Bush pardons those who already served
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

TV ClubHouse: Archives: Bush pardons those who already served

Ocean_Islands

Monday, December 23, 2002 - 03:47 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Inexplicably, President Bush has chosen to pardon people who have served their time already, in some cases many, many years ago, for inconsequential transgressions. No word yet on pardons for any wrongly convicted prisoners on death row.

Bush pardons moonshine maker, others
From Kevin Bohn
CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) --President Bush Monday granted seven Americans whose offenses ranged from a Tennessean who made untaxed whiskey to a man who altered the altered the odometer of his car.

They were the first pardons Bush has issued since taking office.

The Justice Department announced the pardons Monday afternoon. Those who received pardons are:

• Kenneth Copley, sentenced in 1962 to probation for manufacturing untaxed whiskey in Tennessee.

• Harlan Dobas, sentenced in 1966 to three months jail and then probation for conspiracy involving the sale of grain stolen from employer in Washington state.

• Stephen Jackson, sentenced in 1993 for altering the odometer of a motor vehicle in Louisiana. He received three years probation and a $500 fine.

• Douglas Rogers, sentenced in 1957 for failing to submit to a draft induction notice. The ordained Jehovah's Witness minister from Wisconsin was sentenced to two years in prison.

• Walter Schuerer, sentenced in 1989 in Iowa for making a false statement to the Social Security Administration regarding his employment. He was fined $15,000.

• Paul Wieser, sentenced in 1972 for stealing $38,000 of copper wire from an interstate shipment. The Tacoma, Washington, resident received 18 months probation.

• Olgen Williams, a postal employee sentenced in 1971 for the theft of $10.90 from the mail. A resident of Indianapolis, Indiana, he was sentenced to a year in prison.

Bush decided to grant the seven pardons Friday.

White House spokeswoman Ashley Snee noted the seven pardons had four common elements.

Each of the seven committed a minor offense, completed a prison sentence, went on to live an "exemplary life," and remained a positive force in the community.

"That is what they were judged on," Snee said.

Crossfire

Monday, December 23, 2002 - 04:09 pm EditMoveDeleteIP

Quote:

No word yet on pardons for any wrongly convicted prisoners on death row.




There are people who have knowingly been wrongly convicted still sitting on death row?

Ahem! Me thinks someone should be acting on that if it's true.

Kaili

Monday, December 23, 2002 - 06:54 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
What about Laurecia Bembenek (Bambi)? She has paid to have DNA tests to proive she wasn't there when her husband was killed- they came out negative that any of her DNA was at the scene- and they are still saying that isn't enough. Granted she isn't on death row and she did escape and run to Canada, but how many other cases are there like that where the person IS on death row? I think it is either Montel Williams or Maury Povich that are going to pay for more tests for her.

Crossfire

Monday, December 23, 2002 - 07:03 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Yeah, I'm not as worried about the people who are not on the row. The others can wait, and dilly daly around with the process, then sue for the big bank, but I'm not too keen on having "maybes" on the row.

Kaili

Monday, December 23, 2002 - 07:23 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Me either but there are so many who have been sitting, especially those since before DNA and other more accurate methods were available. Hard to say what to do about it. Some will die for it, some will continue to have their lives taken from them while they are alive. Kinda crappy too in my opinion. I just can't imagine spending my life in such a horrible place knowing I am innocent but especially waiting to die knowing I am innocent.

Personally, I don't beleieve in the death penalty at all but that can become a pretty heated discussion that I'm too worn out to delve into right now. But I just opened the can of worms if anyone else is interested :)

But back to these pardons. I'm sorry but these are just dumb. Like these things are really worth presidentail pardons. Maybe to those people, but they seem more like governor level pardons. Nothing really significant. I got an underage drinking ticket 4 years ago- can I be pardoned for that? I have lived a worthwhile life since then. If he wants to make a statement, he should pardon Leonard Peltier- the one name who always comes up and is always overlooked. I thought Clinton would do it, I know Bush won't. Or many other people whose names will make headlines for being pardoned- people who will catch attention. I think no better of him for these pardons. I would if he pardoned someone for something much more significant.

Kaili

Monday, December 23, 2002 - 07:30 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I have a question about this...now these people have paid their fines and served their time. What does a pardon do but remove it from their record. The guy who lied to the Soc. Security Admin...is he going to be paid back the fine costs? And just look at the different sentences these people were given for the things they did...

one year in prison for stealing about $11 in mail (granted mail theft is a big deal...) yet another person gets 18 months probation for stealing wire worth nearly $40,000. I'll take the probation...thanks.

$15,000 fine for lying to Social Security about employmet (now we know just how important that info is) and 2 years in prison for the draft thing. Well, so now we see that where money is involved you get a money fine but where your body is involved you go to jail.

How punishments are decided is just undecipherable to me....

