Sotomayor doesn't mind getting an innocent defendant's off UNLESS...

[GHook93]

...the defendant is WHITE! In this case the defendant has DNA evidence that proved his innocence, yet the racist Sotomayor denied his appeal. Let's get this straight. Unrefutable and highly dependable DNA evidence and Sotomayor decided to deny an appeal! I wonder what would have happened if the defendant wasn't white or better yet was a Latino? I have no doubt an appeal would have been ordered and the defendant would have been released from prison much sooner!

How can even the liberals support such a blantant racists?


Sotomayor Achilles' heel? Wrongly imprisoned man

The fact that DNA on the victim didn't match him was explained away by prosecutors who claimed the victim could have had consensual sex before she was killed.

His sentence was 15 years to life in prison. Eventually he ran out of state court appeals procedures, and then was given until April 24, 1997, to demand habeas corpus.

Get Mark Levin's New York Times best-seller, "Liberty and Tyranny."

According to reports, his lawyer asked a court clerk about the deadline and was told it had to be mailed by that date. Wrong. The court rules required delivery by that date.

When the paperwork arrived late it was dismissed. Eventually Sotomayor and other appellate judge found that such a mistake didn't "rise to the level of an extraordinary circumstance" and dismissed it.

"The district court correctly dismissed Deskovic's petition as untimely," the appeals court decision from Sotomayor concluded. A subsequent appeal was dismissed with the terse: "It is ordered that said petition for rehearing is denied."

Deskovic, knowing his own innocence, was appalled and kept battling.

Ultimately, he was linked to the Innocence Project, and was able to establish his innocence through the discovery of the real murderer, who subsequently confessed.

"Through a twist of fate in 2005," Deskovic writes on his website, a letter I had written was delivered to anti-death penalty activist and amateur investigator, Claudia Whitman. She suggested that I re-contact the Innocence Project and she urged them to take my case. Six months later, they took my case and obtained permission from the new district attorney to take the crime scene DNA and compare it to the state DNA database. The previous district attorney had refused prior requests to run further DNA tests. As of a result of comparing the DNA to the state data base, the actual perpetrator (Stephen Cunningham) was located."

 

[Nik]

...the defendant is WHITE! In this case the defendant has DNA evidence that proved his innocence, yet the racist Sotomayor denied his appeal. Let's get this straight. Unrefutable and highly dependable DNA evidence and Sotomayor decided to deny an appeal! I wonder what would have happened if the defendant wasn't white or better yet was a Latino? I have no doubt an appeal would have been ordered and the defendant would have been released from prison much sooner!

How can even the liberals support such a blantant racists?


Sotomayor Achilles' heel? Wrongly imprisoned man

The fact that DNA on the victim didn't match him was explained away by prosecutors who claimed the victim could have had consensual sex before she was killed.

His sentence was 15 years to life in prison. Eventually he ran out of state court appeals procedures, and then was given until April 24, 1997, to demand habeas corpus.

Get Mark Levin's New York Times best-seller, "Liberty and Tyranny."

According to reports, his lawyer asked a court clerk about the deadline and was told it had to be mailed by that date. Wrong. The court rules required delivery by that date.

When the paperwork arrived late it was dismissed. Eventually Sotomayor and other appellate judge found that such a mistake didn't "rise to the level of an extraordinary circumstance" and dismissed it.

"The district court correctly dismissed Deskovic's petition as untimely," the appeals court decision from Sotomayor concluded. A subsequent appeal was dismissed with the terse: "It is ordered that said petition for rehearing is denied."

Deskovic, knowing his own innocence, was appalled and kept battling.

Ultimately, he was linked to the Innocence Project, and was able to establish his innocence through the discovery of the real murderer, who subsequently confessed.

"Through a twist of fate in 2005," Deskovic writes on his website, a letter I had written was delivered to anti-death penalty activist and amateur investigator, Claudia Whitman. She suggested that I re-contact the Innocence Project and she urged them to take my case. Six months later, they took my case and obtained permission from the new district attorney to take the crime scene DNA and compare it to the state DNA database. The previous district attorney had refused prior requests to run further DNA tests. As of a result of comparing the DNA to the state data base, the actual perpetrator (Stephen Cunningham) was located."

And whats your evidence that she would have ruled differently if he was black or latino?

 

[Xenophon]

Imagine that, keeping an innocent man from appealing based on clerical errors.

Its little wondewr nobody in their right mind respects the leagal profession these days.

 

[GHook93]

...the defendant is WHITE! In this case the defendant has DNA evidence that proved his innocence, yet the racist Sotomayor denied his appeal. Let's get this straight. Unrefutable and highly dependable DNA evidence and Sotomayor decided to deny an appeal! I wonder what would have happened if the defendant wasn't white or better yet was a Latino? I have no doubt an appeal would have been ordered and the defendant would have been released from prison much sooner!

How can even the liberals support such a blantant racists?


