Two illegal Latinos rape 14-year-old girl in Maryland high school

[Uruz]

Stop the pointless discussion and please buy someone a knife, bag of salt, pills of viagra for the father of that girl. Yea and a bottle of liquor so his little faggot-moral angel goes away and he can fully enjoy the glory of revenge.

Laws are for cucked civilised men.

EDIT : If you US citizens can convince Trump to pardon me after, I would gladly buy a ticket to Maryland and do it in the name of her father, I would live stream that shit if you guys interested.

 

[BrewDog]

Stop the pointless discussion and please buy someone a knife, bag of salt, pills of viagra for the father of that girl. Yea and a bottle of liquor so his little faggot-moral angel goes away and he can fully enjoy the glory of revenge.

Laws are for cucked civilised men.

I normally enjoy your comments, but I have to take exception here.

Should no one have a trial? Have you ever been accused of something you didn't do? I fucking have and that shit was horrible for a few hours until the girl admitted she was just angry and told her dad a bunch of lies.

Her father was an honorable man and called the police back to tell them that his daughter had "exaggerated a bit" and the chief of police gave me his blessing and I went on my way. But had she stuck with her BS story, I would have been completely fucked in college and for the rest of my life. I have never hit a girl in my life, but she claimed I "roughed her up." And I fucking didn't.

Anyone can claim anything. That's why we have courts and trials so that no one can just accuse you of some horrible shit and then you get your head chopped off.

 

[MMX2010]

I merely cited the law, and suddenly I'm a Social Justice Warrior. I think that's odd.

You didn't merely cite the law. You made a strong prediction of acquittal, based on certain laws you cited. But when you cited those laws, you drove both me and Fisto into wanting stronger punishments.

I asked if you are a lawyer. And now I'm asking out again, because you didn't answer me the first time.

If you're not a lawyer, that would explain why you stir murderous feelings in at least two people when you argue the law.

 

[Uruz]

No, I haven't but if I was born in the States I probably would, justly or unjustly.

Of course, anyone can claim anything and you might get fucked as result, its bad and shit might happen.

I am probably not the one with whom you should discuss law, courts and so on. I don't think I am a man that is 100% suited for a life in 21st century civilisation. If heard that something like this happened to anyone in my family I probably would not really care and do the right stuff myself. But as well, you usually don't leave rape scene without any visible and obvious marks, especially if it was two guys.

And yea, especially if I heard that it was done by immigrants I would not care at all for their rights. You are alien on my soil, the soil is not defined by law or by whatever regime is currently in power, but by my blood.

 

[nomadbrah]

It's definitely right that the constitution doesn't count for illegals. An absurd proposition in the first place. Illegals are invaders and fall under military jurisdiction not legal.

 

[BrewDog]

I asked if you are a lawyer. And now I'm asking out again, because you didn't answer me the first time.

Look a few posts upwards. Does that look like the face of a lawyer or a lawman?

What is your expertise with the law? Feelings?

 

[BrewDog]

It's definitely right that the constitution doesn't count for illegals. An absurd proposition in the first place. Illegals are invaders and fall under military jurisdiction not legal.

A few rows up I posted the case law; the United States Supreme Court disagrees.

 

[worldwidetraveler]

But when you cited those laws, you drove both me and Fisto into wanting stronger punishments.

Why would that matter to anyone? You act like Brewdog is trying to persuade you.

From my understanding, Brewdog is correct about legal protections afforded anyone who is on our land. I don't get what issues you are having with them being procecuted, throwing them into a jail where they will get raped and getting them out of the country. Screw the deportation bullshit. Too many deportees come back just to screw up another citizen's life. They need to be held accountable and throw in jail before they are deported. They won't like prison once the other inmates find out what they did. Deportation on its own isn't enough of a deterrent.

 

[Samseau]

I don't think BrewDog is being an SJW at all. He's merely stating what the Supreme Court has ruled on this subject.

I agree that the Supreme Court ruled incorrectly, however. I think the Supreme Court is very flawed and has made rulings that make no sense. Gay marriage being one of the most egregious, for example.

nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

The 14th Amendment only applies to STATE governments, not federal. The federal Bill of Rights only applies to citizens. So although State governments must give due process, Federal Authorities do not.

Therefore in crimes involving illegal immigrants of a serious, felony level nature, ICE should step in and deal with the extradition/execution process.

With horribly violent crimes, it makes no sense to send such a person back to a country where they can harm more people. As long as there is solid proof the person did terrible violence, they should just get a summary execution by military judge.

 

[MMX2010]

But when you cited those laws, you drove both me and Fisto into wanting stronger punishments.

Why would that matter to anyone? You act like Brewdog is trying to persuade you.

Brewdog made a specific prediction (acquittal) based on him citing certain laws. But citing those laws produces the opposite emotion effect needed for acquittal, which makes his prediction nonsensical.

 

[BrewDog]

You look like a little weasel too.

Have you ever been in a valley by yourself in the middle of the night with no other agents within miles to help you and suddenly you encounter 70 people? You can't even call anyone on the radio because you're too far away to hit the repeater, so you have to deal with that huge group of people by yourself?

I have.

And that's why I thought your PM threat was a little bit cute. Send some more PM's please. I enjoy laughing. If I can handle 70 people alone, then 69 less doesn't worry me.

