Why? What is even the supposed reason for this? These crimes are horrible.
Because he wants to punish the people who voted him out? Also to pardon a guy for homicide that donated to him. Those would be my guesses. Bevin is another big time Trump supporter too.Why? What is even the supposed reason for this? These crimes are horrible.
Look, keeping people in prison costs a lot of money, so he's helping taxpayers out here. Duh.Why? What is even the supposed reason for this? These crimes are horrible.
It is wrong what he did but it wasn't 428 violent criminals. That is misleading.It is probably horrible, but the story is "some" of the 428 are violent criminals.
It is not misleading, it is incorrect. I have not seen what the number is, it seems like at least a dozen terrible ones of disgusting and/or violent offenders. But it could be much higher. I am sure they will investigate and provide more specific details. At least some of the 428 were legitimate ones that were recommended.It is wrong what he did but it wasn't 428 violent criminals. That is misleading.
Honestly that's where I'm at.but....why?
How do you know it's wrong?It is wrong what he did but it wasn't 428 violent criminals. That is misleading.
You've researched and are aware of the evidence presented in all 428?Why? What is even the supposed reason for this? These crimes are horrible.
It's the Washington Post. I take it you consider such to then not be Fake News?I read the article.
Rant awayIt's the Washington Post. I take it you consider such to then not be Fake News?
I'll keep my rant here to a minimum, but, through no intentional fault of reporters, I will continue to insist that reporting on specific criminal matters is going to be inherently flawed and incomplete. I strongly encourage anyone to not reach a set conclusion about a criminal case based solely on a newspaper article.
The article clearly says "some' of these are violent criminals. They do give several examples but it is just a subset of some size. The examples they lay out seem troubling though, but more details would be good.How do you know it's wrong?
He's right, GB. Not all 428 were violent criminals (I'm guessing not even close). There's examples offered in the article:It's the Washington Post. I take it you consider such to then not be Fake News?
I'll keep my rant here to a minimum, but, through no intentional fault of reporters, I will continue to insist that reporting on specific criminal matters is going to be inherently flawed and incomplete. I strongly encourage anyone to not reach a set conclusion about a criminal case based solely on a newspaper article.
That's obviously not the main takeaway here, but we should all try to be more accurate with stuff like this.Bevin also pardoned Louisville community activist Christopher IIX, who was convicted of possession of a controlled substance in 1990 and theft by failure to make disposition in 1997, according to local reports. In the pardon, Bevin said the activist “has turned his life around after a rocky start many years ago and has paid his debt to society.”
I agree. But the lack of details is Bevin's fault more so than the reporters (who would need weeks to dig through the dockets and old reporting). He and his people could have provided explanations for them up front. They also could have given more complete answers than they gave to media inquiries.The article clearly says "some' of these are violent criminals. They do give several examples but it is just a subset of some size. The examples they lay out seem troubling though, but more details would be good.
Guy served just over a year. Sickening.A Kenton County man was sentenced to 23 years in prison for sexual assault of an Erlanger youth that began when she was just 9 years old.
I don't have any confidence he will be cleared. It looks like a few were in response to donations. Something slimy went down, but let's try not to put out fake news.I agree. But the lack of details is Bevin's fault more so than the reporters (who would need weeks to dig through the dockets and old reporting). He and his people could have provided explanations for them up front. They also could have given more complete answers than they gave to media inquiries.
For what seems like the sketchiest example (the guy convicted of reckless homicide and a bunch of other stuff who served only two years, whose partners weren't pardoned, and whose family threw fundraisers for Bevins) they simply said he "made a series of unwise decisions in his adult life” and that “his drug addiction resulted in his association with people that in turn led to his arrest, prosecution and conviction for murder.” If that's the standard for a pardon we're gonna solve that prison overcrowding problem pretty quick!
If by "fake news" you mean saying that 428 violent criminals were pardoned, I agree.I don't have any confidence he will be cleared. It looks like a few were in response to donations. Something slimy went down, but let's try not to put out fake news.
I meant the former. I had no issue with the actual article.If by "fake news" you mean saying that 428 violent criminals were pardoned, I agree.
