Breaking: Ninth Circuit vacates millennium bomber’s sentence
posted at 1:57 pm on January 16, 2007 by Allahpundit
Initially reported by Fox as their having granted him a new trial, which, thankfully (and surprisingly, given which court we’re talking about here), they did not.
He was convicted on nine counts. One count was reversed. So now the district court has to resentence him based on the remaining eight counts. He was originally given 22 years; he could be given the same sentence this time around.
In other words, not a huge deal.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
The outcome may not be a huge deal, but drawing attention to the 9th Circuit’s history is, no? Why is it whenever they make news, it’s for doing something outrageous.
RightWinged on January 16, 2007 at 2:02 PM
After all, it’s the 9th Circuit.
They have 8 more counts to throw out.
Kini on January 16, 2007 at 2:05 PM
It’s a big deal, because any reversal of anything by the 9th
CircusCircuit Court sets precedent for future rulings and convictions.Lawrence on January 16, 2007 at 2:06 PM
Nice to see the 9th circus is still living up to it’s ideals of sticking it’s collective finger in the eye of America. Just another glaring example of why it is so dangerous to put dems in charge. With a dem president and congress, they will replicate the 9th circus nationwide…
ritethinker on January 16, 2007 at 2:06 PM
why does the 9th circuit continuously do this? I still say its the principles of the schpiel
Defector01 on January 16, 2007 at 2:08 PM
Not yet, but give it time.
Rick on January 16, 2007 at 2:17 PM
Not a big deal? I don’t know about that.
The 9th clearly feels that 22 years is too long for the crime of trying to blow up LAX. I think that it isn’t long enough. Before this is over, I feel confident that the 9th will lower the sentence to much less.
After all, to most liberals, domestic terrorism isn’t a crime, it’s just “acting out” because they are “victims” of society.
georgej on January 16, 2007 at 2:18 PM
“In other words, not a huge deal.”
Doesn’t sound like a big deal … I hope Hannity doesn’t go nuts on this.
darwin on January 16, 2007 at 2:18 PM
It’s only a matter of time before “acting out” becomes protected political speech.
Rick on January 16, 2007 at 2:22 PM
Wasn’t the 9th supposed to be split off into a new Circuit? Or is that getting done right after the border fence?
Kid from Brooklyn on January 16, 2007 at 2:26 PM
Like “performance art”?
Kid from Brooklyn on January 16, 2007 at 2:26 PM
Sandy Berger hid the evidence on them.
Yes, this is the case where a lone border agent at Port Angeles foiled the plot and Slick took credit for it.
JammieWearingFool on January 16, 2007 at 2:28 PM
Of all the federal circuits, the decisions out of the 9th are the most overturned at the SCUTUS (Supreme Court of the US) over all other circuits. And the SCUTUS isn’t that great in getting it right, either…
ricer1 on January 16, 2007 at 2:42 PM
What else would you expect from the ninth socialist court of appeals. That mob of leftist lawyers should be disbanded.
rplat on January 16, 2007 at 2:44 PM
Great minds, etc. etc. This I was thinking something similar in my post, and said:
RightWinged on January 16, 2007 at 2:52 PM
In his pants, while sitting on the new border fence (nice one Kid from Brooklyn)
Just an other case of being sloppy, sloppiness, sloppily, sloppililiness, slop, sloppy…..
PinkyBigglesworth on January 16, 2007 at 2:54 PM
I’d sentence him to 31 years not being executed.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on January 16, 2007 at 3:31 PM
I blame conservatives for this. They always want to do away with the Constitution and due process. Then, when it comes back to bite them in the a**, they try to pin it on liberal “activist” courts. Conservative philosophy is dangerous. Terrorists walk free because of conservatives. You give aid and comfort to the enemy. Next time, maybe you should consider supporting the rule of law.
shackler on January 16, 2007 at 4:10 PM
You saw “Terrorists walk free because of conservatives” . . . and I say that’s liberal hogwash.
rplat on January 16, 2007 at 4:19 PM
I’d sentence him to be shot. I’ll gladly buy the bullet.
jasnell on January 16, 2007 at 4:31 PM
I’m not familiar with you shackler, but you sound serious?
