[hammer4nc]

Tourist jailed over marshmallows

By Ann W. O'Neill
Staff Writer
Posted June 19 2004

Hope Clarke, a teacher's aide from a small mountain town in Wyoming, may think twice about her next vacation.

She was led away in handcuffs from the cruise ship Fascination at dawn on Friday, after a spot security check at the Port of Miami.

She spent a precious day of a romantic summer break behind bars -- all because of a bag of marshmallows that got her in trouble during last summer's vacation.

Her story, a mix of bungling federal bureaucracy and national security jitters, came out Friday in U.S. District Court in Miami. It began with a bench warrant out of a Wyoming federal court, alleging Clarke had failed to pay a $50 ticket last summer. Her name wound up in a federal database.

She'd been cited for an obscure federal offense, "improper food storage at a national park," after leaving a bag of marshmallows out at a campsite at Yellowstone Park. The park has strict food storage laws intended to thwart marauding bears.

Clarke, 32, insisted in court that she used her credit card to pay the $50 ticket. Studying a copy of the citation, U.S. Magistrate John J. O'Sullivan agreed she'd made good on the fine. "This ticket has been paid. This woman should not be in custody," the judge said, ordering her immediate release.

When Assistant U.S. Attorney Peter Outerbridge protested that there might be "some discrepancy" between Clarke's story and the documents, the judge added, "Seven hours in jail, I think, is a suitable punishment for leaving marshmallows out at a camp site."

"I apologize to you," O'Sullivan added, looking down from the bench at Clarke, who was fighting back tears.

"We were acting on what we believed was accurate information," said Zach Mann, a spokesman at Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which conducted the random check. He said agents merely were enforcing the bench warrant.

Mann added that ICE inspections of cruise ships have been going on for years.

Luggage is inspected and passenger lists are routinely screened, he added. Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the ICE has tried to inspect every ship that comes into port.

Clarke teaches 4-year-olds enrolled in a Head Start program. Two hours after the judge ordered her freed, she walked out of the U.S. marshal's office of the federal courthouse in Miami and into the arms of her fiancé, auto mechanic Floyd Leonard, 41.

While in custody, Clarke was photographed and fingerprinted. She said she endured harsh language and catcalls from male prisoners. She became so upset she vomited. Mostly, she said, she cried.

Clarke and Leonard were on the final leg of a four-day Carnival cruise from Miami to Key West, Cozumel and back.

Staff Writer Jaime Hernandez contributed to this report.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Some thoughts:

1. In the enforcement system, once a warrant has been issued, no one seems to care if its for a mass murderer, or a "marshmallow crime". Should the agents acting on this faulty citation be held acountable, or should they be able to just shrug their shoulders, say "I was just following orders", and go on their merry way?

2. Is it possible that this mismanagement of limited resources is a good example why truly dangerous crimes go unpunished? How many times have the resident apologists on THR exclaimed "Well, the (insert alphabet agency here) is too busy to worry about (insert your anecdote here)? Of course, their solution would be ever increasing funding, instead of more focused efforts.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Link: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/palmbeach/sfl-pmarshmallow19jun19,0,2529872.story?coll=sfla-news-palm

[4v50 Gary]

Marshmallow related, but the confinement was because of the bench warrant.

[DorGunR]

Sniff, sniff..............I smell money.

[CEShooter]

Doesn't sound like that big of deal to me. Some sort of error (probably clerical) started the snowball rolling and after the proper channels were followed this lady unfortunately ended up in custody. Camping safety as I've known it has always said you never leave food out to attract animals. I personally don't want a bear coming into my camp who has lost all fear of humans because someone was to ignorant/lazy/distracted to police their site.

DorGunR - Man, I'm glad you don't know who I work for because if you can justify lawsuits over records keeping errors that lead to larger problems you'd probably own every single business I've worked for. (And probably every business in the US)

[DorGunR]

DorGunR - Man, I'm glad you don't know who I work for because if you can justify lawsuits over records keeping errors that lead to larger problems you'd probably own every single business I've worked for. (And probably every business in the US)

CEShooter........I didn't say I thought it was justified......but I know people and I'll bet a case of ammo that it's gonna happen.