Sotomayor Achilles' heel? Wrongly imprisoned man

The fact that DNA on the victim didn't match him was explained away by prosecutors who claimed the victim could have had consensual sex before she was killed.

His sentence was 15 years to life in prison. Eventually he ran out of state court appeals procedures, and then was given until April 24, 1997, to demand habeas corpus.

Get Mark Levin's New York Times best-seller, "Liberty and Tyranny."

According to reports, his lawyer asked a court clerk about the deadline and was told it had to be mailed by that date. Wrong. The court rules required delivery by that date.

When the paperwork arrived late it was dismissed. Eventually Sotomayor and other appellate judge found that such a mistake didn't "rise to the level of an extraordinary circumstance" and dismissed it.

"The district court correctly dismissed Deskovic's petition as untimely," the appeals court decision from Sotomayor concluded. A subsequent appeal was dismissed with the terse: "It is ordered that said petition for rehearing is denied."

Deskovic, knowing his own innocence, was appalled and kept battling.

Ultimately, he was linked to the Innocence Project, and was able to establish his innocence through the discovery of the real murderer, who subsequently confessed.

"Through a twist of fate in 2005," Deskovic writes on his website, a letter I had written was delivered to anti-death penalty activist and amateur investigator, Claudia Whitman. She suggested that I re-contact the Innocence Project and she urged them to take my case. Six months later, they took my case and obtained permission from the new district attorney to take the crime scene DNA and compare it to the state DNA database. The previous district attorney had refused prior requests to run further DNA tests. As of a result of comparing the DNA to the state data base, the actual perpetrator (Stephen Cunningham) was located."

And whats your evidence that she would have ruled differently if he was black or latino?

What is your evidence that she won't have?

Its obvious previous personal decisions that one can easily speculate that she would have treated the defendant differently if he was a latino or other minority!

 

[Nik]

...the defendant is WHITE! In this case the defendant has DNA evidence that proved his innocence, yet the racist Sotomayor denied his appeal. Let's get this straight. Unrefutable and highly dependable DNA evidence and Sotomayor decided to deny an appeal! I wonder what would have happened if the defendant wasn't white or better yet was a Latino? I have no doubt an appeal would have been ordered and the defendant would have been released from prison much sooner!

How can even the liberals support such a blantant racists?


Sotomayor Achilles' heel? Wrongly imprisoned man

And whats your evidence that she would have ruled differently if he was black or latino?

What is your evidence that she won't have?

Its obvious previous personal decisions that one can easily speculate that she would have treated the defendant differently if he was a latino or other minority!

Of course. You are speculating, that is, making shit up.

The evidence that she wouldn't have is there is NO indication of race based preferences in any of her opinions. None. Zero. Zilch.

 

[GHook93]

Imagine that, keeping an innocent man from appealing based on clerical errors.

Its little wondewr nobody in their right mind respects the leagal profession these days.

PLEASE!!! Many people respect the profession and we have the best legal system in the world! Most judges would have allowed the appeal in a criminal case! Especially a case with DNA evidence exconerating the man!

 

[GHook93]

And whats your evidence that she would have ruled differently if he was black or latino?

What is your evidence that she won't have?

Its obvious previous personal decisions that one can easily speculate that she would have treated the defendant differently if he was a latino or other minority!

Of course. You are speculating, that is, making shit up.

The evidence that she wouldn't have is there is NO indication of race based preferences in any of her opinions. None. Zero. Zilch.

Just tell that to Ricci! Can you really state that a member if La Raza would have treated the defendant different if he was a Latino? That is the whole essense of La Raza viewing Latinos differently than Whites! See you liberals want to protect anyone who isn't on the right, even if the person discriminates against you! Amazing where the left's proirities are!

 

[Nik]

What is your evidence that she won't have?

Its obvious previous personal decisions that one can easily speculate that she would have treated the defendant differently if he was a latino or other minority!

Of course. You are speculating, that is, making shit up.

The evidence that she wouldn't have is there is NO indication of race based preferences in any of her opinions. None. Zero. Zilch.

Just tell that to Ricci! Can you really state that a member if La Raza would have treated the defendant different if he was a Latino? That is the whole essense of La Raza viewing Latinos differently than Whites! See you liberals want to protect anyone who isn't on the right, even if the person discriminates against you! Amazing where the left's proirities are!

Yes. I can state that. Some of the defendants were Latino.

Way to set yourself up for a massive fail.

 

[WillowTree]

Imagine that, keeping an innocent man from appealing based on clerical errors.

Its little wondewr nobody in their right mind respects the leagal profession these days.

ditto that! not to mention what they do in DC and to the country!

 

[Midnight Marauder]

It's unjust to keep captured enemy combatants, foreign nationals on foreign soil, locked up with no charges, no trial, etc even though Obama and Holder have said they are going to continue that.