 

[worldwidetraveler]

Brewdog made a specific prediction (acquittal) based on him citing certain laws. But citing those laws produces the opposite emotion effect needed for acquittal, which makes his prediction nonsensical.

I must have missed his post about acquittal. All I saw was his comments about due process which, as far as I am aware, is accurate. Same for tourists as well.

You continue talking about him making you want harsher penalties as if that means anything to anyone.

What we need is jailable offences for people who allow these sanctuary cities. We need stricter responses to people who allow this behavior to cultivate. From my understanding, the only response is to withhold government funding if they break the law. The people running these sanctuary cities should be procecuted.

 

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Constitutional rights should not be given to people who are not legally in the country.

I don't care if SJWs from 1982 or 1886 or 2053 think they should.

hshit2:

 

[rudebwoy]

http://www.kwbg.com/2017/03/24/barnhardt-sentenced-to-205-years-in-prison/

 

[Enigma]

http://www.kwbg.com/2017/03/24/barnhardt-sentenced-to-205-years-in-prison/

Yes, there are white rapists, just like there are white illegal immigrants, and even... (shocking) white Latinos!

Rapists should go to jail, illegal immigrants should be deported, and illegal immigrants should have less rights than citizens and legal immigrants, regardless of what race they are.

What is so hard to understand about that for some people?

 

[MMX2010]

Enigma, I'm also annoyed that rudebwoy didn't explain why he posted that link. But I took it as an example of an extremely long sentence of a convicted pedophile.

 

[Enigma]

Enigma, I'm also annoyed that rudebwoy didn't explain why he posted that link. But I took it as an example of an extremely long sentence of a convicted pedophile.

He got such a long sentence because he was 38, he raped multiple victims, several of the victims were under 12 (a worse crime, as Merenguero pointed out earlier), he abused them over a period of several years, and he recorded it (child porn).

The cases are nothing alike. The boys in Maryland aren't even charged with any age-related sex crimes.

 

[Renzy]

This case would take a turn for crazy if it turns out the girl had prior sexual relations with at least one of the guys.

Samseau I don't know how you do it...but the Washington Post is now reporting that the girl sent texts and “explicitly compromising images of herself” to the accused prior to the incident:

Attorneys for one of the two suspects accused of raping a 14-year-old girl in a bathroom stall at Rockville High School said the girl texted their client the day before the incident and agreed to have sex with him, according to court papers filed Monday.

The girl also texted “explicitly compromising images of herself” to him, the attorneys asserted in the court filing.

Also hints that the girl had previous sexual relations with one of the accused:

On March 17, the suspects appeared in court and were ordered held on no-bond status, based on the seriousness of the charges and their immigration history that made them extreme flight risks. Montano was charged as an adult.

On Monday, the attorneys for Montano asked for a hearing to have his bond conditions reviewed. They cited new evidence that has surfaced — the text messages allegedly sent by the girl to their client. The girl, they said, wrote about previous sexual activity with Montano and agreed to have sex with him “the next day, during P.E. class.”

 

[nomadbrah]

This case would take a turn for crazy if it turns out the girl had prior sexual relations with at least one of the guys.

Samseau I don't know how you do it...but the Washington Post is now reporting that the girl sent texts and “explicitly compromising images of herself” to the accused prior to the incident:

Attorneys for one of the two suspects accused of raping a 14-year-old girl in a bathroom stall at Rockville High School said the girl texted their client the day before the incident and agreed to have sex with him, according to court papers filed Monday.

The girl also texted “explicitly compromising images of herself” to him, the attorneys asserted in the court filing.

Also hints that the girl had previous sexual relations with one of the accused:

On March 17, the suspects appeared in court and were ordered held on no-bond status, based on the seriousness of the charges and their immigration history that made them extreme flight risks. Montano was charged as an adult.

On Monday, the attorneys for Montano asked for a hearing to have his bond conditions reviewed. They cited new evidence that has surfaced — the text messages allegedly sent by the girl to their client. The girl, they said, wrote about previous sexual activity with Montano and agreed to have sex with him “the next day, during P.E. class.”

Oh my, this is a pickle isn't it?

This requires a PHD in Victim Hiearchy Studies.

Two illegal latino immigrants vs a girl who got raped (or did she)?

If they allow the "intent" of the girl by using this information, that means no does not mean no and that we can't trust their testimony only?

Mental gymnastics will be very interesting to follow.

 

[DarkTriad]

Is Tucker not understanding the law, or are you not understanding TV? Almost everything you complained about is good TV for his demographic. And how is he out of line asking for the fee? Just because you're not allowed to answer doesn't means others aren't allowed to ask. If the guy decides to get up on TV and raise questions about other people it's time to put on his big boy pants and be ready to deal with awkward questions himself.

Tucker was a history major. The other guy has a law degree.

Does the lawyer also have a degree in journalism? Because this doesn't appear to be a legal proceeding in a courtroom, it's an interview. A lawyer is certainly entitled to explain how a law works, but a journalist is also entitled to ask questions that reveal whether a particular law is good policy. That's part of the process where we change laws in a democracy. And the lawyer decided to willingly subject himself to these questions by volunteering for this