[CEShooter]

DorGunR - I apologize. I interpreted it as you were incouraging her to sue which just disgusts me. But I think that if you can find someone to take you up on that bet you'll soon be a case of ammo richer.

[Wildalaska]

Agreed with Gary...

Please note that law enforcement outside the jusidcition where the bench warrant was issued has no discretion whatsoever. You must arrest. Only a judge or magistrate can clear the matter up.

I used to tell my clients that if they paid a fine or ticket, carry the reciept with them for at least two years. Hell I still got one in my truck for a ticket I paid 5 years ago.

WildmistakeshappenAlaska

[Hawkmoon]

1. In the enforcement system, once a warrant has been issued, no one seems to care if its for a mass murderer, or a "marshmallow crime". Should the agents acting on this faulty citation be held acountable, or should they be able to just shrug their shoulders, say "I was just following orders", and go on their merry way?
The agents "acting" on the faulty citation had no way to know it was faulty. They are not to blame. The problem lies with whoever failed to record that the fine had been paid, and who failed to cancel the warrant.

And the prosecutor who tried to argue with the judge that "there might be a discrepancy" should be boiled in oil. I agree with the judge -- 7 hours in jail is punishment aplenty for leaving out a bag of marshmallows.

I do, however, wonder why immigration officials are serving domestic warrants.

[TallPine]

Are you not allowed to eat anymore in national parks?

So if I set my hamburger down on the table to take a drink from a coke, does that mean I am breaking the law?

Might as well just collect the picnic tables and burn them for firewood ...

[stevelyn]

Ahhh......the Nazi ParkStaatzPolizie.

The main reason I've never visited Denali nor do I ever intend to step inside the the boundries of this "national treasure" :rolleyes: is because of of the restrictions and rules for going inside the park.
No guns. No motor vehicles. Efforts to shut down and raize the Kantishna Lodge.
I have a far better experience running a boat and hanging out along the Yukon River.
As for Denali, I'll restrict my park experience to driving between Fairbanks and Anchorage.

I wonder why immigration officials are serving domestic warrant?

The warrant was issued by a federal district judge. Immigration agents are federal agents enforcing federal law and serving federal warrants regardless of the originating agency (FBI, NPS, USFWS). Federal warrants issued by U.S. Ditrict Court judges and magistrates are binding nationwide and can be served by any federal agent with enforcement powers.

[Erik]

"I wonder why immigration officials are serving domestic warrant?"

While the articles doesn't specifically outline the chain of events, it is evident that the subject was returning from international waters and thus subject to Customs and Border Protection (CBP - formally INS and USCS) inspection, which would eventually land her in Investigations and Criminal Enforcement (ICE - formerly Immigration and Customs Enforcement/ formerly parts of Immigration and Customs among others) custody for a federal warrant.

[Jeff White]

hammer4nc said;
1. In the enforcement system, once a warrant has been issued, no one seems to care if its for a mass murderer, or a "marshmallow crime". Should the agents acting on this faulty citation be held acountable, or should they be able to just shrug their shoulders, say "I was just following orders", and go on their merry way?

It is the responsibilty of the agency that enetered the warrant into NCIC to make certain it's valid. The originating agency is the only agency that can remove the entry. The officers who arrested her are blameless. They have to rely on the information the originating agency entered into NCIC. I don't know of any agency that will actually make a warrant arrest on an NCIC hit with dispatch confirming that the warrant is valid through telex or by telephone.

The only place to sort these things out is in court. It sounds like that is exactly what happened. The assistant US attorney who argued for that there must have been some discrepancy between the creit card records and the US District Court's records probably isn't fit to prosecute overtime parking cases.

All in all it looks like the system worked. She may have a civil action against the court that failed to post her payment of the fine and caused the bench warrant to be issued.

hammer4nc,
The officers have no recourse but to act on an NCIC hit. You have to assume it's valid. Like I said earlier, every agency I know of detains the person, short of actual arrest until the warrant is confirmed as valid. If I had stopped her driving through the town I work in for a traffic offense, and the warrant was confirmed after checking with the originator, I'd have arrested her too.

