Roaches Get Preferential Treatment in Federal Courts

December 1, 2007

Hello, Folks;

Today's lesson is that even roaches get preferential treatment over the average defendant in federal courts. Could this be professional courtesy?

Read U.S. v. Roach, 502 F.3d 425 (6th Circuit 2007) to get an idea of the truth of this statement.

On March 12, 2005, two Newport, Tennessee police officers, Roach and Sheldon, stopped two Mexicans driving a minivan. The two police officers questioned the two Mexicans, looked through the wallets of the two, frisked them and told them to drive away.

Subsequently, the two Mexicans discovered money was missing from their wallets. (Whodathunkit?)

After a lengthy investigation and two trials, the two officers were found guilty of violation of the civil rights of the two Mexicans.

At sentencing, Roach was sentenced to a mere 10 months in jail and 10 hours of community service, and Sheldon got two years probation.

From what I have read in other like cases, the defendants usually get the book tossed at them, ending up with sentences nearing the middle or upper range of the 10 years the statute allows.

Here, these two fine examples of law enforcement get a figurative slap on the wrist, a "shame on you" and are allowed to go on with their lives, no matter the breach of trust and black eye they give law enforcement's few honest officers left in the world.

Yessir. I think it is proper to say that the federal judicial good ole boy system of justice is alive and well in Tennessee (Judge J. Ronniegreer on the payroll, protecting police officers however he can) and the 6th circuit, Gilman and Griffin, and Ackerman, on loan from New Jersey, all going along with the scheme.

Yessir! the old double standard is alive and well and thriving in federal courts.

Join the No Vote Party and express your discontent with this kind of judicial nonsense.

D. Tom