Posted on 05/17/2005 6:06:03 AM PDT by Boston Blackie
Let's begin with a few unpleasant facts about the practical effects of the "sanctuary policy" Denver officials say doesn't exist.
• According to U.S. Department of Justice data, Denver claimed federal reimbursement for more than 1,900 illegal aliens in its jail system in 2004. Only 175 of those criminals were deported.
• More than 1,500 illegal alien criminals are being released into the community as they finish their jail terms instead of being turned over to immigration authorities for deportation.
• Denver jail officials do not routinely identify illegal aliens in custody and share this information with the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Immigration agents must do this identification themselves with few exceptions.
• An illegal alien who is taken to jail is not likely to be questioned about his immigration status or turned over to immigration authorities. Only major crimes get that kind of attention.
(Excerpt) Read more at rockymountainnews.com ...
One of my very good friends is a sheriff in Georgia. He tells me that when they pick up illegals and hold them the feds seldom do anything about it, and his office can't afford to transport them back home. Unless they're charged with a felony they pretty much get turned back loose. Denver may have sanctuary it doesn't call sanctuary, but the feds also have sanctuary.
Tom Tancredo, patriot, bump.
The fact is that their are 40,000 illegal aliens in American jails. You can bet there are at least that many illegal aliens who have committed felonies (other than just illegal immigration) and who aren't in jail.
This Denver cop who got murdered by the illegal alien is just the tip of the iceberg. And nothing will be done about it by the politicians until the people go after them.
For starters, the widow of the cop ought to sue the Mayor and the Council for requiring the police and Denver businesses to violate federal laws. She should also sue the Mayor for hiring this illegal alien, and for not providing a safe workplace for her husband.
If these politicians get the pants sued off them, I predict that will deter others from doing what these guys have done.
Denver should be refused any payments by the feds as Denver INVITES illegals.
Actually California alone counts 45,000 illegal aliens in its jails.
If Denver counted 1,500 illegal aliens in its jails in one year and lets say that number represented the average for four million people (conservatively) or the entire population of Colorado and we said there were then 375 illegals in jail for every million americans then we would take that number times 285 (millions) and we would get over 105,000 illegals in our jails in any given year.
That is probably a very conservative number.
All 20 million of them are felons. These have just behaved badly enough to actually be incarcerated for their additional felonies and crimes.
Why on earth would you predict such a thing?
Who pays the lawyers? The taxpayers. Who pays the damages if the city loses? The taxpayers. Who pays the penalties if the city loses? The taxpayers.
What lesson does a lawsuit teach elected officials? That they can say and do anything without regard to consequences because the taxpayers will shield them.
I said sue the politicians, not the city... Although suing the city might also help get some action.
Sue the Mayor individually. Just because you're Mayor doesn't mean you can violate the law or issue orders to City employees to violate the law.
And this particular Mayor was personally involved in the death of the cop since it was his restaurant which hired the illegal immigrant, as well as the cop.
You can't sue him (successfully) in his personal capacity for something he did as mayor. The suit would be tossed by a judge. I did see a successful suit against some local politicians where they were sued in their unofficial capacity and even then they voted to have the county represent them and the county's insurance paid the damages. I do not believe that elected officials can successfully be sued individually for actions taken in office.
Not necessarily true. First, what he did was not entirely in his official capacity. He owned the restaurant which hired the illegal alien and the cop. At a minimum, you have a workman's comp claim against his business. And you can expand on that, depending on how much legal protection he set up. If he had anything to do with the management of the company, he's open for being sued personally. If it was not incorporated, he can be sued personally.
As far as being sued personally for acts you took in your official capacity is concerned, I'll grant you that's harder. However, not impossible. Public officials are sued all the time in their individual capacities. It's a tough standard, but his arrogance of power might be enough in this case.
The fact that you are Mayor does not give you immunity from lawsuits resulting from your actions that are illegal. Here, we've got the Mayor and City Council mandating that the police department violate federal law concerning reporting of illegal immigrants. We've got them requiring businesses to violate similar federal laws. At what point has he gone too far? The City of Denver doesn't make our immigration law. Congress does that.
I say let a jury decide. He might win, but not if I'm on the jury. And one big verdict against one of these guys will make the rest of them sit up and take notice.
I would also sue the City if I were the widow. Yeah, it will come out of the taxpayer's wallet, but if the taxpayer must pay the bill for the illegal conduct of the Mayor and City Council, I think the voters will throw them out of office.
ping
' for not providing a safe workplace for her husband. '
He was moonlighting.
So? He was working. He was working at the Mayor's restaurant. The fact that your employees are moonlighting doesn't mean you have no obligation to them.
So how does the 'Mayor' or anyone secure his property against a gangbanger with a gun beyond having two off duty cops bounce? Move to Denver, so you can pay for the suit.
One thing he could do is not hire illegal aliens who can commit murder, then flee to Mexico where they won't be prosecuted. Another thing he could do is ask a little about the background of this guy before he hired him.
You don't seem to realize how completely the Mayor was involved in this. His business hired the guy who got killed, and it hired the guy who committed the murder. If he weren't Mayor, the lawyers would be all over him.
His holdings are in trust, he doesn't run day to day ops.
'You don't seem to realize how completely the Mayor was involved in this. '
Yeah I live in CO.
'His business hired the guy who got killed,'
Source?
'If he weren't Mayor, the lawyers would be all over him.'
Seems to me that is the best reason to get all over him.
As a citizen I already have to present better ID than illegals to work. The solution is to fine the business for not running the SSN check. About $10K/infraction would do it.
The fact that you put your holdings in a trust does not exempt you from the law. The fact that he allowed this to happen and did not get involved might in itself be grounds to hold him liable. The fact that it was his own illegal City policy that his business was observing just makes his guilt even greater.
I would be surprised if a jury simply let him walk away from this. A man's dead, he leaves behind a widow and two daughters. Make the Mayor pay for their college degrees. Make him support the widow.
Thanks to the Mayor's business policy, and his municipal policy, the killer is probably in Mexico yucking it up.
At a minimum, the widow can sue the restaurant. Whether she can get any farther than that is the question. But if I were the lawyer, I'd make the argument.
DICK Daley has the same policy in Chicago.
Help us fight back!!
http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=9761
Join the chicagominutemanproject@hotmail.com
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.