Yolo CountyI post this letter to the editor that appeared a few days ago in the Woodland Daily Democrat. I am not certain I agree with all of the letter. But there has always been something about the case described above that has not sit well with me.
Five of the youths were charged for crimes. Four of them were found guilty. That’s of course the headline. It is interesting that while a lot of the news accounts covered the guilty verdicts, a few of them did not note that they were acquitted of the most serious charge–attempted murder.
In fact, from what I see, only the Sacramento Bee reported that they were acquitted of the attempted murder charges.
But as Mr. McKinnon points out, this case arose about the time the original gang injunction was thrown out. It was sited as why we need the gang injunction. What Mr. Reisig never explained to us is how the gang injunction would have prevented this incident.
The rhetoric was heightened was the beginning, with Mr. Reisig referring to the suspects as “domestic terrorists.”
What does not sit well and Mr. McKinnon notes in his letter was the actions of the engineer who was attacked. Why would he get out of the train and confront them rather than call the police? Did his confrontation and punching one of the young men on the tracks six or more times, escalate the incident from simple mayhem and mischief to violence?
I am not trying to minimize the incident, but again, the media descriptions of the incident have never sat well with me. They are too neat. The incident seemed too well-timed to prove a point on the gang injunction.
Does labeling them as gang members help us in some way? Would the gang injunction have prevented this incident? Are we safer with such laws? I have often wondered.
On a personal level I believe that even gang members are covered by the constitution and are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I will point out the obvious here as well, the legal system isn’t exactly stacked in their favor as it is. Law enforcement feels hamstrung in fighting this kinds of crime, and yet we see large numbers of young minority males in jail. There is a disconnect here, and yet I never hear people on the other side question if maybe we ought not take a little different approach to law enforcement. To acknowledge that the heavy-handed, sometimes almost militaristic mindset just isn’t an effective means by which to fight crime.
None of this unfortunately answers the questions I still have about this case, even after the convictions. I didn’t attend the trial, I wasn’t there, perhaps the case was simple and clear cut. But I still find it interesting that most news accounts never bothered to report that they were acquitted of the most serious charge.
The question here to me is not whether these individuals deserve jail time, whether they deserved to be acquitted, a court of law ruled that they did, but the question to me is whether the DA overreached in the case with some of the charges and the overall efficacy of the gang injunction as a crime fighting tool. Some of the asserted facts are bitterly disputed by residents in the affected areas.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Mike, before we go to the whole terrorist thing, might perhaps additional security do the trick? You keep saying this is a dangerous job where conductors have to exit their cabs in dark places where gang members might be hiding in wait to attack or rob them. I believe it. But it seems to me this is a problem that can be handled by simply putting an armed security guard in the areas where these attacks are happening. This is simple law and order. Reisig has other ideas. Why? To the person who said that gangs are coming in from Mexico: That is utter bullshit. Yes, many immigrant children are joining gangs in this country, but these gangs are AMERICAN gangs. Surenos (spelled with an …u…, not an …o…), means …Southerner… in spanish but for the sake of this discussion it means gang member affiliated with the Mexican Mafia, also a product of the good old U.S.A. (see the film …American Me…). Even that infamous MS 13 was born right here in America, in the Pico Union area of West Los Angeles. They were formed to defend themselves from the 18th street tang. As many members were deported, they recruited members in El Salvador. Many are emigrating back to the US and yes, you could use this as one example of gang members coming here. But the gang was already here. The only gangs coming that with origins below the border are the cartels. They're powerful in Mexico but not that powerful here, and they are completely separate from Surenos or Nortenos. No affiliation, and they rarely do business. Again, the cartels don't have much weight here and in prison they are referred to as …border brothers…, and are basically on the sideline.If people want to focus on the cartels I could see their point. Cartels are nasty and as Mexicans take over the populations of small cities, you'd better believe the cartels are going to try and get their guys into city council seats. But who's watching? Everyone's focused on the Broderick Boys, a gang that had it's heyday over 20 years ago, and really wasn't that violent then. Broderick had some mean vatos in the '70s and '80s but I'm telling you they were mostly junkies. Most of them are grandfathers now and trying to fly straight. The younger generation? As the person above said…they aren't putting up numbers. All the violence is happening on the S. Side, and over at Natomas, Del Paso Heights, and Highlands. Sacramento's weird because most of it is unincorporated county and therefore the ghettos are spread out all over the place. Broderick Boys 14 exists but in the Sacramento region they're in the minor leagues. They're nothing a couple of security guards couldn't handle. But again, Reisig has other plans. And people are rightfully suspicious of this DA and his true motives. Peace.
Last night I watched a news story about an eight year old being charged with murder as an adult in Arizona.
The four kids convicted in this case were “around 14” at the time of the incident. I understand kids develop at different rates, but on average they do not start acting like adults until they reach 18- 22. This case belonged in Juvenile court, but it was taken to Adult court for political purposes. DA’s are making these decisions for their own personal glorification and the decisions have nothing to do with Justice.
Last night I watched a news story about an eight year old being charged with murder as an adult in Arizona.
The four kids convicted in this case were “around 14” at the time of the incident. I understand kids develop at different rates, but on average they do not start acting like adults until they reach 18- 22. This case belonged in Juvenile court, but it was taken to Adult court for political purposes. DA’s are making these decisions for their own personal glorification and the decisions have nothing to do with Justice.
Last night I watched a news story about an eight year old being charged with murder as an adult in Arizona.
The four kids convicted in this case were “around 14” at the time of the incident. I understand kids develop at different rates, but on average they do not start acting like adults until they reach 18- 22. This case belonged in Juvenile court, but it was taken to Adult court for political purposes. DA’s are making these decisions for their own personal glorification and the decisions have nothing to do with Justice.
Last night I watched a news story about an eight year old being charged with murder as an adult in Arizona.
The four kids convicted in this case were “around 14” at the time of the incident. I understand kids develop at different rates, but on average they do not start acting like adults until they reach 18- 22. This case belonged in Juvenile court, but it was taken to Adult court for political purposes. DA’s are making these decisions for their own personal glorification and the decisions have nothing to do with Justice.
Personally, I would have had the little jerks hung.
The conductor has to get out of the train to switch the train from one track to another. It is an incredibly dangerous job to do in West Sacramento thanks to this gang. The crew has no choice and when they go out, they are frequently attacked. This is a Federal crime and it is considered to be a terrorist act. it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.
A practical solution would be for the crews to be allowed to carry shotguns and simply shoot the little monsters if they are out there- but Amtrak doesn’t allow it.
Sorry, but I think the DA should have pushed harder and gotten the attempted murder charges.
By definition this was a terrorist attack…
Personally, I would have had the little jerks hung.
The conductor has to get out of the train to switch the train from one track to another. It is an incredibly dangerous job to do in West Sacramento thanks to this gang. The crew has no choice and when they go out, they are frequently attacked. This is a Federal crime and it is considered to be a terrorist act. it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.
A practical solution would be for the crews to be allowed to carry shotguns and simply shoot the little monsters if they are out there- but Amtrak doesn’t allow it.
Sorry, but I think the DA should have pushed harder and gotten the attempted murder charges.
By definition this was a terrorist attack…
Personally, I would have had the little jerks hung.
The conductor has to get out of the train to switch the train from one track to another. It is an incredibly dangerous job to do in West Sacramento thanks to this gang. The crew has no choice and when they go out, they are frequently attacked. This is a Federal crime and it is considered to be a terrorist act. it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.
A practical solution would be for the crews to be allowed to carry shotguns and simply shoot the little monsters if they are out there- but Amtrak doesn’t allow it.
Sorry, but I think the DA should have pushed harder and gotten the attempted murder charges.
By definition this was a terrorist attack…
Personally, I would have had the little jerks hung.
The conductor has to get out of the train to switch the train from one track to another. It is an incredibly dangerous job to do in West Sacramento thanks to this gang. The crew has no choice and when they go out, they are frequently attacked. This is a Federal crime and it is considered to be a terrorist act. it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.
A practical solution would be for the crews to be allowed to carry shotguns and simply shoot the little monsters if they are out there- but Amtrak doesn’t allow it.
Sorry, but I think the DA should have pushed harder and gotten the attempted murder charges.
By definition this was a terrorist attack…
“it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.”
except they were not on the train
“By definition this was a terrorist attack…”
The is a new definition. Go back to 2001 and then review all of the cases prior to that – there was no thought of defining such an act as a terrorist act.
“it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.”
except they were not on the train
“By definition this was a terrorist attack…”
The is a new definition. Go back to 2001 and then review all of the cases prior to that – there was no thought of defining such an act as a terrorist act.
“it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.”
except they were not on the train
“By definition this was a terrorist attack…”
The is a new definition. Go back to 2001 and then review all of the cases prior to that – there was no thought of defining such an act as a terrorist act.
“it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.”
except they were not on the train
“By definition this was a terrorist attack…”
The is a new definition. Go back to 2001 and then review all of the cases prior to that – there was no thought of defining such an act as a terrorist act.
Mr. McKinnon, were the young men Mexicans or were they Americans? Your letter states the former. I don’t know, thus the question.
Mr. McKinnon, were the young men Mexicans or were they Americans? Your letter states the former. I don’t know, thus the question.
Mr. McKinnon, were the young men Mexicans or were they Americans? Your letter states the former. I don’t know, thus the question.
Mr. McKinnon, were the young men Mexicans or were they Americans? Your letter states the former. I don’t know, thus the question.
Justice in Yolo County currently has a few problems. In a nutshell they are: two inherently conservative and timid newspapers who unquestioningly swallow everything that the DA feeds them, a DA who has no problem overreaching defendants and who exagerrates routinely to make himself look better and tougher than he really is,and a Public Defender who is more concerned with being popular in the community than he is with justice for his office’s clients.
Justice in Yolo County currently has a few problems. In a nutshell they are: two inherently conservative and timid newspapers who unquestioningly swallow everything that the DA feeds them, a DA who has no problem overreaching defendants and who exagerrates routinely to make himself look better and tougher than he really is,and a Public Defender who is more concerned with being popular in the community than he is with justice for his office’s clients.
Justice in Yolo County currently has a few problems. In a nutshell they are: two inherently conservative and timid newspapers who unquestioningly swallow everything that the DA feeds them, a DA who has no problem overreaching defendants and who exagerrates routinely to make himself look better and tougher than he really is,and a Public Defender who is more concerned with being popular in the community than he is with justice for his office’s clients.