You have no idea of the stories that we hear. Once I had a person whose DL came back suspended hand me a letter from his attorney stating that the Secretary of State had suspended his license in error and that it would soon be cleared up. Well, a private attorney is not the issuing authority for driving permits in Illinois. I arrested him for driving while suspended or revoked. Now if he had court papers signed by a judge ordering his license reinstated it would have been different. Even if the woman in question had been able to show the officers her credit card statement, they still would have had to arrest her or risk being held in contempt themselves.

I hope that the victim collects some damages and it teaches the Federal Court to be more careful with their record keeping.

Jeff

[El Tejon]

Jeff, you should know how the King grants immunity to himself for these types of things.:D

SNAFU. If it can go wrong, it will. As WildI'mnotgrumpytodayforsomereasonAlaska sez, expect it to go wrong and you'll be just fine.:D

[AZRickD]

The issue is not whether this woman has been wronged. Clearly she was robbed of seven hours of her freedom and treated like a common criminal, which she is not.

The issue is which federal agency is liable for the damage so that large sums of money will be sent to her to make her whole (should she sue, and I hope, I hope, I hope she does). Too bad the individual(s) responsible for this can't be made an example of.

May she retire early and comfortably.

Rick

[Rebeldon]

I think it's better to get fined than to get mauled by a bear because you didn't store your food properly. But being jailed is a little rough.

[AZRickD]

Jailed....months later for a record-keeping error.

$$$$

Rick

[mountainclmbr]

Sounds to me like street gangs could cause people major grief if they went around removing parking tickets from under the windshield wipers.

It also sounds like a government that is addicted to ever more money is more dangerous than a wild bear!

[JPL]

You know what the bear makes with the marshamallows?

Spoors...

And they're already chocolate colored. :)

[jimpeel]

The food storage regulations are for the protection of the stupid and those in their vicinity. They tried to encourage people to store their foodstuffs proparly to avoid animal engagements but to no avail. People simply ignored common sense and people died or were injured as a result.

The food storage regs come under the governmental duty to "provide for the general welfare" and the protection of the masses from harm by the acts of another.

I say she has no case but will likely procede with a lawsuit anyway. She will also likely win.

[Chris Rhines]

As well she should. The issue is not whether she stored food improperly - she did, and was nominally cited and fined for it*. The issue is that, due to burecratic incompetence, this woman was robbed of seven hours of her life that she will never get back. Mistakes that cost people their liberty should be compensated for with cash and firings.

* - Whether the fine was justified or not is a whole 'nother issue.

- Chris

[CEShooter]

Can someone please tell me where it says that gov't employees are above paperwork mistakes? Yeah, let's tie up the legal system with more lawsuits because someone was inconvienced. All you greedy people who are looking to get rich quick over a clerical error I would like to thank you for helping turn America into the greed driven moral cespool it is, for increased insurance rates, medical costs, and the since of intitlement so strong in the lazy and weak. What happened to this lady is called life. Mistakes happen and yes innocent people do have to deal with them. She has every right to be pissed but entitlement to money, give me a break. It's like some lawyer from Japan said, "If a person here gets hit by a foul ball they say, 'It is my honor', if they get hit by a foul ball in America they sue." But this is getting away from the thread. This lady got caught up in an innocent mistake after all of the proper steps were taken, the error was corrected, end of story. She's now got a good story to tell/bitch about at the water cooler. That's it.

[twency]

She's now got a good story to tell/bitch about at the water cooler. That's it.
Ammendment V: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Yes, the violation of this lady's rights was relatively minor, compared to how gross some civil rights violations can be. But the fact remains that she was improperly deprived of her liberty. Her civil rights were violated.

Should she get millions of dollars of compensation? I don't think so. But neither should she be told (in essence) to just suck it up and deal.

Clearly the judge quoted in the article thought that even if she hadn't paid the ticket, the time she was imprisoned more than paid her supposed debt to society. ("Seven hours in jail, I think, is a suitable punishment for leaving marshmallows out at a camp site.")

Given that she apparently had paid the thing, she was forced to pay twice for the same "crime".

