- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Judge denies Joe Arpaio's request to vacate orders in criminal contempt case.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:18 pm to Giant Leaf
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:18 pm to Giant Leaf
quote:
A presidential pardon wipes a conviction completely clean. It is an absolute power.
So good luck with this passed this stupid arse judge.
A pardon does not remove all guilt.
It is generally acknowledged that a pardon does not compel an expungement of related criminal and judicial records. At least one federal court has addressed this issue, declaring: “[N]o proclamation of the executive has the power and authority ... to order expunction of court records under the aegis of restoring to the pardoned person ‘full ... other rights.’” Unlike states, many of which outline the circumstances under which a person may petition for an expungement of records, there is no general federal statutory procedure addressing how a federal felon can seek an expungement. Moreover, the courts have described expunction as an extraordinary remedy.
United States v. Noonan, 906 F.2d 952, 956 (3d Cir. 1990)
2
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:18 pm to CommoDawg
You should ask for this thread to be deleted at this point bro
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:19 pm to CommoDawg
Do you know an an imputation of guilt is? I wouldn't advise copy and pasting the order if you don't understand what it says.
Additionally....the cited case is a 1915 case and is simply dicta. It was not a ruling the court made. It was a case about a person who did not accept a pardon. The court was opining on why he would do that. The court then made the statement you cite.
Again...you don't know how any of this works.
Additionally....the cited case is a 1915 case and is simply dicta. It was not a ruling the court made. It was a case about a person who did not accept a pardon. The court was opining on why he would do that. The court then made the statement you cite.
Again...you don't know how any of this works.
This post was edited on 10/20/17 at 2:27 pm
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:19 pm to CommoDawg
quote:You're a real believer.
Hopefully the victims of his abuse
Some, perhaps all, of those "victims" were activist "bird dogs".
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:23 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:Maybe I’m misremembering, but I thought accepting a pardon sans a conviction (applicable to Nixon) as an implied admission of guilt. That’s not applicable to many cases, including Arpaio’s, since someone else determined guilt, whether they were truly guilty or not.
Nonsense. Did Nixon admit to any guilt before Ford pardoned him? Among thousands of other pardons that didn't include an admission of guilt.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:29 pm to Volatile
quote:
A pardon does not remove all guilt.
This may be true...but that is not what the case you cited says. It merely says the pardoned party does not have a right to an expunction That is simply a records keeping and documentation issue. Has nothing to do with guilt or innocence.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:30 pm to Giant Leaf
quote:
A presidential pardon wipes a conviction completely clean. It is an absolute power.
You have absolutely no idea what a pardon does.
If you don't understand concepts, please don't try and pretend you do.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:31 pm to Volatile
quote:
A pardon does not remove all guilt.
Yes. It removes all guilt.
Expunging court records of no significance is another issue
If it even matters anymore in the online world where its all published forever
Now if you are going to try to sue a guy because he was guilty of a federal crime and he gets a pardon those court records wont help you. He isnt guilty of a damn thing anymore
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:31 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
This may be true
No. It IS true. Accepting a pardon, means accepting guilt. That's how a pardon works.
Trump can't make him innocent, he can only pardon him.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:32 pm to CommoDawg
quote:
CommoDawg
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:32 pm to LSUconvert
quote:
You have absolutely no idea what a pardon does.
If you don't understand concepts, please don't try and pretend you do.
As Justice Stephen Field wrote in Ex parte Garland (1867), "If granted before conviction, it prevents any of the penalties and disabilities consequent upon conviction from attaching [thereto]; if granted after conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities, and restores him to all his civil rights; it makes him, as it were, a new man, and gives him a new credit and capacity....A pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt of the offender....so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence."
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:32 pm to Giant Leaf
quote:
Yes. It removes all guilt.
No. That's the opposite of what it does. It removes the penalty. To accept a pardon, is to accept guilt of the crime.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:32 pm to CommoDawg
Think how bad you'll be melting when you're in sheriff joes tent camp in Arizona
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:34 pm to Giant Leaf
quote:
As Justice Stephen Field wrote in Ex parte Garland (1867), "If granted before conviction, it prevents any of the penalties and disabilities consequent upon conviction from attaching [thereto]; if granted after conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities, and restores him to all his civil rights; it makes him, as it were, a new man, and gives him a new credit and capacity....A pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt of the offender....so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence."
Ok so are you disagreeing with Justice Stephen Field? He LITERALLY says in what you quoted it removes the PENALTIES.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:35 pm to LSUconvert
quote:
No. That's the opposite of what it does. It removes the penalty. To accept a pardon, is to accept guilt of the crime.
The only thing that matters are the penalties
What are you even talking about
One of the penalties would be culpable in a lawsuit you jackass
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:36 pm to LSUconvert
quote:
No. It IS true. Accepting a pardon, means accepting guilt. That's how a pardon works.
This just isn't true. I don't know what else to tell you.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:36 pm to LSUconvert
quote:In the case of an already existing conviction, wouldn't it just wanted your accepting they you're already convicted? You're not accepting that you're actually guilty, just that the criminal justice system already deemed you guilty, even if you main innocence.
Accepting a pardon, means accepting guilt.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:37 pm to Giant Leaf
quote:
One of the penalties would be culpable in a lawsuit you jackass
No?
You should reread the quote that you posted. Maybe a few times until you feel like you really grasp the concept.
Accepting a pardon is accepting guilt. There's no 2 ways about it.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:37 pm to LSUconvert
A president can pardon someone before they are even charged with a crime. A pardon is not an admission of guilt, nor is it an admission of innocence.
Posted on 10/20/17 at 2:37 pm to LSUconvert
quote:
A pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt of the offender..
You must have missed this part.
This post was edited on 10/20/17 at 2:40 pm
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News