prophet Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070216/ap_en_tv/mexico_bounty_hunter GUADALAJARA, Mexico - A federal court has cleared the way for TV bounty hunter Duane "Dog" Chapman to be extradited to face charges in Mexico, but the decision can still be appealed. Norma Jara, a spokeswoman for the second district court in Guadalajara, said Thursday the court rejected Chapman's injunction request, ruling there was no reason not to try him on charges he illegally arrested Max Factor makeup heir and convicted rapist Andrew Luster in 2003. The charges against the 53-year-old star of the A&E reality series "Dog the Bounty Hunter" stem from his June 2003 capture of Luster in Puerto Vallarta. Luster had fled to Mexico to avoid trial, and his detention by Chapman led to his return to the U.S. and a 124-year prison term. Luster's capture shot the Honolulu-based bounty hunter to fame and led to the TV series. Chapman, who is now free on $300,000 bail, faces up to four years in a Mexican jail if convicted. ---------- Does anyone else have a problem with this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 He helped arrest a ****in rapist, a CONVICTED ****ing rapist and is being punished? Dem sum smrt folks! :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I think we can add this to the recent string of "the legal system is all focked up" threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Mexico needs to let this go, I understand why they arent out of national pride and how important they view their laws. However, mexico is about as lawless a place as there is, so they need to just let this one go just like all the other crime they let go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raub Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Maybe they can extradite all the Mexican criminals who are illegally in the United States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titaw Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Mexico needs to let this go, I understand why they arent out of national pride and how important they view their laws. However, mexico is about as lawless a place as there is, so they need to just let this one go just like all the other crime they let go. If I were President Bush I would tell Mexico to come and get him. We will not deliver him until you get all of these illegal fock out of America. I think Mexico would let this guy slide. The problem is that Dog is a celebrity and Mexico can flex their muscle and get a US celebrity in jail and get some global notariety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 He helped arrest a ****in rapist, a CONVICTED ****ing rapist and is being punished?Dem sum smrt folks! :doh: He kidnapped (that's what it's called when someone who isn't a cop forcably grabs someone and drags them off) a rapist by (allegedly) breaking the law. Mexico may now be able to arrest (that's what it's called when a cop detains someone) an (alleged) criminal, by following the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 He kidnapped (that's what it's called when someone who isn't a cop forcably grabs someone and drags them off) a rapist by (allegedly) breaking the law. Mexico may now be able to arrest (that's what it's called when a cop detains someone) an (alleged) criminal, by following the law. You got a kinky fettish with underlining? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I think we can add this to the recent string of "the legal system is all focked up" threads. Yeah, I don't know where that country gets the idea that they have the right to write and enforce their own laws. Ranks right up there with those folks who think laws should apply to everybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 You got a kinky fettish with underlining? How did you know which web page I had open in the other window? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Maybe they can extradite all the Mexican criminals who are illegally in the United States. make it a package deal, and mexico has to pay the expenses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Yeah, I don't know where that country gets the idea that they have the right to write and enforce their own laws. Ranks right up there with those folks who think laws should apply to everybody. So, lemme get this straight. You are fine with the fact that this guy is wanted for RAPE, and he goes to Mexico, which wont extradite him. HOWEVA! You have a problem with the US not extraditing Dog. Thats like a new-and-improved kind of nonsense. FURTHER! Mexicans dont EXACTLY respect the laws of the USA what with the hundreds (thousands?) of Mexican citizens that ILLEGALLY cross the border into the US every week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 We are Americans. The laws of other countries do not apply to us. That is all. Yee haw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Yeah, I don't know where that country gets the idea that they have the right to write and enforce their own laws. Ranks right up there with those folks who think laws should apply to everybody. I wouldnt have a problem if it was a country that actually enforces the laws they ennact on actual criminals. Seems like only foreigners and town drunks feel the wratch of the mexican legal system. hell a police chief had his head cut off cause he decided he was going to be proactive and start enforcing laws. Also, if they wouldnt put the effort into going and getting luster to send to us why should we put the effort into sending Dog to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 So, lemme get this straight. You are fine with the fact that this guy is wanted for RAPE, and he goes to Mexico, which wont extradite him.HOWEVA! You have a problem with the US not extraditing Dog. Well, so far, for assumptions, you're 0-2. Show me something that says that Mexico violated Mexican law and refused a legal extradition order, and yeah, I'll have a problem with that. And show me something that says that the US is violating US law and refusing to extradite the bounty hunter scum (Sorry. Star Wars reference.) and then I'll have a problem with that. But so far, I haven't seen anything that says that either country has done anything other than follow their own legal procedures. As near as I can tell, the only people who've broken any laws are the (convicted) rapist and the (alleged) kidnapper. Therefore, so far, the only thing I have a "problem" with, are the folks who think that laws only apply to some people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 He kidnapped (that's what it's