Posted on 08/17/2010 12:39:28 PM PDT by ButThreeLeftsDo
RICHMOND, Va. - A judge on Tuesday dismissed piracy charges against six Somali nationals accused of attacking a Navy ship off the coast of Africa, concluding the U.S. government failed to make the case their alleged actions amounted to piracy.
The dismissal of the piracy count by U.S. District Judge Raymond A. Jackson tosses the most serious charge against the men, but leaves intact seven other charges related to the alleged April 10 attack on the USS Ashland in the Gulf of Aden. A piracy conviction carries a mandatory life term.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
Don’t waste a missile...give the boys on deck some practice with a deck gun.
These are frickin pirates. Why do we capture them and try them in US court like they are US criminals??? The Navy needs to take a page from the Russian playbook and kill them.
Another Islamic Terrorist Rights liberal....
Would it help to know that his middle name is Alvin?
According to the judge, they didn’t successfully complete their act of piracy, so it wasn’t piracy? So, isn’t there a penalty for attempted piracy, just as there would be for attempted murder?
Thanks, many things are explained by a picture.
Let's ask the question a different way: the bad guys who attacked the USS Cole ... were they pirates?
I guess the question is: did the US demonstrate that the bad guys actions were committed "for private ends," (i.e., for economic gain) as opposed to some other violent reason?
It's not that difficult to recognize the difference between a Navy ship and a merchant one.... One might argue (in technicalities) that the pirates had a more "military" purpose, rather than a piratey purpose.
Such as ... identifying bigots and racists among FReepers.
Gonna have to be pretty fast with that shovel. };^)
I gave up long ago trying to follow libtard logic. Maybe you need to smoke a bong to understand.
I’m in IT and have to do a lot of “and” vs “or” comparisons. If you are careful with the wording, these guys qualify as pirates by meeting two conditions:
1) any illegal acts of violence or detention
and
2) directed:
(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft
The clause “for private ends” is not required to meet the definition of priate. Rather, it is there to provide cover for those acting under privateering, which could be (but was not) authorized by their national authorities.
the middle ‘s’ here appears to be sink,
as in deep six
as in no crater in water
8-) shoot, sink, shut up.
the shut up rule now applies including discussion over drinks as you can’t tell who’s listening anymore. (a case may be made you didn’t ever know who was listening in)
woerm
According to the article, the judge relied on the Smith decision of 1820, which states, "We have therefore no hesitation in declaring that piracy, by the law of nations, is robbery upon the sea.
Was a robbery committed or attempted? Probably ... but the prosecutors have to demonstrate intent here, as the bad guys never got close enough to commit an actual act of robbery. It's up to the prosecutors to show that they had that sort of thing in mind.
Part of due process is that the prosecutors have to have solid grounds for their charges.
In addition, those devoted to the non sequitur.
As a scientist, you must have be exposed to the rudiments of statistics. HyperLibroidism is much more common amongst America’s blacks than its whites.
Therefore the picture does have predictive value.
What is it like being a scientist in a state where Boulder Dementia Syndrome (BDS)is spreading like a rash?
Just google the name and do the bio!
Right. Looks to me that the charges were dismissed because they were unsuccessful......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.