Arizona decisions....

Ozzie_Isaac

blasting said:

Legume said:

I think I might move to Arizona, is it good?

@Legume No, it's too damn hot.  88 degrees on November 26.  

I love the heat, but 90 at the end of November is not ideal.  I much prefer our normal mid 70s this time of year

westernbbq

td66snrf said:

westernbbq said:

td66snrf said:

Sheriff Joe Arapaio would never let you into AZ. I would pay to hear the conversation between the two of you though. 

Penzone beat him in the last election....

Yeah and Trump pardon  him before he was convicted. WTF  Doesn't that totally bypass our judicial system? 

Arpaio case was political witch hunt...

westernbbq

blasting said:

Legume said:

I think I might move to Arizona, is it good?

@Legume No, it's too damn hot.  88 degrees on November 26.  

My kids jumped in the pool yesterday although my arthritic knee and lower back love the heat...the hotter the better...

DoubleEgger

Legume said:

I think I might move to Arizona, is it good?

You better like brown

DMW

westernbbq said:

td66snrf said:

westernbbq said:

td66snrf said:

Sheriff Joe Arapaio would never let you into AZ. I would pay to hear the conversation between the two of you though. 

Penzone beat him in the last election....

Yeah and Trump pardon  him before he was convicted. WTF  Doesn't that totally bypass our judicial system? 

Arpaio case was political witch hunt...

Dude is an upstanding citizen that was unfairly targeted. Sounds reasonable. 

nolaegghead

westernbbq said:

td66snrf said:

westernbbq said:

td66snrf said:

Sheriff Joe Arapaio would never let you into AZ. I would pay to hear the conversation between the two of you though. 

Penzone beat him in the last election....

Yeah and Trump pardon  him before he was convicted. WTF  Doesn't that totally bypass our judicial system? 

Arpaio case was political witch hunt...

If you mean "political witch hunt" the same way Trump keeps whining about the Mueller investigation, then you're completely convinced.  But I don't think it means what you think it means. 

7 Bengazi investigations - that's a political witch hunt.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/oct/12/hillary-clinton/clinton-there-have-been-7-benghazi-probes-so-far/

Uranium one is a propaganda witch hunt:

http://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one

Arpaio violated the law, flagrantly.  You seem to be partisan in your accusations, with no arguments as to why you support your position.  I call that uninteresting and irrelevant.  Please be more interesting and relevant.

westernbbq

Well Nola you dont know this about me but i am pretty close to this situation.   And i am VERY close to someone inside this situation.   Joe Arpaio is not popular with Democrats.  He was convicted of criminal contempt for racially profiling Hispanic people and 'cracking down' on illegal immigration, which, as you may or may not know is a problem here in Arizona.

Anyway, US Federal Judge Murray Snow decided Arpaio's fate in this case.  The problem is, and this is why i say this is a political witch hunt is that the US Constitution, in the Sixth Amendment states that "in all criminal prosecutions" the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury.   Arpaio never got this right's guarantee....he never got a jury trial.  The decision of criminal guilt was made by one man, a federal judge who in many legal experts' opinion violated the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution, and many people on the inside of this situation feel this was politically motivated.  Regardless of one's like or dislike of Joe Arpaio and his prejudice against Hispanics, he was assigned criminal guilt by a federal judge and his right to a jury trial as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution was violated.

Ironically this targeting of illegals was  all brought about by the passage of the Employer Sanctions Bill, which made it illegal to knowingly hire and employ illegal in the US citiczens.  Why is this ironic?  Because the Employer Sanctions Bill was signed into law by then-Governor Janet Napolitano, who, with this political move, would become popular and seen as tough on immigration and as a resultb would later become the head of the US Department of Homeland Security via appointment by President Barack Obama.


