Thursday, July 14, 2005

Trial of the New Ipswich Trespassing Case

District Court Judge L. Phillips Runyon, who presided over the case of the illegal immigrant arrested by New Ipswich, NH police chief W. Garrett Chamberlain on the charge of trespassing (link to original incident posted here), ruled to delay the hearing until the cases in neighboring New Husdon, which were inspired by the action in New Ipswich, go to trial. However, that trial too will feature the same defense lawyers & the same judge.

Chief Chamberlain’s arrest of Ramirez was based the trespass code in the New Hampshire (RSA 635:2), which states that- criminal trespass involves a person who, “knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so . . . enters or remains in any place.” The reason for arrest being, Ramirez is not “licensed or privileged” to enter New Hampshire.

“What I’m trying to do, is find a manner in which we can get the federal government to step up to the plate and start helping out,” Chamberlain told the Associated Press. “It’s basically a situation here where right now if you make it past the border patrol, you’re free and clear. . . . What I’m hoping to do is find a way that if the feds aren’t going to help us out, then local enforcement can take care of it.”

The high powered lawyers, procured by the ACLU, and paid for by the Mexican government have intimidated the police department into dropping one part of the charge - the “enters” portion, leaving only “remains,” apparently because when first questioned by police he had already stopped inside the town. I remain baffled by how a person "remains" in town without "entering" the town first. I am sure the law firm must be aware of some law of nature of which I am not.

Another interesting note was that,
Among those in the crowd was Porfirio Thierry Munoz-Ledo, consul general for the Mexican consulate in Boston. The Mexican government has expressed concern about the New Ipswich arrest and has been helping to pay Ramirez’ legal fees and driving him and his father to court.

Is this the best use of the money of the Mexican taxpayer? The exorbitant fees paid to these lawyers could easily be used to open several schools or several employment-generating businesses or provide health care for many people in Mexico. The fact that the Mexican government chooses to spend money on lawyers for Mexicans who violate America law rather than on the needs of the law abiding people in Mexico is very telling.

Incidentally, several state representatives, including Lee Slocum, R-Amherst, and Andrew Renzullo and Jordan Ulery, both Hudson Republicans are urging the local House Immigration Caucus to consider bills that would provide a legal framework to trespassing charges. Should they succeed, the federal government would find it-self hard put not to act on the issue.

Another issue is the employers who hire illegals. Despite the charges & trial, Ramirez's employer has yet to be charged with any crime by the Officials at Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The reason they cite is the numerous incidents that have occurred involving the use of fake Social Security numbers. Such incidents are indicative of the need for a better system of identification verification in the US.

Comments:
It brings up a nice angle: if the Mexican government is paying this guy's legal costs, are they saying that they take responsibility for the actions of their citizens here?

The broader questions are if it is gainst the law for this guy to be here, to be working here, to be driving here, to maybe illegally using federal & state documents, then why aren't the laws being enforced against him and those who assist him?

That's all I want to know, under what legal basis are the laws being ignored and unenforced? Plus it would help to know what other laws aren't being enforced.
 
Given the money and effort the Mexican government is putting into this case, one would almost think they WANT their people to come here.

Hey, that's an idea! We strike a bargain with the Mexicans along the following lines:

They can send as many of their people across the Rio Grande as they want, and we'll take 'em, provided that the Mexican government:

1. Does criminal background checks and provides appropriate documentation / certification that the people coming are Mexican citzens who simply want to escape their s***hole country and live peacefully in the United States;

2. Provide 'stake' money to the immigrants to help them start their new lives here in America;

3. Pay a fee to the state where the immigrant eventually settles to offset the cost of health care, public schooling, etc.

My gosh, I'm a GENIUS!

:-P

Shipwrecked, I'd hate to think how many laws AREN'T enforced. As we NRA members like to point out every time the Congress wants to pass another gun control bill, there are already some 22,000 gun bills on the books across the country. How many more do they need?

By the way, one law that isn't enforced - and the Senate knows it - is the one that requires members of Congress to have their pay docked for every 'unexcused absence'. Some members of Congress (such as Jean-Francois) have missed MANY days, but the Senate refuses to enforce the law.
 
With regard to gun laws, I think the idea is to have a law for each legally owned gun in America! That's why they want more laws! Illegally owned guns are obviously outside the law, and as no-one would dare to commit a crime with an illegal gun, they aren't important. Far better to persecute honest citizens.

I have an idea about Mexicans crossing the Rio Grande. Instead of deporting them back to Mexico, lets dump them at the tip of South America. Then we can see how long it takes them to get back to the US, we could even take bets on it, the proceeds funding the deportations.
 
Wonderful and informative web site.I used information from that site its great.
» »
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
|

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?