Justice in Yolo County currently has a few problems. In a nutshell they are: two inherently conservative and timid newspapers who unquestioningly swallow everything that the DA feeds them, a DA who has no problem overreaching defendants and who exagerrates routinely to make himself look better and tougher than he really is,and a Public Defender who is more concerned with being popular in the community than he is with justice for his office’s clients.
A person is not innocent, but PRESUMED innocent, until proven guilty in a court of law. Why does everyone leave out the presumed part?
A person is not innocent, but PRESUMED innocent, until proven guilty in a court of law. Why does everyone leave out the presumed part?
A person is not innocent, but PRESUMED innocent, until proven guilty in a court of law. Why does everyone leave out the presumed part?
A person is not innocent, but PRESUMED innocent, until proven guilty in a court of law. Why does everyone leave out the presumed part?
Anonymouse 8:20-
Actually, the work a conductor does on the ground is far more complex and important for the operation of the train than what the Engineer is doing in the cab. It really is no different than what happens in a plane, or on a ship etc. It is transportation security and covered by Federal law.
You are correct that prior to 2001 there were a lot of cases that defined a lot of things differently. But 2001 kinda changed things… Terrorists come in all races and appearance.
The little thugs were terrorists and I think the DA could have been far tougher- I wish he had been.
BTW- this is not an isolated incident, trainmen are attacked and murdered by gangs in Sacramento and Stockton yards. They have to work alone in the dark in a noisy and dangerous environment. They are easy prey for this scum.
Anonymouse 8:20-
Actually, the work a conductor does on the ground is far more complex and important for the operation of the train than what the Engineer is doing in the cab. It really is no different than what happens in a plane, or on a ship etc. It is transportation security and covered by Federal law.
You are correct that prior to 2001 there were a lot of cases that defined a lot of things differently. But 2001 kinda changed things… Terrorists come in all races and appearance.
The little thugs were terrorists and I think the DA could have been far tougher- I wish he had been.
BTW- this is not an isolated incident, trainmen are attacked and murdered by gangs in Sacramento and Stockton yards. They have to work alone in the dark in a noisy and dangerous environment. They are easy prey for this scum.
Anonymouse 8:20-
Actually, the work a conductor does on the ground is far more complex and important for the operation of the train than what the Engineer is doing in the cab. It really is no different than what happens in a plane, or on a ship etc. It is transportation security and covered by Federal law.
You are correct that prior to 2001 there were a lot of cases that defined a lot of things differently. But 2001 kinda changed things… Terrorists come in all races and appearance.
The little thugs were terrorists and I think the DA could have been far tougher- I wish he had been.
BTW- this is not an isolated incident, trainmen are attacked and murdered by gangs in Sacramento and Stockton yards. They have to work alone in the dark in a noisy and dangerous environment. They are easy prey for this scum.
Anonymouse 8:20-
Actually, the work a conductor does on the ground is far more complex and important for the operation of the train than what the Engineer is doing in the cab. It really is no different than what happens in a plane, or on a ship etc. It is transportation security and covered by Federal law.
You are correct that prior to 2001 there were a lot of cases that defined a lot of things differently. But 2001 kinda changed things… Terrorists come in all races and appearance.
The little thugs were terrorists and I think the DA could have been far tougher- I wish he had been.
BTW- this is not an isolated incident, trainmen are attacked and murdered by gangs in Sacramento and Stockton yards. They have to work alone in the dark in a noisy and dangerous environment. They are easy prey for this scum.
“In fact, from what I see, only the Sacramento Bee reported that they were acquitted of the attempted murder charges.”
Huh?
This is the first sentence from Lauren Keene’s Davis Enterprise story:
“WOODLAND — Four West Sacramento youths accused of assaulting an Amtrak crew last year were convicted Thursday of multiple felony charges but acquitted of attempted murder.”
The letter you quote misses the most important point: an unbiased jury found these four, one of whom was 19 years old when he attacked the train and beat and robbed the engineer, guilty. The jury didn’t simply find this group guilty of one or two charges. “Austen Nunes, 19; Pauliton Nunes, 20; and Orlando Ramos, 16; each were found guilty of 11 felonies” and “Daniel Bonge, 19; was convicted of 10 felonies.”
It’s possible that upon appeal it will be determined that there was prosecutorial misconduct. If so, that will support the accusations against Mr. Reisig. We’ll just have to wait to see if that comes about. But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.
“In fact, from what I see, only the Sacramento Bee reported that they were acquitted of the attempted murder charges.”
Huh?
This is the first sentence from Lauren Keene’s Davis Enterprise story:
“WOODLAND — Four West Sacramento youths accused of assaulting an Amtrak crew last year were convicted Thursday of multiple felony charges but acquitted of attempted murder.”
The letter you quote misses the most important point: an unbiased jury found these four, one of whom was 19 years old when he attacked the train and beat and robbed the engineer, guilty. The jury didn’t simply find this group guilty of one or two charges. “Austen Nunes, 19; Pauliton Nunes, 20; and Orlando Ramos, 16; each were found guilty of 11 felonies” and “Daniel Bonge, 19; was convicted of 10 felonies.”
It’s possible that upon appeal it will be determined that there was prosecutorial misconduct. If so, that will support the accusations against Mr. Reisig. We’ll just have to wait to see if that comes about. But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.
“In fact, from what I see, only the Sacramento Bee reported that they were acquitted of the attempted murder charges.”
Huh?
This is the first sentence from Lauren Keene’s Davis Enterprise story:
“WOODLAND — Four West Sacramento youths accused of assaulting an Amtrak crew last year were convicted Thursday of multiple felony charges but acquitted of attempted murder.”
The letter you quote misses the most important point: an unbiased jury found these four, one of whom was 19 years old when he attacked the train and beat and robbed the engineer, guilty. The jury didn’t simply find this group guilty of one or two charges. “Austen Nunes, 19; Pauliton Nunes, 20; and Orlando Ramos, 16; each were found guilty of 11 felonies” and “Daniel Bonge, 19; was convicted of 10 felonies.”
It’s possible that upon appeal it will be determined that there was prosecutorial misconduct. If so, that will support the accusations against Mr. Reisig. We’ll just have to wait to see if that comes about. But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.
“In fact, from what I see, only the Sacramento Bee reported that they were acquitted of the attempted murder charges.”
Huh?
This is the first sentence from Lauren Keene’s Davis Enterprise story:
“WOODLAND — Four West Sacramento youths accused of assaulting an Amtrak crew last year were convicted Thursday of multiple felony charges but acquitted of attempted murder.”
The letter you quote misses the most important point: an unbiased jury found these four, one of whom was 19 years old when he attacked the train and beat and robbed the engineer, guilty. The jury didn’t simply find this group guilty of one or two charges. “Austen Nunes, 19; Pauliton Nunes, 20; and Orlando Ramos, 16; each were found guilty of 11 felonies” and “Daniel Bonge, 19; was convicted of 10 felonies.”
It’s possible that upon appeal it will be determined that there was prosecutorial misconduct. If so, that will support the accusations against Mr. Reisig. We’ll just have to wait to see if that comes about. But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.
“Huh?”
There’s a simple explanation for that. I read 10 stories, the Enterprise wasn’t one that I read. Go figure, the one I didn’t have immediate access to, I did preface it by: “from what I see…”
“an unbiased jury”
Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.
“But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.”
Is it fair to say that? Based on what? You have people on here who don’t think they were hard enough and people complaining that they were too hard. So I don’t think we can conclude anything from that.
Neither of us know how well the defense represented their clients, that is certainly a variable that we need to account for in order to sustain either of your claims.
“Huh?”
There’s a simple explanation for that. I read 10 stories, the Enterprise wasn’t one that I read. Go figure, the one I didn’t have immediate access to, I did preface it by: “from what I see…”
“an unbiased jury”
Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.
“But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.”
Is it fair to say that? Based on what? You have people on here who don’t think they were hard enough and people complaining that they were too hard. So I don’t think we can conclude anything from that.
Neither of us know how well the defense represented their clients, that is certainly a variable that we need to account for in order to sustain either of your claims.
“Huh?”
There’s a simple explanation for that. I read 10 stories, the Enterprise wasn’t one that I read. Go figure, the one I didn’t have immediate access to, I did preface it by: “from what I see…”
“an unbiased jury”
Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.
“But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.”
Is it fair to say that? Based on what? You have people on here who don’t think they were hard enough and people complaining that they were too hard. So I don’t think we can conclude anything from that.
Neither of us know how well the defense represented their clients, that is certainly a variable that we need to account for in order to sustain either of your claims.
“Huh?”
There’s a simple explanation for that. I read 10 stories, the Enterprise wasn’t one that I read. Go figure, the one I didn’t have immediate access to, I did preface it by: “from what I see…”
“an unbiased jury”
Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.
“But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.”
Is it fair to say that? Based on what? You have people on here who don’t think they were hard enough and people complaining that they were too hard. So I don’t think we can conclude anything from that.
Neither of us know how well the defense represented their clients, that is certainly a variable that we need to account for in order to sustain either of your claims.
“Mr. McKinnon, were the young men Mexicans or were they Americans? “
I don’t know why you are addressing your comment to Mr. McKinnon, who did not write the post on this blog and is unlikely to be reading your question.
Second, what difference does it make if they were or were not Americans–would it change the events that occurred or the DA’s response to them?
Third, do you have any reason to believe that the defendants were not Americans?
“Mr. McKinnon, were the young men Mexicans or were they Americans? “
I don’t know why you are addressing your comment to Mr. McKinnon, who did not write the post on this blog and is unlikely to be reading your question.
Second, what difference does it make if they were or were not Americans–would it change the events that occurred or the DA’s response to them?
Third, do you have any reason to believe that the defendants were not Americans?
“Mr. McKinnon, were the young men Mexicans or were they Americans? “
I don’t know why you are addressing your comment to Mr. McKinnon, who did not write the post on this blog and is unlikely to be reading your question.
Second, what difference does it make if they were or were not Americans–would it change the events that occurred or the DA’s response to them?
Third, do you have any reason to believe that the defendants were not Americans?
“Mr. McKinnon, were the young men Mexicans or were they Americans? “
I don’t know why you are addressing your comment to Mr. McKinnon, who did not write the post on this blog and is unlikely to be reading your question.
Second, what difference does it make if they were or were not Americans–would it change the events that occurred or the DA’s response to them?
Third, do you have any reason to believe that the defendants were not Americans?
