High Profile Arrests Recently you may not have Heard About... [Archive]

Devastatin Dave

09-05-2008, 15:09

A lot of coverage about the elections and such, here's two important developements you may have missed...

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gMmCL2ZE66E0ZnDDmXkjF5E4b9NgD9305QK01

The Mayor of Detroit will be sproting an orange jumpsuit this year intead of his Armane suit and bling
Also Jack "The Dirtbag lobbiest" Abramhoff gets 4 years in the pokey..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080905/ap_on_go_ot/abramoff_sentencing_20

You know, I'm liking this. Sen Stevens might be next. The more these high profile politicians and their enablers start seeing bars, maybe they'll be less enthusiastic about backroom deals and such.

Finally a subject I would hope we can all agree on.

So here's the question, do you think that this is a start of more accountability within our the US government (and other countries) or are these just scapegoats of a broken system?

Ice

09-05-2008, 16:21

Jolt

09-05-2008, 16:25

One question: Who are those two people and why are they high profile? Surely they are unheard of the entire European population.

Lemur

09-05-2008, 16:33

I'm glad these scumbags are going down. Now why is William Jefferson (http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/gill/index.ssf?/base//news-0/122059205098330.xml&coll=1) still free?

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 16:54

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gMmCL2ZE66E0ZnDDmXkjF5E4b9NgD9305QK01

OMG!

Assuming I have understood this case correctly, this just blows my mind. All he did was have sex with his secretary? And this starts off a media and legal circus costing millions of dollars and him eventually going to jail? Unbelievable. Simply unbelievable.

I thought you people learned your lesson with Clinton. Apparently not. :no:

Someone tell me I have this case all wrong. Please tell me he did something more than have sex. Please.

drone

09-05-2008, 17:04

OMG!

Assuming I have understood this case correctly, this just blows my mind. All he did was have sex with his secretary? And this starts off a media and legal circus costing millions of dollars and him eventually going to jail? Unbelievable. Simply unbelievable.

I thought you people learned your lesson with Clinton. Apparently not. :no:

Someone tell me I have this case all wrong. Please tell me he did something more than have sex. Please.

The scandal stems from a whistleblower lawsuit filed by two former police officers who accused Kilpatrick of retaliating against them for trying to investigate misconduct by the mayor and his security detail. Questioned under oath in 2004 and 2007, Kilpatrick repeatedly denied having an affair with his chief of staff, Christine Beatty.

But the Detroit Free Press later obtained text messages between the two — some of them sexually explicit — and published excerpts. Kilpatrick and Beatty were later charged.

In addition to perjury, Kilpatrick was accused of misleading City Council when he secured its approval of an $8.4 million settlement with three former police officers. Prosecutors said he settled to keep the text messages from becoming public.It's not the sex, but the cover up. Just like it always is. Good riddance to him.

Happy about Abramhoff as well. I guess my question is: How much did he spill, and will that keep him from getting pardoned on Jan 19th?

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 17:14

It's not the sex, but the cover up. Just like it always is. Good riddance to him.

....But why did he try to cover it up....?

Gah I say. Hopeless.

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 17:24

Ronin

09-05-2008, 17:33

It's the same thing as the Bill Clinton deal, but this guys also pushed a State Trooper to stop him from handing an associate a subpoena, jumped his bail by attending a meeting across the lake in Canada (when all he had to do was tell somebody at the court.)

Perjury under oath about an affair with an employee using government equipment + assault on a Trooper in order to block an investigation + jumping bail across national lines without notifying your bail board = 4 months in prison, 5 years probation, removal of your license to practice law and the Democratic Governor asking forcefully that you resign.

You really believe that this is unfair? You believe that it was unfair that Clinton was "technically impeached" without leaving office for banging an employee in his office and lying under oath about it? I don't see the injustice unless I'm looking at the Mayor and the President.

You would protect anyone on the left it seems no matter what their crimes. Didn't you once say that Stalin was a hero?

In the case of Clinton I think he commited perjury on a question that no one had any right asking anyway....so I think that makes it square between the 2 parts....

if I was questioned in that way about my private life I would probably lie as well.....the only person who had the right to ask those questions of him was his wife....not some hatchet man from the "holier-than-thou" toe-tapping republicans...

this case is considerably more serious because of the assault issue and the bail jumping.....I´ll give you that.

drone

09-05-2008, 17:36

....But why did he try to cover it up....?

Gah I say. Hopeless.