The more we let "minor" civil rights violations go unanswered, the more "minor" civil rights violations there will be.

-twency
________________
"The parent who complained, Karen Young, doesn't want fish-shaped toy guns in her house because she accidentally shot an ex-boyfriend one time when the gun she was beating him with went off."

[longrifleman]

Can someone please tell me where it says that gov't employees are above paperwork mistakes?

We all make mistakes. The difference is if I make a mistake on some paperwork (IRS Form 1040) I will be fined or sent to jail. Govt employees are just supposed to be given a pass?

That kind of double standard is unacceptable and is a cause of most of the public's resentment of govt.

[JPL]

Hey this is America, where every person who is subject of a mistake is entitled to a lawyer and a couple million compensation.

Ain't America grand?

[hammer4nc]

Buried by paper

Warrants pile up faster than deputies can serve them

BY GLENN SMITH
Of The Post and Courier Staff

Sheriff's Deputy Bill Van Horn peered through the dark window of a James Island condominium, scanning for signs of life as he loudly rapped on the front door and announced he had a warrant to serve.

Van Horn was greeted with silence, just as he had been on his last two trips to the home.

Charleston County Sheriff's Deputy Bill Van Horn, with backup from Deputy D. R. DeLong, looks through a window at a residence on James Island as he attempts to serve a bench warrant from Beaufort County.
The deputy was fairly certain that the condo was serving as a hideout for a 31-year-old man who skipped out on child support payments in Beaufort County. The man's mother had confirmed as much in a previous visit. Through the window, Van Horn could even see the tussled couch where the man apparently spent the night.

The problem was catching him there.

"I don't see any movement," Van Horn said, shaking his head as he walked down the empty driveway. "I'll probably leave my card for the third time and wait to see if we get some more information."

The warrant could soon end up back in the stacks of nearly 45,000 outstanding warrants at the Charleston County Sheriff's Office. The warrants, which fill an entire wall of doubled-sided shelves, stem from a cornucopia of offenses, from bad checks and missed court dates to rapes and murders.

These papers, a few of which date back 20 years or more, are waiting to be served on thousands of suspected criminals and scofflaws who continue to walk the streets. As deputies try to whittle down the swollen backlog, hundreds of new warrants pour in each month. The bulk are generated by bad checks and people who run afoul of the court system.

"What we're seeing from the numbers is that warrants are coming in faster than they can be served, and it's growing exponentially," said Sheriff's Sgt. B.K. Williams, a warrants division supervisor.

Charleston County authorities hardly are alone. Law enforcement agencies across the country have struggled to keep pace with the rising tide of legal paperwork.

Nearly 1 million wanted people from across the country are listed in the National Crime Information Center database. That represents only a small percentage of all fugitives, however, because the database only includes people wanted for felonies and serious misdemeanors that qualify for extradition. Nearly 30,000 people on that list are from South Carolina.

"Warrants have always been a problem everywhere," said Chief Deputy C.W. "Butch"Henerey of the Berkeley County Sheriff's Office, which has more than 12,000 active warrants on file.

As police keep hunting and checking on tips, the danger exists that these fugitives will go on to commit more crimes. Consider:

-- In March, a North Charleston police officer had his face sliced several times by a woman who attacked him with her fingernails at a traffic stop. Celisa Jones, 37, had been on the run for more than a decade from a 1993 warrant for an illegal gun purchase, police said.

-- In October 2002, a 24-year-old man wanted on warrants for a police chase six months earlier is accused of injuring a North Charleston police officer with gunfire at a mobile home park. Demaul Simmons, who was wounded when police returned fire, also had outstanding probation warrants, police said.

-- In July 2002, 22-year-old Jesse Waylon Sapp shot and killed veteran Highway Patrol Cpl. Kenneth Johnson, 38, at a Berkeley County traffic checkpoint. At the time, Sapp had been wanted on warrants for a year for escaping from a work release program in May 2001.

Authorities say they give dangerous suspects and crimes against people first priority, but it's the warrants for lesser crimes that are fueling the backlog. More than 50 percent of the active warrants on file at the Charleston County Sheriff's Office are for people who wrote bad checks, failed to show up for court or didn't comply with court orders, Williams said.