“The four kids convicted in this case were “around 14″ at the time of the incident. I understand kids develop at different rates, but on average they do not start acting like adults until they reach 18- 22. This case belonged in Juvenile court, but it was taken to Adult court for political purposes. DA’s are making these decisions for their own personal glorification and the decisions have nothing to do with Justice.”
In the Andrew Mockus murder case, right here in Davis, a 14 year old was let off – to murder again a year later. If you do an adult crime, perhaps you should do adult time. It is a question of protecting society from predators, no matter what their age. Some kids cannot be “saved”, no matter how much you would like to think otherwise.
“The conductor has to get out of the train to switch the train from one track to another. It is an incredibly dangerous job to do in West Sacramento thanks to this gang. The crew has no choice and when they go out, they are frequently attacked. This is a Federal crime and it is considered to be a terrorist act. it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.”
This is a very good point. The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial. Had the kids not engaged in criminal activity, beaten the engineer within an inch of his life, they would now not be going to jail. KISS.
The perps were found guilty, period. What does that have to do with a gang injunction? The two things are two separate issues, especially since the gang injunction was already ruled on. DA’s try different methods of attacking a problem, just as the police do, just as teachers do. Some work, some don’t. Everyone has an opinion, which is fine, but I like the DA erring on the side of protecting the public’s safety.
“The four kids convicted in this case were “around 14″ at the time of the incident. I understand kids develop at different rates, but on average they do not start acting like adults until they reach 18- 22. This case belonged in Juvenile court, but it was taken to Adult court for political purposes. DA’s are making these decisions for their own personal glorification and the decisions have nothing to do with Justice.”
In the Andrew Mockus murder case, right here in Davis, a 14 year old was let off – to murder again a year later. If you do an adult crime, perhaps you should do adult time. It is a question of protecting society from predators, no matter what their age. Some kids cannot be “saved”, no matter how much you would like to think otherwise.
“The conductor has to get out of the train to switch the train from one track to another. It is an incredibly dangerous job to do in West Sacramento thanks to this gang. The crew has no choice and when they go out, they are frequently attacked. This is a Federal crime and it is considered to be a terrorist act. it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.”
This is a very good point. The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial. Had the kids not engaged in criminal activity, beaten the engineer within an inch of his life, they would now not be going to jail. KISS.
The perps were found guilty, period. What does that have to do with a gang injunction? The two things are two separate issues, especially since the gang injunction was already ruled on. DA’s try different methods of attacking a problem, just as the police do, just as teachers do. Some work, some don’t. Everyone has an opinion, which is fine, but I like the DA erring on the side of protecting the public’s safety.
“The four kids convicted in this case were “around 14″ at the time of the incident. I understand kids develop at different rates, but on average they do not start acting like adults until they reach 18- 22. This case belonged in Juvenile court, but it was taken to Adult court for political purposes. DA’s are making these decisions for their own personal glorification and the decisions have nothing to do with Justice.”
In the Andrew Mockus murder case, right here in Davis, a 14 year old was let off – to murder again a year later. If you do an adult crime, perhaps you should do adult time. It is a question of protecting society from predators, no matter what their age. Some kids cannot be “saved”, no matter how much you would like to think otherwise.
“The conductor has to get out of the train to switch the train from one track to another. It is an incredibly dangerous job to do in West Sacramento thanks to this gang. The crew has no choice and when they go out, they are frequently attacked. This is a Federal crime and it is considered to be a terrorist act. it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.”
This is a very good point. The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial. Had the kids not engaged in criminal activity, beaten the engineer within an inch of his life, they would now not be going to jail. KISS.
The perps were found guilty, period. What does that have to do with a gang injunction? The two things are two separate issues, especially since the gang injunction was already ruled on. DA’s try different methods of attacking a problem, just as the police do, just as teachers do. Some work, some don’t. Everyone has an opinion, which is fine, but I like the DA erring on the side of protecting the public’s safety.
“The four kids convicted in this case were “around 14″ at the time of the incident. I understand kids develop at different rates, but on average they do not start acting like adults until they reach 18- 22. This case belonged in Juvenile court, but it was taken to Adult court for political purposes. DA’s are making these decisions for their own personal glorification and the decisions have nothing to do with Justice.”
In the Andrew Mockus murder case, right here in Davis, a 14 year old was let off – to murder again a year later. If you do an adult crime, perhaps you should do adult time. It is a question of protecting society from predators, no matter what their age. Some kids cannot be “saved”, no matter how much you would like to think otherwise.
“The conductor has to get out of the train to switch the train from one track to another. It is an incredibly dangerous job to do in West Sacramento thanks to this gang. The crew has no choice and when they go out, they are frequently attacked. This is a Federal crime and it is considered to be a terrorist act. it is no different than trying to stick a knife into the co-pilot of a commercial jetliner.”
This is a very good point. The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial. Had the kids not engaged in criminal activity, beaten the engineer within an inch of his life, they would now not be going to jail. KISS.
The perps were found guilty, period. What does that have to do with a gang injunction? The two things are two separate issues, especially since the gang injunction was already ruled on. DA’s try different methods of attacking a problem, just as the police do, just as teachers do. Some work, some don’t. Everyone has an opinion, which is fine, but I like the DA erring on the side of protecting the public’s safety.
“an unbiased jury”
Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.
—-
We know they were accepted as jurors by both defense and prosecution. So they were unbiased enough to get through the challenges by both sides. So they didn’t show sufficient bias to cause concern for attorneys from either side. Nobody thinks that jurors have no bias whatsoever.
“an unbiased jury”
Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.
—-
We know they were accepted as jurors by both defense and prosecution. So they were unbiased enough to get through the challenges by both sides. So they didn’t show sufficient bias to cause concern for attorneys from either side. Nobody thinks that jurors have no bias whatsoever.
“an unbiased jury”
Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.
—-
We know they were accepted as jurors by both defense and prosecution. So they were unbiased enough to get through the challenges by both sides. So they didn’t show sufficient bias to cause concern for attorneys from either side. Nobody thinks that jurors have no bias whatsoever.
“an unbiased jury”
Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.
—-
We know they were accepted as jurors by both defense and prosecution. So they were unbiased enough to get through the challenges by both sides. So they didn’t show sufficient bias to cause concern for attorneys from either side. Nobody thinks that jurors have no bias whatsoever.
“The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial.”
In the literal sense, he is not on trial. In the sense of trying to ascertain culpability and responsibility, his actions are very much in question, the extent to which he exacerbated the situation in particular is important to understand.
“The perps were found guilty, period.”
That is really the beginning of the story, rather than the end. Much is unanswered.
I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.
“The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial.”
In the literal sense, he is not on trial. In the sense of trying to ascertain culpability and responsibility, his actions are very much in question, the extent to which he exacerbated the situation in particular is important to understand.
“The perps were found guilty, period.”
That is really the beginning of the story, rather than the end. Much is unanswered.
I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.
“The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial.”
In the literal sense, he is not on trial. In the sense of trying to ascertain culpability and responsibility, his actions are very much in question, the extent to which he exacerbated the situation in particular is important to understand.
“The perps were found guilty, period.”
That is really the beginning of the story, rather than the end. Much is unanswered.
I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.
“The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial.”
In the literal sense, he is not on trial. In the sense of trying to ascertain culpability and responsibility, his actions are very much in question, the extent to which he exacerbated the situation in particular is important to understand.
“The perps were found guilty, period.”
That is really the beginning of the story, rather than the end. Much is unanswered.
I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.
Don:
My only objections was the assertion that he made of an unbiased jury. I wouldn’t have raised the point if he had said jury, but unbiased implies something that we don’t really know.
Don:
My only objections was the assertion that he made of an unbiased jury. I wouldn’t have raised the point if he had said jury, but unbiased implies something that we don’t really know.
Don:
My only objections was the assertion that he made of an unbiased jury. I wouldn’t have raised the point if he had said jury, but unbiased implies something that we don’t really know.
Don:
My only objections was the assertion that he made of an unbiased jury. I wouldn’t have raised the point if he had said jury, but unbiased implies something that we don’t really know.
“Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.”
I presume that the defense attorneys accepted them as fair individuals. That is a perfectly reasonable presumption, given what I know about our system.
I presume that, if one or more had a bias in this case going in, he would have been removed from the jury by defense challenges.
So based on the evidence, it is fair to presume it was an unbiased jury and it is unfair to presume otherwise, unless you have evidence to suggest bias. You have presented no evidence to that effect.
But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.
“Is it fair to say that? Based on what?”
Based on the fact that 12 unbiased jurors heard the evidence and arguments presented at trial and convicted these four of 10, 11, 11, and 11 counts.
“Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.”
I presume that the defense attorneys accepted them as fair individuals. That is a perfectly reasonable presumption, given what I know about our system.
I presume that, if one or more had a bias in this case going in, he would have been removed from the jury by defense challenges.
So based on the evidence, it is fair to presume it was an unbiased jury and it is unfair to presume otherwise, unless you have evidence to suggest bias. You have presented no evidence to that effect.
But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.
“Is it fair to say that? Based on what?”
Based on the fact that 12 unbiased jurors heard the evidence and arguments presented at trial and convicted these four of 10, 11, 11, and 11 counts.
“Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.”
I presume that the defense attorneys accepted them as fair individuals. That is a perfectly reasonable presumption, given what I know about our system.
I presume that, if one or more had a bias in this case going in, he would have been removed from the jury by defense challenges.
So based on the evidence, it is fair to presume it was an unbiased jury and it is unfair to presume otherwise, unless you have evidence to suggest bias. You have presented no evidence to that effect.
But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.
“Is it fair to say that? Based on what?”
Based on the fact that 12 unbiased jurors heard the evidence and arguments presented at trial and convicted these four of 10, 11, 11, and 11 counts.
“Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.”
I presume that the defense attorneys accepted them as fair individuals. That is a perfectly reasonable presumption, given what I know about our system.
I presume that, if one or more had a bias in this case going in, he would have been removed from the jury by defense challenges.
So based on the evidence, it is fair to presume it was an unbiased jury and it is unfair to presume otherwise, unless you have evidence to suggest bias. You have presented no evidence to that effect.
But at this point, it’s perfectly fair to say Reisig and DDA Linden did a very good job in prosecuting dangerous people.
“Is it fair to say that? Based on what?”
Based on the fact that 12 unbiased jurors heard the evidence and arguments presented at trial and convicted these four of 10, 11, 11, and 11 counts.
All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.
All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.
All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.
All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.
I think that everyone is missing an important point. Will the community be better served by the trial and conviction of the juveniles as adults?
