Skip to comments.
Angry Hillary threw book
at Secret Service agent
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com ^
| June 7, 2003
| By Paul Sperry
Posted on 06/07/2003 9:23:37 AM PDT by judicial meanz
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-226 next last
To: baseballmom
Absolutely...
Laura Bush is a LADY par excellence
Hillary is a classless, hideous parody of one.
To: judicial meanz
22
posted on
06/07/2003 9:46:31 AM PDT
by
MeekOneGOP
(Bu-bye Dixie Chimps! / Check out my Freeper site !: http://home.attbi.com/~freeper/wsb/index.html)
To: DoughtyOne
What did they not want people to know and why did they not want people to know it?
To: MeeknMing
"But early in the Clinton administration, Newsweek reported that Hillary had thrown a lamp at the president in a fit of anger. She later denied the incident took place while suggesting, ironically, that the Secret Service spread the story Lamps too...LOL
To: judicial meanz
The problem is she thinks she's above the law. Why wouldn't she. The EVIL and CORRUPTION have not cost the Clintoons ANYTHING they care about. In fact they're getting "richer and more powerful" as a result of their deceit. I fear for our country, way too many citizens immitate them.
25
posted on
06/07/2003 9:50:23 AM PDT
by
Mister Baredog
((They wanted to kill 50,000 of us on 9/11, we will never forget!))
To: judicial meanz
I hope these accounts keep on coming. All the country has to hear just how nasty this woman is, can be, and will continue to be.
Will any of her interviewers ask her about that picture on her book? ----The 'Dorian Gray' one.
26
posted on
06/07/2003 9:50:45 AM PDT
by
Exit148
(Just added another $3.06 to the Loose Change Club collection bag for the next Freep-a-thon!)
To: judicial meanz; pubmom
She accused the plainclothes agent of "eavesdropping" on her conversation with another passenger in the back seat of the limo You can't blam Hillary for wanting some privacy with Donna Shalala. EWWWWWWW! I wonder if the secret service guy had to wash the limo afterwards?
27
posted on
06/07/2003 9:50:55 AM PDT
by
Teacup
(Bush, Leadership, Morality, Integrity)
To: LaraCroft
We should learn from her and stop kowtowing to special interests, ie. Trent, etc. Yeah, and how about emulating her refusal to do any press conference except where she controls the slow pitch softball questions? How do you insinuate yourself into public life, then cease to be public?
28
posted on
06/07/2003 9:50:59 AM PDT
by
Migraine
(my grain is pretty straight today)
To: ppaul
29
posted on
06/07/2003 9:51:00 AM PDT
by
MeekOneGOP
(Bu-bye Dixie Chimps! / Check out my Freeper site !: http://home.attbi.com/~freeper/wsb/index.html)
To: judicial meanz
So what would happen to a serf if they threw a book at a Treasury agent?
Just another example of our nobles being above the law.
30
posted on
06/07/2003 9:51:24 AM PDT
by
Mulder
(Live Free or die)
To: gov_bean_ counter
I'm with you -- who was the conversation with, and what was the gist of it?
To: pubmom
Lucky for the agent Hillary didn't throw Bill's official "look at me going to church" ten pound Bible. That could have hurt!
To: judicial meanz
Hillary is a classless,hideous parody of one. Hey, you're talking about our next president.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
33
posted on
06/07/2003 9:54:57 AM PDT
by
ditto h
To: Mulder
6.18.111 ASSAULT ON A FEDERAL OFFICER [WITH A
DANGEROUS OR DEADLY WEAPON] (18 U.S.C. § 111)
The crime of assault on a federal officer [with a dangerous or deadly weapon], as charged in [Count of] the indictment, has three essential elements, which are:
One, the defendant forcibly assaulted (describe federal officer by position and name)1 [with a deadly or dangerous weapon]2;
Two, the assault was done voluntarily and intentionally;3 and
Three, at the time of the assault (name of officer) was doing what he was employed by the federal Government to do.4
An "assault" is any intentional and voluntary attempt or threat to do injury to the person of another, when coupled with the apparent present ability to do so sufficient to put the person against whom the attempt is made in fear of immediate bodily harm.5
"Forcibly" means by use of force. Physical force is sufficient. You may also find that a person who, in fact, has the present ability to inflict bodily harm upon another and who threatens or attempts to inflict bodily harm upon such person acts forcibly. In such case, the threat must be a present one.
[A "deadly and dangerous weapon" is an object used in a manner likely to endanger life or inflict serious bodily harm.]6
(Insert paragraph describing Government's burden of proof; see Instruction 3.09, supra.)
Committee Comments
See 2 Edward J. Devitt, et al., FEDERAL JURY PRACTICE AND INSTRUCTIONS: Criminal §§ 42.01-42.11 (4th ed. 1990); Fifth Circuit Offense Instructions 1 and 2; Ninth Circuit Instruction 8.01; Eleventh Circuit Offense Instructions 1.1 and 1.2.
