"F. Brown" <fredbrown@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>"Full Name" <user@example.net> wrote in message
>news:ohfc599bfdaveg8nc81m53f6tlumchivea@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 19:38:08 -0400, "F. Brown" <fredbrown@nowhere.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Oglethorpe" <antikerry@go.com> wrote in message
>>>news:K86dnSNJiKF7ncnPnZ2dnUVZ_q-dnZ2d@mchsi.com...
>>>>
>>>> "F. Brown" <fredbrown@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:524c388a$0$30596$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com...
>>>>> Haven't seen you lately.
>>>>
>>>> Good question. He never should have been charged.
>>>
>>>We agreed on that a couple of years ago. Last I heard I thought
>>>his attorney was filing an appeal.
>>
>> Frank has been in his prison cell since 9/11
>>
>> The judge refused bail pending appeal because the child pornography
>> videos found on his computers showed he was a danger to children and
>> having allowed his home to go into foreclosure made him a flight risk.
>>
>> https://ecf.gamd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2007-00018-196-1-cr
>>
>> the Court cannot find by clear and convincing evidence that Defendant
>> is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the community.
>>
>> Accordingly, for the reasons stated herein,
>> the Court finds that Defendant's Motion
>> (Doc. 194) should be, and is,hereby DENIED
>> .
>> SO ORDERED this 11th day of September, 2013.
>> /s/ W. Louis Sands
>> THE HONORABLE W. LOUIS SANDS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
>
>Thanks for the info, Judge Sands is a piece of shit. He delayed three years
>in issuing
>his verdict, probably hoping Frank would die first. I'm no lawyer but I
>don't think
>using the child porn found on Frank's computer as a reason to deny bail on
>appeal is
>right. Frank was neither charged no convicted because it was found without a
>warrant
>and thus inadmissible. So why should it be brought up at a bail hearing.
>I hope his lawyer is appealing this. This whole thing has been a kangaroo
>court.
>There is supposed to be an element of fairness in out judicial system, but
>the government
>is increasingly using unfair tactics to charge people for petty violations.
>
I'm not knocking Judge Sands.
As to why he denied bail, it was mainly a misunderstanding between me
and my parole-agent about my home, NOT that he found me a danger to
anybody.
The home was NOT in default.
I had NOT given away everything I needed to live here.
I HAD given away (or sold) some of the NICER stuff that nobody in the
family (or friends) wanted, that I didn't want left for whoever took
over the house; but I had mainly *replaced* most of that stuff with
cheap junk so I could live comfortably while staying there.
The kid DID take the car; so I had to get a replacement when I got
back; though I COULD have gotten around with my bike and Public
Transportation (that I was just learning how to use).
The main bother when I got back was replacing all of the food I gave
away while expecting to be gone for an indefinite period (up to 18
months). I still had a FEW canned-goods left; and managed to pick up
a few necessities (like milk and such) with my bike; but it wasn't
until one of the wife's relatives drove me around with his rather
large pickup that I managed to fill up the refrigerator (and deplete
my bank-account).
Once the misunderstanding was cleared up, Judge Sands *DID* issue
bail, pending appeals, and then, when asked by my lawyer, *DID*
reinstate my Internet Access ... Subject to the same restrictions as
before. If he had been a complete A**, then he could have left me
sitting.
Of course, THAT would have raised the possibility (probability?) of
the Appeals-Court finding me "Not Guilty" several years AFTER I had
already served the full sentence ... and lost the house and everything
in it as well.
But it wasn't the judge's fault!
Nor was it really my Parol-Agent's fault.
I just didn't realize how my keeping the guy up-to-date on what I was
doing in getting ready in case I DID have to spend more than a month
or two in jail, sounded to him.
Once corrected ... Well, I'm back ... For now at least, while the
appeals process grinds slowly through the courts.
Since it's taken THIS long to get this far, any bets on how a system
notoriously SLOW will drag on?
--
_____
/ ' / ™
,-/-, __ __. ____ /_
(_/ / (_(_/|_/ / <_/ <_
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 |
|