any law regarding piracy on the books in 1820 has long been superseded by formal treaty that has redefined piracy and its punishments.
I guess the same stupid fkwad of a judge if we tried them at sea via captain's mast and hung them would then roll out the fact that the law of 1820 for piracy no longer exists.
The key to this will be if the DOJ appeals. If it does not look for these assholes to get off with a slap on the wrist and THEN given asylum in the U.S.
Posted by: Vic at August 17, 2010 12:26 PM (/jbAw)
National suicide is a terrible thing to watch unfold.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at August 17, 2010 12:27 PM (Qp4DT)
The sad fact in all of this including all the other judicial rulings that are being handed down the last few years by statist judges is that no matter if repubs. claim the congress in 2010 and the presidency in 2012, not one of these asshat judges will be impeached.
Posted by: Soona at August 17, 2010 12:27 PM (+5voc)
we'll have to attack the chinese waterlanes....so maybe this ruling is good?
I know I might want a new TV some day down the road say by 2025......
Posted by: sven10077 at August 17, 2010 12:27 PM (kq1lG)
So what exactly were the ROE in April? I'd like to know whether the captain of the Ashland was under orders not to return fire when fired upon by Somali criminals.
Posted by: Grizzly Adams at August 17, 2010 12:28 PM (HjPtV)
I actually agree with the judge. If the law dosen't say it then change the law if that's what you want. I don't want judges making their own law from the bench.
What I don't agree with is why were these fucks tried in a civilian court? Why didn't the navy just blow them out of the water and be done with it or at worst try them in a military tribunal?
Posted by: robtr at August 17, 2010 12:28 PM (fwSHf)
Maybe the "kill em at sea" notion is part of Justice Jackson's reasoning. It's his way of communicating, "don't be bringing the skinnies over here for trial."
And God bless the US Navy!
Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at August 17, 2010 12:28 PM (8lCJT)
Posted by: Hedgehog at August 17, 2010 12:28 PM (oQIfB)
Didn't a coupla those non-pirates get popped by double taps courtesy of the SEALs?
The surviving non-pirates acted stupidly then.
Posted by: kevlarchick at August 17, 2010 12:29 PM (TNuqz)
Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at August 17, 2010 12:29 PM (8lCJT)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at August 17, 2010 12:29 PM (P9+0W)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at August 17, 2010 12:30 PM (NuAIL)
In honor of Judge Jackson's ruling, Disneyland has annnounced the planned opening of its latest attraction, Idiosyncratically-Attired Seagoing Characters of the Caribbean.
Posted by: Cicero at August 17, 2010 12:31 PM (QKKT0)
OT but, found this on a website:
A furious lightsaber duel is underway. DARTH VADER is backing LUKE SKYWALKER towards the end of the gantry. A quick move by Vader, chops off Luke's hand! It goes spinning off into the ventilation shaft. Luke backs away. He looks around, but realizes there's nowhere to go but straight down.
Darth Vader: Obi Wan never told you what happened to your father.
Luke: He told me enough! He told me you killed him!
Darth Vader: No, Luke... I am your father!
Luke: No. It can't be. That's not true. That's impossible!
Darth Vader: Search your feelings Luke... you know them to be true.
Luke: NOOoooo!
Darth Vader: Yes, it is true... and you know what else? You know that brass droid of yours?
Luke: Threepio?
Darth Vader: Yes... Threepio... I built him... when I was 7 years old.
Luke: No! ... Wait, huh?
Darth Vader: Seven years old. And what have you done? Look at yourself. No hand. No job. And you couldn't even levitate your own ship out of the swamp...
Luke: But... I destroyed your precious Death Star!
Darth Vader: But that was when you were 20! When I was 10, I single-handedly destroyed an entire Trade Federation Droid Control ship!
Luke: Well, it's not my fault...
Darth Vader: Oh, here we go... "Poor me... my father never gave me what I wanted for my birthday... boo hoo, my daddy's the Dark Lord of the Sith... Nobody loved me... waahhh wahhh!"
Luke: Shut up!
Darth Vader: You're a slacker! By the time I was your age, I had already exterminated the Jedi knights!
Luke: I used to race my T-16 through Beggar's Canyon.
Darth Vader: Oh, for the love of the Emperor... 10 years old, winner of the Boonta Eve Open... the Only human to ever fly a Pod Racer... right here baby!