Deputies caught up with one woman who had 120 warrants for writing bad checks. Though her arrest cleared those warrants from the books, she later blew off her court date, prompting a judge to issue bench warrants for each of the 120 counts she was facing. Deputies were right back where they started.

Charleston County has nine deputies dedicated to serving warrants, and other officers also chip in. Deputies serve an average of 855 warrants every month, but more than 1,400 new warrants are generated in the same time period, Williams said. The sheriff's office handles warrants from all the courts in the county except municipal courts, as well as out-of-county and out-of-state warrants.

"It's an enormous task," said Sheriff's Capt. Dana Valentine. "They set up sweeps, work different hours, call in other units to help. They're doing everything they can think of to reduce the amount of warrants, but it's just overwhelming. No matter what we do, we can't keep up."

North Charleston police, who have about 3,700 active warrants, have two officers assigned to serving warrants; but they want to add at least three more to keep up with the demand, said Capt. Marie Henderson. About 60 percent of the department's outstanding warrants are for people who didn't show for court or comply with a judge's orders. Still, the backlog also includes several felonies, including charges for one murder, five armed robberies, eight assaults with intent to kill and six rapes, she said.

Marissa Ladson, supervisor in the warrants division of the Charleston County Sheriff's Office, checks outstanding warrants.
Some petty offenders will turn themselves in after getting a call or letter from police informing them of a warrant for their arrest. Many suspects, however, play a cat-and-mouse game with authorities, using aliases, moving frequently and getting friends and relatives to lie for them.

Earlier this month, Charleston County deputies found a man who was wanted on 11 outstanding warrants hiding under the floor of his Hollywood mobile home after his common-law wife told them he had moved to Colorado. Deputies found his hiding place after hearing a noise and moving aside a garbage bag covering a hole cut in the floor.

Sometimes, patrol officers can help clear old warrants when they make traffic stops or arrest wanted suspects for other crimes. Such was the case when police in Connecticut recently apprehended a man wanted for a 1985 rape in North Charleston, said Valentine, who worked on the case when she was a patrol deputy.

Investigators say part of the problem in tracking down wanted offenders is people give them precious little information to work with at times.

Van Horn went to a West Ashley home last week to look for a 38-year-old man wanted in Greenwood County for failing to pay his child support. The warrant included the man's name, race and age, but few other identifying details. No photo was included.

"You don't really know who you're dealing with sometimes," he said.

Henerey said his department has a warrant on file from 1989 for a woman wanted for writing bad checks. The victims provided authorities with the suspect's name, a possible address and nothing else. The chances of actually serving that warrant are close to nil.

"Other than her name, we don't have anything to go on," he said. "The warrant doesn't even say whether she is white or black ... Unless she came in and admitted to writing this check, I have no way of proving it's her or not."

As police continue to hunt for the wanted, they also are looking for solutions to keep the backlog from growing.

Charleston police, who have about 3,300 unresolved warrants, are clearing many bad check warrants by giving scofflaws a chance to pay their debts in full rather than go to jail, said Sgt. Regina Wilhite. Police get rid of the warrants and save time, victims get their money back and offenders avoid jail, she said.

Police use a similar approach for misdemeanor bench warrants, giving offenders an opportunity to avoid jail by paying their outstanding court fines. They have to pay at least 50 percent up front and settle the bill within two weeks or they end up in custody. Wilhite said the system has driven up collection rates and cut down on the time and expense of jailing petty offenders.

"People are much more willing to come in and bring money to avoid going to jail for 20 or 30 days," she said. "It's not fair to inundate the county jail when there is another option."

Dorchester County is one of four counties participating in a program aimed at reducing bad check warrants. Instead of merchants applying for multiple warrants from a magistrate, the solicitor's office tracks down offenders and collects restitution and court fees. The business gets its money and offenders avoid jail because the process occurs before a warrant is even filed. The unit is funded by a $50 service fee placed on bounced checks.