called when someone who isn't a cop forcably grabs someone and drags them off) a rapist by (allegedly) breaking the law. Mexico may now be able to arrest (that's what it's called when a cop detains someone) an (alleged) criminal, by following the law. Thank you for the crayon drawn picture of a whole lotta "no ****!" information. The POS was a CONVICTED rapist. I do not care if he took the **** out of East Bumble****. He is a sick **** and needed to be locked up. He was. So be happy. Dog didn't go to Mexico to snatch one of their own people. He went there to snatch someone who was hiding out there. Two differences there. Dog was doing his job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogsLover Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Thank you for the crayon drawn picture of a whole lotta "no ****!" information.The POS was a CONVICTED rapist. I do not care if he took the **** out of East Bumble****. He is a sick **** and needed to be locked up. He was. So be happy. Dog didn't go to Mexico to snatch one of their own people. He went there to snatch someone who was hiding out there. Two differences there. Dog was doing his job. Stupid idiot. Wake up. You need locked up you sick perv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Funny, our own own government has actively promoted illegal immigration by providing illegals with government benefits while the Mexican government is encouraging the exodus of its own people. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Thank you for the crayon drawn picture of a whole lotta "no ****!" information.The POS was a CONVICTED rapist. I do not care if he took the **** out of East Bumble****. He is a sick **** and needed to be locked up. He was. So be happy. Dog didn't go to Mexico to snatch one of their own people. He went there to snatch someone who was hiding out there. Two differences there. Dog was doing his job. Laws are laws though ... we don't typically allow just anyone to go out and arrest criminals, no matter how bad they might be. This kind of vigilante justice would also be prosecuted in the United States.The fact that he was doing the right thing can be taken into account in the sentencing. Chapman, who is now free on $300,000 bail, faces up to four years in a Mexican jail if convicted. But his Mexican lawyer, Jorge Huerta, doubts he would get the maximum. Huerta said illegal detention is a relatively minor crime in Mexico, and that if Chapman is convicted, he would likely only have to pay a fine of several hundred dollars. *edit: Didn't anyone see "A Time to Kill"? You can take the law into your own hands, but you will still be prosecuted. Although if Matthew McConaughey is your lawyer, the jury will let you off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Stupid idiot. Wake up. You need locked up you sick perv. LOL! Huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Laws are laws though ... we don't typically allow just anyone to go out and arrest criminals, no matter how bad they might be. This kind of vigilante justice would also be prosecuted in the United States.The fact that he was doing the right thing can be taken into account in the sentencing. The way they are acting.. They better give him more than a few hundred dollar fine. LOL Dog would have doubled that to settle this thing early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Dog was doing his job. Hope you won't mind the appropriation of your style (since critiquing style seems to be popular in this thread), but, No, he ****ing wasn't. Breaking the law isn't his job. (News flash: It isn't the cop's job, either.) If Mexico (or the US) wants to have a law that says "anybody's allowed to do anything they want, and ignore any law they feel like, as long as they're effing with somebody who isn't popular" then they can pass a law that says so. Until that happens, then the rule is "break the law, do the time". (I'm starting to wonder, here. I wonder how many of the folks who are claiming that there's something immoral about Mexico prosecuting a kidnapper (or the US prosecuting a border patrol officer for assault with a deadly weapon) because "that law shouldn't count, because breaking the law is part of their jobs", have also claimed, with equal black-and-white vehemence, that "it doesn't matter if illegal immigrants just came to the US to try to get a job, the law's the law, and that's it, we should kill 'em.") Explain the differences, folks: Why is it, when an illegal immigrant comes to the US to mow lawns, then "the law's the law", and it doesn't matter why he did it. But when the border patrol shoots somebody in the back, or when a private, self-appointed vigilante commits a kidnapping, the rule is "who cares what laws he broke, look at the other guy"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjcdaman Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Didn't the rape(that the guy was CONVICTED of) occur in the U.S.? Honestly, our government(whether it be the Hawaiian or Federal, not sure of who has jurisdiction here) should say no. We will not turn him over. End of story. EDIT: Why is it, when an illegal immigrant comes to the US to mow lawns, then "the law's the law", and it doesn't matter why he did it. But when the border patrol shoots somebody in the back, or when a private, self-appointed vigilante commits a kidnapping, the rule is "who cares what laws he broke, look at the other guy"? Because illegal immigrants bring criminals to our country. We(Dog) were taking criminals out of their country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Didn't the rape(that the guy was CONVICTED of) occur in the U.S.? Honestly, our government(whether it be the Hawaiian or Federal, not sure of who has jurisdiction here) should say no. We will not turn him over. End of story. "Because you see, Mr. Fox, when we signed that treaty (and bullied you into signing a reciprocal treaty with us), we really intended extradition to be a one-way street. We wanted to be able to order you folks to hand over your citizens for trial in a foreign court, but we didn't really mean that the same rules applied to Americans. I mean, we said it did, but we really didn't mean it. What we really meant was that our citizens can do whatever they want in your country, and you can't do a thing about it." Was that what you meant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Because illegal immigrants bring criminals to our country. We(Dog) were taking criminals out of their country. We (Dog) are the criminals in their country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.