If "self defense" is raised as an affirmative defense, an appropriate instruction setting forth the defense and the government's burden thereon should be given. See United States v. Alvarez, 755 F.2d 830, 842-43 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 905 (1985); see also Instructions 3.09, supra, and 9.00 and 9.04, infra.
Notes on Use
1 Whether a person performing the functions delegated to the assault victim is a federal officer or employee within the meaning of section 111 is a question of law for the court. See, e.g., United States v. Oakie, 12 F.3d 1436 (8th Cir. 1993); United States v. Lopez, 586 F.2d 978, 979-980 (2d Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 923 (1979); United States v. Patrin, 575 F.2d 708, 712-14 (9th Cir. 1978). However, whether the assault victim was in fact acting as an officer or employee, and whether he was performing federal "investigative, inspection, or law enforcement functions" at the time of the alleged assault, are fact questions for the jury. United States v. Oakie, 12 F.3d at 1440. The Committee recommends that the specific title of the federal officer be used.
2 This language must be used if it is charged that the assault was with a deadly or dangerous weapon. The question of what constitutes a "deadly and dangerous weapon" is a question of fact for the jury. United States v. Czeck, 671 F.2d 1195, 1197 (8th Cir. 1982). A thorough discussion of this question is found in United States v. Moore, 846 F.2d 1163, 1166-67 (8th Cir. 1988).
3 The assault must be intentional, even though the term "willful" is not used in the statute. United States v. Feola, 420 U.S. 671, 684 (1975); Potter v. United States, 691 F.2d 1275, 1280 (8th Cir. 1982); United States v. Manelli, 667 F.2d 695, 696 (8th Cir. 1981). The requirement that the defendant acted "voluntarily and intentionally" would appear to satisfy that element. United States v. Hanson, 618 F.2d 1261, 1264-65 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 854 (1980). In United States v. Sweet, 985 F.2d 443 (8th Cir. 1993), the court stated "[n]less used in the statute itself or unless the crime falls within that rare type of offense where defendant's knowledge that [s]he is violating the law is an element of the offense, there is no occasion for an instruction defining specific intent." Id. at 444-45 (quoting United States v. Dougherty, 763 F.2d 970, 974 (8th Cir. 1985).
The defendant need not know that the victim is a federal officer. United States v. Goldson, 954 F.2d 51 (2d Cir. 1992); United States v. Feola, 420 U.S. at 684-86; United States v. Alvarez, 755 F.2d 830, 842-47 (11th Cir. 1985); United States v. Maynard, 452 F.2d 1087, 1088 (1st Cir. 1971).
4 The statute uses the phrase "while engaged in . . . the performance of his official duties." This means simply acting within the scope of what that person is employed to do and the test is whether the person is acting within that area of responsibility. United States v. Murdock, 826 F.2d 771, 774 n.2 (8th Cir. 1987).
It is also a violation of the statute to assault a federal officer "on account of" or in retaliation for his discharge of his official duties. E.g., United States v. Lopez, 710 F.2d 1071, 1074 n.3 (5th Cir. 1983). If this conduct is charged, Element Three should be so modified.
5 See United States v. Maynard, "assault is the act of putting in fear." 452 F.2d at 1088. This case covers the typical situation of a firearm being pointed at an agent.
6 See United States v. Hollow, 747 F.2d 481, 482 (8th Cir. 1984). "Serious bodily harm" has been defined as more than minor injury, but not necessarily injury creating a substantial likelihood of death. Moore, 846 F.2d at 1166; United States v. Webster, 620 F.2d 640, 641-42 (7th Cir. 1980)
Thats ANY federal employee. Right down to the lowest clerk.
To: judicial meanz
Hillary Clinton threw a book at a Secret Service agent, hitting him in the back as he was driving her
I'm trying to visualize this. Don't limosine seats have BACKS to them????
35
posted on
06/07/2003 9:57:10 AM PDT
by
BSunday
(My other post is a pulitzer - winner)
To: MeeknMing
That is one air brushed picture of Hillary. That's not even her body if you ask me. If it is Hillary, she must have had an over dose of Botox injections.
36
posted on
06/07/2003 9:58:43 AM PDT
by
Teacup
(Bush, Leadership, Morality, Integrity)
To: BSunday
Apparently this was a 1995 Cadillac without a divider and privacy window.
To: judicial meanz
I've always suspected, within the Secret Service, being assigned to the Clinton's was some sort of punishment for agents how've pissed off their higher ups.
To: judicial meanz
Why some evil wench thinks she is above the law and can assault and batter a law enforcement officer ( who she views as a private driver) is beyond me. You forgot about the cop that was run over.
39
posted on
06/07/2003 9:59:49 AM PDT
by
TheSpottedOwl
(America...love it or leave it. Canada is due north-Mexico is directly south...start walking.)
To: Welsh Rabbit
Probably kind of like being assigned to keep the Addams Family in Check..or Bay Bays kids.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 221-226 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson