OR: Portland woman raped by man with ICE detainer released by police.

[philip964]

http://www.kgw.com/news/woman-65-in-ne- ... /459231264

So is there no civil liability when the police release a man the federal government wants handed over to them, and then the man commits a crime.

Does the Sheriff in this case, feel any remorse for what happened to the poor lady.

Or is this a case of: its what the majority of the people in Portland want to happen. I work for them. Some old ladies will get raped, but its for the greater good of globalism.

[RoyGBiv]

No way to comment here within forum rules.

[bdgyeah]

What a Joke!

[crazy2medic]

Humor me.

In the State of Texas if a Grass fire is burning across the land and the Fire Dept pulls up to your gate, should you refuse to allow them access to your property to fight the fire, you can be held liable for everything that burns after the fire leaves your property!
So why not a federal law that holds individuals (police chiefs, sheriffs, etc.) and municipalities, counties liable for every crime committed by criminals after they leave custody!

[rotor]

Humor me.

In the State of Texas if a Grass fire is burning across the land and the Fire Dept pulls up to your gate, should you refuse to allow them access to your property to fight the fire, you can be held liable for everything that burns after the fire leaves your property!
So why not a federal law that holds individuals (police chiefs, sheriffs, etc.) and municipalities, counties liable for every crime committed by criminals after they leave custody!

I don't know if the above is true or not and I really agree with your premise but to be devil's advocate is the state responsible for crimes that a released convict commits? There seems to always be 2 standards of punishment for every crime. If you or I knowingly let someone else use equipment that could injure or kill them or others you or I would be held responsible. If a big corporation or government agency does the same thing, like GM knowing that their ignition keys could cause fatal accidents, the worst they get is a fine. That fine is not paid by the persons involved but by the stockholders. Almost never do the people that commit that crime go to jail and I think GM is the best case. I personally would like to see the people responsible criminally charged including sheriffs, judges, corporate executives, etc.

[OlBill]

is the state responsible for crimes that a released convict commits?

If he gets an early out, should the state be?

[philip964]

is the state responsible for crimes that a released convict commits?

If he gets an early out, should the state be?

If a felon is arrested and charged with a state and a federal crime, the feds say don't release him on bail, we want him first and you ignore the federal request and he rapes a woman before you rearrest him again. Are you the police as an organization civilly liable to the woman who was raped? Yes the stockholder (taxpayers) are the ones who will pay the judgement. But you the stockholders can elect a new sheriff at the next board meeting, or decide paying an occasional judgement is just part of doing business.

In Portland, I think the stockholders feel its part of doing the global world view business. To them a woman being raped is kind of like not fixing those ignition switches or the Pinto gas fill pipes.

Its why I don't own Portland stock.

[crazy2medic]

Humor me.

In the State of Texas if a Grass fire is burning across the land and the Fire Dept pulls up to your gate, should you refuse to allow them access to your property to fight the fire, you can be held liable for everything that burns after the fire leaves your property!
So why not a federal law that holds individuals (police chiefs, sheriffs, etc.) and municipalities, counties liable for every crime committed by criminals after they leave custody!

I don't know if the above is true or not and I really agree with your premise but to be devil's advocate is the state responsible for crimes that a released convict commits? There seems to always be 2 standards of punishment for every crime. If you or I knowingly let someone else use equipment that could injure or kill them or others you or I would be held responsible. If a big corporation or government agency does the same thing, like GM knowing that their ignition keys could cause fatal accidents, the worst they get is a fine. That fine is not paid by the persons involved but by the stockholders. Almost never do the people that commit that crime go to jail and I think GM is the best case. I personally would like to see the people responsible criminally charged including sheriffs, judges, corporate executives, etc.

This is true, this is how most of your rural fire dept. Gain access to private land, it's to the ranchers advantage to let a wildfire burn off the brush and cactus, however once it is explained that they could be financially liable for every house, barn, tractor, etc that burns after the fire leaves their property when the fire dept could have stopped it before that happened then MOST will allow the Fire dept. access. I was a Firefighter for 22 yrs!