Luke looks down the shaft. Takes a step towards it.
Darth Vader: I was wrong... You're not my kid... I don't know whose you are, but you sure ain't mine.
Luke takes a step off the platform, hesitates, then plunges down the shaft.
Darth Vader looks down after him.
Darth Vader: And get a haircut!
Posted by: Radioactive Satellite Of LOVE at August 17, 2010 12:31 PM (LdYLm)
Common sense has been in dangerously short supply in this country for quite some time now. When I see it being applied these days, it shocks the shit out of me.
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at August 17, 2010 12:32 PM (554T5)
No, it's a misdemeanor against good taste.
MAKING Cutthroat Island counts as a crime against humanity.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at August 17, 2010 12:33 PM (P9+0W)
Posted by: Judge Raymond A. Jackson at August 17, 2010 12:33 PM (QKKT0)
Posted by: Judge Raymond Jackson at August 17, 2010 12:34 PM (xO+6C)
Instead, you have sturdy yardarm, and a lot of spare rope.
Posted by: JSchuler at August 17, 2010 12:34 PM (yKEQc)
Posted by: The 9th Circuit at August 17, 2010 12:35 PM (GwPRU)
This is absolute BS and smacks of a behind the door deal by the DOJ who does not want to prosecute.
That's a stupid comment. As I wrote in the post and quoted from the article, there were several other charges and those are proceeding to be prosecuted. The DOJ did not make a "behind the door deal". And who would they have made a deal with anyway? The judge? You're seriously suggesting collusion between the prosecutors and the judge to get the defendants OFF? The prosecutors can dismiss counts at any time and didn't need to bring the charges in the first place if they didn't want to.
So what exactly were the ROE in April? I'd like to know whether the captain of the Ashland was under orders not to return fire when fired upon by Somali criminals.
The Ashland blew their little raft to splinters and then fished these guys out of the water.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at August 17, 2010 12:36 PM (IkTb7)
...the most important and obvious of the charges was piracy, which carries a mandatory life sentence.
I thought the sentence for piracy was summary hanging from the yardarm.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Nobody said it was a LONG-TERM life sentence. If he is locked in the brig for the ten minutes it takes to find rope, I suppose it technically a life sentence in prison.
Followed by a hanging.
Posted by: Keith Arnold at August 17, 2010 12:36 PM (Jdtsu)
I LMAO watching that episode of Whale Wars, especially when I saw that the one crewmember from the "bat boat" was wearing a tobaggan that had "Prepare to be Boarded" on it. It is funny (in an ironic kind of way) that these guys do all kinds of stuff (including illegally boarding Japanese ships) and act like it is ok, but the first time a Japanese ship defends against them, they begin to cry like babies.
Another interesting note is that the crews of those ships (the Bob Barker and Steve Irwin) subsist off of a vegan diet. If you watch the crew as the season progresses, they get paler, thinner and sickly looking.
Posted by: DaveK at August 17, 2010 12:37 PM (boNGU)
Don't the charges against him have to be dropped in order to maintain legal consistency? If, as the judge has agreed, piracy couldn't have occurred, it is impossible for him to be guilty.
Right?
Posted by: rogerB at August 17, 2010 12:38 PM (Bl76y)
Nice catch,
if that fat ass on whale wars gets to play "do whatever the fuck I want" on the high seas maybe we can as well no?
Posted by: sven10077 at August 17, 2010 12:38 PM (kq1lG)
Posted by: Dr. Spank at August 17, 2010 12:39 PM (xO+6C)
Drunk and abiguously gay is no way to portray a pirate.
Trust me.
Those are ass-pirates. They roam the waterways of San Francisco.
Posted by: Soona at August 17, 2010 12:39 PM (+5voc)
Posted by: Radioactive Satellite Of LOVE at August 17, 2010 12:41 PM (LdYLm)
____________
This is all just coverup for The Won. You see, the constitution doesn't define "natural-born citizen"; you have to go to the law of nations to find that. By undercutting the law of nations, the judge seeks to kneecap the birthers.
Posted by: Orly wears tinfoil Taitz at August 17, 2010 12:41 PM (3K4hn)
The Ashland blew their little raft to splinters and then fished these guys out of the water.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at August 17, 2010 04:36 PM (IkTb7)
After letting it float in front of them for a couple of days, because the Indonesian Imbecile wouldn't give them permission to fire. That almost cost the captain his life when he went overboard in the beginning and was just pulled back on board since the Traitor-in-Chief was trying as hard as he could to fuck the whole situation up (which he did).