Crossfire

Monday, December 23, 2002 - 07:46 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
California's three strike law concerns me the most. I'm not to big on locking people up for life on stealing a box of smarties.

Kaili

Monday, December 23, 2002 - 08:08 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
That I agree with. While allowing a judge to use discretion in punishments can lead to a lot of variety in how punishments are doled out, I think maybe a judge should have discretion. Especially in a case like you mentioned. Those laws throw out any circumstances a crime may be commited under. Now lets look at drug offenders and compare their mandatory sentences with the sentences of rapists and murderers. I do like the idea of truth in sentencing though. Again, I am pulled by the whole circumstances thing but if a person is sentenced to 10 yrs for murder I really don't want to see them out in 4 years. For good behavior. Sorry...killing someone is bad behavior and I don't know how much good you can do in a prison to make up for that.

So for me...judges discretion...they serve what they are given. Maybe judges shouldn't be given sole power in every type case though. We need a checks and balances system for that too that works.

Ocean_Islands

Tuesday, December 24, 2002 - 05:43 am EditMoveDeleteIP
California is the only state that models their justice system on a game -- and they think they are forward-thinking in that state ... (!)

Crossfire, you can't sue the government for 'the big bank' ....

Crossfire

Tuesday, December 24, 2002 - 06:27 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Really? So if the government locks you up for twenty years by mistake, that's it, they just let you go...no compensation.

That's too bad. You get better treatment than that wearing a hot McDonald's coffee.

I know of some Canadians that cashed out after wrongful imprisonment.

Juju2bigdog

Tuesday, December 24, 2002 - 06:47 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Kaili wrote:

Quote:

But back to these pardons. I'm sorry but these are just dumb. Like these things are really worth presidentail pardons. Maybe to those people, but they seem more like governor level pardons. Nothing really significant.




Kaili, it looks to me like these were all crimes that were brought by the federal government. Therefore, a governor would have no jurisdiction to issue a pardon; only the president of the U.S. could do it.

Further, under the federal system, it is difficult to tell the magnitude or significance of the crime from the official charge. It is often that way in the lesser courts as well. Realistically, nobody is prosecuted for stealing one piece of mail. They have usually stolen many thousands before they get caught, but they get charged with one count. The untaxed whiskey fellow would have had a major operation going. The odometer tamperer would have been altering multiple cars. And etcera with the other crimes. My best guess would be that these pardons are more related to the exemplary lives since the convictions, rather than the wrongness of the prosecution in the first place.

Kaili

Tuesday, December 24, 2002 - 07:55 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Mmmm....I suppose that would be true but I want to know what these people have done that is so exemplary. What good does a pardon for these people really do? Make them feel good about themselves, maybe let them be able to vote again if that right was taken from them? I would just personally rather see people pardoned who are in prison now.

Crossfire- if you are wrongfully incarcerated there are ways of getting compensation though I don't know how you go about it. People can sue for mental anguish or something. I don't really know for sure.

My car was broken into a few years back- $500 damage- but since it was 2 kids and one adult that did it they were never really held to the charges and I was paid about $100. I actually got a letter from the DA basically stating that since it appears they are not going to pay, they don't have to. So a victim of their crime and a victim of the so called justice system. Well, I don't feel like paying my bills- does that mean I can just not do it and have nothing done or said about it? It's ridiculous. Between the three of them in the past few years since this happened, someone must have gotten a job or something. They must have money coming from somewhere. No, I don't expect their parents to pay me- the parents didn't break into my car. I just thought that was one lousy way of ending that incident- they aren't paying so they no longer have to.

Anyway, that was quite a tangent. Honestly I don't really care about Bush pardoning these people- they're old crimes and didn't seem to result in any real harm to anyone. I just wish some of the people sitting in prison serving too much time for too small of incidents would be pardoned. Or maybe people who did something illegal but it was somehow justifiable.

Bigsister

Wednesday, December 25, 2002 - 02:46 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Maybe President Bush selected these people to pardon because it was a relatively easy way to issue a few pardons without doing anything that might be considered controversial. Who would complain if some low profile miscreant is pardoned years after completing their sentence?

Sadiesmom

Wednesday, December 25, 2002 - 09:24 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I think the question is why bother if they have served any jail time. Most states allow felons to vote today, so there is no reason unless they were seeking a job with clearance. Then the question would be do we want these people to have clearance.
The man who did not register from the draft, I might not care, but stealing 40 thousand dollars worth of wire, do I want them in charge of a government contract? The other issue is which of these is a one time crime versus which is the one thay have been caught at? The turning back of an odometer, might not be bad if you did it once on your car, and is another story if you work at a car dealership.

PS My odometer was turned back once while I was visiting a friend by her husband who thought he was doing me a favor. Unfortunately I had a buyer for the car who declined when he found the odometer read less and wondered what else I was lying about. God save me from my friends.