Politicians don't like the constituency to know who else they are screwing, because the constituency doesn't like them to be unfaithful. ~;)

Devastatin Dave

09-05-2008, 18:02

I'm glad these scumbags are going down. Now why is William Jefferson (http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/gill/index.ssf?/base//news-0/122059205098330.xml&coll=1) still free?

You know, I haven't heard much about Mr Jefferson lately, maybe the Matag man left $300,000 in the DA's freezer!!!:laugh4:

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 18:29

In the case of Clinton I think he commited perjury on a question that no one had any right asking anyway....so I think that makes it square between the 2 parts....

if I was questioned in that way about my private life I would probably lie as well.....the only person who had the right to ask those questions of him was his wife....not some hatchet man from the "holier-than-thou" toe-tapping republicans...

this case is considerably more serious because of the assault issue and the bail jumping.....I´ll give you that.

Does a boss have the right to ask about his manager banging an employee in the office? I think so. When the boss asks his manager under oath and the manager lies - that is a offense worthy of termination.

Put yourself in the shoes of all parties.

Ronin

09-05-2008, 18:46

Does a boss have the right to ask about his manager banging an employee in the office? I think so. When the boss asks his manager under oath and the manager lies - that is a offense worthy of termination.

Put yourself in the shoes of all parties.

the manager would have no reason to ask unless he observed something wrong with the behavior of his employees....

not to mention that a manager would probably call you aside quietly and ask this in a calm way...not turn it into an inquisition.

we both know that the republican party pulled that whole shindig because they were looking for some mud to fling...not because these acts where somehow getting in the way of "the employee" getting is work done...

and yeah I´d still have lied....deny it deny it deny it.....

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 19:04

It's the same thing as the Bill Clinton deal, but this guys also pushed a State Trooper to stop him from handing an associate a subpoena, jumped his bail by attending a meeting across the lake in Canada (when all he had to do was tell somebody at the court.)

Perjury under oath about an affair with an employee using government equipment + assault on a Trooper in order to block an investigation + jumping bail across national lines without notifying your bail board = 4 months in prison, 5 years probation, removal of your license to practice law and the Democratic Governor asking forcefully that you resign.

You really believe that this is unfair? You believe that it was unfair that Clinton was "technically impeached" without leaving office for banging an employee in his office and lying under oath about it? I don't see the injustice unless I'm looking at the Mayor and the President.

You would protect anyone on the left it seems no matter what their crimes. Didn't you once say that Stalin was a hero?

I must say, what a truly ridiculous post. I'll take the longest shots first then:

1. Protecting anyone on the left? Are you kidding me? These guys are right-wing nutjobs to me.
2. I've said Stalin was a hero? Hm, didn't you once say that you fantasize about Hitler torturing jews when you have sex with your wife. See? I can make stuff up too, you know. Now the question is, do we stop it and behave like grown-ups, or do we continue like idiots?

Now, to the matter at hand;

No, I do not think this is fair, because the fact remains that what he did was simply having sex with someone. And I don't think it's fair to send people to jail because they have sex with who they want. As for his cover-up, it was wrong, but I put the blame for that entirely on you people. He lied? So what, you were asking questions you had no business asking in the first place. Such question do not deserve a truthful answer, in fact they don't deserve an answer at all. Our private lives belong to ourselves, and that goes for elected officials too. You have no business looking under their sheets.

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 19:17

What business did people have outing Larry Craig in a mens bathroom? That guy didn't even have sex with anyone in that specific occurance, but there was still an inquisition that I approved of. Larry Craig solicited sex in a public restroom, was crucified for it and all of his dirty laundry was aired. This wasn't in his office, didn't involve an employee, but It was still used as a tool to get him. I found his actions to be disturbing and unethical as Ihave found the actions of Kilpatrick and Clinton to be disturbing and unethical. At least don't accuse us of double standards. Who do you think was leading the charge against Craig?

People's professional actions when in public office are our concern. If the 2 women in question with Clinton and Kilpatrick were not employees and if the sexual relationship took place outside of public property or oversight I might not be as quick to urge them out of office - but the fact is that it happened that way, was lied about underoath and then blamed on the opposition.

Havn't you ever seen the movie "Roadhouse" with Patrick Swayze?:2thumbsup: He walked into the backroom of the club, found an employee having sex with a girl on the table during his break and then fired the guy on the spot. We need to think about this as if they were not politicians, merely in a regular job what the punishment would have been. Then we can couple what the punishment would have been numerous federal offenses and I think the case can be made for removal from office.