I dont know how interesting all of this is but it sure is relevant...

nolaegghead

Well cited and fairly comprehensive, please read this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio

pgprescott

@nolaegghead would prefer you read Wikipedia rather than rely upon your own personal and intimate knowledge. LOL! 

fishlessman

i have a slightly used 1 owner 1989 dodge dakota 4x4 sport with the convertible roof. you can have it for free. would be better to push it around nola though than arizona.  patch the holes, new paint, replace the frame, 2 gas tank straps, broken manifold, power steering pump, front and back bumpers, and the brake line that went this morning and it would be mint. got to work limping in first gear this morning after a hundred mile trip from camp, dad says he saw the light go on yesterday on the boat ramp when we took the boat off the lake wth

westernbbq

nolaegghead said:

Well cited and fairly comprehensive, please read this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio

I am not an arpaio fan by the way and because of the industry i am in, i was an outspoken opponent of the immigration legislation that all but killed segments of my business, as it relies in hard working honest people-many of whom are Hispanic.  

Arpaio was less of a sheriff and more of a media showman, pandering to a  base that kept getting him elected.  But none of his antics justify a  condition where he is excluded from the guaranteed right to a jury trial provided for in the 6th amendment.  I was actually in favor of his criminal contempt until a lawyer, who is really outspoken against arpaio explained to me in simple terms (he had to because im not that smart) that arpaio didnt get a fair shake under the law.  He was convinced that even with the circus atmosphere surrounding a jury trial that the overwhelming evidence would have convicted him and this atty explained to me that politics in this case interfered with the legal process.

DoubleEgger

westernbbq said:

Arpaio was less of a sheriff and more of a media showman, pandering to a  base that kept getting him elected.  

How is this different than any other elected official? 

nolaegghead

westernbbq said:

nolaegghead said:

Well cited and fairly comprehensive, please read this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio

I am not an arpaio fan by the way and because of the industry i am in, i was an outspoken opponent of the immigration legislation that all but killed segments of my business, as it relies in hard working honest people-many of whom are Hispanic.  

Arpaio was less of a sheriff and more of a media showman, pandering to a  base that kept getting him elected.  But none of his antics justify a  condition where he is excluded from the guaranteed right to a jury trial provided for in the 6th amendment.  I was actually in favor of his criminal contempt until a lawyer, who is really outspoken against arpaio explained to me in simple terms (he had to because im not that smart) that arpaio didnt get a fair shake under the law.  He was convinced that even with the circus atmosphere surrounding a jury trial that the overwhelming evidence would have convicted him and this atty explained to me that politics in this case interfered with the legal process.

I'll have to ask our Brisket Camp lawyer for clarification, but contempt charges don't seem to be something that you necessarily go to trial over.

from http://litigation.findlaw.com/going-to-court/civil-contempt-of-court.html

Punishment for Civil Contempt of Court vs. Criminal Contempt of Court

Unlike criminal contempt sentences, which aim to punish the act of contempt, civil contempt sanctions aim to either: (1) restore the rights of the party who was wronged by the failure to satisfy the court's order; or (2) simply move an underlying proceeding along. Civil contempt sanctions typically end when the party in contempt complies with the court order, or when the underlying case is resolved.

Like those charged with criminal contempt, the court may order incarceration of people held in civil contempt. However, unlike individuals charged with criminal contempt, people held in civil contempt are generally not given the same constitutional rights that are guaranteed to criminal contempt defendants.

Those held in civil contempt generally must be given notice of the contempt sanctions and an opportunity to be heard, but usually are not guaranteed a jury trial. Also, their contempt does not need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, while criminal contempt charges must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Finally, criminal contempt involves a specified sentence (jail and/or fine), while civil contempt sanctions can be more indefinite, lasting until either the underlying case is resolved or the party in contempt complies with the court order.

nolaegghead

pgprescott said:

@nolaegghead would prefer you read Wikipedia rather than rely upon your own personal and intimate knowledge. LOL! 

Yes.  Absolutely.  I'm not litigating, just distilling through the fog of confusion.

The_Stache

Lotus Super 7

nolaegghead

The_Stache said:

Lotus Super 7

Great car, despite one of the highest drag coefficients in any production car.  Gotta love it.

Eoin

nolaegghead said:

The_Stache said:

Lotus Super 7

Great car, despite one of the highest drag coefficients in any production car.  Gotta love it.