"We don't have any hard data yet, but the folks I've talked to think it's a good program," said First Circuit Solicitor Robbie Robbins. "Anything that helps law enforcement not have to serve bad check warrants has to be a good thing."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Link to story: http://www.charleston.net/stories/062004/loc_20warrants2.shtml
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Comment: After reading this article, almost justifies the cynical view that "everyone's a criminal, that just hasn't been arrested yet!". At least some at the local level are trying to distinguish between more serious crimes, in light of the overwhelming volume. Contrast to the lamebrain approach taken by the Miami US Attorney in the first story, (and applauded by some on this board i.e., "no discretion in the matter"). Anyone care to argue that tying up a cell for a day, all attendant paperwork, was a wise use of resources for the marshmallow lady (even assuming the fine wasn't paid, as she asserts it was)? I thought that some intelligence, and judgement was why we these US attorneys were chosen in the first place!

[Warren]

I wonder how diferent things would have gone for her if Yellowstone was privately owned.

I don't think the hypothetical owners of the park would have set up a system that would allow this sort of thing to happen.

[CEShooter]

True this was a "minor" infraction, but how many larger criminals have been brought down by "minor" infractions? If I remember all of these correctly, Capone was brought down over a minor tax law, Tim McVeigh was caught over a minor traffic citation, and one of the terrorist for 9/11 was stopped and then let go over a minor traffic violation. Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. Heck, I'd bet a weeks pay that if this lady had been a terrorist and a week later had blew up a nuke in some major city that this board would be screaming about how the gov't didn't do its job when they ignored this minor warrant to go after the "real" criminals. But in the big picture I'm the type of guy that thinks if you do something wrong and get caught your punishment should be inforced as much as reasonably possible. A crime is a crime is a crime type of mentality I guess. And I also belief that the founding fathers included the 5th Amendment with intent playing a large role. Judging from the biographies I've read of them, they were more of the practical mindset than the literal one.

[sendec]

And how could this all have been avoided?

Mistakes happen. I am amazed by the immediate call for a suit, when we are the first to criticize others for a entitlement/ victimhood mindset. Yeah it's unpleasant, but the root cause of her inconvenience was her inability to follow a rule that was put into place because people could'nt follow even simpler rules like don't feed the 2,000 pound predators. Violation of her civil rights, well, if you want to make a federal case out of it.

I have no idea how many citations the Central Violation Bureau handles, but probability dictates that there will be errors.

I would prefer that the thread be titled something different, like "tourist jailed because idiots get eaten by animals doing what animals do ordinarily when tempted by tasty morsels, kept in either plastic bags or sleeping bags."

[madcowburger]

Let me see if I've got this straight: you can't even go on a cruise now without being subject to detainment, search, interrogation, and warrant checks? *Is* there still any way to travel unmolested by men with guns and badges? (Believe me, *walking* sure ain't it.)

And if the food storage regulations in national parks are for the protection of people, who are the "no firearms" regulations supposed to protect?

Personally, I stay the hell out of national parks, just like I stay the hell out of places like Ohio, Illinois, California, Massachusetts, and New York.

The rule used to be: "Some days you eat the bear, and some days the bear eats you." But the new rule in national parks is "Some days the bear eats you, and then the bear eats you on all the other days too, since we'd rather see you eaten by a bear than able to protect yourself."

Now I know better than to ever go on a cruise as well. :mad:

MCB

[0007]

Not wishing to splash gasoline on the flames, but how did people avoid being eaten by bears for the 150 years or so before some bureaucrat came up with this rule?
If you aren't smart enough to avoid being eaten by a bear(the two "greenies" in Alaska come to mind), then maybe you DO need a rule telling you what do do. But if you arrest someone AFTER they have paid their fine for violating one of YOUR silly rules, somebody else should also get burned.
And if you can't keep track of who's paid and who hasn't, well, maybe you have too many rules.

[c_yeager]

Not wishing to splash gasoline on the flames, but how did people avoid being eaten by bears for the 150 years or so before some bureaucrat came up with this rule?

Umm, actually they didnt.

Let me see if I've got this straight: you can't even go on a cruise now without being subject to detainment, search, interrogation, and warrant checks? *Is* there still any way to travel unmolested by men with guns and badges? (Believe me, *walking* sure ain't it.)

