Re: LI Cheap Shot Time - Thomas Sowell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: HI Sue, Yeah, that was an ironic bit of timing, wasn't it? And I guess we shouldn't minimize the fact that she and her husband DID commit crimes and stole money from others. But I wouldn't have a problem with crediting her for timed served on the contempt charge. I've never heard of anyone held that long for contempt of court. Even Flea Bailey didn't get that kind of treatment. Bill On Tue, 10 Mar 1998 13:05:36 -0800 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: I think that if the woman is actually guilty of stealing money or whatever it was she did, she should serve out her term just like anyone else. I understand too though that they are thinking of cutting her sentence because of what she has already served. And to be honest, I wouldn't really object to that either, because she doesn't seem like she would be that much of a threat to society. But as far as throwing her in jail for not cooperating with Starr, if what she says is true, that was really wrong. She couldn't testify anyway, because anything that she said wouldn't make Starr happy. Nothing like being caught between the rock and the hard place. What was so weird about this whole deal though was that Susan got out of jail the same day that her ex husband died. :( Sue _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Cheap Shot Time - Thomas Sowell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Kathy, That's right! I remember this case. Thanks for the recap on it. I remember thinking at the time how unfair it was that this woman had to sit in jail simply for protecting her daughter. I never realized that her case precipitated the law that limits jail time for contempt to 18 months. Bill On Thu, 12 Mar 1998 21:25:27 -0500 Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill and Sue :) Just a slight correction here in case your not aware of it, there was another lady that spent 18mos in jail for contempt charges it was due to her that the law now limits the time of being held to 18mos for contempt. _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Cheap Shot Time - Thomas Sowell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: Hi Sue, That's the problem with the independent prosecutor's office. Not to pick on Starr all the time. It's really the law that set up the office itself that is the problem. It invites abuse of the worst kind, IMO. Bill On Thu, 12 Mar 1998 12:48:50 -0800 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: Seriously?? I didn't think that anyone was that far above the law. Sue HI Sue, I don't think Starr is affected by ANY statutes. :) Bill _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Cheap Shot Time - Thomas Sowell
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: Bailey didn't have Starr after his butt either. :) Isn't there a statute of limitations on cases like this. That Whitewater thing happened 25 or so years ago. Sue HI Sue, Yeah, that was an ironic bit of timing, wasn't it? And I guess we shouldn't minimize the fact that she and her husband DID commit crimes and stole money from others. But I wouldn't have a problem with crediting her for timed served on the contempt charge. I've never heard of anyone held that long for contempt of court. Even Flea Bailey didn't get that kind of treatment. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Cheap Shot Time - Thomas Sowell
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: Seriously?? I didn't think that anyone was that far above the law. Sue HI Sue, I don't think Starr is affected by ANY statutes. :) Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Cheap Shot Time - Thomas Sowell
Kathy E [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill and Sue :) Just a slight correction here in case your not aware of it, there was another lady that spent 18mos in jail for contempt charges it was due to her that the law now limits the time of being held to 18mos for contempt. I can't remember her name but you most likely will remember the case, it was a child custody case concerning two Doctors. She claimed her daughter was being molested by her husband who is also a doctor, the daughter testified to this and so did other doctors testify to it. The husband had others testify the daughter and mother were making it up and it wasn't true, (IMHO it was especially since the little girl had gonorrhea and so did the father). Well the judge decided to give him unsupervised visitation, and he was to have the daughter on the weekends, the mother decided she couldn't allow this, so her mother and father went to Australia and they took the daughter, due to the fact the Australian courts also looked at this and believed the little girl was being molested they would not force her to be returned to her father. The mother was jailed here in the US, due to contempt, refusing to tell the judge where her daughter was. She was held indefinitely, it was in all the papers and even made into a movie of the week. Eventually enough people were outraged and it then hit the supreme court and it was then decided no one can be held in jail for longer than 18 months for contempt. The mother was eventually released, and as she said, she would do it all over again to protect her daughter. I commend her for that. Sue Hartigan wrote: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: Bailey didn't have Starr after his butt either. :) Isn't there a statute of limitations on cases like this. That Whitewater thing happened 25 or so years ago. Sue HI Sue, Yeah, that was an ironic bit of timing, wasn't it? And I guess we shouldn't minimize the fact that she and her husband DID commit crimes and stole money from others. But I wouldn't have a problem with crediting her for timed served on the contempt charge. I've never heard of anyone held that long for contempt of court. Even Flea Bailey didn't get that kind of treatment. Bill -- Two rules in life: 1. Don't tell people everything you know. 2. Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues -- Kathy E "I can only please one person a day, today is NOT your day, and tomorrow isn't looking too good for you either" http://members.delphi.com/kathylaw/ Law Issues Mailing List http://pw1.netcom.com/~kathye/rodeo.html - Cowboy Histories http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2990/law.htm Crime photo's Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
Re: LI Cheap Shot Time - Thomas Sowell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes: On Mon, 09 Mar 1998 11:40:33 -0800 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi Bill: On the Sunday morning news shows, there was a lot of talk about the Republican party saying enough is enough, and for Starr to take what he has and do something with it, or get off it. I think it is coming to a dead end also. The public isn't really interested in it anymore, from what I understand. There was a news guy on the Today show this morning who said that it really isn't going to make that much difference about McDougal dying. They wouldn't have been able to use him as a witness anyway because his credibility was shot. He had given too many variations to his story, and he was a convicted felon. But that the materials and witnesses that he led them to could be and would be used. It's sad about him dying, but as far as Whitewater goes, I guess it really isn't going to matter one way or the other. A side note to this is that Susan McDougal is getting out of jail today, but of course is on her way to prison for the bank deal. Out of curiosity, just how long can a person be kept in jail on contempt charges, normally. Is there any end to the time. Sue Hi Sue, I'm not sure if the sentences for contempt are the same in each state. Probably not. But I think Susan McDougal spent 18 months in jail on the comtempt charge. Her lawyers are trying to get some consideration for reducing her two year sentence on the fraud conviction. I also read that she might face more charges in the future relating to Whitewater. If Starr decides to put more heat on her he probably will be able to do so. I think it's a shame that McDougal died at such an young age. (57) His personal physician said that in spite of his medical problems he should have had a life expectancy of 77 instead of 57. Bill _ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