Posted by: progressoverpeace at August 17, 2010 12:41 PM (Qp4DT)
But we LIKE those vegans. We're friendly towards 'em. That's why we call them "chum."
Posted by: Keith Arnold at August 17, 2010 12:41 PM (Jdtsu)
I also liked the voices from that old Mac game Ancient Art of War at Sea.
Posted by: logprof at August 17, 2010 12:42 PM (BP6Z1)
Darth Vader: Obi Wan never told you what happened to your father.
Luke: He told me enough! He told me you killed him!
Darth Vader: No, Luke... I am your father!
Luke: No. It can't be. That's not true. That's impossible!
Darth Vader: Search your feelings Luke... you know them to be true.
Luke: N..... *getting interrupted*
Alvin Green: NOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Posted by: Alvin Green for Imperial Senate Campaign Ad at August 17, 2010 12:42 PM (U5bLY)
Then we're well on our way to jury nullifications if this is the way our Courts are going to be. So much of this law is an ass and frustrated Americans are being poked, prodded, and forced into becoming less tolerant of their betters. American juries, when used, are going to have to smack down the Courts even at the risk of "usurping the Constitution" or acting irrationally/illegally. Who can put faith in a system where Justice is not served? The Court is inviting, if not insisting upon, tyranny of the majority whether they mean to or not.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at August 17, 2010 12:43 PM (swuwV)
Another interesting note is that the crews of those ships (the Bob Barker and Steve Irwin) subsist off of a vegan diet. If you watch the crew as the season progresses, they get paler, thinner and sickly looking.
Except for the pasty fatass captain who looks like the Albino in Princess Bride. He looks like he's eaten several of the crew members.
Posted by: Sherrif Joe F'N Biden at August 17, 2010 12:43 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: Dr. Spank at August 17, 2010 12:43 PM (xO+6C)
"While the alleged pirates did attack, they were not sailing in a stolen galleon with a black flag sporting the skull and crossbones. This 'Jolly Roger' is the sine qua non of piracy."
--the judge
Posted by: rdbrewer at August 17, 2010 12:43 PM (VNdDa)
________________
But you're not a pirate if you never manage to get that chunk of the torrent containing the final seconds of the end credits, since you will not have completed your act of piracy.
Posted by: wink wink at August 17, 2010 12:43 PM (3K4hn)
Posted by: maddogg at August 17, 2010 12:44 PM (OlN4e)
Seriously, Gabe? Look, this kind of crap isn't consistent. Are you telling me that English Common Law doesn't have a definition of piracy? Of course, these are the people who think "Congress shall make no law" applies to state governments.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 17, 2010 12:45 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: chillin' the most at August 17, 2010 12:45 PM (6IV8T)
The Congress shall have Power ... To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
Funny how Congress can spend time forcing us to buy a private product... and yet can't seem to pass a Law coherent enough to get Pirates, when it is specificly spelled out by the Constitution, that they should do so.
Posted by: Romeo13 at August 17, 2010 12:45 PM (H+oXM)
Fixed.
Posted by: baldilocks at August 17, 2010 12:46 PM (vBppj)
Posted by: Judge Raymond Jackson at August 17, 2010 12:47 PM (xO+6C)
"These men were swarthy, but none had a hoary beard."
Posted by: rdbrewer at August 17, 2010 12:47 PM (VNdDa)
Perhaps not actual "collusion" but prosecution in the same manner that the State of CA failed to prosecute the defense for Proposition 8. A half-assed defense with a wink and a nod at the judge.
And the motive for this is the same; political. This way Obama and his pet DOJ can blame the judge for a "bad ruling".
This kind of stuff has been going on for years now.
And no it is not a "stupid comment".
Posted by: Vic at August 17, 2010 12:48 PM (/jbAw)
Posted by: Allen at August 17, 2010 12:48 PM (sGtp+)
Posted by: Hedgehog at August 17, 2010 12:49 PM (oQIfB)
Posted by: Judge Raymond Jackson at August 17, 2010 12:49 PM (xO+6C)
Posted by: real joe at August 17, 2010 12:49 PM (IpIBJ)
Posted by: Soona at August 17, 2010 12:50 PM (+5voc)
Darth Vader: Yes, it is true... and you know what else? You know that brass droid of yours?