All of the defendants spent a year in juvenile hall and/or jail while waiting for their trial; the ones convicted will spend some time in prison and re-enter the community as parolees after intense criminal education and a 70% chance of recidivism; the boy who was acquitted will re-enter the community without any services – not even probation.
Would these young men have been better served and community concerns better served by keeping the case in juvenile court for the ones under 18 years old?
I think that everyone is missing an important point. Will the community be better served by the trial and conviction of the juveniles as adults?
All of the defendants spent a year in juvenile hall and/or jail while waiting for their trial; the ones convicted will spend some time in prison and re-enter the community as parolees after intense criminal education and a 70% chance of recidivism; the boy who was acquitted will re-enter the community without any services – not even probation.
Would these young men have been better served and community concerns better served by keeping the case in juvenile court for the ones under 18 years old?
I think that everyone is missing an important point. Will the community be better served by the trial and conviction of the juveniles as adults?
All of the defendants spent a year in juvenile hall and/or jail while waiting for their trial; the ones convicted will spend some time in prison and re-enter the community as parolees after intense criminal education and a 70% chance of recidivism; the boy who was acquitted will re-enter the community without any services – not even probation.
Would these young men have been better served and community concerns better served by keeping the case in juvenile court for the ones under 18 years old?
I think that everyone is missing an important point. Will the community be better served by the trial and conviction of the juveniles as adults?
All of the defendants spent a year in juvenile hall and/or jail while waiting for their trial; the ones convicted will spend some time in prison and re-enter the community as parolees after intense criminal education and a 70% chance of recidivism; the boy who was acquitted will re-enter the community without any services – not even probation.
Would these young men have been better served and community concerns better served by keeping the case in juvenile court for the ones under 18 years old?
If the four attackers had been white gangsters and the victim had been black, this blog would have presented this case as a racial hate crime and would have said the DA was too soft on the criminals and he would have said that the attack shows how racist white gangs are.
If the four attackers had been white gangsters and the victim had been black, this blog would have presented this case as a racial hate crime and would have said the DA was too soft on the criminals and he would have said that the attack shows how racist white gangs are.
If the four attackers had been white gangsters and the victim had been black, this blog would have presented this case as a racial hate crime and would have said the DA was too soft on the criminals and he would have said that the attack shows how racist white gangs are.
If the four attackers had been white gangsters and the victim had been black, this blog would have presented this case as a racial hate crime and would have said the DA was too soft on the criminals and he would have said that the attack shows how racist white gangs are.
You’re really sick, Mike. I only hope that you are not a father.
You’re really sick, Mike. I only hope that you are not a father.
You’re really sick, Mike. I only hope that you are not a father.
You’re really sick, Mike. I only hope that you are not a father.
I think it’s interesting that Tim Mckinnon seems intent on blaming the Amtrak driver for being attacked. Blaming the victim rather than the criminal is the kind of criminal mentality that pervades many corrupt officials in Yolo County. Hats off to Jeff Reisig for going tough on these gangs. They need to be stoped. The Amtrak driver had the right to defense, and in that moment, calling the police would do nothing as I’m sure the kids who were vandalizing the train would have been gone as soon as they saw him call the police. Gang activity is every where in Yolo County and it has to stop. It’s in Davis, it’s in Winters, W. Sac, and Woodland. The more we go soft on crime the more were will have to pay the price. Good for Jeff Reisig. I think calling them domestic terrorists was a bit much, but still, they are gang memebers and the crimes must be dealt with accordingly so as not prevent more criminal activity.
I think it’s interesting that Tim Mckinnon seems intent on blaming the Amtrak driver for being attacked. Blaming the victim rather than the criminal is the kind of criminal mentality that pervades many corrupt officials in Yolo County. Hats off to Jeff Reisig for going tough on these gangs. They need to be stoped. The Amtrak driver had the right to defense, and in that moment, calling the police would do nothing as I’m sure the kids who were vandalizing the train would have been gone as soon as they saw him call the police. Gang activity is every where in Yolo County and it has to stop. It’s in Davis, it’s in Winters, W. Sac, and Woodland. The more we go soft on crime the more were will have to pay the price. Good for Jeff Reisig. I think calling them domestic terrorists was a bit much, but still, they are gang memebers and the crimes must be dealt with accordingly so as not prevent more criminal activity.
I think it’s interesting that Tim Mckinnon seems intent on blaming the Amtrak driver for being attacked. Blaming the victim rather than the criminal is the kind of criminal mentality that pervades many corrupt officials in Yolo County. Hats off to Jeff Reisig for going tough on these gangs. They need to be stoped. The Amtrak driver had the right to defense, and in that moment, calling the police would do nothing as I’m sure the kids who were vandalizing the train would have been gone as soon as they saw him call the police. Gang activity is every where in Yolo County and it has to stop. It’s in Davis, it’s in Winters, W. Sac, and Woodland. The more we go soft on crime the more were will have to pay the price. Good for Jeff Reisig. I think calling them domestic terrorists was a bit much, but still, they are gang memebers and the crimes must be dealt with accordingly so as not prevent more criminal activity.
I think it’s interesting that Tim Mckinnon seems intent on blaming the Amtrak driver for being attacked. Blaming the victim rather than the criminal is the kind of criminal mentality that pervades many corrupt officials in Yolo County. Hats off to Jeff Reisig for going tough on these gangs. They need to be stoped. The Amtrak driver had the right to defense, and in that moment, calling the police would do nothing as I’m sure the kids who were vandalizing the train would have been gone as soon as they saw him call the police. Gang activity is every where in Yolo County and it has to stop. It’s in Davis, it’s in Winters, W. Sac, and Woodland. The more we go soft on crime the more were will have to pay the price. Good for Jeff Reisig. I think calling them domestic terrorists was a bit much, but still, they are gang memebers and the crimes must be dealt with accordingly so as not prevent more criminal activity.
When viewed as an isolated incident an argument about apropriate punishment could be made, but Reisig works in an environment full of gang violence where young people have no respect for life or what a gun can do. How much violence are you willing to accept in society?
These guys got convicted and maybe they will get too much time for their crime. But maybe it will serve as a deterrent or keep the rest of us protected from some violent young people. If you want to criticize maybe you should start by asking where are the gang intervention programs instead of taking on the DA who is just cleaning up the streets so the rest of us can go about our business safely.
When viewed as an isolated incident an argument about apropriate punishment could be made, but Reisig works in an environment full of gang violence where young people have no respect for life or what a gun can do. How much violence are you willing to accept in society?
These guys got convicted and maybe they will get too much time for their crime. But maybe it will serve as a deterrent or keep the rest of us protected from some violent young people. If you want to criticize maybe you should start by asking where are the gang intervention programs instead of taking on the DA who is just cleaning up the streets so the rest of us can go about our business safely.
When viewed as an isolated incident an argument about apropriate punishment could be made, but Reisig works in an environment full of gang violence where young people have no respect for life or what a gun can do. How much violence are you willing to accept in society?
These guys got convicted and maybe they will get too much time for their crime. But maybe it will serve as a deterrent or keep the rest of us protected from some violent young people. If you want to criticize maybe you should start by asking where are the gang intervention programs instead of taking on the DA who is just cleaning up the streets so the rest of us can go about our business safely.
When viewed as an isolated incident an argument about apropriate punishment could be made, but Reisig works in an environment full of gang violence where young people have no respect for life or what a gun can do. How much violence are you willing to accept in society?
These guys got convicted and maybe they will get too much time for their crime. But maybe it will serve as a deterrent or keep the rest of us protected from some violent young people. If you want to criticize maybe you should start by asking where are the gang intervention programs instead of taking on the DA who is just cleaning up the streets so the rest of us can go about our business safely.
They definitely should not have been drinking and misbehaving, throwing rocks at a passing train. They should have ran when the train stopped. They should not have hung around to talk to the conductor and definitely not gotten close enough for the conductor to start hitting one of them.
The conductor should not have stopped the train. He should not have gotten off the train and confronted the five teenagers with a train full of passengers waiting and wanting to get to their destination. He should not have hit one of the young men in the face 7-8 times, breaking the kids nose, and drawing the other teenagers and his co-workers into a physical fight and putting them all at risk for injury.
They definitely should not have been drinking and misbehaving, throwing rocks at a passing train. They should have ran when the train stopped. They should not have hung around to talk to the conductor and definitely not gotten close enough for the conductor to start hitting one of them.
The conductor should not have stopped the train. He should not have gotten off the train and confronted the five teenagers with a train full of passengers waiting and wanting to get to their destination. He should not have hit one of the young men in the face 7-8 times, breaking the kids nose, and drawing the other teenagers and his co-workers into a physical fight and putting them all at risk for injury.
They definitely should not have been drinking and misbehaving, throwing rocks at a passing train. They should have ran when the train stopped. They should not have hung around to talk to the conductor and definitely not gotten close enough for the conductor to start hitting one of them.
The conductor should not have stopped the train. He should not have gotten off the train and confronted the five teenagers with a train full of passengers waiting and wanting to get to their destination. He should not have hit one of the young men in the face 7-8 times, breaking the kids nose, and drawing the other teenagers and his co-workers into a physical fight and putting them all at risk for injury.
They definitely should not have been drinking and misbehaving, throwing rocks at a passing train. They should have ran when the train stopped. They should not have hung around to talk to the conductor and definitely not gotten close enough for the conductor to start hitting one of them.
The conductor should not have stopped the train. He should not have gotten off the train and confronted the five teenagers with a train full of passengers waiting and wanting to get to their destination. He should not have hit one of the young men in the face 7-8 times, breaking the kids nose, and drawing the other teenagers and his co-workers into a physical fight and putting them all at risk for injury.
Mr. Mckinnon I appreciate the fact that you do not fear sharing an opinion outside of those already stated. I too have concerns regarding the use of the term “terrorists” and “gang members”. Are they Broderick Boys because they a male and are from Broderick? Are they gang members because they hang out together? The definition of a gang member as defined by expert testimony for Yolo County courts is: one who commits a crime solely for the purpose of status amongst other gang members, or one who commits a crime for the benefit of the gang. I see none of either criterion here.
The young men definitely should be held accountable for their actions. But the terms gang members and terrorists are simply being tossed out by our District Attorneys office to drive fear into the residents of our community.
As to whether or not they should have been tried as juveniles or adults should be determined by the intent of the actions during the crime. I will admit that as a teenager had I been goofing off, and one of my friends was being attacked by an adult I would not have set idly by either. And by the way, the days of hanging have been outlawed for some time. So to make such a suggestion you could be considered a person who conspired the commission of a crime.