If by "fake news" you mean publishing this news article that makes Bevins look really really bad, that's entirely on Bevins. A mass pardoning on the way out the door that includes people convicted of horrific crimes is big news. The news media has no choice but to publish it. If there's a legitimate defense to what he's done Bevins should have offered it already.
See my previous post. I FIXED THE THREAD TITLE. I wasn't trying to be misleading.I don't have any confidence he will be cleared. It looks like a few were in response to donations. Something slimy went down, but let's try not to put out fake news.
Did not think you were intentionally doing it.See my previous post. I FIXED THE THREAD TITLE. I wasn't trying to be misleading.
Just because of the pareona doesnt mean theyre not welching you.Look at this thread. Jon and Tobias agreeing. Everyone getting along and agreeing the pareona were bad. This is like ####### Utopia!
He said “it’s wrong what he did.” How do we know the 428 pardons were wrong?The article clearly says "some' of these are violent criminals. They do give several examples but it is just a subset of some size. The examples they lay out seem troubling though, but more details would be good.
I should have said some but hey if you want to make a project of it I'm always game...You've researched and are aware of the evidence presented in all 428?
I interpreted “he” as the governor. Maybe I misread somewhere.He's right, GB. Not all 428 were violent criminals (I'm guessing not even close). There's examples offered in the article:
That's obviously not the main takeaway here, but we should all try to be more accurate with stuff like this.
Go nuts. Should only take you a few thousand hours to get to know those cases well enough.I should have said some but hey if you want to make a project of it I'm always game...
Well its Friday at 5:02 and my beer drinking has already been delayed by 5 hours so why the hell not.... maybe I'll just post the article first because I'm not even sure everyone has seen the whole thing.Go nuts. Should only take you a few thousand hours to get to know those cases well enough.
I think the WaPo is about as good as it gets.Well its Friday at 5:02 and my beer drinking has already been delayed by 5 hours so why the hell not.... maybe I'll just post the article first because I'm not even sure everyone has seen the whole thing.
I sometimes think that I am too blithe about these things. It's Friday evening, etc. ... But. Just looking at this point - let's talk about process as I understand it there have been 428 pardons since the first week of November, so that's roughly 6 weeks, right?But there’s no ####### way whether they know whether those pardons are justified or not.
I’ve researched and believe I am aware of the evidence in several of them, some of which are cases I at least understand what he was thinking, some of which seem to be unbelievable pardons to issue. He appears to be unilaterally deciding that rape, child molestation, and murder convictions without DNA are conspiracy convictions brought about by an out of control prosecution team.You've researched and are aware of the evidence presented in all 428?
Interesting. Any idea where that’s coming from?I’ve researched and believe I am aware of the evidence in several of them, some of which are cases I at least understand what he was thinking, some of which seem to be unbelievable pardons to issue. He appears to be unilaterally deciding that rape, child molestation, and murder convictions without DNA are conspiracy convictions brought about by an out of control prosecution team.
No, and I hope it isn’t something we ever have to find out.Interesting. Any idea where that’s coming from?
Taking it from another angle, assuming that a significant proportion of these are justified, it would indicate to me that the justice system in Kentucky is really messed up given, then, that the outcomes were erroneous in so many cases. And beyond that, if all these corrections of the justice system were appropriate, it was pretty lousy and cowardly of this Governor to wait until he was voted out of office to apply corrections.But there’s no ####### way whether they know whether those pardons are justified or not.
We don't know that all 428 pardons were wrong.He said “it’s wrong what he did.” How do we know the 428 pardons were wrong?
GOODThis is becoming a big deal.
- KY State Senate - read Republicans- are calling for a federal investigation, and there’s more coming out about the specific cases.
A Republican Senate holding a Republican executive responsible for his actions? I'm confused.This is becoming a big deal.
- KY State Senate - read Republicans- are calling for a federal investigation, and there’s more coming out about the specific cases.
It will be determined this is all Chelsea Clinton's fault.A Republican Senate holding a Republican executive responsible for his actions? I'm confused.
Probably Jimmy Carter too.It will be determined this is all Chelsea Clinton's fault.