Miami … Did they have a Warrant or court order.

This might clarify some of the confusion about the warrant/document or whatever that the Feds say they had. I do not believe they even tried to "serve" the document to the home owners. Another law shredded. This is from "Nealz Nuze" of April 26, 2000


ABOUT THAT SEARCH WARRANT

Just a little information about the warrant that Clinton used in an attempt to justify the Saturday raid.

The Federal District Judge in Miami who is handling the Elian matter is Michael Moore. He has full knowledge of the case.
He would normally be the one who would issue the order or warrant allowing the Clinton posse to enter the home and seize
Elian. Obviously Clinton didn’t want to go through Judge Moore to get his warrant. Perhaps that is because the allegations
contained in the warrant were going to be lies --- and Judge Moore would figure that out in a heartbeat. So, the Clinton
posse waited until after 7:00 Friday night when they could go to some federal duty magistrate who had no familiarity with
the case and get him to sign the warrant.

The warrant said that Elian was "concealed" in the house. He was not. The warrant also said that Elian was an "illegal
alien." Again, he was not. A federal court had already ruled that Elian had applied for asylum and, thus, was not an
"illegal."

So ... again. The Clinton Administration used it’s most common weapon ... lies.
 
This is from today's Wall Street Journal (I have an online subscription) editorial. I'll extract a few paragraphs.

Reno's Raid Was Based On a Tissue of Lies

By Andrew P. Napolitano. Mr. Napolitano, a former New Jersey Superior Court judge, practices law in Newark, N.J., and teaches constitutional law at Seton Hall Law School.


<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>...a review of the affidavit on which the warrant was based shows that the raid was constitutionally flawed, unlawful and repugnant to the language and spirit of the then three-day-old decision of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that ordered Ms. Reno to keep Elian in the U.S. and denied her request for an injunction requiring Mr. Gonzalez to turn the boy over.

True to form, the administration lied to the American people. The first effort to hide the truth was the application for a search warrant. The Immigration and Naturalization Service didn't present it to Judge Michael Moore, the federal district judge in Miami handling the case. Rather, the INS waited until after 7 p.m. on Good Friday, when a federal duty magistrate, not familiar with the case and notoriously pro-government in his rulings, was available to hear warrant applications.

The affidavit presented to the magistrate was signed by Special Agent Mary Rodriguez of the INS. Ms. Rodriguez told the magistrate that Elian was being "concealed" at Lazaro's home, that the boy was "unlawfully restrained" there, and that INS Deputy Director of Investigations James T. Spearman Jr. had already ordered the arrest of Elian because the boy was "an illegal alien." In response, the magistrate issued a search warrant.[/quote]

------------------
Protect your Right to Keep and Bear Arms!

[This message has been edited by Gorthaur (edited April 26, 2000).]
 
Per numerous sources I've seen in all this, a "search warrant" is completely the wrong type of document for anything like this.

An ARREST warrant is for grabbing a specific named person...but the tyke hadn't done anything wrong.

Then add in the lies. "Concealed"? Jeeezus...the entire planet knew where that poor kid was.

What a mess.

Jim
 
I'm not an attorney either, nor do I play one on evening television., or radio for that matter BUT.

As I understand the thing, correct me if I'm wrong, re the grab and run handling of Elian, there was "a search warrant" issued. So far as I know, search warrants authorize searching a particular location for A THING, AN INANIMITE OBJECT. The boy is a person, he is not a thing.

Arrest warrants, on the other hand, usually mention some particular person, but Elian has not been accused of the commission of any crime, so far as I know.

It appears, that aside from the seeming double-talk, something that we have come to expect from DOJ in particular and Clinton Administration in general, federal action in this case was on rather "thin ice".

While this case is one that does "pull at the heart strings", taking a longer view, the following comes to mind. If the feds get away with pulling this sort of possibly illeagle stunt, where does that leave Constitutional Rights for/of the rest of us, for instance, how about the citizens rights under The Fourth Amendment. Yes, I know that I'm terrible old fashioned, but that might be the least of my problems.
 
alan:
You may not be an attorney, but you've hit on a vital point; judging the actions of Reno and Co. The boy is a "THING", in the same manner a runaway slave in pre-civil war days was considered to be a piece of property.

I dont know what's more nauseating, the JBT's or the mindless apologists on this attack against the constitution, who jutify it with the chant of "the boy belongs with his father" as if this were a self evident fact, period.

Never mind that Mr. Gonzales is here on a diplomatic passport courtesy of Fidel and could take the boy back to Cuba if Clinton greenlights the deal (and to hell with the 11th circuit court). Ignore Mr. Gonzales's original statement in the Cuban press "I have lost NOTHING in Miami"--prior to Fidel deciding to make him a diplomat. And above all, ignore the fact that his mother drowned trying to get her son to free soil...

The homicidal regime of Castro is not a "warm fuzzie" for the sheeple. Don't count on Elian getting his day in court, as the people would have to hear both sides and face some ugly realities.

Not the least of which is this tap dancing around the 4th amendment by Slick Willie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top