Luke: Threepio?
Darth Vader: Yes... Threepio... I built him... when I was 7 years old.
______________
Obi-Wan: What brings you out into the desert?
Luke: It's this droid. It claims to be the property of an "Obi-Wan Kenobi".
Obi-Wan: Ah, R2-D2. We meet again.
Posted by: Anachronda at August 17, 2010 12:50 PM (3K4hn)
Posted by: maddogg at August 17, 2010 12:50 PM (OlN4e)
This is scary, and if I am wrong, PLEASE prove it. For awhile I have been concerned that the New Black Panther voting intimidation was a test case to see how far Holder could sway the courts. Think about how many questionable decisions have come down, and how now the Supremes are stacked with 2 people who were active at supressing every "birther" case. I am concerned that Holder is trying to control/corrupt the courts. Am I crazy? Paranoid?
In an earlier comment, I said I didn't know if Holder's justice Dept. was just incompetent or venal. I'm going to have to go with venal!
Posted by: Sherrif Joe F'N Biden at August 17, 2010 12:51 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: Jurisprudence in the 21st century at August 17, 2010 12:51 PM (R2fpr)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 17, 2010 12:51 PM (0GFWk)
Re: Whale Wars
I've never watched the show, but the current commercial caught my ear when one guy was telling others that they have to risk their lives for animals.
A thought:
One can choose to risk their life for loved ones.
Ditto for their country.
Perhaps they themselves can risk to save a beloved animal, if they so choose.
But when somebody else demands that you risk your life to save an animal, some moral line has been crossed.
Posted by: lordsomber at August 17, 2010 12:52 PM (QMtmy)
Posted by: rdbrewer at August 17, 2010 12:53 PM (VNdDa)
Posted by: Asshole Judge at August 17, 2010 12:53 PM (WZFkG)
Posted by: rdbrewer at August 17, 2010 12:53 PM (VNdDa)
Posted by: t-bird at August 17, 2010 12:54 PM (dVUpA)
Posted by: kansas at August 17, 2010 12:54 PM (mka2b)
_____________
FIFY
Posted by: That fat guy from Whale Wars at August 17, 2010 12:55 PM (3K4hn)
All this reminds me of Bill Clinton. "You see, he didn't get a blowjob-blowjob, it was just an attempted blowjob"
And in regards to the "why are they still alive?" question, once again Slick Willie and his affair with Ms Lewinsky comes to mind:
The French wondered what all the fuss was about
The Africans wondered why he did not get her pregnant.
The Russians wondered why she was still alive.
When those three groups seem more commonsense and/or civilized than we are, we are in trouble.
Posted by: West at August 17, 2010 12:56 PM (1Rgee)
Posted by: kansas at August 17, 2010 12:56 PM (mka2b)
Posted by: rdbrewer at August 17, 2010 12:56 PM (VNdDa)
Were any of the defendants captured wearing tights and pencil-thin moustaches?
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at August 17, 2010 12:57 PM (P9+0W)
Interesting the law of nations has jurisdiction, because according to them a "natural born citizen" is someone born to parents (plural) who are citizens, and guess what president doesn't meet that test? Nothing to see here, move along...
Posted by: ccruse456 at August 17, 2010 12:58 PM (xcbly)
When did law stop working, then? It worked so well in 1820 that the Supreme Court had "no hesitation" in saying what piracy was.
"piracy" is not defined in statute
According to 18 USC 1111, "Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought."
But "killing" doesn't seem to be defined in statute. How can we justify keeping murderers locked up?
Posted by: bgates at August 17, 2010 12:58 PM (XGMJ0)
"And, since it has been determined by this all-knowing court that the defendants cannot be held for piracy, any American who calls them 'pirates' is clearly engaging in defamation and will be locked away and fined into bankruptcy. We are civilized in America and will not abide the defaming of these good men who were engaging in something, that is not piracy, on the high seas."
Posted by: progressoverpeace at August 17, 2010 12:59 PM (Qp4DT)
Normal Judge: Yes, sir.
Asshole Defense Attorney: You've read it?
Normal Judge: Yes, sir.
Asshole Defense Attorney: Good. Would you open it up to the page that defines piracy, please?
Normal Judge: Sir?
