June 11, 2002
-
How stupid is this!!!
"The charge - attempting to wreck a mass transportation vehicle - was filed under the USA Patriot Act, which was passed by Congress after the September 11 terrorist attacks.
US District Judge William Young said that although an aircraft was engaged in mass transportation it is not a vehicle as defined by the new law. "
This is the shoe bomber - the judge threw out one of the charges, because a plane is not a vehicle *rolls her eyes* Apprently a vehicle is only for transportation on the ground.
I wonder what other legal technicalities his lawyer will find?
Do you think it would suck having to defend someone like this guy - or is it a case of job pride? Wanting to do the best job you can no matter who you are defending?
Or does it come down to $$$.
Comments (3)
Yeah, but they can still charge him with attempting to wreck a tennis shoe. And since tennis shoes transport the masses one step to the next, by extension, attempting mass destruction of a mode of transport. LOL
I think it comes down to money with these folks. I personally think that at the rate people are suing others in hope of hitting the jackpot, the whole legal system in the US going to be so crooked that no one will know anything about fair justice anymore.
Money. Definitely. How many sickos get off on a technicality? The opposite to NZ, where it doesn't matter how pathetically circumstantial the evidence, you can kiss your ass goodbye for the 11 years your life sentence consists of.
Comments are closed.