OK, When someone LEAVES THE COUNTRY and comes back you DONT think we should check them out? I mean how do ww know she isnt Bin Laden in a dress? Are you in favor of open borders too?

Frankly i think extensive checks at the BORDERS are one of the most SANE things the Fed does.

[hammer4nc]

0007 asked:
how did people avoid being eaten by bears for the 150 years or so before some bureaucrat came up with this rule?
c yeager answered:
Umm, actually they didnt.
Again, some perspective: http://www.yellowstone-bearman.com/yell_bear_maul_info.html

From 1980 to 1997, over 47 million people visited Yellowstone National Park (YNP). During the same period, 23 people were injured by bears. The chance of being injured by a bear while in the park is approximately 1 in 2.1 million.

Yellowstone was established in the 1870's, now gets 3 million visitors a year. While we could debate the efficacy of the bear/food rules, this wasn't the main thrust of the story.

C yeager may have a point that checking for warrants might be a wise action. However, in light of our unsecured borders/lax checking elsewhere, checking returning cruise ship passenger lists may arguably be nothing more than window dressing, from a national security standpoint.

Returning to the central focus, and the one that caused this story to get noticed in the first place, once a NCIC "hit" was flagged in the computer, were the subsequent actions reasonable? Cost effective? What was the prosecutor trying to accomplish, when he read that the source of the "hit" was a food storage citation in a national park, yet still decided to imprison and arraign the lady, rather than just issue a paperwork citation?

Curiously, and invariably, some on this board can be counted on to applaud when a citizen is hurt by govt. "They deserved it, yeah baby!"

If the official acts like a "mind numbed robot" (to quote a Rush phrase), in light of the facts of the case, even better. I guess expecting the officials to exercise some discretion, and treat the enforcement resource as a valuable, limited commodity (not waste it meaninglessly), is too much to ask?

[Firethorn]

Warrents are checked for basically every time an officer runs a name. Stopped for a traffic violation? Warrent search done. Come into the country through an airport? Warrent search done. Get checked on a cruise line? Warrent search done. Incidentally, I can think of a number of ways for illegals to sneak into the US on board a cruise ship.

I'm all for open immigration, as long as they inprocess and go through the legal procedures. There's no reason for us to let known international criminals in, for example.

[ravinraven]

...torque me off. Especially when some idiot threatens me for something that I have not been wrong about. I had the IRS after me for not making a payment I HAD made. Not only that, but they quoted the exact amount I owed and had no way of knowing that except having received the payment and the papers that went with it. And the check had cleared. They still threatened me with all kinds of violence if I did not fill out some forms for them to use to decide if I had paid or not.

I was talking to an idiot in Andover, Mass IRS center. I yelled into the phone: "YOU IDIOTS MADE THE MISTAKE. YOU COULD NOT KNOW HOW MUCH I OWED WITHOUT HAVING RECEIVED IT. AND THE CHECK HAS CLEARED. NOW YOU EITHER DROP THIS NOW OR WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A VERY STRONGLY WORDED NEWSPAPER ARTICLE AND A VERY EXPENSIVE LAWSUIT."

The idiot [female] kept up the blather about what I was going to have to do. I shouted again into the phone. DID I MAKE MYSELF PERFECTLY CLEAR? She kept blathering. I shouted about PERFECTLY CLEAR again. She kept it up. I shouted again. I went around with the b.... I'll bet twenty times before she hung up.

I had everybody in the office rolling on the floor. I never heard another word from the idiots. That was thirty years ago and a couple of the guys are still laughing.

I did the same thing four years ago when the DMV here in good old NY noticed someway that I had not insured a car that I had sold and transferred the policy to the new[er] one. They sent me a threatening letter and I got on the blower and told then that I sold the car, the new owner insured it and so forth.

The dunce on the other end of the phone said that I would have to get a copy of the bill of sale of the old car to prove I wasn't still driving it.

This time I remained low voiced and said that since it was their screw up, they could figure it out any way they wanted to but if they carried out any of "your idiotic threats" we will have a nice big lawsuit.

I don't think they like lawsuits.