Asshole Defense Attorney: Just flip open to the page of the book that talks about piracy.
Normal Judge: Well, sir piracy is a term that we use, I mean, just in Chapter 81, I really don't think that...
Asshole Defense Attorney: Ah, we're in luck then. US Code, Chapter 81, Privacy and Privateering. Now I assume we'll find the term piracy and its definition in that book. Am I right?
Normal Judge: No sir.
Asshole Defense Attorney: Your Honor, I'm a lawyer. Is there no book, no pamphlet or manual, no regulation or set of written orders or instructions that lets me know that, as a lawyer, what it means to commit piracy?
Normal Judge: No sir. No book, sir.
Asshole Defense Attorney: No further questions.
[as Defense walks back to his table sane prosecutor takes the book out of his hand]
Prosecutor: Judge would you open this book up to the part that says that where the mess hall is....
Posted by: bgates at August 17, 2010 01:01 PM (XGMJ0)
Posted by: Soona at August 17, 2010 01:02 PM (+5voc)
In my personal view, the decision has a good chance of being overturned on appeal if the government does/can pursue this course. The judge in this case appears to have relied on United States v. Smith in reaching his decision, which is an early Supreme Court case where actual robbery had taken place.
It is in that context that Justice Story stated that robbery was piracy. Justice Story's statement was mere dicta, since the holding in Smith was whether the statute itself was sufficiently clear to meet constitutional muster in supporting the conviction. The Court answered yes. Smith never addressed the question as to whether attempted robbery, but not robbery itself, was also piracy. It is the law, though, that piracy is sufficiently defined to pass constitutional muster.
Judge Jackson appears to be holding with the dissent in Smith, which stated that the term "piracy" was too vague to meet constitutional muster. So it will be interesting to see whether the government presses this issue. I hope they will.
Posted by: Chestertonrocks at August 17, 2010 01:07 PM (MQVHA)
all kidding aside that is what is troubling about the willful or bought stupidity of our judges....
if anything we should be trying the terrorists as pirates, since one of the accepted definitions of piracy was engaging in martial maritime actions without national sanction, hence why a Letter of Marque was so vital to other men of the sea.
Posted by: sven10077 at August 17, 2010 01:10 PM (kq1lG)
Hence, honorable judge, you are FOS
Posted by: Vic at August 17, 2010 01:15 PM (/jbAw)
That is what I said earlier, look at what the DOJ does. If they do not appeal it shows what they are truly after.
Posted by: Vic at August 17, 2010 01:17 PM (/jbAw)
Posted by: CTD at August 17, 2010 01:22 PM (RurGt)
Posted by: cthulhu at August 17, 2010 01:22 PM (/0IOT)
Posted by: baldilocks at August 17, 2010 01:23 PM (vBppj)
and were this some BRAND NEW set of case law rather than one with a long and established precedentary trail I'd agree....what you have here is a moonbat who doesn't want to condone going after the "downtrodden" or he is trying to backdoor us into the LoST by judicial fiat.
Posted by: sven10077 at August 17, 2010 01:23 PM (kq1lG)
Posted by: Banjo at August 17, 2010 01:24 PM (nnZ5F)
+1 that is what I meant by "long precedential trail"
167 Baldilocks,
EXACTLY this message is "keep firing we've upped your odds of not getting busted" to pirates.
Posted by: sven10077 at August 17, 2010 01:25 PM (kq1lG)
Because in 1820 the law specifically referenced "the law of nations" which is defined as "international law" which currently defines piracy as I listed it in the previous post from 1982.
Again, if the DOJ doesn't appeal this they never wanted to bring the true case in the first place. This ruling begs to be overturned and the idiot judge removed from the bench and disbarred.
Posted by: Vic at August 17, 2010 01:27 PM (/jbAw)
Posted by: Vic at August 17, 2010 01:35 PM (/jbAw)
Love and kisses!
KP
Posted by: Kirsten Powers at August 17, 2010 01:37 PM (A7toZ)
Posted by: sven10077 at August 17, 2010 01:43 PM (kq1lG)
Posted by: The guys from Korn at August 17, 2010 01:45 PM (xq7pr)
Posted by: Mike at August 17, 2010 01:52 PM (2e6Dn)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at August 17, 2010 02:47 PM (PQY7w)
Posted by: Great White Shark at August 17, 2010 03:17 PM (obXYX)
Posted by: R. Waher at August 17, 2010 03:19 PM (GWAGh)
Posted by: red speck at August 17, 2010 03:53 PM (/vfpn)
The US isn't a party to the Law of the Sea Convention. This case notwithstanding, there are actually a lot of reasons why that's a good thing.