But it's JUST for an exonerated man to be held? A US Citizen? Falsely accused and convicted?

It doesn't matter the person's skin color. If he's not guilty of the crime, he should be released.

 

[Nik]

It's unjust to keep captured enemy combatants, foreign nationals on foreign soil, locked up with no charges, no trial, etc even though Obama and Holder have said they are going to continue that.

But it's JUST for an exonerated man to be held? A US Citizen? Falsely accused and convicted?

It doesn't matter the person's skin color. If he's not guilty of the crime, he should be released.

He was released. After he was actually exonerated. At the time Sotomayor rejected the petition, it was just another untimely petition.

 

[Xenophon]

Perhaps a white male would have been better able to judge his case.

Using Ms Sotomayor's standards that is.

 

[Nik]

Perhaps a white male would have been better able to judge his case.

Using Ms Sotomayor's standards that is.

Oh? And what are her standards exactly?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Perhaps a white male would have been better able to judge his case.

Using Ms Sotomayor's standards that is.

Oh? And what are her standards exactly?

THAT is the $64,000 question isn't it?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

It's unjust to keep captured enemy combatants, foreign nationals on foreign soil, locked up with no charges, no trial, etc even though Obama and Holder have said they are going to continue that.

But it's JUST for an exonerated man to be held? A US Citizen? Falsely accused and convicted?

It doesn't matter the person's skin color. If he's not guilty of the crime, he should be released.

He was released. After he was actually exonerated. At the time Sotomayor rejected the petition, it was just another untimely petition.

The petition at that time wasn't for release. It was for a new Habeas Corpus hearing on the rejected DNA evidence, and the defense missed a deadline. So Sotomayor summarily rejected the appeal. She could have ordered the lower court to either extend the deadline or schedule the hearing. The defendant however finally GOT a hearing, and the same evidence which was originally rejected, exonerated him.

I notice you didn't say anything about whether or not it's okay with you for innocent and/or even un-accused people to be held, be it foreign nationals on foreign soil, or US citizens on US soil.

 

[Nik]

Perhaps a white male would have been better able to judge his case.

Using Ms Sotomayor's standards that is.

Oh? And what are her standards exactly?

THAT is the $64,000 question isn't it?

Not really, no. Her court opinions are measured, precise, and well reasoned. Whatever her personal opinions, they don't seem to enter into it. Nobody has been able to cite, and back up, a case where her opinion was absurd, or racist.

The Ricci case is an unclear one, and is a novel area of law. The 2nd amendment case that everyone was wailing about before was also ruled in a similar way by IIRC, the 7th circuit by a very conservative judge who cited her decision. The right is running on empty on this one and grasping at straws, and there isn't really much to go for. So instead they are saying incredibly stupid shit like:

Just tell that to Ricci! Can you really state that a member if La Raza would have treated the defendant different if he was a Latino?

 

[manu1959]

Perhaps a white male would have been better able to judge his case.

Using Ms Sotomayor's standards that is.

Oh? And what are her standards exactly?

the one where she said she would make better decissions than a white male because she was a latino woman.....

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Oh? And what are her standards exactly?

THAT is the $64,000 question isn't it?

Not really, no. Her court opinions are measured, precise, and well reasoned. Whatever her personal opinions, they don't seem to enter into it. Nobody has been able to cite, and back up, a case where her opinion was absurd, or racist.

Oh how neat! We should just dispense with the Senate hearings then!

 

[Nik]

It's unjust to keep captured enemy combatants, foreign nationals on foreign soil, locked up with no charges, no trial, etc even though Obama and Holder have said they are going to continue that.

But it's JUST for an exonerated man to be held? A US Citizen? Falsely accused and convicted?

It doesn't matter the person's skin color. If he's not guilty of the crime, he should be released.

He was released. After he was actually exonerated. At the time Sotomayor rejected the petition, it was just another untimely petition.

The petition at that time wasn't for release. It was for a new Habeas Corpus hearing on the rejected DNA evidence, and the defense missed a deadline. So Sotomayor summarily rejected the appeal. She could have ordered the lower court to either extend the deadline or schedule the hearing. The defendant however finally GOT a hearing, and the same evidence which was originally rejected, exonerated him.

I notice you didn't say anything about whether or not it's okay with you for innocent and/or even un-accused people to be held, be it foreign nationals on foreign soil, or US citizens on US soil.

Of course its not ok for innocent people to be held. The only problem with accusing Sotomayor of this is that she didn't know he was innocent.

And no, its not ok for people to be held without a trial.

Courts have rules. Do you think that anyone should be able to just miss deadlines, not show up, whatever, and the court should forgive it and overlook it?

 

[Nik]

Perhaps a white male would have been better able to judge his case.

Using Ms Sotomayor's standards that is.

Oh? And what are her standards exactly?

the one where she said she would make better decissions than a white male because she was a latino woman.....

Oy, we went over this. Not what she said. But alrighty then.