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 19:27

What business did people have outing Larry Craig in a mens bathroom? That guy didn't even have sex with anyone in that specific occurance, but there was still an inquisition that I approved of. Larry Craig solicited sex in a public restroom, was crucified for it and all of his dirty laundry was aired. This wasn't in his office, didn't involve an employee, but It was still used as a tool to get him. I found his actions to be disturbing and unethical as Ihave found the actions of Kilpatrick and Clinton to be disturbing and unethical. At least don't accuse us of double standards. Who do you think was leading the charge against Craig?

People had nothing to do with it in that case either. And I find it truly sad that people do these things. People should care about what they do for the nation, not what they do in their private lives. We employ them to serve us, nothing more. Who they choose to have sex with has nothing to do with their capability to serve us, and as such it's completely irrelevant.

Now, I may see a small point if an anti-prostitution crusader was caught buying a hooker or a gaybasher being gay or something like that, but still... Not much.

Havn't you ever seen the movie "Roadhouse" with Patrick Swayze?:2thumbsup: He walked into the backroom of the club, found an employee having sex with a girl on the table during his break and then fired the guy on the spot. We need to think about this as if they were not politicians, merely in a regular job what the punishment would have been. Then we can couple what the punishment would have been numerous federal offenses and I think the case can be made for removal from office.

That would probably not happen here. I've had sex at work myself, and I know of countless others who have, but I have yet to hear about anyone getting fired for it.

Ronin

09-05-2008, 19:36

What business did people have outing Larry Craig in a mens bathroom? That guy didn't even have sex with anyone in that specific occurance, but there was still an inquisition that I approved of. Larry Craig solicited sex in a public restroom, was crucified for it and all of his dirty laundry was aired. This wasn't in his office, didn't involve an employee, but It was still used as a tool to get him. I found his actions to be disturbing and unethical as Ihave found the actions of Kilpatrick and Clinton to be disturbing and unethical. At least don't accuse us of double standards. Who do you think was leading the charge against Craig?

People's professional actions when in public office are our concern. If the 2 women in question with Clinton and Kilpatrick were not employees and if the sexual relationship took place outside of public property or oversight I might not be as quick to urge them out of office - but the fact is that it happened that way, was lied about underoath and then blamed on the opposition.

Larry Craig outed himself when he propositioned a man for gay sex in a public bathroom.....he was the one that made it a public issue.

you are dumb enough to make moves on a cop....and you´re in public office....big surprise....it will become public knowledge.

as for going after him....politically......this has already been discussed here....if you belong to a party that at every turn condemns the gay lifestyle...and then you get outed...well...people are gonna come after you for the hypocrisy of your political position...

if you find a statement of Bill Clinton condemning the heterosexual lifestyle in his political life then you may have a leg to stand on as to your claim that the situations are equivalent.

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 20:18

as for going after him....politically......this has already been discussed here....if you belong to a party that at every turn condemns the gay lifestyle...and then you get outed...well...people are gonna come after you for the hypocrisy of your political position...

if you find a statement of Bill Clinton condemning the heterosexual lifestyle in his political life then you may have a leg to stand on as to your claim that the situations are equivalent.

So you can go after them based on politics? If Clinton was a pro-family politician it would have been a grounded question, but since he is a liberal it is none of our business? That's what I got out of what you've just written. I try to apply my condemnation of marital infidelity, sexual harassment, public sex and federal perjury under oath evenly no matter who is responsible for it.

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 20:24

That would probably not happen here. I've had sex at work myself, and I know of countless others who have, but I have yet to hear about anyone getting fired for it.

If I were your boss and found out that you were having sex at work, particularly with one of your employees, you would be fired. Especially if you lied under oath about it. I wouldn't fire you if you had sex with the same girl outside of the office. I just don't get the "it's only a crime if you are being hypocritical about it" line. If you want to play that game: Clinton ran as a Baptist and was married in a Baptist church. I'm sure that people expected him to be faithful to his wife since he made an oath to her about the issue in public. I don't think that they should fire him for it if it wasn't in the office or with an employee, but it can be viewed as public hypocrisy. Maybe if you don't believe in or practice monogamy you shouldn't promise it to your spouse. Just get married in the state or leave the oath out of your ceremony.

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 20:33

If I were your boss and found out that you were having sex at work, particularly with one of your employees, you would be fired. Especially if you lied under oath about it. I wouldn't fire you if you had sex with the same girl outside of the office. I just don't get the "it's only a crime if you are being hypocritical about it" line.

