Posted on 10/19/2017 7:20:54 PM PDT by markomalley
The judge in former Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s now-pardoned criminal case has refused the retired lawman’s request to throw out all rulings in the case, including a blistering decision that explained her reasoning in finding him guilty of a crime.
The request denied Thursday by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton was aimed at clearing Arpaio’s name and barring the ruling’s use in future court cases as an example of a prior bad act.
Bolton said pardons don’t erase convictions or the facts of cases. She said the pardon issued by President Donald Trump only mooted Arpaio’s possible punishments.
“The pardon undoubtedly spared defendant from any punishment that might otherwise have been imposed,” Bolton wrote. “It did not, however, ‘revise the historical facts’ of this case.”
Arpaio attorney Jack Wilenchik said his client will appeal Thursday’s decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Tyranny in black robes...
Well, it’s up to us whether we let the “pillars” lay bare or cover them with something. We let our own faith towards God down then wonder why the heathen are eating our lunch!
FWIW, Arpaio would be wise not to get into a war of words with a judge.
A higher Judge will supervise the scene. Whether or not this judge believes it.
Calm down Sherf. Let God do what God does. Don’t throw a hissy fit about sinful men — or women. The bible says that’s always to the evil.
You can say THAT again ;^)
ping to disgusting ruling by Judge Bolton to refuse to fully honor Trump’s pardon of Sheriff Arpaio by wiping out his case file, has he now had no chance of clearing his name on appeal!
Sheriff Arpaio’s legal team is appealing to 9th circus...
There is not a politician in this country who has the gonads to file the paperwork to remove the piece of filth in a black robe. Even the Republican politicians like having liberal judges on the bench as it allows them to destroy the USA and deny culpability.
ask Marc Rich! He’s free as a bird.. probably as popular with the rats as Roman Polanski..
plus he paves the way with dollar bills...
Wow.
p
Hell yeah
There was no jury and therefore no jury verdict.
How then can this judge claim evidence of MOTIVE or INTENT establishes fact?
The Sheriff was charged with violating a court order to which he admitted he was knowledgeable of the court order but chose to do his job as he was authorized and expected to do without intent to profile persons arrested.
This judge can rule evidence is admissible, but deeming evidence as fact of MOTIVE or INTENT without a jury verdict appears arbitrary.
When a defendant pleads innocent, the defendant’s MOTIVE or INTENT is determined by credible witness testimony, legal recording, or admissible documents in front of a jury.
I remember reading that the Sheriff asked more than once for his right to a jury trial and was denied.
I sense that Sheriff Arpaio’s rights have been violated, perhaps grossly.
Even if you get all the Republicans to vote for conviction, how do get enough Democrats to vote along with them?
No. A pardon means no punishment or other 'disability' may be imposed on the person pardoned. Period.
A number of court rulings indicate using a pardon in court as a defense is an admission of guilt, notably Burdick v. United States.
Thanks, jjotto.
I would think that should indicate that any conviction records be sealed.
It would also seem that this “judge” is acting in direct contravention of the President’s authority.
One of the less understood yet revolutionary features of our governing forms is the built-in retention of the sovereign people’s authority to affect peaceful improvements to our state and national governments. Our new contribution to politics in 1787 was the idea of provisions for reformation, of enabling society to return to first principles.
I guarantee the attitude of the 900 or so Article III judges would change for the better if congress collected, through impeachment, a judicial scalp or two every year.
I think Article V is well intentioned but too dangerous to currently initiate.
There are too many termites not only in the infrastructure but the general population as well. They must be permanently removed.
Our society needs a true spiritual revival, to have it once again restored as deeply religious and moral. If that were ever to truly happen, we wouldn’t need to mess with our Founders’ original documents.
JMO.
Yes.
Reliance on the virtue of the public, without regard to the structure of governing institutions, is what necessitated the 1787 federal convention.
Society cannot revive under the existing Scotus rulings.
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.