Mr. Mckinnon I appreciate the fact that you do not fear sharing an opinion outside of those already stated. I too have concerns regarding the use of the term “terrorists” and “gang members”. Are they Broderick Boys because they a male and are from Broderick? Are they gang members because they hang out together? The definition of a gang member as defined by expert testimony for Yolo County courts is: one who commits a crime solely for the purpose of status amongst other gang members, or one who commits a crime for the benefit of the gang. I see none of either criterion here.
The young men definitely should be held accountable for their actions. But the terms gang members and terrorists are simply being tossed out by our District Attorneys office to drive fear into the residents of our community.
As to whether or not they should have been tried as juveniles or adults should be determined by the intent of the actions during the crime. I will admit that as a teenager had I been goofing off, and one of my friends was being attacked by an adult I would not have set idly by either. And by the way, the days of hanging have been outlawed for some time. So to make such a suggestion you could be considered a person who conspired the commission of a crime.
Mr. Mckinnon I appreciate the fact that you do not fear sharing an opinion outside of those already stated. I too have concerns regarding the use of the term “terrorists” and “gang members”. Are they Broderick Boys because they a male and are from Broderick? Are they gang members because they hang out together? The definition of a gang member as defined by expert testimony for Yolo County courts is: one who commits a crime solely for the purpose of status amongst other gang members, or one who commits a crime for the benefit of the gang. I see none of either criterion here.
The young men definitely should be held accountable for their actions. But the terms gang members and terrorists are simply being tossed out by our District Attorneys office to drive fear into the residents of our community.
As to whether or not they should have been tried as juveniles or adults should be determined by the intent of the actions during the crime. I will admit that as a teenager had I been goofing off, and one of my friends was being attacked by an adult I would not have set idly by either. And by the way, the days of hanging have been outlawed for some time. So to make such a suggestion you could be considered a person who conspired the commission of a crime.
Mr. Mckinnon I appreciate the fact that you do not fear sharing an opinion outside of those already stated. I too have concerns regarding the use of the term “terrorists” and “gang members”. Are they Broderick Boys because they a male and are from Broderick? Are they gang members because they hang out together? The definition of a gang member as defined by expert testimony for Yolo County courts is: one who commits a crime solely for the purpose of status amongst other gang members, or one who commits a crime for the benefit of the gang. I see none of either criterion here.
The young men definitely should be held accountable for their actions. But the terms gang members and terrorists are simply being tossed out by our District Attorneys office to drive fear into the residents of our community.
As to whether or not they should have been tried as juveniles or adults should be determined by the intent of the actions during the crime. I will admit that as a teenager had I been goofing off, and one of my friends was being attacked by an adult I would not have set idly by either. And by the way, the days of hanging have been outlawed for some time. So to make such a suggestion you could be considered a person who conspired the commission of a crime.
“Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.”
Is it fair to say that? Based on what? You have people on here who don’t think they were hard enough and people complaining that they were too hard. So I don’t think we can conclude anything from that.
“All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.”
So Yolo County has incompetent juries and DA’s? Or is someone looking under every rock for a story….
Why is it not mentioned that these “around 14 year old kids” had stolen 2 cases of beer prior to the attack? Blogism…
“Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.”
Is it fair to say that? Based on what? You have people on here who don’t think they were hard enough and people complaining that they were too hard. So I don’t think we can conclude anything from that.
“All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.”
So Yolo County has incompetent juries and DA’s? Or is someone looking under every rock for a story….
Why is it not mentioned that these “around 14 year old kids” had stolen 2 cases of beer prior to the attack? Blogism…
“Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.”
Is it fair to say that? Based on what? You have people on here who don’t think they were hard enough and people complaining that they were too hard. So I don’t think we can conclude anything from that.
“All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.”
So Yolo County has incompetent juries and DA’s? Or is someone looking under every rock for a story….
Why is it not mentioned that these “around 14 year old kids” had stolen 2 cases of beer prior to the attack? Blogism…
“Now you’re jumping to conclusions. You know it’s a jury, you don’t know much else about them.”
Is it fair to say that? Based on what? You have people on here who don’t think they were hard enough and people complaining that they were too hard. So I don’t think we can conclude anything from that.
“All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.”
So Yolo County has incompetent juries and DA’s? Or is someone looking under every rock for a story….
Why is it not mentioned that these “around 14 year old kids” had stolen 2 cases of beer prior to the attack? Blogism…
And what else is on their records a history of gang involvement perhaps? and how do they go from being 14 to nineteen in a year and a half?
And what else is on their records a history of gang involvement perhaps? and how do they go from being 14 to nineteen in a year and a half?
And what else is on their records a history of gang involvement perhaps? and how do they go from being 14 to nineteen in a year and a half?
And what else is on their records a history of gang involvement perhaps? and how do they go from being 14 to nineteen in a year and a half?
All of those questions were answered in open court. Just because you did not attend and find out the answers to your questions does not mean they were not answered to the jury and to the public. It is not the DA’s responsibility to call all bloggers and hash over the details. Go to the court and buy the transcripts. Everything will be answered right there in black and white.
All of those questions were answered in open court. Just because you did not attend and find out the answers to your questions does not mean they were not answered to the jury and to the public. It is not the DA’s responsibility to call all bloggers and hash over the details. Go to the court and buy the transcripts. Everything will be answered right there in black and white.
All of those questions were answered in open court. Just because you did not attend and find out the answers to your questions does not mean they were not answered to the jury and to the public. It is not the DA’s responsibility to call all bloggers and hash over the details. Go to the court and buy the transcripts. Everything will be answered right there in black and white.
All of those questions were answered in open court. Just because you did not attend and find out the answers to your questions does not mean they were not answered to the jury and to the public. It is not the DA’s responsibility to call all bloggers and hash over the details. Go to the court and buy the transcripts. Everything will be answered right there in black and white.
Well since you were there and you know, I’m sure you wouldn’t mind sharing some of those answers.
Well since you were there and you know, I’m sure you wouldn’t mind sharing some of those answers.
Well since you were there and you know, I’m sure you wouldn’t mind sharing some of those answers.
Well since you were there and you know, I’m sure you wouldn’t mind sharing some of those answers.
Many young people all over get themselves into some kind of trouble. The severity is determined on the District Attorneys office.
These young people are offered various deals that include suspended sentences, strikes, and registering as gang members. There are even those that will not accept the gang relationships and are still “determined” to be a gang member.
They are made an offer and all they understand is “if you agree, you will get out today”. As children they only see the door open or shut. Despite what is written black and white can make gray.
Many young people all over get themselves into some kind of trouble. The severity is determined on the District Attorneys office.
These young people are offered various deals that include suspended sentences, strikes, and registering as gang members. There are even those that will not accept the gang relationships and are still “determined” to be a gang member.
They are made an offer and all they understand is “if you agree, you will get out today”. As children they only see the door open or shut. Despite what is written black and white can make gray.
Many young people all over get themselves into some kind of trouble. The severity is determined on the District Attorneys office.
These young people are offered various deals that include suspended sentences, strikes, and registering as gang members. There are even those that will not accept the gang relationships and are still “determined” to be a gang member.
They are made an offer and all they understand is “if you agree, you will get out today”. As children they only see the door open or shut. Despite what is written black and white can make gray.
Many young people all over get themselves into some kind of trouble. The severity is determined on the District Attorneys office.
These young people are offered various deals that include suspended sentences, strikes, and registering as gang members. There are even those that will not accept the gang relationships and are still “determined” to be a gang member.
They are made an offer and all they understand is “if you agree, you will get out today”. As children they only see the door open or shut. Despite what is written black and white can make gray.
“Domestic terrorist” is the new “Enemy of the State/People”. George Orwell couldn’t have used it any better than its present usage. Here we see the neo-cons expanding the definition. Soon everyone arrested for civil disobedience will be charged as such.
“Gang injunctions” can only be brought about by abrogating constitutional guarantees, such as freedom of assembly.
Our own forefathers would have been deemed “domestic terrorists” by the Crown and forbidden to assemble by “gang injunction”.
Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution. And the justice system isn’t about justice, it’s about winning and getting elected to a higher position. Heaven help you if you get caught in its orbit.
“Domestic terrorist” is the new “Enemy of the State/People”. George Orwell couldn’t have used it any better than its present usage. Here we see the neo-cons expanding the definition. Soon everyone arrested for civil disobedience will be charged as such.
“Gang injunctions” can only be brought about by abrogating constitutional guarantees, such as freedom of assembly.
Our own forefathers would have been deemed “domestic terrorists” by the Crown and forbidden to assemble by “gang injunction”.
Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution. And the justice system isn’t about justice, it’s about winning and getting elected to a higher position. Heaven help you if you get caught in its orbit.
“Domestic terrorist” is the new “Enemy of the State/People”. George Orwell couldn’t have used it any better than its present usage. Here we see the neo-cons expanding the definition. Soon everyone arrested for civil disobedience will be charged as such.
“Gang injunctions” can only be brought about by abrogating constitutional guarantees, such as freedom of assembly.
Our own forefathers would have been deemed “domestic terrorists” by the Crown and forbidden to assemble by “gang injunction”.
Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution. And the justice system isn’t about justice, it’s about winning and getting elected to a higher position. Heaven help you if you get caught in its orbit.
“Domestic terrorist” is the new “Enemy of the State/People”. George Orwell couldn’t have used it any better than its present usage. Here we see the neo-cons expanding the definition. Soon everyone arrested for civil disobedience will be charged as such.
“Gang injunctions” can only be brought about by abrogating constitutional guarantees, such as freedom of assembly.
Our own forefathers would have been deemed “domestic terrorists” by the Crown and forbidden to assemble by “gang injunction”.
Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution. And the justice system isn’t about justice, it’s about winning and getting elected to a higher position. Heaven help you if you get caught in its orbit.
Thanks to poor border control and to illegal immigration we have plenty of gang bangers to spare. Thanks goes to the, U.S. Gov’t and the Mexican Gov’t. for the problems.
One day the drug war killings will escalate here, like in mexico, and some people will hear a loud pop. That loud pop will be those people pulling their heads out of their rear ends.
Thanks to poor border control and to illegal immigration we have plenty of gang bangers to spare. Thanks goes to the, U.S. Gov’t and the Mexican Gov’t. for the problems.
One day the drug war killings will escalate here, like in mexico, and some people will hear a loud pop. That loud pop will be those people pulling their heads out of their rear ends.