Small frontal area though. Would like one (of the many impractical toys I would like).

northGAcock

Cosmic moment. I am reading this thread in PHX (Sky Harbor) while waiting for a connecting flight. 

Hans61

westernbbq said:

Well Nola you dont know this about me but i am pretty close to this situation.   And i am VERY close to someone inside this situation.   Joe Arpaio is not popular with Democrats.  He was convicted of criminal contempt for racially profiling Hispanic people and 'cracking down' on illegal immigration, which, as you may or may not know is a problem here in Arizona.

Anyway, US Federal Judge Murray Snow decided Arpaio's fate in this case.  The problem is, and this is why i say this is a political witch hunt is that the US Constitution, in the Sixth Amendment states that "in all criminal prosecutions" the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury.   Arpaio never got this right's guarantee....he never got a jury trial.  The decision of criminal guilt was made by one man, a federal judge who in many legal experts' opinion violated the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution, and many people on the inside of this situation feel this was politically motivated.  Regardless of one's like or dislike of Joe Arpaio and his prejudice against Hispanics, he was assigned criminal guilt by a federal judge and his right to a jury trial as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution was violated.

Ironically this targeting of illegals was  all brought about by the passage of the Employer Sanctions Bill, which made it illegal to knowingly hire and employ illegal in the US citiczens.  Why is this ironic?  Because the Employer Sanctions Bill was signed into law by then-Governor Janet Napolitano, who, with this political move, would become popular and seen as tough on immigration and as a resultb would later become the head of the US Department of Homeland Security via appointment by President Barack Obama.


I dont know how interesting all of this is but it sure is relevant...

Contempt is not a criminal charge, it’s willful violation of a court order.

Hans61

Or being disruptive to court proceedings 

JNDATHP

If you’re still interested in a vehicle for AZ, I would suggest a 4WD (but not a dually) or AWD with selective dis-engagement of AWD for those times you need power at different wheels when in the sand, mud, hard crust, floods and snow. Yes, snow because it does happen. 

If just on tarmac roadways, I would choose AWD anything because during the wet season you will have rain water and oil & grease mixed together. 

thetrim

He should've stopped more Asians for entering the country illegal.   That's good police work right there and would help him against the racial profiling charge I guess.    

westernbbq

But this was criminal contempt, not civil comtempt.  Im not a lawyer but an anti arpaio lawyer gave me his opinion which was pretty clear.  6th amendment protection applicable here was not afforded the defendant...

JohnInCarolina

Arpaio is one of the worst human beings walking the earth.  Full stop.  

HeavyG

westernbbq said:

But this was criminal contempt, not civil comtempt.  Im not a lawyer but an anti arpaio lawyer gave me his opinion which was pretty clear.  6th amendment protection applicable here was not afforded the defendant...

Didn't SCOTUS reject Arpaio's appeal/argument that he should have been able to have a jury trial?

All part of the deep state witch hunt I guess.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

JohnInCarolina

westernbbq said:

But this was criminal contempt, not civil comtempt.  Im not a lawyer but an anti arpaio lawyer gave me his opinion which was pretty clear.  6th amendment protection applicable here was not afforded the defendant...

There's no right to a jury trial for criminal contempt when the prison sentence is six months or less.  So, 6th amendment protection doesn't apply. 

https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-06/06-criminal-proceedings-to-which-the-guarantee-applies.html

Arpaio's own lawyers granted this fact in their own arguments, by the way.  

nolaegghead

jeffwit

So to recap: Nola pretends to be Ozzy and moving to Arizona, which has evolved/devolved into a discussion of criminal vs. non-criminal contempt in the Arpiao case. On a barbecue forum. 
God, I love this place. 

JohnInCarolina

jeffwit said:

So to recap: Nola pretends to be Ozzy and moving to Arizona, which has evolved/devolved into a discussion of criminal vs. non-criminal contempt in the Arpiao case. On a barbecue forum. 
God, I love this place. 

nolaegghead

Want!