Then I will be sure never to have you as my boss ~;)

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 20:35

Then I will be sure never to have you as my boss ~;)
You've made your point known - you don't believe that a boss should be able to inquire as to whether or not you have been having sex in the office with an employee - that their hands should be tied about the issue. I wonder how many would agree with that sentiment on these forums in an honest capacity without trying to be funny.

Lemur

09-05-2008, 20:36

I find it very hard to believe that if I were living in Norway, and say I were a bartender, there would be no repercussions for me banging a waitress over a table. I just find that very difficult to envision.

Personally, I think pursuing politicians for sex is a silly thing to do. And I'm amazed that we waste police man-hours having detectives stake out public restrooms to stop teh gays from hooking up.

But I'm really, really happy Jack Abramoff is going to jail, and I'm glad Mister It's Not A Truck It's A Series of Tubes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f99PcP0aFNE) may go to jail, and I seriously hope William Jefferson goes down hard.

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 20:40

I find it very hard to believe that if I were living in Norway, and say I were a bartender, there would be no repercussions for me banging a waitress over a table. I just find that very difficult to envision..

But I'm really, really happy Jack Abramoff is going to jail, and I'm glad Mister It's Not A Truck It's A Series of Tubes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f99PcP0aFNE) may go to jail, and I seriously hope William Jefferson goes down hard.

I agree. I've wanted these guys out of their official capacity. A case can be made about an expensive case going forward about sex being unnecessary, but I support both of those in question. The only thing is that those cases are the official way of dealing with the indiscretion. They are similar to hearings that might take place at your employer for a similar offense, but on a bigger and more important scale.

Crazed Rabbit

09-05-2008, 20:52

No, I do not think this is fair, because the fact remains that what he did was simply having sex with someone.

No, it wasn't that simple. He's a thug who stole money from the city, lied to a court under oath, and assaulted law enforcement officers (that's just off the top of my head). He came to power and retained it solely through race baiting.

CR

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 20:56

I find it very hard to believe that if I were living in Norway, and say I were a bartender, there would be no repercussions for me banging a waitress over a table. I just find that very difficult to envision.

Well I was working at a store when I banged a co-worker in the storage room... The only thing that happened was that my boss started smiling and laughing whenever he saw one of us after he found out...

As I said, I've never heard of anyone getting fired for having sex at work, and yet I know of dozens of people who have had it.

the closest thing I can think of was when my company captain in the army used a few minutes of his "captains hour"(basically a monthly info meeting with the entire company by the company commander) to point out that sex at military facilities is forbidden and plead us to go outside the fence when we had sex after one of the barracks had turned into a semi-brothel...(one guy got his gf to conscript, they ended up in the same platoon and barracks, started doing the natural thing and then things just snowballed...) No reprimand though, just pointing out that we got huge discounts at the nearby hotel... :beam:

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 20:58

No, it wasn't that simple. He's a thug who stole money from the city, lied to a court under oath, and assaulted law enforcement officers (that's just off the top of my head).

Yes it is that simple, because the reason he did those other things, is because the US population is so ridiculous that they care about who he has sex with. If you didn't care about utterly irrelevant stuff, he would never have done that stuff.

Lemur

09-05-2008, 20:59

Well I was working at a store when I banged a co-worker in the storage room... The only thing that happened was that my boss started smiling and laughing whenever he saw one of us after he found out...
Oh, I see, you had relatively discreet sex in a closet and the boss winked at it. That's a different bit of business. Heck, we had a couple meet, fall in love and get married on my crew back in NYC. That's just different from what it sounded like you were saying.

Remember that if your boss thought you weren't being discreet, or if your boss was utterly without sympathy, you might have been in trouble. I'm glad to hear it isn't just a free-sex jambalaya in Norway.

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 21:00

Yes it is that simple, because the reason he did those other things, is because the US population is so ridiculous that they care about who he has sex with. If you didn't care about utterly irrelevant stuff, he would never have done that stuff.

You'd probably be cool with smoking weed, doing some coke or drinking in the backroom every once in a while?

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 21:07

You'd probably be cool with smoking weed, doing some coke or drinking in the backroom every once in a while?

My old boss supplied six-packs and pizza whenever we were working overtime, yes ~;)

But anyway, how can you even compare having sex with doing drugs? :inquisitive:

Last time I checked, sex was legal, healthy and does not interfere with work. Coke, weed and alcohol are none of that.

@ Lemur: well, as long as you don't disturb anyone, noone is going to have a problem with it. Oh, and assuming it's not unhygienic, of course, like doing it in the soup bawls in the restaurant kitchen...