Thanks to poor border control and to illegal immigration we have plenty of gang bangers to spare. Thanks goes to the, U.S. Gov’t and the Mexican Gov’t. for the problems.
One day the drug war killings will escalate here, like in mexico, and some people will hear a loud pop. That loud pop will be those people pulling their heads out of their rear ends.
Thanks to poor border control and to illegal immigration we have plenty of gang bangers to spare. Thanks goes to the, U.S. Gov’t and the Mexican Gov’t. for the problems.
One day the drug war killings will escalate here, like in mexico, and some people will hear a loud pop. That loud pop will be those people pulling their heads out of their rear ends.
That’s nice, what does that have to do with this?
That’s nice, what does that have to do with this?
That’s nice, what does that have to do with this?
That’s nice, what does that have to do with this?
“The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial.”
In the literal sense, he is not on trial. In the sense of trying to ascertain culpability and responsibility, his actions are very much in question, the extent to which he exacerbated the situation in particular is important to understand.
Excuse me? Are you serious? First of all, who should have been near the train in the first place, the train engineer, or the gang members? This is stoopid.
“The perps were found guilty, period.”
That is really the beginning of the story, rather than the end. Much is unanswered.
I’ll say it again. To know who instigated what, you have to look for who should have been there in the first place. What reason did those kids have to be there?
I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.
At any cost?
DPD, your position is outrageous. You just put the victim on trial, while you treat the perpetrators with kid gloves. This is one for the books.
“The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial.”
In the literal sense, he is not on trial. In the sense of trying to ascertain culpability and responsibility, his actions are very much in question, the extent to which he exacerbated the situation in particular is important to understand.
Excuse me? Are you serious? First of all, who should have been near the train in the first place, the train engineer, or the gang members? This is stoopid.
“The perps were found guilty, period.”
That is really the beginning of the story, rather than the end. Much is unanswered.
I’ll say it again. To know who instigated what, you have to look for who should have been there in the first place. What reason did those kids have to be there?
I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.
At any cost?
DPD, your position is outrageous. You just put the victim on trial, while you treat the perpetrators with kid gloves. This is one for the books.
“The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial.”
In the literal sense, he is not on trial. In the sense of trying to ascertain culpability and responsibility, his actions are very much in question, the extent to which he exacerbated the situation in particular is important to understand.
Excuse me? Are you serious? First of all, who should have been near the train in the first place, the train engineer, or the gang members? This is stoopid.
“The perps were found guilty, period.”
That is really the beginning of the story, rather than the end. Much is unanswered.
I’ll say it again. To know who instigated what, you have to look for who should have been there in the first place. What reason did those kids have to be there?
I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.
At any cost?
DPD, your position is outrageous. You just put the victim on trial, while you treat the perpetrators with kid gloves. This is one for the books.
“The engineers had a trainful of passengers to protect. We don’t really know why the engineer made the choices he did, but he is not the one on trial.”
In the literal sense, he is not on trial. In the sense of trying to ascertain culpability and responsibility, his actions are very much in question, the extent to which he exacerbated the situation in particular is important to understand.
Excuse me? Are you serious? First of all, who should have been near the train in the first place, the train engineer, or the gang members? This is stoopid.
“The perps were found guilty, period.”
That is really the beginning of the story, rather than the end. Much is unanswered.
I’ll say it again. To know who instigated what, you have to look for who should have been there in the first place. What reason did those kids have to be there?
I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.
At any cost?
DPD, your position is outrageous. You just put the victim on trial, while you treat the perpetrators with kid gloves. This is one for the books.
“Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution.”
Reisig is a neo-con? What evidence do you have for that?
“Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution.”
Reisig is a neo-con? What evidence do you have for that?
“Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution.”
Reisig is a neo-con? What evidence do you have for that?
“Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution.”
Reisig is a neo-con? What evidence do you have for that?
“I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.”
Tell that to the engineer who was beaten within an inch of his life. I’m more concerned about his welfare, since he did not choose to put himself in the hospital – those hooligans made that choice for him.
“All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.”
And why do you assume they did not???
“Would these young men have been better served and community concerns better served by keeping the case in juvenile court for the ones under 18 years old?”
In the Andrew Mockus murder case, a 14 yr old was let off, and murdered another within one year. Had he been tried as an adult and jailed, the person he murdered might be alive today. Would this 14 year old murder when he got out of adult prison had he been tried as an adult. Who knows?
“The conductor should not have stopped the train. He should not have gotten off the train and confronted the five teenagers with a train full of passengers waiting and wanting to get to their destination.”
Should the conductor have just run over the kids standing on the tracks in front of the train? Would you have preferred the conductor had made that choice?
“Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution. And the justice system isn’t about justice, it’s about winning and getting elected to a higher position. Heaven help you if you get caught in its orbit.”
Would you prefer that Reisig let these thugs off??? They attacked a train full of passengers, for heaven’s sake!
“I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.”
Tell that to the engineer who was beaten within an inch of his life. I’m more concerned about his welfare, since he did not choose to put himself in the hospital – those hooligans made that choice for him.
“All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.”
And why do you assume they did not???
“Would these young men have been better served and community concerns better served by keeping the case in juvenile court for the ones under 18 years old?”
In the Andrew Mockus murder case, a 14 yr old was let off, and murdered another within one year. Had he been tried as an adult and jailed, the person he murdered might be alive today. Would this 14 year old murder when he got out of adult prison had he been tried as an adult. Who knows?
“The conductor should not have stopped the train. He should not have gotten off the train and confronted the five teenagers with a train full of passengers waiting and wanting to get to their destination.”
Should the conductor have just run over the kids standing on the tracks in front of the train? Would you have preferred the conductor had made that choice?
“Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution. And the justice system isn’t about justice, it’s about winning and getting elected to a higher position. Heaven help you if you get caught in its orbit.”
Would you prefer that Reisig let these thugs off??? They attacked a train full of passengers, for heaven’s sake!
“I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.”
Tell that to the engineer who was beaten within an inch of his life. I’m more concerned about his welfare, since he did not choose to put himself in the hospital – those hooligans made that choice for him.
“All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.”
And why do you assume they did not???
“Would these young men have been better served and community concerns better served by keeping the case in juvenile court for the ones under 18 years old?”
In the Andrew Mockus murder case, a 14 yr old was let off, and murdered another within one year. Had he been tried as an adult and jailed, the person he murdered might be alive today. Would this 14 year old murder when he got out of adult prison had he been tried as an adult. Who knows?
“The conductor should not have stopped the train. He should not have gotten off the train and confronted the five teenagers with a train full of passengers waiting and wanting to get to their destination.”
Should the conductor have just run over the kids standing on the tracks in front of the train? Would you have preferred the conductor had made that choice?
“Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution. And the justice system isn’t about justice, it’s about winning and getting elected to a higher position. Heaven help you if you get caught in its orbit.”
Would you prefer that Reisig let these thugs off??? They attacked a train full of passengers, for heaven’s sake!
“I like the DA erring on the side of preserving people’s constitutional rights.”
Tell that to the engineer who was beaten within an inch of his life. I’m more concerned about his welfare, since he did not choose to put himself in the hospital – those hooligans made that choice for him.
“All of which is based on the assumption that they got quality and competent defense.”
And why do you assume they did not???
“Would these young men have been better served and community concerns better served by keeping the case in juvenile court for the ones under 18 years old?”
In the Andrew Mockus murder case, a 14 yr old was let off, and murdered another within one year. Had he been tried as an adult and jailed, the person he murdered might be alive today. Would this 14 year old murder when he got out of adult prison had he been tried as an adult. Who knows?
“The conductor should not have stopped the train. He should not have gotten off the train and confronted the five teenagers with a train full of passengers waiting and wanting to get to their destination.”
Should the conductor have just run over the kids standing on the tracks in front of the train? Would you have preferred the conductor had made that choice?
“Reisig is a neo-con and we know how neo-cons feel about the Constitution. And the justice system isn’t about justice, it’s about winning and getting elected to a higher position. Heaven help you if you get caught in its orbit.”
Would you prefer that Reisig let these thugs off??? They attacked a train full of passengers, for heaven’s sake!
“Tell that to the engineer who was beaten within an inch of his life. I’m more concerned about his welfare, since he did not choose to put himself in the hospital – those hooligans made that choice for him.”
Why do you believe that people cannot be kept safe within the confines of the constitution?
“Tell that to the engineer who was beaten within an inch of his life. I’m more concerned about his welfare, since he did not choose to put himself in the hospital – those hooligans made that choice for him.”
Why do you believe that people cannot be kept safe within the confines of the constitution?
“Tell that to the engineer who was beaten within an inch of his life. I’m more concerned about his welfare, since he did not choose to put himself in the hospital – those hooligans made that choice for him.”
Why do you believe that people cannot be kept safe within the confines of the constitution?
“Tell that to the engineer who was beaten within an inch of his life. I’m more concerned about his welfare, since he did not choose to put himself in the hospital – those hooligans made that choice for him.”
Why do you believe that people cannot be kept safe within the confines of the constitution?
David Greenwald on, 11/24, 6:08 p.m.
In regard to your reply to Anon that said, the “problems lie within the illegal alien issue”. What that person was saying was this. The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens.
What is it that you don’t understand. Mexicans, and other South Americans, by the tens of thousands, come here illegally, constantly. Their country does not educate them. The illegal couples that come here have a common story I have listened to hundreds of times. It goes like this; No education, no job skills, manual laborer. After a few years the stupid father goes back to mexico or some other south american country and leaves the mother with as many as 6 children.
The mother,whose country of origin did not educate her,is left to fend for the children. The Mom cannot speak, OR, will not speak English. Most importantly the mother cannot help her children with Math, History,Enlish or any other homework because her country did not educate her. Yes David, home is where the greater part of education takes place.
So the children do not do well in school and have little discipline at home. And they have lots of company in the same boat at school. So eventually they form up their own families, called gangs. These gangs, in general, are referred to as, norteno’s and sureno’s. They hate and kill each other based on a North or South orientation. Yes, that is how mindless the violence is against each other.
The violence these maggots do against each other and those in their vicinity is tremendous. The fear they create in their neighborhoods is beyond description. Was the train Engineer a victim of gang members whose parents came here illegally? The answer is,YES.
Do you understand any of this yet? Your refusal, or inability to understand this issue is astounding. Do not tell me about your mother in-law who worked in the hot fields, so did I.
The myriad of problems associated with this issue is mind boggling and bank breaking. Maybe you’ll hear that “Loud Pop” one day as you pull you head out of the darkness of refusal to see.
