Mark - save you time euwenuch will always support illegal alien/criminals both of his parents were illegal spics
On May 23, 7:08 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > Euwe, > > I do suggest that you get a dictionary of legal definitions. Then look up > the rules for human smuggling, then look up the conspiracy rules that apply > and do so to the act committed in the particular instance,ie conspiratorial, > before the fact illegal entry. It deals only with the conspiracy and the > acts leading up to but NOT INCLUDING the actual criminal or civil violation. > Those pre-act discussions and planning are in deed a felony. > > Then read the entire summary and keep each phrase as self defining (I love > legalese, it keeps the common man from being able to understand enough to > represent himself.) and read it as though each sentence were its own > paragraph with all content simply referring back to the main theme (illegal > entry) while each sentence is in fact self defining. It has a whole new > meaning IN CONTEXT of the law, not layman's terms and definitions of same.. > > > > On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 4:41 PM, euwe <[email protected]> wrote: > > I've heard you reiterating a point that doesn't apply. Your references > > apply to smugglers. > > > Establishing that someone who is simply "present" without > > documentation helped someone to come in, and is therefore guilty of a > > felony is not a forgone conclusion - it requires at least one witness, > > evidence, or confession, since criminal violations assume innocence. > > Neither witness, evidence or testimony that the immigrant was guilty > > of helping somoene across would be available during a simple > > discovery, nor would one think, at any time from then until they are > > deported. > > > You might insist on repeating your "analysis" again, but it' would not > > make "being an illegal alien" a felony. Even after another 10 or so > > repetitions, it will still be a civil violation to be illigally > > present in the United States. > > > Try again. > > > On May 23, 3:45 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > As I keep saying.... it is on the books as a felony.... I would imagine > > that > > > the research done by these people is a whole lot more thorough than > > yours. > > > > The Congressional Research Service (CRS), in an Apr. 6, 2006 report > > entitled > > > "Immigration Enforcement Within the United States," offered the > > following: > > > > "The INA [Immigration and Nationality Act] includes both criminal and > > civil > > > components, providing both for criminal charges (e.g., alien smuggling, > > > which is prosecuted in the federal courts) and for civil violations > > (e.g., > > > lack of legal status, which may lead to removal through a separate > > > administrative system in the Department of Justice). Being illegally > > present > > > in the U.S. has always been a civil, not criminal, violation of the INA, > > and > > > subsequent deportation and associated administrative processes are civil > > > proceedings. For instance, a lawfully admitted nonimmigrant alien may > > become > > > deportable if his visitor's visa expires or if his student status > > changes. > > > Criminal violations of the INA, on the other hand, include felonies and > > > misdemeanors and are prosecuted in federal district courts. These types > > of > > > violations include the bringing in and harboring of certain undocumented > > > aliens, the illegal entry of aliens, and the reentry of aliens previously > > > excluded or deported." > > > * > > > * > > > > On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:29 PM, euwe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > CIVIL CONSPIRACY > > > > 'The elements of an action for civil conspiracy are the formation and > > > > operation of the conspiracy and damage resulting to plaintiff from an > > > > act or acts done in furtherance of the common design. . . . In such an > > > > action the major significance of the conspiracy lies in the fact that > > > > it renders each participant in the wrongful act responsible as a joint > > > > tortfeasor for all damages ensuing from the wrong, irrespective of > > > > whether or not he was a direct actor and regardless of the degree of > > > > his activity.'' (Doctors' Co. v. Superior Court (1989) 49 Cal.3d 44, > > > > citing Mox Incorporated v. Woods (1927) 202 Cal. 675, 677-78.)' (Id. > > > > at 511.) > > > > > 'Conspiracy is not a cause of action, but a legal doctrine that > > > > imposes liability on persons who, although not actually committing a > > > > tort themselves, share with the immediate tortfeasors a common plan or > > > > design in its perpetration. By participation in a civil conspiracy, a > > > > coconspirator effectively adopts as his or her own the torts of other > > > > coconspirators within the ambit of the conspiracy. In this way, a > > > > coconspirator incurs tort liability co-equal with the immediate > > > > tortfeasors. Standing alone, a conspiracy does no harm and engenders > > > > no tort liability. It must be activated by the commission of an actual > > > > tort. ''A civil conspiracy, however atrocious, does not per se give > > > > rise to a cause of action unless a civil wrong has been committed > > > > resulting in damage.'' 