WHAT??? Judge dismisses all charges against 3 'extremist Muslim' New Mexico compound suspects

originally posted by: openyourmind1262
a reply to: watchitburn

I second this statement. It is precisely what's needed.

Seconded

This is outrageous. The same people championing their release are the first ones in line to call for "gun control"

Anyone seeing a theme here? They support the murderous terrorist criminals while trying to disarm the rest of us. They have shown this through their actions and constant rhetoric.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: Vasa Croe

READ THIS:

The owner of the property in Mexico, Jason Badger, on Friday took the Associated Press on a tour of the property, which is littered with diesel cans, used diapers, household garbage and Korans. He questioned why authorities did not search the squalid New Mexico compound for the boy, saying he told them in late spring that he had met the child's father at the site and that the man was wanted in Georgia for kidnapping his own son.

"If they knew about it, and then that kid died in that timeframe, when they knew, somebody has to be held accountable," Badger said.

Fox News

Trash in your home is not a crime.

Probable cause is needed to conduct search warrants and from the statements of the sheriff at the time he wanted to go in but had no legal way to do so. It was not until one of the suspects made a call that gave them evidence for a warrant.

Did you read what I posted? Because within my post that you responded to it said that the owner was told by one of the men on the compound that he was wanted for kidnapping his son. The owner told the authorities about this months ago and now we find the boy dead.

I understand what you are saying now. Thanks for clarification cause i did not get it the first time.

That must be why there were watching them and perhaps they never seen the son so they did not go in until the call from the inside.

What you say definitely fly's in the face of the sheriffs statements that he was looking for a reason to go in for a long time before he went in.

Only thing i can think of is that the person wanted for kidnapping was never seen by the sheriff and therefore the statement was just hearsay. He would have been violating rights to go in on them just on one second hand account of a wanted person being there.

Now if the guys name was on some documents then that would have been more than hearsay.

Wow.

Just.. wow.

Something very suspicious about this from the beginning. Their release and subsequent dismissal of the charges only deepens the mystery.

If the prosecution does not elect to retry this case I think it is clear something bigger is going on. I do not buy the constant line of "coincidences" TPTB always seem to leave behind

a reply to: JBurns

This is outrageous. The same people championing their release are the first ones in line to call for "gun control"

The claims of compound and stockpile of weapons when there were less than 5 does not help average citizens feel safe from police when we have people calling having less than 5 guns to be evidence of a crime and act as though it is a bad thing.

I feel that we have to be careful of lowering the bar in these cases where media hyperbole and lack of facts is flying in our face.

Judge dismisses all charges against 3 'extremist Muslim' New Mexico compound suspects

So what makes these 3 extremist?

What makes these 3 guilty of anything?

What made that travel trailer a compound?

That is the media hyperbole that is keeping so many confused on this topic.

Hope someone is checking all banking accounts (on and off shore) of the prosector(s) for large deposits...

From the way the local article reads to me, the Father of the Child and one of his partners are still in jail facing charges. It sounds to me like prosecutors focused on those two. The 10 days ran out on these 3 so legally they had to be released, but it sounds like they will come back and indict them via Grand Jury.

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: howtonhawky

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: Vasa Croe

READ THIS:

The owner of the property in Mexico, Jason Badger, on Friday took the Associated Press on a tour of the property, which is littered with diesel cans, used diapers, household garbage and Korans. He questioned why authorities did not search the squalid New Mexico compound for the boy, saying he told them in late spring that he had met the child's father at the site and that the man was wanted in Georgia for kidnapping his own son.

"If they knew about it, and then that kid died in that timeframe, when they knew, somebody has to be held accountable," Badger said.

Fox News

Trash in your home is not a crime.

Probable cause is needed to conduct search warrants and from the statements of the sheriff at the time he wanted to go in but had no legal way to do so. It was not until one of the suspects made a call that gave them evidence for a warrant.

Did you read what I posted? Because within my post that you responded to it said that the owner was told by one of the men on the compound that he was wanted for kidnapping his son. The owner told the authorities about this months ago and now we find the boy dead.

I understand what you are saying now. Thanks for clarification cause i did not get it the first time.

That must be why there were watching them and perhaps they never seen the son so they did not go in until the call from the inside.

What you say definitely fly's in the face of the sheriffs statements that he was looking for a reason to go in for a long time before he went in.

Only thing i can think of is that the person wanted for kidnapping was never seen by the sheriff and therefore the statement was just hearsay. He would have been violating rights to go in on them just on one second hand account of a wanted person being there.

Now if the guys name was on some documents then that would have been more than hearsay.

I agree.

I tell you one thing im not sure if i trust the FBI to have raided once they had enough evidence. They may have just monitored them enough to find out exactly what their plan was and just watch it play out so they could use the situation in their favor like they did for 9/11. Im sure glad that sharrif was looking out for us.

Then again the FBI said the Sharrif moved too quickly and they hadn't had time to gather enough evidence to keep them detained. I wonder if they knew the boy was dead in there? Surely they knew that dude was there and wanted for kidnapping? They had been supposedly watching the compound for months.

Something definitely smells fishy. Im going to do some research and if i find out enough I'll be making a thread.

a reply to: howtonhawky

I suppose the dead body of a child laying around was also incidental?

Or their plans to conduct domestic attacks within the United States?