I hope the gal in the story takes these anal orifices for about five million.

rr

[jimpeel]

My favorite ploy when threatening legal action for these types is to ask "And what was your name again?"

"Joe Doaks"

"Is your name 'Joe' or 'Joseph'?"

"Joseph."

"And how do you spell 'Doaks'?"

"D-o-a-k-s."

"Thank you. I just want to get the name correct for the lawsuit. Have you ever been named as co-respondent in a lawsuit before this, Joseph Doaks?"

They tend to get a bit more cooperative after that.

[MeekandMild]

Let me get this straight. Was this FELONY marshmallow carry or MISDEMEANOR marshmallow carry?

[c_yeager]

"Thank you. I just want to get the name correct for the lawsuit. Have you ever been named as co-respondent in a lawsuit before this, Joseph Doaks?"

They tend to get a bit more cooperative after that.

I take it you havent actually tried this very often. I get threatened with being "sued" just about every day. And i bet everyone in law enforcement gets the same treatment. Getting yet another "lawsuit" is more grounds for a chuckle than fear.

[13A]

Rainraven. How dare you ruffle your master's feathers.

I wouldn't try that with today's "friendlier" IRS agents.

[dustind]

CEShooter said:Can someone please tell me where it says that gov't employees are above paperwork mistakes? Yeah, let's tie up the legal system with more lawsuits because someone was inconvienced. All you greedy people who are looking to get rich quick over a clerical error I would like to thank you for helping turn America into the greed driven moral cespool it is, for increased insurance rates, medical costs, and the since of intitlement so strong in the lazy and weak. What happened to this lady is called life. Mistakes happen and yes innocent people do have to deal with them. She has every right to be pissed but entitlement to money, give me a break. It's like some lawyer from Japan said, "If a person here gets hit by a foul ball they say, 'It is my honor', if they get hit by a foul ball in America they sue." But this is getting away from the thread. This lady got caught up in an innocent mistake after all of the proper steps were taken, the error was corrected, end of story. She's now got a good story to tell/bitch about at the water cooler. That's it. There are other ways to run the system so that people are not... photographed and fingerprinted. She said she endured harsh language and catcalls from male prisoners. She became so upset she vomited. Mostly, she said, she cried. This was preventable. There is no incentive for the feds to fix the system unless people sue. She has the right to collect damages. An honest mistake within any competent system would not have involved her riding inside of a police car. They should have given her the benefit of the doubt because it was only one ticket. She would have had to face it again if she was lying, there was no reason to arrest her over it.

If I make a mistake and harm someone they are within their rights to make me pay for it. That is the reason why I have liability insurance on my car and motorcycle.

No one said she should become an instant millionare, but she should collect damages.

CEShooter said: Heck, I'd bet a weeks pay that if this lady had been a terrorist and a week later had blew up a nuke in some major city that this board would be screaming about how the gov't didn't do its job when they ignored this minor warrant to go after the "real" criminals. That is false. I would not want the governmnent throwing people in jail for no reason in the hopes that they may get lucky and stop a serious crime from happening.

Capone was brought down for millions (IIRC) of dollars of tax evasion. He sat in jail for commiting the crime of tax evasion.

[Frohickey]

When Assistant U.S. Attorney Peter Outerbridge protested that there might be "some discrepancy" between Clarke's story and the documents, the judge added, "Seven hours in jail, I think, is a suitable punishment for leaving marshmallows out at a camp site."

"I apologize to you," O'Sullivan added, looking down from the bench at Clarke, who was fighting back tears.

"We were acting on what we believed was accurate information," said Zach Mann, a spokesman at Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which conducted the random check. He said agents merely were enforcing the bench warrant.


I think that O'Sullivan should start an inquiry as to who is to blame for the clerical error that showed Clarke to not have paid the fine, when in fact she did.

I think that Asst.US Atty Peter Outerbridge should accompany Clarke on a replacement romantic cruise after the culprit who made the clerical error has been found and made to pay via garnished wages, for a cruise. As for Peter Outerbridge, "Seven weeks in the cruise ship brig, I think, is a suitable punishment for making a inane stupid statement in court." :fire: :cuss: :fire: