BMW rider gets Presidential Pardon

[UberXY]

I noted in todays paper that a BMW rider I once worked with got a Presidential pardon yesterday. Good guy, good co-worker, good family man. Made a dumbass no-victim mistake that got him in trouble when young, a mistake that in some states would have been a $100 misdemeanor, but not for him.

 

Haven't seen him in a while, but I am sure the deserving dude is already having a very Merry Christmas. Made my day.

[StuGotz]

Sounds like a "pot" thing to me...good on him!

 

What a difference from the BS that was made against Tommy Chong.

 

MB>

 

mods may delete if necessary.

[Ken H.]

Should there even be such thing as a presidential pardon? (Yes I know the US Constitution grants it.) But isn’t it at its core a travesty of a true equitable justice system? You know, judged by your peers and all that.

 

That there is an ‘exception to the system’ power granted to one person seems to me to make a mockery of the basic principle.

 

[Heck]

That there is an ‘exception to the system’ power granted to one person seems to me to make a mockery of the basic principle.

 

Yes.

[SeanC]

Should there even be such thing as a presidential pardon? (Yes I know the US Constitution grants it.)

Yes. And the Constitution grants it for a reason, one very similar to the reason it grants the President the power of veto. Checks and balance. A decision made by peers is no more written in stone than one made by the duly elected representatives of those peers. They're both subject to judicial and executive review.

 

Do you have a problem when, say, death sentences are commuted?

 

But isn’t it at its core a travesty of a true equitable justice system?

No. It may challenge ideas of judicial supremacy, but that does not mean it's a travesty of the system. Has pardon power often been abused? Sure. What aspect of our system hasn't been?

 

That there is an ‘exception to the system’ power granted to one person seems to me to make a mockery of the basic principle.

So you oppose presidential veto power then, too?

[tallman]

Ken,

The PrezPardon has its roots in the monarchial form of government where the King/Queen could issue a pardon.

Seems like that would fly well in Canada.

In fact they have a board to do just that.

 

http://www.pardons.org/

 

The President can even pardon people for crimes before they are charged, or before adjudication.

Possibly before the act.

And, quite possibly pardon themself.

(See, Ex Parte Garland)

 

I'm all for it.

[rob1100r]

 

edited for political content

[R80RTKen]

System of checks and balances.. no one branch (executive, judicial, or legislative) has total control of the domain it oversees. While the system is not perfect, it truly prevents any part of government getting too much power.

 

 

[Wooster]

Sounds like a "pot" thing to me...good on him!

 

What a difference from the BS that was made against Tommy Chong.

 

MB>

 

mods may delete if necessary.

 

MA recently passed a voter intiative/proposition to decriminalize possession of small pot amounts. This "lightening up" of pot policy goes into effect thirty to forty days after the election of November 4. I wish I knew the specific date so that I could commemorate this en-lightenment appropriately.

 

Wooster

[motoguy128]

Remember, the president can only pardon, he can't convict... same as a veto. I see it as a check and balance as long as it can be justified. Sometimes I wonder if we'd be better off with more foregiveness in hte legal system for criminals that show honest remorse and are willing to do a substantial amount of community service and a lengthy parole. Better than just locking them up to "reform" them. Expecially for non-violent criminals.

 

Good for this guy. Every BMW rider deserves a second chance.

[marcopolo]

Ken,

The PrezPardon has its roots in the monarchial form of government where the King/Queen could issue a pardon.

Seems like that would fly well in Canada.

In fact they have a board to do just that.

 

http://www.pardons.org/

 

Big difference; the organization you've linked to simply helps individuals with a past criminal offence remove it from public record. Now don't ask me who, if anyone, can grant pardons in Canada. I'd have to show my ignorance.

[SageRider]

Ken,

The PrezPardon has its roots in the monarchial form of government where the King/Queen could issue a pardon.

Seems like that would fly well in Canada.

In fact they have a board to do just that.

 

http://www.pardons.org/

 

Big difference; the organization you've linked to simply helps individuals with a past criminal offence remove it from public record. Now don't ask me who, if anyone, can grant pardons in Canada. I'd have to show my ignorance.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon

[Ken H.]

Do you have a problem when, say, death sentences are commuted?

Well I don't believe in the death penalty, but that's a different conversation. But to your question specifically, I think any pardons are an aberration in the purity of the judicial system. It elevates the judgment of one person above that of the system designed to (but admittedly fails at times) judge all men equally.