"Because in 1820 the law specifically referenced "the law of nations" which is defined as "international law" which currently defines piracy as I listed it in the previous post from 1982."
"The law of nations" is a term of art. It has a specific meaning, arguably going back to the Romans, the Phoenicians, etc. It means so-called customary international law, not treaties. Customary international law is to treaties what the common law is to statutes, i.e., what applies internationally in the absence of anything else. Undoubtedly, there is plenty of customary law to support the position that piracy is a lot broader than requiring a completed robbery, and if DOJ doesn't appeal, they WANT to lose.
Posted by: Dave J. at August 17, 2010 04:01 PM (DCQ0q)
Talk about honesty in advertising.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at August 17, 2010 06:21 PM (PQY7w)
Posted by: eaglewingz08 at August 17, 2010 08:18 PM (ktkHk)
Pure comedy gold from another nit-fucking-pickin' California lawyer.
Posted by: 13times at August 18, 2010 02:29 AM (h6XiD)
Note to the Navy JAG corps: this is why you hang the ratfucking pirates from the yardarm and be done with it.
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at August 18, 2010 04:55 AM (1hM1d)
Posted by: jordan shoes at August 29, 2010 08:21 PM (sCd8t)
But the question is that the disc will not be compatible with your DVD player if you burn MP4 to DVD directly, you know, most DVD players cannot read MP4 files. So you need to convert MP4 into a DVD format (Mac and Windows) and then burn it out.
Posted by: ZaithynColin at September 20, 2010 05:44 PM (MQ+IY)
Posted by: hellodemott at November 01, 2010 11:03 PM (4FBxC)
Posted by: Walmart Application Form at December 08, 2010 01:57 AM (2T23z)
Posted by: enchanted unicorn at January 24, 2011 08:20 PM (ZVg6f)
Posted by: davinci diamonds at January 26, 2011 11:12 AM (WgoRp)
Yeah, I strongly agree with you. It seems there are really talented writers who are willing to share a very good articles online.
Posted by: herbs at January 28, 2011 10:51 AM (uPkxb)
<a rel="dofollow"http://takeawayroyal.co.uk/">Takeaway Newcastle-under-Lyme</a>
I think we still have to wait for a while to get the real effects of the stimulus plan. It will take several years to get back on the track again.
Posted by: Takeaway Newcastle-under-Lyme at January 28, 2011 10:24 PM (3vejz)
Posted by: Google Place Page at February 03, 2011 06:33 AM (A9qPr)
Posted by: Google Local at February 04, 2011 06:44 PM (I4heq)
Posted by: montys millions at February 23, 2011 04:27 AM (s8sbw)
<a rel="dofollow"http://paprika.org.uk/">paprika Order Online</a>
Posted by: Paprika & Bolton Takeaway Order Online at March 06, 2011 09:55 AM (lFAGj)
Posted by: Caribbean Fast Food in Manchester at March 09, 2011 02:38 AM (lFAGj)
Posted by: Caribbean Fast Food in Manchester at March 15, 2011 07:02 PM (lFAGj)
Posted by: convert mkv to dvd at March 19, 2011 06:20 AM (rSQlp)
Posted by: Learn Quran at March 29, 2011 06:14 PM (xOeFW)
Posted by: dvd ripper software at May 30, 2011 12:25 AM (bjux4)
Posted by: sac at June 22, 2011 12:59 AM (Q2Fa0)
DRM Converter
Posted by: iTunes to DVD at June 28, 2011 10:38 PM (MQaaz)
Posted by: backpack at July 01, 2011 06:08 PM (C8EsI)
DVD Ripper, transfer music from iTunes to Windows Meida Player
Posted by: iTunes to DVD at July 02, 2011 11:25 PM (zgYYj)
Posted by: Philadelphia Phillies Jersey at July 09, 2011 10:00 PM (dwhLX)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2404 seconds, 343 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Prediction:
Judge Rules Kalid Sheik Mohammed Not A Terrorist, Acquitted.
Posted by: certoirari refused at August 17, 2010 12:02 PM (uFokq)