But still, I'm not sure if it's legal to fire you for having sex on the job anyway. I'll try to have a looksy in the employment laws and see if there is an answer...

yesdachi

09-05-2008, 21:11

Yes it is that simple, because the reason he did those other things, is because the US population is so ridiculous that they care about who he has sex with. If you didn't care about utterly irrelevant stuff, he would never have done that stuff.

Sex, and sex with a subordinate, and sex with a subordinate at work while you are a public servant is hardly “irrelevant stuff”. Read upon the guy he was a rotten thug of a mayor. Half of me thinks he should have been punished more but the other half thinks, you get what you ask for, and the people of Detroit voted for him TWICE! Maybe all the fools who voted for him should serve a day of his sentence with him.

yesdachi

09-05-2008, 21:18

But still, I'm not sure if it's legal to fire you for having sex on the job anyway. I'll try to have a looksy in the employment laws and see if there is an answer...

Unless you are being paid to have sex I would guess you are not doing what you are being paid to do and could get in trouble by your boss.

Same with spending time at the .org rather than doing what I am paid to do. :creep:

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 21:29

Unless you are being paid to have sex I would guess you are not doing what you are being paid to do and could get in trouble by your boss.

Same with spending time at the .org rather than doing what I am paid to do. :creep:

Exactly. If I can get fired from my job for spending too much time on websites while getting my job done, he can be fired for banging his employee and lying under oath.

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 21:30

Unless you are being paid to have sex I would guess you are not doing what you are being paid to do and could get in trouble by your boss.

Same with spending time at the .org rather than doing what I am paid to do. :creep:

Yeah, checked around a little, and that's what it will be filed under. Nothing specifically about sex, just not doing what you're paid to do. However, your employer is required to warn you in writing a few times(assuming you continue( before he could actually fire you for it. But if you do it without it conflicting with your work(like on a break), he has no way to fire you for it.:2thumbsup:

@TuffStuff: I seriously doubt that a few rounds in the hay every now and then conflicted much with his work as mayor ~;)

Ronin

09-05-2008, 21:40

So you can go after them based on politics? If Clinton was a pro-family politician it would have been a grounded question, but since he is a liberal it is none of our business? That's what I got out of what you've just written. I try to apply my condemnation of marital infidelity, sexual harassment, public sex and federal perjury under oath evenly no matter who is responsible for it.

if it´s just their personal sexual preferences.....then it´s nobody´s business......but if you "preach" one thing and do the opposite....then I say someone has the right to yell out "the emperor has no clothes!"

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 21:43

I get what you're saying, I just don't agree that it should happen for political reasons only.

Crazed Rabbit

09-05-2008, 21:43

Yes it is that simple, because the reason he did those other things, is because the US population is so ridiculous that they care about who he has sex with. If you didn't care about utterly irrelevant stuff, he would never have done that stuff.

No, he did not steal money because he was having an affair, but because he was corrupt. He did not assault police because of ramifications to do with his affair and perjury, but because of an investigation into his security detail. You are completely wrong.

He was a corrupt thug, and the perjury about the affair was only one facet of it. It just happens to be what they caught him on, like Al Capone going away for tax evasion.

CR

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 21:48

No, he did not steal money because he was having an affair, but because he was corrupt. He did not assault police because of ramifications to do with his affair and perjury, but because of an investigation into his security detail. You are completely wrong.

Now now CR, no need to get your panties in a knot. ~;)

Take a look at my first post in this thread:

Assuming I have understood this case correctly....

Someone tell me I have this case all wrong. Please tell me he did something more than have sex. Please.

So.... If I've misunderstood this(haven't heard about it before this thread, as such all I have to go on is the link in the OP), please do tell me what it's really all about :yes:

Crazed Rabbit

09-05-2008, 21:51

Well try reading the link first off in the OP.

CR

HoreTore

09-05-2008, 21:59

Well try reading the link first off in the OP.

That is what I've been reading, and perhaps I'm blind, but I can't see any reference to any crime except those he committed trying to cover up his affair...

Would you like to point it out to me, then?

ICantSpellDawg

09-05-2008, 22:03

That is what I've been reading, and perhaps I'm blind, but I can't see any reference to any crime except those he committed trying to cover up his affair...

Would you like to point it out to me, then?

We've laid them out for you already, but here is a quick summary of some of the reasons he was jailed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwame_Kilpatrick#Controversies

follow the links if you'd like. You can also re-evaluate your support for the man.