David Greenwald on, 11/24, 6:08 p.m.
In regard to your reply to Anon that said, the “problems lie within the illegal alien issue”. What that person was saying was this. The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens.
What is it that you don’t understand. Mexicans, and other South Americans, by the tens of thousands, come here illegally, constantly. Their country does not educate them. The illegal couples that come here have a common story I have listened to hundreds of times. It goes like this; No education, no job skills, manual laborer. After a few years the stupid father goes back to mexico or some other south american country and leaves the mother with as many as 6 children.
The mother,whose country of origin did not educate her,is left to fend for the children. The Mom cannot speak, OR, will not speak English. Most importantly the mother cannot help her children with Math, History,Enlish or any other homework because her country did not educate her. Yes David, home is where the greater part of education takes place.
So the children do not do well in school and have little discipline at home. And they have lots of company in the same boat at school. So eventually they form up their own families, called gangs. These gangs, in general, are referred to as, norteno’s and sureno’s. They hate and kill each other based on a North or South orientation. Yes, that is how mindless the violence is against each other.
The violence these maggots do against each other and those in their vicinity is tremendous. The fear they create in their neighborhoods is beyond description. Was the train Engineer a victim of gang members whose parents came here illegally? The answer is,YES.
Do you understand any of this yet? Your refusal, or inability to understand this issue is astounding. Do not tell me about your mother in-law who worked in the hot fields, so did I.
The myriad of problems associated with this issue is mind boggling and bank breaking. Maybe you’ll hear that “Loud Pop” one day as you pull you head out of the darkness of refusal to see.
David Greenwald on, 11/24, 6:08 p.m.
In regard to your reply to Anon that said, the “problems lie within the illegal alien issue”. What that person was saying was this. The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens.
What is it that you don’t understand. Mexicans, and other South Americans, by the tens of thousands, come here illegally, constantly. Their country does not educate them. The illegal couples that come here have a common story I have listened to hundreds of times. It goes like this; No education, no job skills, manual laborer. After a few years the stupid father goes back to mexico or some other south american country and leaves the mother with as many as 6 children.
The mother,whose country of origin did not educate her,is left to fend for the children. The Mom cannot speak, OR, will not speak English. Most importantly the mother cannot help her children with Math, History,Enlish or any other homework because her country did not educate her. Yes David, home is where the greater part of education takes place.
So the children do not do well in school and have little discipline at home. And they have lots of company in the same boat at school. So eventually they form up their own families, called gangs. These gangs, in general, are referred to as, norteno’s and sureno’s. They hate and kill each other based on a North or South orientation. Yes, that is how mindless the violence is against each other.
The violence these maggots do against each other and those in their vicinity is tremendous. The fear they create in their neighborhoods is beyond description. Was the train Engineer a victim of gang members whose parents came here illegally? The answer is,YES.
Do you understand any of this yet? Your refusal, or inability to understand this issue is astounding. Do not tell me about your mother in-law who worked in the hot fields, so did I.
The myriad of problems associated with this issue is mind boggling and bank breaking. Maybe you’ll hear that “Loud Pop” one day as you pull you head out of the darkness of refusal to see.
David Greenwald on, 11/24, 6:08 p.m.
In regard to your reply to Anon that said, the “problems lie within the illegal alien issue”. What that person was saying was this. The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens.
What is it that you don’t understand. Mexicans, and other South Americans, by the tens of thousands, come here illegally, constantly. Their country does not educate them. The illegal couples that come here have a common story I have listened to hundreds of times. It goes like this; No education, no job skills, manual laborer. After a few years the stupid father goes back to mexico or some other south american country and leaves the mother with as many as 6 children.
The mother,whose country of origin did not educate her,is left to fend for the children. The Mom cannot speak, OR, will not speak English. Most importantly the mother cannot help her children with Math, History,Enlish or any other homework because her country did not educate her. Yes David, home is where the greater part of education takes place.
So the children do not do well in school and have little discipline at home. And they have lots of company in the same boat at school. So eventually they form up their own families, called gangs. These gangs, in general, are referred to as, norteno’s and sureno’s. They hate and kill each other based on a North or South orientation. Yes, that is how mindless the violence is against each other.
The violence these maggots do against each other and those in their vicinity is tremendous. The fear they create in their neighborhoods is beyond description. Was the train Engineer a victim of gang members whose parents came here illegally? The answer is,YES.
Do you understand any of this yet? Your refusal, or inability to understand this issue is astounding. Do not tell me about your mother in-law who worked in the hot fields, so did I.
The myriad of problems associated with this issue is mind boggling and bank breaking. Maybe you’ll hear that “Loud Pop” one day as you pull you head out of the darkness of refusal to see.
“The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens. “
And you know this from what documentation?
You know you are a racist, right?
“The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens. “
And you know this from what documentation?
You know you are a racist, right?
“The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens. “
And you know this from what documentation?
You know you are a racist, right?
“The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens. “
And you know this from what documentation?
You know you are a racist, right?
“The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens. “
And you know this from what documentation?
You know you are a racist, right?
typical left ad-hominem. never fails.
the person was making a point. If the person believed they were mexican and they were gang bangers, then pointing that out doesn’t make a person racist any more than saying they were Anglo Nazi types.
Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican. If the US bordered Europe, I would say otherwise and conclued many would be of European descent.
“The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens. “
And you know this from what documentation?
You know you are a racist, right?
typical left ad-hominem. never fails.
the person was making a point. If the person believed they were mexican and they were gang bangers, then pointing that out doesn’t make a person racist any more than saying they were Anglo Nazi types.
Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican. If the US bordered Europe, I would say otherwise and conclued many would be of European descent.
“The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens. “
And you know this from what documentation?
You know you are a racist, right?
typical left ad-hominem. never fails.
the person was making a point. If the person believed they were mexican and they were gang bangers, then pointing that out doesn’t make a person racist any more than saying they were Anglo Nazi types.
Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican. If the US bordered Europe, I would say otherwise and conclued many would be of European descent.
“The parents, of the mexican gang bangers who assaulted the Engeineer, were illegal aliens. “
And you know this from what documentation?
You know you are a racist, right?
typical left ad-hominem. never fails.
the person was making a point. If the person believed they were mexican and they were gang bangers, then pointing that out doesn’t make a person racist any more than saying they were Anglo Nazi types.
Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican. If the US bordered Europe, I would say otherwise and conclued many would be of European descent.
“typical left ad-hominem. never fails.
the person was making a point.”
Calling people “maggots” is not making a point.
Still asking for evidence that their parents were illegal. Thanks.
You make a point by actually making a point with evidence and not use invective language.
“typical left ad-hominem. never fails.
the person was making a point.”
Calling people “maggots” is not making a point.
Still asking for evidence that their parents were illegal. Thanks.
You make a point by actually making a point with evidence and not use invective language.
“typical left ad-hominem. never fails.
the person was making a point.”
Calling people “maggots” is not making a point.
Still asking for evidence that their parents were illegal. Thanks.
You make a point by actually making a point with evidence and not use invective language.
“typical left ad-hominem. never fails.
the person was making a point.”
Calling people “maggots” is not making a point.
Still asking for evidence that their parents were illegal. Thanks.
You make a point by actually making a point with evidence and not use invective language.
North or South orientation. Yes, that is how mindless the violence is against each other.
The violence these maggots do against each other and those in their vicinity is tremendous. The fear they create in their neighborhoods is beyond description. Was the train Engineer a victim of gang members whose parents came here illegally? The answer is,YES.
kudos.
“Calling people “maggots” is not making a point.”
The hell it isn’t. People who engage in thug-like behavior are called thugs. maggot is another good term for them. They take pleasure in hurting innocent people, including people like yourself. You could have just as easily been on that train and got caught in their path. Quite frankly, I think these people probably do more damage within their own community than others. Hurting hard-working and good citizens within the hispanic community. Why we cannot unite as a community against these people is beyond me.
Just like the lyrics in gangsters paradise goes: “why are we, so blind to see, that the ones we hurt, are you and me.”
North or South orientation. Yes, that is how mindless the violence is against each other.
The violence these maggots do against each other and those in their vicinity is tremendous. The fear they create in their neighborhoods is beyond description. Was the train Engineer a victim of gang members whose parents came here illegally? The answer is,YES.
kudos.
“Calling people “maggots” is not making a point.”
The hell it isn’t. People who engage in thug-like behavior are called thugs. maggot is another good term for them. They take pleasure in hurting innocent people, including people like yourself. You could have just as easily been on that train and got caught in their path. Quite frankly, I think these people probably do more damage within their own community than others. Hurting hard-working and good citizens within the hispanic community. Why we cannot unite as a community against these people is beyond me.
Just like the lyrics in gangsters paradise goes: “why are we, so blind to see, that the ones we hurt, are you and me.”
North or South orientation. Yes, that is how mindless the violence is against each other.
The violence these maggots do against each other and those in their vicinity is tremendous. The fear they create in their neighborhoods is beyond description. Was the train Engineer a victim of gang members whose parents came here illegally? The answer is,YES.
kudos.
“Calling people “maggots” is not making a point.”
The hell it isn’t. People who engage in thug-like behavior are called thugs. maggot is another good term for them. They take pleasure in hurting innocent people, including people like yourself. You could have just as easily been on that train and got caught in their path. Quite frankly, I think these people probably do more damage within their own community than others. Hurting hard-working and good citizens within the hispanic community. Why we cannot unite as a community against these people is beyond me.
Just like the lyrics in gangsters paradise goes: “why are we, so blind to see, that the ones we hurt, are you and me.”
North or South orientation. Yes, that is how mindless the violence is against each other.
The violence these maggots do against each other and those in their vicinity is tremendous. The fear they create in their neighborhoods is beyond description. Was the train Engineer a victim of gang members whose parents came here illegally? The answer is,YES.
kudos.
“Calling people “maggots” is not making a point.”
The hell it isn’t. People who engage in thug-like behavior are called thugs. maggot is another good term for them. They take pleasure in hurting innocent people, including people like yourself. You could have just as easily been on that train and got caught in their path. Quite frankly, I think these people probably do more damage within their own community than others. Hurting hard-working and good citizens within the hispanic community. Why we cannot unite as a community against these people is beyond me.
Just like the lyrics in gangsters paradise goes: “why are we, so blind to see, that the ones we hurt, are you and me.”
Actually, I looked up “maggot” in the dictionary:
“Slang: A despicable person.”