Why was the crime scene demolished?

IMO it reeks of some type of false-flag/preparation of a false-flag/sleeper cell/etc. Of course I accept the possibility it could be regular old zealotry and extremism or even that these people could be not guilty of a crime (it looks bad, but they have the right to a presumption of innocence)

My outrage is directed at the prosecution for not meeting his state's legal requirement, for demolishing the crime scene (along with how many unrelated others?)

And some outrage is also directed at those immediately seeking to provide cover for them. That's a great attitude, only problem is they selectively apply it. For instance, from the second those ridiculous invented Russian conspiracy allegations started flinging at Trump, how many on the left recognized his right to a presumption of innocence?

Not many. Some, but not many. So I find it interested those same people would immediately jump to their defense. Lets switch gears, if this was a white family with a compound and 5 firearms and allegations of terror-plots would those same people be defending them? I'm very curious

My first thought on the whole story is the locals stumbled onto something they were not supposed to find, and a federal agency that was involved swooped in to sweep it under the rug.

a reply to: Alien Abduct

From what i remember of the confession he killed his son within a week of being apprehended.

The only thing that comes to mind is that the fbi was trying to gather a terrorist case against them instead of just arresting him for the kidnapping. Perhaps that is why the boy is dead and would account for the reports of the kidnapper being there not being acted on.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

This is insane!

Nope, that's New Mexico. It's a beautiful state which has been horribly missrun by it's elected officials for decades now.

originally posted by: howtonhawky
Judge dismisses all charges against 3 'extremist Muslim' New Mexico compound suspects

So what makes these 3 extremist?

What makes these 3 guilty of anything?

What made that travel trailer a compound?

That is the media hyperbole that is keeping so many confused on this topic.

What makes them extremists?

Uh...are you serious? You dont think that living out in the middle of a desert without running water or electricity and teaching kids how to shoot up a school is extreme?

What makes these 3 guilty of anything?

I think a better question is with all the evidence of crimes why havent they been held?

What made that travel trailer a compound?

Because that's exactly how they do it at home.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

OK, I think I've wrapped my head around this after reading that article, and a few others. The Prosecutors, for whatever reason, "because prosecutors missed the 10-day limit for an evidentiary hearing to establish probable cause" - a seemingly fundamental part of the process to prosecute.

The charge dropped was for child abuse, for 3 of the 5 initially arrested. All other charges against all 5(five) remain in effect.

The Prosecution can still call for a grand jury indictment to have the charge reinstated.

From what I can gather, the judge would have broken the law if the charges were allowed to continue, so this is a technical issue that the prosecution failed to address but still has an avenue to pursue the original charge.

Since that bolded bit is the law, the prosecution failed in their duty, so this situation is the prosecutions fault, and I'll repeat it again, they can still have the charge reinstated via a grand jury indictment.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
You dont think that living out in the middle of a desert without running water or electricity

This part of your statement does not make anyone an extremist. I've lived with no electricity or running water, it's a window into one's ruggedness, not one's penchant for terroristic views.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: howtonhawky

I suppose the dead body of a child laying around was also incidental?

Or their plans to conduct domestic attacks within the United States?

Why was the crime scene demolished?

IMO it reeks of some type of false-flag/preparation of a false-flag/sleeper cell/etc. Of course I accept the possibility it could be regular old zealotry and extremism or even that these people could be not guilty of a crime (it looks bad, but they have the right to a presumption of innocence)

My outrage is directed at the prosecution for not meeting his state's legal requirement, for demolishing the crime scene (along with how many unrelated others?)

And some outrage is also directed at those immediately seeking to provide cover for them. That's a great attitude, only problem is they selectively apply it. For instance, from the second those ridiculous invented Russian conspiracy allegations started flinging at Trump, how many on the left recognized his right to a presumption of innocence?

Not many. Some, but not many. So I find it interested those same people would immediately jump to their defense. Lets switch gears, if this was a white family with a compound and 5 firearms and allegations of terror-plots would those same people be defending them? I'm very curious

5 weapons is not a stockpile no matter the color of a persons skin.

A travel trailer is not a compound no matter who it is.

Allegations of terror plots were obviously unfounded.

The crime scene being demolished is something i do not have facts on but i imagine that the owners had some say in it.

Let us not pretend that the place was not investigated though.

There was no dead body laying around. He was buried.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

This is what i gathered also. With this case being so dann important its hard to fathom how the prosecutor could botch the case over such a simple task. Something is amiss here.

a reply to: Alien Abduct

shoot up a school

That does not seem to be supported by facts and it negates the rest of your statement.imo

At home i guess you mean the middle east.

I have never seen a travel trailer in the middle east made into a compound.

Honestly with respect i feel your answers do not equate justification against this judges decision.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
You dont think that living out in the middle of a desert without running water or electricity

This part of your statement does not make anyone an extremist. I've lived with no electricity or running water, it's a window into one's ruggedness, not one's penchant for terroristic views.

Your confusion could perhaps be relieved if you read the whole sentence instead of erroneously taking a section of one sentence out of context.

Try reading the second half of the same sentence where it said they were teaching kids how to shoot up schools. Its one sentence and should be read as such.....SMH

here it is....

You dont think that living out in the middle of a desert without running water or electricity and teaching kids how to shoot up a school is extreme?