 

So you oppose presidential veto power then, too?

Hummm... not sure if that's a valid parallel or not. It does seem like the Veto plays a more valid checks & balances role than the Pardon. But I'd have to admit, at the moment I have no argument for why that would be so.

[Ken H.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon

Well at least it’s a group (the National Pardon Board) in Canada rather at the sole discretion of one person. Not a lot better, but a bit.

 

I always thought the mad rush to do end of term pardons (by Governors too, not just the Pres.) was kind of sadly comical. If someone deserved a pardon, why only deserved during the last month or so of an administration? Seems like sort of a parting gesture to try to save ones soul for sins of office or something.

 

[Shaman97]

Well I don't believe in the death penalty, but that's a different conversation. But to your question specifically, I think any pardons are an aberration in the purity of the judicial system. It elevates the judgment of one person above that of the system designed to (but admittedly fails at times) judge all men equally.

 

One of the things that James Madison wanted to avoid was a 'tyranny of the majority' so the ability of the President to grant a pardon is in keeping with this. The Electoral College also follows this pattern, though not the 'one person judgment' thing.

[SeanC]

Well I don't believe in the death penalty, but that's a different conversation.

Same power. Same issue. Same conversation.

 

But to your question specifically, I think any pardons are an aberration in the purity of the judicial system.

"Purity of the judicial system"? I think you're confusing the judiciary with the papacy. Unlike the Pope, the judicial system is not infallible.

 

It elevates the judgment of one person above that of the system designed to (but admittedly fails at times) judge all men equally.

Pardons aren't judgments. They're reversals of judgments.

[Bud]

It is a necessary evil which is sometimes abused.

 

Can you say Scooter?

 

But when DNA evidence exonerates folks all the time, how can we have much confidence in the system?

[tallman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon

Well at least it’s a group (the National Pardon Board) in Canada rather at the sole discretion of one person. Not a lot better, but a bit.

 

I always thought the mad rush to do end of term pardons (by Governors too, not just the Pres.) was kind of sadly comical. If someone deserved a pardon, why only deserved during the last month or so of an administration? Seems like sort of a parting gesture to try to save ones soul for sins of office or something.

 

 

Or using the power of the office to right a wrong, or mitigate an injustice.

Glass is half full, not half empty.

Besides, everyone knows that design by committee is better than by an individual, right?

 

Oh, and who appoints the members?

Any possible abuse or conflicts in that process?

And so on...

[steve.foote]

Can you say Scooter?

 

Can you say Marc Rich? Come on, Bud, get over it.

[Bud]

Can you say Scooter?

 

Can you say Marc Rich? Come on, Bud, get over it.

 

It is a necessary evil which is sometimes abused.

[Mark K]

Can you say Scooter?

 

Can you say Marc Rich? Come on, Bud, get over it.

 

 

[Rphoto]

Wall Street Journal had a front page story today about the pardons. Seems the common tie is that most of them are gun enthusiasts who want to be able to own guns again so they can shoot with their grand kids, etc. One of the guys accidentally poisoned a bald eagle while trying to kill coyotes that were plaguing his ranch. Being a gun enthusiast I can understand their interest in getting the felony think revoked.

 

That said, I dislike the concept of pardons and think the judicial system should be left to make its own decisions. And as has been noted the process is political and can be abused -- Marc Rich.

 

Rob

[Dave McReynolds]

That said, I dislike the concept of pardons and think the judicial system should be left to make its own decisions. And as has been noted the process is political and can be abused -- Marc Rich.

 

Respect your opinion, but I don't see much difference between a president/governor pardoning someone and a case being overturned on appeal. In both cases, it's just a man or woman looking at a case with fresh eyes and making a different decision than was made by the court at a lower level. I'm sure in the judicial system, a lot of times it just comes down to the personal sense of justice of one judge vs. another, which can always be supported by adopting the legal arguments put forth by whichever side the appelate judge happens to support.

 

Well, you say, but politics enters into it less in a judicial appeal than in a pardon. Well, I say, politics is just one other force among many that influence someone's decision. Politics influenced the decision of which judges to appoint. No doubt the judge's "politics" influenced his personal outlook on life and will affect the decisions he makes on cases that come before him on appeal.

[Rphoto]

Dave, you make some good points!