Anyone who would hurt or kill innocent people is a maggot by definition.
I’m sorry DPD, but maggot is arguably justified here.
Actually, I looked up “maggot” in the dictionary:
“Slang: A despicable person.”
Anyone who would hurt or kill innocent people is a maggot by definition.
I’m sorry DPD, but maggot is arguably justified here.
Actually, I looked up “maggot” in the dictionary:
“Slang: A despicable person.”
Anyone who would hurt or kill innocent people is a maggot by definition.
I’m sorry DPD, but maggot is arguably justified here.
Actually, I looked up “maggot” in the dictionary:
“Slang: A despicable person.”
Anyone who would hurt or kill innocent people is a maggot by definition.
I’m sorry DPD, but maggot is arguably justified here.
“Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican.”
Mexico is in North America, not South America.
A good, and not all that easy question for the geographically challenged, is to ask someone to name all 40 countries of North America?
Off the top, anyone with a junior high school education should be able to come up with Canada, the U.S. and Mexico (the countries of NAFTA, which stumped Gov. Palin).
The next seven are tricky, because of the misleading moniker "Central America*" (which at one time used to be the name of a country), despite the fact that Guatemala, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama** are in continental North America.
Yet those 10 are not the end of it. Just like Great Britain and Ireland and Iceland are considered part of Europe, despite being islands, the countries in the Caribbean plus Greenland are a part of geographical North America.
So Anguilla, Antigua & Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Clipperton Island, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Haiti, Jamaica, Martinique, Montserrat, Navassa Island, Netherlands Antilles, Puerto Rico, St. Bartelemy, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Martin, St. Pierre & Miquelon, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Trinidad & Tobago, Turks & Caicos Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are all North American countries and territories.
—
* Following independence from Spain in 1823, the provinces of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica formed a new country, the United States of Central America, which lasted for about 15 years and then dissolved into civil wars and divorce. Belize (then British Honduras) was never a part of the USCA.
** Panama was originally part of Colombia, and thus South America. However, while trying to take ownership of the new Panama Canal Zone early in the 20th Century, we engineered an "independence" movement in Panama and it broke away from Colombia. Because of the canal (and political reasons), Panama is considered North American.
“Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican.”
Mexico is in North America, not South America.
A good, and not all that easy question for the geographically challenged, is to ask someone to name all 40 countries of North America?
Off the top, anyone with a junior high school education should be able to come up with Canada, the U.S. and Mexico (the countries of NAFTA, which stumped Gov. Palin).
The next seven are tricky, because of the misleading moniker "Central America*" (which at one time used to be the name of a country), despite the fact that Guatemala, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama** are in continental North America.
Yet those 10 are not the end of it. Just like Great Britain and Ireland and Iceland are considered part of Europe, despite being islands, the countries in the Caribbean plus Greenland are a part of geographical North America.
So Anguilla, Antigua & Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Clipperton Island, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Haiti, Jamaica, Martinique, Montserrat, Navassa Island, Netherlands Antilles, Puerto Rico, St. Bartelemy, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Martin, St. Pierre & Miquelon, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Trinidad & Tobago, Turks & Caicos Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are all North American countries and territories.
—
* Following independence from Spain in 1823, the provinces of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica formed a new country, the United States of Central America, which lasted for about 15 years and then dissolved into civil wars and divorce. Belize (then British Honduras) was never a part of the USCA.
** Panama was originally part of Colombia, and thus South America. However, while trying to take ownership of the new Panama Canal Zone early in the 20th Century, we engineered an "independence" movement in Panama and it broke away from Colombia. Because of the canal (and political reasons), Panama is considered North American.
“Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican.”
Mexico is in North America, not South America.
A good, and not all that easy question for the geographically challenged, is to ask someone to name all 40 countries of North America?
Off the top, anyone with a junior high school education should be able to come up with Canada, the U.S. and Mexico (the countries of NAFTA, which stumped Gov. Palin).
The next seven are tricky, because of the misleading moniker "Central America*" (which at one time used to be the name of a country), despite the fact that Guatemala, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama** are in continental North America.
Yet those 10 are not the end of it. Just like Great Britain and Ireland and Iceland are considered part of Europe, despite being islands, the countries in the Caribbean plus Greenland are a part of geographical North America.
So Anguilla, Antigua & Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Clipperton Island, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Haiti, Jamaica, Martinique, Montserrat, Navassa Island, Netherlands Antilles, Puerto Rico, St. Bartelemy, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Martin, St. Pierre & Miquelon, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Trinidad & Tobago, Turks & Caicos Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are all North American countries and territories.
—
* Following independence from Spain in 1823, the provinces of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica formed a new country, the United States of Central America, which lasted for about 15 years and then dissolved into civil wars and divorce. Belize (then British Honduras) was never a part of the USCA.
** Panama was originally part of Colombia, and thus South America. However, while trying to take ownership of the new Panama Canal Zone early in the 20th Century, we engineered an "independence" movement in Panama and it broke away from Colombia. Because of the canal (and political reasons), Panama is considered North American.
“Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican.”
Mexico is in North America, not South America.
A good, and not all that easy question for the geographically challenged, is to ask someone to name all 40 countries of North America?
Off the top, anyone with a junior high school education should be able to come up with Canada, the U.S. and Mexico (the countries of NAFTA, which stumped Gov. Palin).
The next seven are tricky, because of the misleading moniker "Central America*" (which at one time used to be the name of a country), despite the fact that Guatemala, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama** are in continental North America.
Yet those 10 are not the end of it. Just like Great Britain and Ireland and Iceland are considered part of Europe, despite being islands, the countries in the Caribbean plus Greenland are a part of geographical North America.
So Anguilla, Antigua & Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Clipperton Island, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Haiti, Jamaica, Martinique, Montserrat, Navassa Island, Netherlands Antilles, Puerto Rico, St. Bartelemy, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Martin, St. Pierre & Miquelon, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Trinidad & Tobago, Turks & Caicos Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are all North American countries and territories.
—
* Following independence from Spain in 1823, the provinces of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Costa Rica formed a new country, the United States of Central America, which lasted for about 15 years and then dissolved into civil wars and divorce. Belize (then British Honduras) was never a part of the USCA.
** Panama was originally part of Colombia, and thus South America. However, while trying to take ownership of the new Panama Canal Zone early in the 20th Century, we engineered an "independence" movement in Panama and it broke away from Colombia. Because of the canal (and political reasons), Panama is considered North American.
Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican.”
Mexico is in North America, not South America.
A good, and not all that easy question for the geographically challenged, is to ask someone to name all 40 countries of North America?
Umm, I actually was referring to south America because a lot of people that come through the US Mexican border are both south and central American. Given that Mexico borders the US, I concluded a lot of people who are crossing the border are mexican too. I guess I was a little unclear.
Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican.”
Mexico is in North America, not South America.
A good, and not all that easy question for the geographically challenged, is to ask someone to name all 40 countries of North America?
Umm, I actually was referring to south America because a lot of people that come through the US Mexican border are both south and central American. Given that Mexico borders the US, I concluded a lot of people who are crossing the border are mexican too. I guess I was a little unclear.
Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican.”
Mexico is in North America, not South America.
A good, and not all that easy question for the geographically challenged, is to ask someone to name all 40 countries of North America?
Umm, I actually was referring to south America because a lot of people that come through the US Mexican border are both south and central American. Given that Mexico borders the US, I concluded a lot of people who are crossing the border are mexican too. I guess I was a little unclear.
Furthermore, there is a surge in Gangs coming in from south america (i.e. Sorenos 13) recently. Since Mexico borders the united states, it is not unreasonable to conclude many of those people will be Mexican.”
Mexico is in North America, not South America.
A good, and not all that easy question for the geographically challenged, is to ask someone to name all 40 countries of North America?
Umm, I actually was referring to south America because a lot of people that come through the US Mexican border are both south and central American. Given that Mexico borders the US, I concluded a lot of people who are crossing the border are mexican too. I guess I was a little unclear.
“Umm, I actually was referring to south America because a lot of people that come through the US Mexican border are both south and central American.”
Okay. You seem to be a gang maven. Nationals from which countries in South America are populating the “Sorenos 13”? Uruguayans? Chileans? Bolivians? Guayanese?
If “Sorenos 13” is composed of gangsters from Argentina, for example, can you provide a link to that evidence?
Thanks for keeping me informed.
“Umm, I actually was referring to south America because a lot of people that come through the US Mexican border are both south and central American.”
Okay. You seem to be a gang maven. Nationals from which countries in South America are populating the “Sorenos 13”? Uruguayans? Chileans? Bolivians? Guayanese?
If “Sorenos 13” is composed of gangsters from Argentina, for example, can you provide a link to that evidence?
Thanks for keeping me informed.
“Umm, I actually was referring to south America because a lot of people that come through the US Mexican border are both south and central American.”
Okay. You seem to be a gang maven. Nationals from which countries in South America are populating the “Sorenos 13”? Uruguayans? Chileans? Bolivians? Guayanese?
If “Sorenos 13” is composed of gangsters from Argentina, for example, can you provide a link to that evidence?
Thanks for keeping me informed.
“Umm, I actually was referring to south America because a lot of people that come through the US Mexican border are both south and central American.”
Okay. You seem to be a gang maven. Nationals from which countries in South America are populating the “Sorenos 13”? Uruguayans? Chileans? Bolivians? Guayanese?
If “Sorenos 13” is composed of gangsters from Argentina, for example, can you provide a link to that evidence?
Thanks for keeping me informed.
El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, mostly. Do a Google search on maras and you’ll get the idea.
El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, mostly. Do a Google search on maras and you’ll get the idea.
El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, mostly. Do a Google search on maras and you’ll get the idea.
El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, mostly. Do a Google search on maras and you’ll get the idea.
ps–I still call everything except Canada, the U.S.A., and Mexico Central America. I think most people do as well, and it’s a perfectly acceptable term.
ps–I still call everything except Canada, the U.S.A., and Mexico Central America. I think most people do as well, and it’s a perfectly acceptable term.
ps–I still call everything except Canada, the U.S.A., and Mexico Central America. I think most people do as well, and it’s a perfectly acceptable term.
ps–I still call everything except Canada, the U.S.A., and Mexico Central America. I think most people do as well, and it’s a perfectly acceptable term.
“El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, mostly.”
Latin America, yes. South America, no.
“El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, mostly.”
Latin America, yes. South America, no.
“El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, mostly.”
Latin America, yes. South America, no.
“El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua, mostly.”
Latin America, yes. South America, no.