Reply With Quote
(Some) US attorneys carry water for corporations and abuse the process on their behalf. That is, seeing that "justice" is done.
Bummer, but it's in keeping with the times. If you ain't too big to fail/jail, you ain't .
U.S. used 'unmitigated gall' and B.C. court to jail exec
The giant computer company Cisco and U.S. prosecutors deceived Canadian authorities and courts in a massive abuse of process to have a former executive thrown in jail, says a B.C. Supreme Court judge.
The point, said Justice Ronald McKinnon in a stinging decision delivered orally on Tuesday, was to derail a lawsuit launched by the former employee, and involved a series of machinations that would make a normal person “blanch at the audacity of it all.”
In a rare move, McKinnon stayed extradition proceedings against Peter Adekeye, a British computer entrepreneur who once worked for Cisco Systems, Inc.
The judge said U.S. prosecutors acted outrageously by having the respected executive bizarrely arrested in Vancouver on May 20, 2010 as he testified before a sitting of the American court he was accused of avoiding.
He called Adekeye’s ordeal something out of a novel by Joseph er, the author of Catch-22.
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/use...#ixzz1OF1WHmHC
(Some) US attorneys carry water for corporations and abuse the process on their behalf. That is, seeing that "justice" is done.
Bummer, but it's in keeping with the times. If you ain't too big to fail/jail, you ain't .
Last edited by Winehole23; 06-03-2011 at 03:13 PM.
Truly sad the leverage these corps have not just with the legislative, but also with the judicial...
Full judgement released today.
It was an interesting read. Also interesting is that the Assistant US Attorney for the Justice Department who is singled out by the judge for grossly lying, has prosecuted other cases for Cisco, and seemingly also been an invited speaker in a Cisco-sponsored event.
http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybe.../lytlePlea.htm
http://www.justice.gov/usao/can/pres...ced.press.html
http://archive.constantcontact.com/f...451267941.html
UCA rules, everbody's their fools.
Cisco just announced laying off 1000s, 10% of their workforce, "to increase their profits", which will probably up their stock price, which is probably the primary motivation, to enrich capitalists (execs and other stockholders).
More signs the economy isn't promising in the future.
That's your take away?
lawyers are hired s for lawyering and technicalities. They don't care about truth or justice, only about ringing up the hourly fees.
Officers of the court should take care that justice is done.
Lawyers don't get paid to see justice done. They get paid by their clients. It's a profession, not a legal aid charitable society.
They may not get paid to do so, but they do take an oath. I totally understand if that means nothing to you.
Well? Does it make a difference to you or not?
Are you a bot? Say something, dude.
Everybody else does it is not a winning defense for breaking one's oath. Nor is, I've done it a thousand times before; I didn't think I would get caught this time either.
Cha-ching, right?
Some swarthy Brit got squashed by abuse of process. BFD.
Cisco wins again. Walks home with pride and wallet intact, and the judge's thoughtful words to soothe its gentle conscience.
gfy, right?
I think the abuse of process in this case is de able. One has to wonder what would've happened if this case wasn't tried in Canada, but in America, where these officials have much more la ude to operate.
"is de able"
SOP for wealthy Corporate-Americans and their ARMY of lawyering s.
Here's an example of the extreme activist right-wing SCOTUS slamming the court house door on individual's ability to seek compensation when forced to eat "external costs" of Corporate-American profits:
Judge Tosses Out Massive Ground Poisoning Class Action Against Dow Chemical
Earlier this year, in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, the Supreme Court drastically limited the ability of plaintiffs who all share a similar injury to join together in a class action to hold major lawbreakers accountable for their actions. Thanks to this precedent, Dow Chemical just convinced a state judge in Michigan to strip over one hundred landowners of their right to join together to hold the chemical giant accountable for poisoning their land:
Operations at Dow’s Midland plant have spread dioxin — a highly toxic and cancer-causing byproduct of the chemical manufacturing process — and other chemicals, through the tabawassee and Saginaw Rivers and into Lake Huron. Flooding of the rivers downstream from Dow has deposited dioxin-laden sediments on properties in the floodplain.
Sampling of floodplain properties has revealed dioxin contamination at levels thousands of times higher than allowed by Michigan and prompted state health officials to warned [sic] residents to keep children from playing in dirt near their homes, to wear masks while mowing their lawns, to avoid eating fish and livestock raised in the floodplain and to take other precautions. [...]
The plaintiffs claim that they are not able to fully use their properties because of the contamination and that their properties have lost value. [...] In an opinion released Tuesday [Judge Leopold] Borello reversed his earlier approval of class status for the group.
He said that the case met the Michigan guidelines for class standards but that the recent U.S. Supreme Court case Wal-Mart v. Dukes has created a new rules for what a group must have in common with one another in order to be considered a class.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...-class-action/
=======
Another suckers game: Corporate-Americans: 1, Human-Americans: 0
Why do you say that?
Layoffs protect the profits and bonuses of this country's job creators. More money for job creators = more jobs.
Therefore, Layoffs = More Jobs.
@boutons:Relevance? That's not an abuse of process that's just a result you don't like.
It's relevant as an example of a Corporate-American buying a win in court.
Whether it's abuse of process or use of wealth (lawyer s) to buy wins in court, same category, same judicial bias in favor of Corporate-Americans.
Defining a "class" so narrowly is the judicial decision of "divide and conquer". Now individual landowners (or other plaintiffs) have to find/finance a lawyer to go up against Corporate-American team of lawyers. Fat chance finding a trial lawyer who would work on contingency for the small sum that would be awarded to one landowner vs the much larger sum won by an 1000 or 1000s of plaintiffs in a class.
(same problem with tort reform: TX lawyers won't spend time to get a slice of the $250K cap)
So do you "like" the Dow ruling that s the owners of Dow-poisoned lands?
Last edited by boutons_deux; 07-24-2011 at 04:36 PM.
Unfamiliar with the case, don't like the result. Why should I?
Abuse of process is cheapened if you call every adverse result abuse of process.
then don't do it
Oh, now it's my fault. I see how you are.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