'A bare agreement among two or more persons to > > > > harm a third person cannot injure the latter unless and until acts are > > > > actually performed pursuant to the agreement. Therefore, it is the > > > > acts done and not the conspiracy to do them which should be regarded > > > > as the essence of the civil action.' [para.s] By its nature, tort > > > > liability arising from conspiracy presupposes that the coconspirator > > > > is legally capable of committing the tort, i.e., that he or she owes a > > > > duty to plaintiff recognized by law and is potentially subject to > > > > liability for breach of that duty.' (Allied Equipment Corp. v. Litton > > > > Saudi Arabia Ltd., supra, 7 Cal.4th at 510-11.) > > > > > On May 23, 3:27 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Presence in the United states without permission is a civil > > > > > infraction. For it to be a criminal offience, the offender has to > > have > > > > > been deported. > > > > > > That is assuming he/she acted alone. > > > > > > On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 2:23 PM, euwe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > One of the most fundamental distinctions between civil and criminal > > > > > > law is in the notion of punishment. > > > > > > > criminal law > > > > > > In criminal law, a guilty defendant is punished by either (1) > > > > > > incarceration in a jail or prison, (2) fine paid to the government, > > > > > > or, in exceptional cases, (3) execution of the defendant: the death > > > > > > penalty. Crimes are divided into two broad classes: felonies have a > > > > > > maximum possible sentence of more than one year incarceration, > > > > > > misdemeanors have a maximum possible sentence of less than one year > > > > > > incarceration. > > > > > > > civil law > > > > > > In contrast, a defendant in civil litigation is never incarcerated > > and > > > > > > never executed. In general, a losing defendant in civil litigation > > > > > > only reimburses the plaintiff for losses caused by the defendant's > > > > > > behavior. > > > > > > > So-called punitive damages are never awarded in a civil case under > > > > > > contract law. In a civil case under tort law, there is a > > possibility > > > > > > of punitive damages, if the defendant's conduct is egregious and > > had > > > > > > either (1) a malicious intent (i.e., desire to cause harm), (2) > > gross > > > > > > negligence (i.e., conscious indifference), or (3) a willful > > disregard > > > > > > for the rights of others. The use of punitive damages makes a > > public > > > > > > example of the defendant and supposedly deters future wrongful > > conduct > > > > > > by others. Punitive damages are particularly important in torts > > > > > > involving dignitary harms (e.g., invasion of privacy) and civil > > > > > > rights, where the actual monetary injury to plaintiff(s) may be > > > > > > small. > > > > > > > One can purchase insurance that will pay damages and attorney's > > fees > > > > > > for tort claims. Such insurance coverage is a standard part of > > > > > > homeowner's insurance policies, automobile insurance, and insurance > > > > > > for businesses. In contrast, it is not possible for a defendant to > > > > > > purchase insurance to pay for his/her criminal acts. > > > > > > > While a court can order a defendant to pay damages, the plaintiff > > may > > > > > > receive nothing if the defendant has no assets and no insurance, or > > if > > > > > > the defendant is skillful in concealing assets. In this way, large > > > > > > awards for plaintiffs in tort cases are often an illusion. > > > > > > ------------------- > > > > > > Presence in the United states without permission is a civil > > > > > > infraction. For it to be a criminal offience, the offender has to > > have > > > > > > been deported. > > > > > > > On May 23, 3:09 pm, euwe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Immigration law is civil law; law enforcement never enforces > > civil > > > > > > > law, > > > > > > > > On May 23, 12:05 pm, Harry Beck <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I agree, therefore the name ILLEGAL aliens. > > > > > > > > > Harry Beck > > > > > > > > Capt. US Army, Ret. > > > > > > > > Montrose, New York > > > > > > > > > Wherever you go, no matter what the weather, bring your own > > > > sunshine. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: plainolamerican <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > To: PoliticalForum <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Sent: Sun, May 23, 2010 11:49 am > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Illegal aliens are not criminals > > > > > > > > > yeah, I heard this defense from an ACLU lawyer once > > > > > > > > > those who break the law are considered criminals > > > > > > > > > On May 21, 3:05 pm, euwe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Theirs is a civil infraction, not prosecutable in criminal > > courts > > > > > > > > > until they have been deported at least once. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Thanks for > > ... > > read more » -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
