Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BREAKING: Judge throws out 1 of 9 charges against shoe bomber
Fox News ^ | 06.11.02 | FOX NEWS

Posted on 06/11/2002 2:24:16 PM PDT by callisto

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last
To: callisto
Wow! I knew the Patriot Act was dangerous, but I had no idea that so many of our rights were stripped away by it... man... ;0)
41 posted on 06/11/2002 3:18:11 PM PDT by Chad Fairbanks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: callisto
Did anyone else catch more of the story?

No. But I come here for news.

42 posted on 06/11/2002 3:21:37 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: callisto
I think the charge was for trying to remove an ingrown toenail with a plastic explosive in an occupied vehicle.
43 posted on 06/11/2002 3:32:39 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: all
Young said he looked to a legal definition of "vehicle" drafted by Congress, which says that a vehicle is something used as a means of transportation on land.

A plane moves on the ground while at the airport, therefore it is a "vehicle", since the law did not state how long the "vehicle" had to travel on the land.

44 posted on 06/11/2002 3:34:35 PM PDT by Lockbox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Comment #45 Removed by Moderator

To: imyconsults
They could let him go, put his shoes back on him (with detonator of course), and let him go back to his friends. Then they would only have to borrow the Israeli "work accident" device.
46 posted on 06/11/2002 3:42:48 PM PDT by Ingtar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: callisto
So they threw out what was basically a charge of sabotage on a technicality? He's still facing 197 counts of attempted murder.
47 posted on 06/11/2002 4:02:52 PM PDT by Salman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar


WILLIAM WEBSTER


William Webster is a senior partner in the Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP's Washington office, and heads the Litigation Department there. He is also involved in the Firm's international corporate, banking, trade and administrative law practices. Prior to joining Milbank Tweed in 1991, Judge Webster was, since 1987, Director of Central Intelligence, where he headed all the foreign intelligence agencies of the United States and directed the Central Intelligence Agency. Earlier, he served as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (1978 - 1987), Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (1973 - 78), and Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (1970 - 73). A practicing attorney with a St. Louis law firm from 1949 to 1959, Judge Webster served as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri from 1960 to 1961. He returned to private practice in 1961. From 1964 to 1969, he was a member of the Missouri Board of Law Examiners.


Judge Webster graduated from Amherst College and received his Juris Doctor from Washington University Law School. He is a member of the American Bar Association, the Council of the American Law Institute, Order of the Coif and is a fellow of the American Bar Foundation. He has received numerous honorary degrees and awards, including the Freedoms Foundation National Service Medal (1985), the Presidential Medal of Freedom (1991) and the National Security Medal (1991). He is a past Chairman of the American Bar Association Business Law Section and past President of the Institute of Judicial Administration. He is a Trustee of Washington University in St. Louis.
48 posted on 06/11/2002 4:06:57 PM PDT by vannrox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: vannrox
Near as I can tell, Webster has nothing to do with this trial. The judge is William Young, not William Webster.
49 posted on 06/11/2002 4:24:51 PM PDT by RightOnTheLeftCoast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: callisto
Moron.
50 posted on 06/11/2002 4:38:32 PM PDT by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: callisto
The judge, not you...
51 posted on 06/11/2002 4:39:00 PM PDT by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
"If they have to define every word they will quickly get lost in an infinite maze of meanings since each term is defined by other terms. Our local government adopted an ordinary dictionary as standard just to shut off such debate."

That, my friend, is exactly the problem with litigation. Any minute opening into the law is pounced upon by most attorney's in their effort to defend their client. I wonder if Congress had not defined any terms if this legal pleading would not have applied, or if by their act of defining the other terms they opened this loophole themselves. I defer to those with more legal expertise than I for any possible answer to this query.

Congress would be wise to follow your local goverments actions and designate a standard dictionary themselves, if they haven't already done so.

52 posted on 06/11/2002 4:48:52 PM PDT by callisto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: callisto
I wonder if Congress had not defined any terms if this legal pleading would not have applied, or if...

That should read:
I wonder if Congress had not defined any terms if this legal pleading would have applied, or if...

53 posted on 06/11/2002 4:50:53 PM PDT by callisto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: callisto
Why would they have to define vehicle? It's already defined in the dictionary.

If they can't accept the dictionary meaning of vehicle, why don't they have to define EVERY word in the law?

54 posted on 06/11/2002 4:56:34 PM PDT by chaosagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: all
A message from Jim Robinson regarding the fundraiser!
55 posted on 06/11/2002 5:02:59 PM PDT by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PoppingSmoke
Non-Middle Eastern citizens

You aren't from the Middle-east. Let's have a military tribunal look into your behavior over the last 3 years.

56 posted on 06/11/2002 5:14:52 PM PDT by ReadMyMind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ReadMyMind
"You aren't from the Middle-east. Let's have a military tribunal look into your behavior over the last 3 years."

If you going to make a point, then make it. If yoru going to be a jerk, then buzz off. No I am not from the Middle East, but that does not make me unknowledgeable. Make your point or go play with someone else.

57 posted on 06/11/2002 5:20:08 PM PDT by PoppingSmoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Lockbox
>>...A plane moves on the ground while at the airport, therefore it is a "vehicle", since the law did not state how long the "vehicle" had to travel on the land...<<

My thoughts exactly!

I was getting ready to post this very statement when I came upon your post.

58 posted on 06/11/2002 6:47:03 PM PDT by FReepaholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
There's no evidence I'm aware of linking him to the 9/11 plot.

The plane landed in Boston where he was charged, and the case is still in federal court there.

59 posted on 06/11/2002 6:49:51 PM PDT by Plummz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: callisto
Reid's lawyers argued that an airplane was not a mass transportation vehicle as defined by the new law.

WTF????

What next? It wasn't really a shoe bomb, but merely a medically required foot massage device?

This criminal trial strategy is a BAD idea. We are going to be subjected to thousands of OJ trials. The leftist liars and their sub-human clients are going to use the system -- which is meant to benefit We the People -- to mock the USA, furthering their terrorist agenda and distracting much needed focus from the REAL problem. Good grief.

Go ahead, assholes and traitors. Time will come when We the People will have to take charge.

60 posted on 06/11/2002 7:23:35 PM PDT by Mad_Tom_Rackham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson