Jeremy Stephens to be Extradited???

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by Liddellfan

1)That's got to be the worst post I have ever seen on this forum and you have had some whoppers!....
2)You sound like a Communist IMO...........
3) The States are independent of the Federal Govt.
4) We, the American people have a FREE society. Unlike other countries where you are forced to do as they say and stopped and questioned every time you want to go somewhere, that is NOT freedom by any means.
5)If you knew anything at all about the United States Constitution, you would know that the American people have the freedom of movement (travel) to other States if they so please.
6) It is illegal to be stopped during your travels for no reason. Check point on State lines is nonsense, sound like the old Soviet Union where they keep their people behind the walls pointing machine guns at them.
7) If Law Enforcement REALLY wanted him, they would of picked him up a long time ago.
8)We don't talk bad about your beloved England, so don't do it about the United Stated!
9)If you don't like the laws and rights to citizens of our country, don't come here, stay in England since you love it so much.

1) not been on this forum long enough then have you
2) I am somewhere between Centrist Right and Nationalism. To EVERY other nation in the world, America is Far Right...even your Democrats are Centrist Right. In Terms of Political Philosophy. You evidently dont understand what the word Communism actually means...like many Americans, you believe anything Left of Centrist Right is Communism....If You bothered to see me in light of my Countries political background, you would see I'm considered positively Right Wing...again, spend more time on the forum and read what I say when crime and punishment, centralized Government, the European Union, or immigration come up.
3) Constitutionally, the States are Soverignties, but to say three hundred years later they have anything like Soverignty is Riddiculous. Your State Governments have been reduced to Shire County Councils pretty much. Your Federal Government has gone WELL beyond its Quota in terms of design brief...the fact your States dont Rule on things like Health Care and Education as Independants are well and truely proof...outside of the Judiciary...how...practically are your States independant? They dont even defend their boarders, and in congress they do not rally to support their own States, but rally behind some Political Parties which are Nationalized...Should it be that way...not according to the Consitution...but wake up to the ACTUAL power your Federal Government illicitly has.
4) Having been stopped by your police, I happen to know that that is NOT true. Your Police are not keepers of the peace, they are searchers of criminals...there is a difference. One is called to conflicts brought to their attention, one hunts for conflicts. If you dont understand what I mean, I can post a video that explains the differences between Americas ideal of Law Enforcements, and the British ideal of keeping the peace.
5) European Union members have Freedom to move around...the issue isnt whether you can cross state lines...it whether anyone can trace your movement. Flow around the Union is monitored with passports. You may come and go as you please...BUT everytime you cross a boarder you will be logged...that means if your on the run, you dont get far. In the US...if your on the run you can move across state boarders, not only freely...but UNCHECKED...that DOESNT happen between True Soverignties. This makes your State Governments Provincial Governments of a Federal Government...thats NOT Constitutional either.
6) You dont want to make that sort of comparison, since your entire bloody force is armed and you dont need to approach any restricted area to have a gun shoved in your face...heavens above, half your citizens are armed, and you have the nerve to talk about machine guns at checkpoints??? Which dont even exist!!! Why would a passport checkpoint need to be armed??? Its about monitoring movement not about restricting movement. Our Police arent even armed...outside of the Ministry of Defence Police who spend most of their time protecting YOUR listening outposts in this country...and the British Transport Police, but you almost never see them. They are usually stationed in ports...I dont know why
7) Oh...so they dont really want him? What is this laziness...or is it not important for them to protect the freedom of GOD-fearing, law abiding citizens from a fugitive??
8)I'm not "Talking bad" im talking Truth...See I'm not a "Yes" man. I dont need to pretend a system or country is perfect before I can admit to having love for it. The irony of it, is that I probably aggree on a lot of negative points you might come up with about England. Do you even know what I think of my own country? Do you know what I think of first past the post Democrasy? Do you know what I think about the British Government? Do not assume that because you cant stand certain truthes about your country, that I would stand and cry, if someone had a legitamate criticism of my country...I have plenty of my own....and even more of Europe...and I REALLY dislike "Federal" systems. I do not believe that Governments should be Multinational...unless in an Imperial Fashion...Oh...I'm all for Empire...but Federations, Unions...Giving Europe to the German Chancellor? I dont think so. Do you?
9) I was commenting on your LACK of laws in certain areas, not the ones you already have. Without order there is chaos...but what is the point in having an Extradition Treaty between States when they dont have boarders...do you understand what Deportation actually means? Its riddiculous to use the word when refering to Provincial Governments run by an overarching Union FIFTY "Soverignties" strong Surely...if he was free to leave Iowa...why isnt he free to go back to Iowa? why does Minnesota have to ask Iowa? Wouldnt it be easier, if States were to have checkpoints to prevent this issue in the first place...would that not be more simple? What do you have to fear in approaching a checkpoint...unless you are already on the run from the law? To let a man be on warrent of arrest for an entire year is outrageous, surely, by anyones standards??? Tell me....if he travels long enough, does the warrent go out of date?

