Mick Strider has some explaining to do.

Status
Not open for further replies.
pricecw said:
1. I am not a lawyer, but I continue to read of judges that impose creative sentences. Yeah, they can be appealed, but if both sides are for it, it is unlikely.

--Carl
Click to expand...

Carl, I am a lawyer and Bruce is absolutely correct, federal judges simply do not have the power to do that. If you google Federal Criminal Procedure and Federal Sentencing Guidelines, you can read up on it. For Federal crimes there are mandatory minimum sentences, especially with the use of a firearm in a crime -that is why those Border Patrol agents got very long sentences.

I don't know anything about this stuff except what has been posted but the Somalia part would stand out to any lawyer as BS, it really can't be done.

Also, it was mentioned about the plea agreement- it would have been signed before the hearing and a prosecutor can't just show at the hearing and decide not to honor it.
 
hardheart said:
user privileges could be set to restrict searching on some forums. Spark himself would know a hell of a lot more about the ins and outs of board software, I'd wager. (not $500 :D)
Click to expand...

Possible, however unlikely. The Badlands isn't a forum that you hear that kind of thing about. IMHO. Again, I'm betting it was just a mistake. A non issue. But I think Michelle had a legitimate question and was told to go to pm with it when the question arose because of something in the same thread. Just trying to be fair.

Keith offered another very possible explanation while I was typing.
 
The Last Confederate said:
Can you point that out?

I followed your link, and what he actually said according to your own source was "[FONT=Verdana, Arial,stencil]Since I'm banned from searching [/FONT]on your forum, Badlands and Usual Suspects, this is difficult[FONT=Verdana, Arial,stencil].[/FONT]"

I saw nowhere in that link where Spark said "banned".
Click to expand...

You're kidding right?

You want the screen dumps of Spark searching Badlands? I've got them. You want a query of user activity? I've got that too.

Move on to an argument with merit please.

Gollnick said:
This site is not moderated 24/7.
Click to expand...

I am referencing threads that have spanned nearly two weeks worth of contribution and discourse. If threads like this "slip through the cracks" due to the fact the site is "not moderated 24/7" than there is a serious issue here. Not to mention the fact Mr. Spark has contributed to these very threads that have been allowed to go "off topic" without intervention.... Sir.


Gollnick said:
I suggested to you what I have suggest to several others already: that we try to keep this thread, which has quite a potential to become messy, on-topic. The topic you've raised sounds like a matter between you and Spark.
Click to expand...

There are other threads out there that had "quite a potential to become messy on-topic." Where was the intervention there? There was none. The topic I've raised sounds like a matter between Spark and I? Why is that? Because it has the potential to not look good?

Based on your philosophy, the matter of all these topics should have been dealt with via PM, by the questioner and the questionee. But they haven't been.... have they?

Why?

m1
 
STR said:
If you look closely at the Strider approved DD214 section 1 and 2 do look as they should as does section 9. Section 5 for date of birth is unlike any I've seen though as most start out as mine and my wife's do with the year of birth first, month second and day last like so. 1957 Apr 1. In my experience this is how the service always dated everything but maybe the Army did things differently or as someone else said they let one slip out with some lower case in it because of someone green.

STR
Click to expand...

The date is different than I saw in the USMC, which were always in the form of 11Feb07 or 11 Feb 2007. That was pounded into my head so much I still date things that way (the other dating method was the day (1-365) plus year (two digit), that one didn't stick, although, I have programs that use it for appending to log files as a unique identifier). So that is different from yours too. I still think this focus on the DD214 is a dead end, unless someone calls the pentagon and gets a different story than SkinnyDale, it appears that the DD214 and the pentagon agree. Again, I would be happy to see some proof that it is not legit.

--Carl
 
I don't know anything about this stuff except what has been posted but the Somalia part would stand out to any lawyer as BS, it really can't be done.
Click to expand...

I watch enough court tv and Law and Order to have to wonder if an over zealous prosecutor wouldn't say anything to a naive young man just to get a confession with no intention of honoring anything he said though. I vaguely remember seeing somewhere that Mick did not have representation there to protect him from such behavior.

Its feesible and believable that Mick was told exactly what he said he was told in this regard. Once the prosecutor got what he wanted he forgot all about his little promise to him under the table or plea or whatever it was.

STR
 
digitalrebelttu said:
Carl, I am a lawyer and Bruce is absolutely correct, federal judges simply do not have the power to do that. If you google Federal Criminal Procedure and Federal Sentencing Guidelines, you can read up on it. For Federal crimes there are mandatory minimum sentences, especially with the use of a firearm in a crime -that is why those Border Patrol agents got very long sentences.

I don't know anything about this stuff except what has been posted but the Somalia part would stand out to any lawyer as BS, it really can't be done.

Also, it was mentioned about the plea agreement- it would have been signed before the hearing and a prosecutor can't just show at the hearing and decide not to honor it.
Click to expand...

A couple things.

These are guidelines, and are generally followed, but I still see cases where judges use creative sentencing. It happens less and less, but still does happen.

