"It's time to start...RUNNING!"
Posted on 01/12/2012 11:34:46 AM PST by ColdOne
Extraditing pardoned citizens...
Only in America- where the Dem media helps Dem politicians break the most basic laws.
That’s an interesting story. A governor grants clemency or pardons and somehow someone got a stay against those same acts? The governor does in fact have this power, what can be their argument against it?
A “nationwide manhunt” for people who’ve been pardoned.
Interesting.
No. He is not.
Were they paroled or pardoned? If they were paroled I could understand why they’d have to check in with the state, but pardoned criminals having to do that?
Jim Hood = Democrat Drama Queen
I question Barbour's actions at least on those whose were released, the majority however had already served their time and were out, the pardon just clearing their record.
"It's time to start...RUNNING!"
But, apparently, at least some lawyers/judges/politicians in Mississippi think he does not.
I guess there are certain Notice procedures required on pardons in Miss. which the Court said had not been complied with.
Article 5, Section 124. Reprieves and pardons.
In all criminal and penal cases, excepting those of treason and impeachment, the governor shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons, to remit fines, and in cases of forfeiture, to stay the collection until the end of the next session of the legislature, and by and with the consent of the senate to remit forfeitures. In cases of treason he shall have power to grant reprieves, and by and with consent of the senate, but may respite the sentence until the end of the next session of the legislature; but no pardon shall be granted before conviction; and in cases of felony, after conviction no pardon shall be granted until the applicant therefor shall have published for thirty days, in some newspaper in the county where the crime was committed, and in case there be no newspaper published in said county, then in an adjoining county, his petition for pardon, setting forth therein the reasons why such pardon should be granted.
SOURCES: 1832 art V § 10; 1869 art V § 10.
Yes, hard to believe they were not complied with.
Anyway the citizens are, of course, pardoned until the judicial process has been completed and found them otherwise.
“That’s an interesting story. A governor grants clemency or pardons and somehow someone got a stay against those same acts? The governor does in fact have this power, what can be their argument against it?”
In a previous article there is an assertion made that some of the pardons did not meet the procedural requirements - advance notice to victims was specifically mentioned. If there is a protocol to follow and it was not followed, then the former Governor did not follow the law.
Apparently he didnt follow the correct process.
That just maybe someone got paid a great deal of money to get one or more of these folks out.
I heard of maybe he let out a bunch as a smoke screen to let one person out.
I suspect Barbour did this to stay out of prison himself.
Some folks had some REAL dirty stuff on him.
“Were they paroled or pardoned?”
Pardoned.
OK, it makes a little more sense now although I am not saying I agree with the Governor's action. At least he didn't pick these murderers at random. He likely had contact with them, heard the sob stories, etc. And when all is said and done, we might even agree with one or two of the pardons.
But riddle me this ... why were life-sentenced murders part of a trustee program, and one outside rather than inside the prison walls??? Looks like the fix needs to start there. Were the lessons of Willie Horton forgotten? you know, the Massachusetts policy of giving weekend furloughs to life-sentenced murderers as it made them more "manageable" for the prison officials. And Dukakis had no trouble with that policy and said so. Then his comment blew up in his face.
Amen to that. He is not even close.
Maybe the judge suspects this part was not complied with?
“... and in cases of felony, after conviction no pardon shall be granted until the applicant therefor shall have published for thirty days, in some newspaper in the county where the crime was committed, and in case there be no newspaper published in said county, then in an adjoining county, his petition for pardon, setting forth therein the reasons why such pardon should be granted.”
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.