[Tyburn]

BTW...I do like visiting the US...I even thought of living there...my problem was actually nothing to do with anything but Employment Law...I'm not sure I would ever feel safe in my livlihood in a Union which had virtually no Employment law at all!

Oh you might give the individual freedom...but as for protection from corrupt employers...Your Employment Law basically leaves your workforce completely without any rights period.

I have more freedom in England with my Employment then I would in the US because Businesses can not treat us like slaves. We have rights as a workforce. You cant just sack us because you dont like us...if you make a Contract, you have to stick to it...you cant...decide to prematurely terminate contracts like the UFC do...

WE Believe that individuals have rights. We do not believe in the Corruption of multinational coorperations. WE have that written into Civil Law...and Guess what, American Firms that choose to opporate in this Country, have to abide by these Laws...I work for an American Firm...so I see what they WANT to do sometimes, and CANT...and let me tell you, without that safety net of those Employment laws, I could never feel safe. Since those laws do not exist properly in the United States...I dont know if I could ever live there do you follow?

Ironically...I would prefer a certain level of protection above absolute freedom anyday

I wont go into the missinterpretation of the fact that "Freedom" in your constitution doesnt mean "Freedom to Travel" but "Freedom under GOD" because I'd hate to cause an uproar amoung the heathen...who infact believe that the United States believes in "Freedom of Religion" when it really means Freedom to practise any form of Christianity..in a Dis-established manner...not freedom to practise what you want...For that you have to understand what your forefathers were trying to do, and what model they were trying to oppose....They were horrified by the fall out from the Reformation, which they blamed on having an Established Church...be it Roman or Anglican..thats what they wanted Freedom from, an Established Church...NOT Freedom from Christianity, but Freedom FOR many denominations of Christianity.

but I digress...coz its 3am and I'm sooo knackered...Goodnight...and for the record, I'm not angry at you, nor have I cried out in offence at your response to my original post. I believe in the Freedom and Rights to have a different view point

[Bonnie]

Originally Posted by F34R

kinda difficult to find the actual charges... Here's what Mins has:

Full Name: STEPHENS, JEREMY DEAN
Booking Number: 2012027864
Date of Birth: 05/26/1986
Sheriff's Custody:
IN CUSTODY
Housing Location:
SHERIFF'S JAIL - PSF Address
Received Date/Time: 10/05/2012 10:44
Arrested By: MINNEAPOLIS PD
Case/Count Description of Charge Charged By Reason for Arrest Severity of Charge State of Charge Bail Information Court Appearance Date/Time Court Appearance Location
1/1 OTHER STATE HCSO HOLD FELONY $0.00 HOLD W/O BAIL


I've already looked at Des Moines records, and they don't have an online registry for Polk County. They have a "most wanted" list, but not warrant search. I'll dig a little deeper.

Thanks, James.

[Neezar]

Originally Posted by VCURamFan

Extraditing from Minnesota to Iowa. He committed the felony in Iowa, but was arrested in Minnesota. Either Iowa can asked to have him back & try him there, or they can (through some legal means I dunno) kinda shift the cahrges over & let Minnesota try him.

