Replies

The police chief said there were no charges because “there was no victim”, since nobody (except the slut) was there to see the indecent exposure.

The rationale used there would mean that a participant in a crime can’t be a victim of the crime. So how could they ever arrest somebody for drug use? Not using a seat belt? Speeding when you’re the only person on the road? Entering the country illegally if nobody sees you do it? Forging a birth certificate? Who are the “victims” of those crimes?

The excuses made reveal a mindset that deserves further scrutiny.

This cop was connected to the democratic polical establishment. I posted a link to a site that noted some of the connections earlier; I could fetch it again.

Here’s what I posted earlier:

Apparently this guy is well-connected with the NM Democratic Party. According to http://joemonahansnewmexico.blogspot.com/ :

“The ties of La Politica go deep indeed and they are now surfacing in the notorious case of State Police Officer Bert Lopez. He’s been identified by the press as the officer who had his way with a lady friend on the hood of her Honda while he was in full uniform . The sexcapade near Santa Fe was captured on security video and Lopez, Jr. awaits disciplinary action. Now to the officer’s ties to La Politica from one of our Alligators:

Lopez is the grandson of Alex Armijo, a former Santa Fe politico and former Dem state land commissioner. And his political ties don’t stop there. His mother, Raquel Lopez, is a close friend of Lenore Naranjo, the Chief Clerk of the State Senate and serves as a Senate clerk...Lenore Naranjo is pushing Bert Lopez Jr.’s nephew, Vince Torres, for Deputy Chief Clerk of the Senate. If this comes to pass, Vince Torres would be the first male to have such a post... “

As a longtime advocate of taking victimless crimes off the books, I'd like to civilly respond to your examples, if you don't mind.

So how could they ever arrest somebody for drug use? Not using a seat belt? Speeding when you’re the only person on the road?

None of these actually directly interefere with the rights of another. Indirect interference situations - "victimless crimes", in leyman's terms - shouldn't result in criminal litigation.

Entering the country illegally if nobody sees you do it?

Entering the country requires crossing Federal, State, and Private property lines. Direct interference of property holder's exclusive rights. Criminal charge? Trespassing, several different deviations. Deportation if federal or state borders involved.

Forging a birth certificate?

Forging a birth certificate is essentially fraud, thus directly interfering with those financially and legally affected by the addition of another number in the census pool. Direct interference. In context of you-know-who's Birth Certificate, compounded interference because his decisions directly affect the rights of every single citizen. Criminal charge? Fraud, possible identity fabrication in the first case. The second? High treason.