RightWinged on January 16, 2007 at 5:15 PM
What??!
The “rule of Law” as you put it is what convicted him in the first place. It is liberal judges overturning it.
Or, are you just making this stuff up to get a rise out of us?
Lawrence on January 16, 2007 at 5:18 PM
Maybe Shackler is being sarcastic (?) doubt it but you never know. Anyway, this should tell everyone all they need to know about the “tolerant” leftist clowns at the 9th Circus. There’s something else I’d like to say but it would probably get me banned. So, I will refrain but I’m pretty sure there are many of you who think the same.
Catie96706 on January 16, 2007 at 5:44 PM
What IS a big deal is that you can plot and attempt to blow up one of the biggest airports in the US (and whoever might be in it) and get 22 years, and, as a border patrol agent, if you shoot at a fleeing illegal (who could be trying to blow up an airport, for all you know) you will get 12 years…
So let’s see, if the lady who stopped this terrorist had somehow shot him in the ass as he tried to run back across the border, SHE would go to jail for 12 years and he could file a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the US…
Wow, just…wow.
NTWR on January 16, 2007 at 5:53 PM
Shackler…nevermind, I’ll wait until there is a response from you to RightWinged, Lawrence and Catie on whether you are being serious.
Rick on January 16, 2007 at 5:55 PM
No, I am being serious. Conservatives are the reason terrorists are set free. Conservatives can’t stand obeying the law, so, instead, they go around it. And then act shocked and offended when judges rule that the law was ignored. Conservatives will get us attacked again. Conservatives are the reason terrorists are set free. Conservatives are a DANGEROUS bunch.
shackler on January 16, 2007 at 6:06 PM
shackler, what the hell are you talking about?? Give me one example of a terrorist being “set free” because of conservatives?
Rick on January 16, 2007 at 6:14 PM
Maybe Shackler would like to address the pardoning of Puerto Rican terrorists at the 11th hour by Bubba Clinton. Of course the cynics in us thought this was a political ploy to help his wife with her election hopes in NY(which has a sizeable PR population). Is this what you mean Shackler by setting terrorists free? Only one problem my friend, Bubba is not a conservative……..
ritethinker on January 16, 2007 at 6:26 PM
Take your time, shackler. Whenever you are ready, I’ll be here waiting for your response.
Rick on January 17, 2007 at 12:01 AM
22 years because he was caught BEFORE he could kill anybody. Pathetic. Reward him for gettin’ snagged. If he had blown up LAX and killed a thousand people, he’d get what, 25 years?
Murder and attempted murder should get the same punishment.
Slacker is just tryin’ to get a response, he has nothing to back up his claim.
Tony737 on January 17, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Re: Shackler. Time to stop feeding this troll.
georgej on January 17, 2007 at 7:11 AM
Shackler, you are so full of $hit that it is most likely you have to cover your ears with Pampers.
A mind (?) is a terrible thing to waste.
hillbillyjim on January 17, 2007 at 11:28 AM
Wow, I go to work and come back to all this badgery. Betcha Jose Padilla gets off because conservatives hate the constitution and can’t stand to obey its conscripts. The dirty bomber. No one wanted due process. Then, when it was clear the courts were going to rule against Bushie, he was put up for trial. Not a chance the charges are gonna stick. Why? Because conservatives hate the rule of law. They hate America and everything it stands for. Oh sure, they liek BBQ, and pickup trucks and hot girls in short skirts. But when it comes down to it, they hate freedom, and liberty, due process, and the rule of law.
shackler on January 17, 2007 at 2:58 PM
Still waiting for a response – every example you mentioned is pure speculation on your part – they are still locked-up. I’ve seen some bad lib arguments, but “conservatives hate the rule of law” may just take the cake (or at least, come in at a close second).
Rick on January 17, 2007 at 3:42 PM
I don’t need examples. I don’t operate in reality. I utilize baseless emotional rhetoric. I learned that trick from Karl Rove.
shackler on January 17, 2007 at 5:43 PM