No, they can't try him in Minnesota. 'Extradition' is one of the jobs I did when I worked for the sheriff's dept. You can't legally bring a prisoner across state lines and try him unless he signs a waiver agreeing to go back to that state. The prisoner will get sort of a mini trial at first. The judge will ask him to sign a waiver, if he refuses the judge will either hold with no bond until the orginal state can start the extradition process or set the prisoner a bond (not likely, lol). However, it only wastes time and money because if he refuses (that is where my crappy part came in, lol) you prepare an Order for Extradition, the case goes to the state attorney general, then to be signed by a higher court. That Order goes to a state judge where he was arrested and the judge rules on whether to send the guy back or not. In all my years doing it, no judge ever denied us. A state pretty much isn't going to spend that kind of money without good cause.

There are other ways around all the red tape, too. But that is probaly tmi.

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by Neezar

No, they can't try him in Minnesota. 'Extradition' is one of the jobs I did when I worked for the sheriff's dept. You can't legally bring a prisoner across state lines and try him unless he signs a waiver agreeing to go back to that state. The prisoner will get sort of a mini trial at first. The judge will ask him to sign a waiver, if he refuses the judge will either hold with no bond until the orginal state can start the extradition process or set the prisoner a bond (not likely, lol). However, it only wastes time and money because if he refuses (that is where my crappy part came in, lol) you prepare an Order for Extradition, the case goes to the state attorney general, then to be signed by a higher court. That Order goes to a state judge where he was arrested and the judge rules on whether to send the guy back or not. In all my years doing it, no judge ever denied us. A state pretty much isn't going to spend that kind of money without good cause.

There are other ways around all the red tape, too. But that is probaly tmi.

Is the Extradition order the same method as if you were deporting someone to outside the US??

[F34R]

Originally Posted by Tyburn

1)
9) I was commenting on your LACK of laws in certain areas, not the ones you already have. Without order there is chaos...but what is the point in having an Extradition Treaty between States when they dont have boarders...do you understand what Deportation actually means? Its riddiculous to use the word when refering to Provincial Governments run by an overarching Union FIFTY "Soverignties" strong Surely...if he was free to leave Iowa...why isnt he free to go back to Iowa? why does Minnesota have to ask Iowa? Wouldnt it be easier, if States were to have checkpoints to prevent this issue in the first place...would that not be more simple? What do you have to fear in approaching a checkpoint...unless you are already on the run from the law? To let a man be on warrent of arrest for an entire year is outrageous, surely, by anyones standards??? Tell me....if he travels long enough, does the warrent go out of date?

Minnesota isn't asking Iowa. It's the other way around. Iowa will be requesting the extradition. If Iowa didn't ask for extradition, then Minnesota would just let this guy out, and be done with it.

Let's not get into the ideas of check points, and the fear of approaching check points. The comment about letting a man be on a warrant... where did you get the idea of them "LETTING" him be on the loose for a year? That they've not arrested him in a year? I have warrants on people that we've not been able to locate in ten years. I've been involved with dozens of cases where people just don't get caught for a period of time. Sometimes, a week, a month, a year, a decade... or longer. No warrants don't go out of date.

States don't have "borders" per se. They have state lines.

[MattHughesRocks]

FREE JEREMY!!!!

[Bonnie]

Originally Posted by F34R

Minnesota isn't asking Iowa. It's the other way around. Iowa will be requesting the extradition. If Iowa didn't ask for extradition, then Minnesota would just let this guy out, and be done with it.

Let's not get into the ideas of check points, and the fear of approaching check points. The comment about letting a man be on a warrant... where did you get the idea of them "LETTING" him be on the loose for a year? That they've not arrested him in a year? I have warrants on people that we've not been able to locate in ten years. I've been involved with dozens of cases where people just don't get caught for a period of time. Sometimes, a week, a month, a year, a decade... or longer. No warrants don't go out of date.

States don't have "borders" per se. They have state lines.

I was trying to look up Iowa law for "failure to appear" and I happened on one site where a man found out Iowa had had a bench warrant out on him for six years and he had just found out about it (not sure how). He had been living in San Francisco that whole time. In his case it looks like it might have been some administration foul up to do with his community service which he had completed but for some reason might not have been recorded. He was asking the question, "Should he contact a lawyer about sorting it out, or contact the Iowa authorities himself?"

[Neezar]

Originally Posted by MattHughesRocks

FREE JEREMY!!!!

[Neezar]

Originally Posted by Tyburn

Is the Extradition order the same method as if you were deporting someone to outside the US??

We don't deport people.