When were the guidelines fixed, and rolled out to the judges.

Last, could the prosecutor have lied to get where he wanted? I don't know, but the case you mentioned have just had the Dept of Homeland Security telling congress they lied when the documents the swore they had were not turned over. Again, proof one way or the other would be nice.

Again, this is not aimed at you, but I have watched a few cases the last couple of years, and the lawyers have been less than honest in a number of places (RIAA suites, SCO lawsuits, etc). There are a lot of good lawyers out there, but there are some real lowlifes in my opinion too.

--Carl
 
Michelle said:
Move on to an argument with merit please.
Click to expand...

We're still waiting for your first one.

Since you're here now, why not answer my queries from the other thread?

Are Mick's own writings hearsay? Has someone been impersonating Mick all these years in all of the listed places?
 
I suggest that it is generally easier to prove that one engaged in a given activity than to prove that one did not. That is, "proving the negative," is generally acknowledged to be far more difficult than proving the affirmative of a claim. That is why the burden of proof is on the person claiming that a fact is true -- in debate and in law.

I take the point that if one has faith in the word of another, no proof is required.
 
STR said:
I watch enough court tv and Law and Order to have to wonder if an over zealous prosecutor wouldn't say anything to a naive young man just to get a confession with no intention of honoring anything he said though. I vaguely remember seeing somewhere that Mick did not have representation there to protect him from such behavior.

STR
Click to expand...

The documents at the start of this thread clearly indicate Mick had federal public defenders. Must have been rollin' with a hard luck crew.:p :p :p :p :p :p
 
Michelle said:
You're kidding right?

You want the screen dumps of Spark searching Badlands? I've got them. You want a query of user activity? I've got that too.

Move on to an argument with merit please.

m1
Click to expand...

Uhh...I wasn't making an argument, I was just asking you to clarify as to why your source link didn't actually say what you said it did.

"banned from searching" and "banned" are two different things to me, just trying to understand which was meant.
 
Well, I have contacted CSM of the Ranger Training Brigade before, asking about phony claims before. I'll post again after he emails me back.

Also, do Micks friends here believe all the claims that he was a gungho paramilitary super duper secret pooper scooper agent? What will it take for you to believe the TRUTH? If Mick got a Purple Heart from the CIA as claimed, please have Mick sign a document to that extent, then we can turn it over to the Feds to research it and other claims under the STOLEN VALOR ACT. If Micks claims are true then he would have no problem signing statements to his FACTS. If not, then you have nothing further to back up your claims that he is Mr Secret Agent Man.

Paul
 
Boats said:
The documents at the start of this thread clearly indicate Mick had federal public defenders. Must have been rollin' with a hard luck crew.:p :p :p :p :p :p
Click to expand...

Wasn't there some public defenders that were just sanctioned for falling asleep during trials? Again, I am sure there are good ones, but I am also pretty sure the ones in Southern California are pretty well overworked, even if you do draw a good one.

--Carl
 
There's a bit of confusion here.... This website has a great many forums and most of them have moderators. Gollnick is a (very respected) moderator of another forum where the discussion is much calmer and more inclined to stay on topic. His suggestion was surely a reasonable suggestion to make, but it was a suggestion, not a mandate from the moderators of this forum.

This forum, The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, is the free marketplace of ideas. Here we believe if everyone is allowed to say his piece eventually the truth will come out. We allow everybody to post their opinions, and we let them show their character, too, so we can all see how much their opinions are worth....
 
Strider Knives Rock Thankyou Mick,this has to be one of my personel favorite knives one solid piece of A2 tool steel and cocobolo scales. I havent seen anyone else make anything even close to this one since Case made the original during WWII :D Maybee Boss Hog will make one like this out of INFI :D it would be a definate must have:thumbup:



Removed pics. This is not a forum for advertising.

CODE 3
 
Grayscouts said:
Well, I have contacted CSM of the Ranger Training Brigade before, asking about phony claims before. I'll post again after he emails me back.

Also, do Micks friends here believe all the claims that he was a gungho paramilitary super duper secret pooper scooper agent? What will it take for you to believe the TRUTH? If Mick got a Purple Heart from the CIA as claimed, please have Mick sign a document to that extent, then we can turn it over to the Feds to research it and other claims under the STOLEN VALOR ACT. If Micks claims are true then he would have no problem signing statements to his FACTS. If not, then you have nothing further to back up your claims that he is Mr Secret Agent Man.

Paul
Click to expand...

The funny part is if he was asecret agent it would still be a secret. people in those lines of work don't wake up one morning and start bragging about what they have done.
 
DE OPPRESSO LIBER said:
Strider Knives Rock Thankyou Mick,this has to be one of my personel favorite knives one solid piece of A2 tool steel and cocobolo scales. I havent seen anyone else make anything even close to this one since Case made the original during WWII :D Maybee Boss Hog will make one like this out of INFI :D it would be a definate must have:thumbup:
Click to expand...

That one is sweet!!!!!!!!:thumbup:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top