Posted on 09/15/2006 1:18:49 PM PDT by NapkinUser
Washington, DC – U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Littleton) criticized Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in a letter to the Justice Department in the wake of media reports yesterday that the U.S. Marshals raided the Hawaii home of Duane “Dog” Chapman at the direction of the Mexican government.
A spokeswoman for the Marshals Office confirmed yesterday that an arrest warrant was signed Wednesday by a federal magistrate in Hawaii at the urging of the administration. Chapman could now be extradited to to face criminal charges for successfully capturing Max Factor heir Andrew Luster in Puerto Vallarta in 2003. Luster, who was wanted in the for rape is now serving a 124-year sentence.
“This Administration routinely tells Congress that they cannot secure our borders and immigration system due to a lack of resources. We are told that the U.S. Attorneys offices in Border States are simply overwhelmed with cases and cannot prosecute all the violations – even serious ones,” said Tancredo.
“Somehow this administration has plenty of time to track down a Mexican drug smuggler and give him immunity so he can testify against our Border Patrol agents,” said Tancredo referring to the prosecution of two Border Patrol agents facing 20 years in prison for wounding a Mexican smuggler during the course of their normal duties earlier this year.
“Americans are apparently supposed to happily accept presence the roughly 100,000 criminal aliens inside our borders – a number that is growing every year – while the Marshals use their resources to track down ‘Dog’ Chapman on orders from a foreign master for successfully brining a convicted rapist to justice.”
“It is becoming increasingly clear that the real problem with this administrations inability to address the failures of U.S. border security policy is not so much a lack of resources as it is one of misplaced priorities,” concluded Tancredo, “I’m beginning to wonder who is in charge of prioritizing assignments at DOJ. Is it this administration – or the one in Mexico City ?”
I can! Mexico ignores our official extradition requests all the time.
I for one don't mind seeing that cowboy arrested. Dog might be the single sleaziest person on TV.
He jumped his bail? That's a shame if true. Although it is major overkill to go to these lengths over a misdemeanor...
Up yours, you twit. First, I'm not obliged to like or support the same politicians you do. Second, to state the reasons why I don't like Tancredo or any other politician is not an occasion for me go "step outside and get some air." It is merely my opinion. Take it or leave it. What I despise most about folks like you who think people like Tancredo walk on water is that you feel compelled to insult those whose opinions differ from your own.
As for Tancredo's website, I never visit it, so I'll have to take your word for whatever is there. On those occasions when he turns up on talk radio here in the L.A. market, all I ever hear from him is whining, bitching and moaning about the Administration's failings -- in his opinion. He rarely has anything constructive to say.
Obviously you are not from CA or you would have heard more about Mexico's refusals to send murderers and cop killers to the US for justice.
France is definately one of those countries.
Officer jackass was debating with another cop that had pulled up what weapons charges he was going to press when the seargent pulled up in his car. After about 30 seconds, he said, "This is crap. Give him his license back. Sir, you're free to go. This traffic stop is over." Praise the lord the cop supervisor had some common sense that day.
You are right. And I agree that we need to try to work out these extradition issues. But it's not just mexico that refuses to send prisoners back to us, many European countries won't extradite unless we promise not to seek the death penalty.
Like it or not, many countries no longer support the death penalty, and won't extradite people, especially their own citizens, to face the death penalty.
IN fact, I don't have any links to check about this, but my guess is the reason Mexico had no problem sending Luster back was that he wasn't facing the death penalty. Also, I wonder if they will send U.S. citizens back to face the death penalty, just not their own citizens?
Ouch!
Not true at all. What I had to say was neither idiotic nor a rant. It was my opinion. As I just told NU, take it or leave it. Either choice has not affect on your life or mine whatsoever.
When one's first impulse is to insult those with whom they disagree, which is precisely the first impulse displayed by NU, that betrays a defensiveness and lack of confidence in one's own position.
One who doesn't like Gringos? Plenty of PRIista judges who fit that description, even more PRIista wardens and guards. Skipping bail in Mexico might have been a smart thing. Mexican jails are the pits, and you have to pay your own way. They don't provide food for the prisoners for example, they expect their families to do that. Same with clothing, bedding, etc. I've seen one Mexican prison, from a distance. It didn't look like anyplace I'd send, well a Dog, to.
It could really go hard for a Gringo who'd embarrassed the federales. Even for a misdemeanor. Much better to jump bail, and take your chances with the US justice system.
I'll save my sympathy for someone who deserves it.
Like who? Your mama?
Dog found him based on a tip from someone who gave the same tip to the FBI, who was going to arrest Luster during the same time period.
IN any case, I disagree that this is about how bad Luster is. This is about whether the United States will live up to it's extradition treaty obligations, when requested to by official government request.
To suggest that George Bush is personally involved in the extradition request of some bounty hunter because Fox called him up and threatened to expose some dark secret is, frankly, insane.
I can't fathom why otherwise intelligent people really think our President has ANY idea this is happening. Do you really think that the war on terror isn't occupying him enough?
Not you personally, just some of the people posting to this thread.
Other than past performance of the Mexican authorities when faced with similar well to do criminals.
I suspect they only sent Luster back when it became a "Big Deal". If he had been quietly turned in, they'd have kept him in Mexico, probably not a the same sort of facility that Chapman would have been put into.
EXcellent! Thank you TT!!!
my point is that Dog Chapman, and four others, were arrested in Mexico and charged with a crime. They were let out on bail, and then did not return for their trial. The court then issued a warrant for their return, and since Dog was known to be in the United States, the authorities generated an official government extradition request.
That request, being valid, was accepted by our government, as it should be, and Dog was arrested by U.S. marshals under the lawful order of a JUDGE who reviewed the evidence of the case.
It makes no difference WHY Dog broke the law in Mexico -- not for the extradition request. It might make a difference at his trial, which apparently will be a lot worse for him since he jumped bail.
That is my point. Well, that and that a lot of people are posting here about how Dog HAD to go get Luster because the mexican government was harboring him and being paid off (no evidence), and that Bush personally sent the marshals to arrest Dog (no evidence) and that he did this because Fox knows something bad about him and is blackmailing him (no evidence).
I don't expect people to take by blind faith what multiple contemporaneous news reports said, even though they include statements from Dog's family and attorney that largely corraberate the story.
You may "expect" that, and I can't refute that. We don't know. What we DO know is Dog was arrested, Luster was returned, and Dog jumped bail and fled.
While I like Dog, and wish him well, I can't be mad at my government for acting on a valid arrest warrant submitted through proper channels based on our current extradition treaty. This isn't like the case of the boarder patrol agents, no matter how much Tom Tancredo tries to link them.
In fact, doing so hurts the cause of those brave men.
I'll save my sympathy for someone who deserves it.
Like who? Your mama?
Well, yeah, of course.
What's so bad about your mama? I thought
(I won't say it. No sir, I won't)
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.