[Vision2020] Sunil and His Defense of Terrorists and ConvictedChild Molesters

Sat Sep 16 23:30:34 PDT 2006

Sunil,

 I don't disagree with defending the rights of the  accused. I disagree with giving any rights at all to convicted and self  admitted child molesters over the rights of others. If someone is  accused of child molestation, they should get the best defense  possible. But after that, shy of a mistrial or rigged trail, lawyers  shouldn't be arguing, in court or on-line that they should be free to  go to another city, unsupervised, that is FUBAR. To me, that is  supporting Child Molesters over the rights of children and other  potential victims. I don't care your logic, that self admitted and  convicted child molesters should have those rights. PERIOD.

  Second, I would never support putting you in charge of the nation's  security.  I listed plenty of emails that indicate your position  on terrorists. It is my opinion, Sunil, that the tone and language of  your emails combined, over time,  indicate you sympathize with the  plight of the majority of these individuals that wish real harm to  Americans and Westerns. Others are entitled to look at those 20+ emails  over the last 3 years and think otherwise. It is my opinion that any  foreigner that states they wish real harm to the United States, its  elected leaders, its people, or its property, and has the ability to  act on that statement, the military has the duty to detain that  foreigner until her/she is no longer poses a threat. It is called  National Security. National Security and the prevention of an immediate  harm and death of the innocent take precedence over that of individual  freedom of movement of US enemies. 

 Nobody is putting a gun  to your head to represent convicted and self-admitted child molesters.  That is your choice, and yours only. Nobody is forcing you to  sympathize with the rights of people who say "Death to America". You  could choose to represent the elderly, disabled, or millions of other  poor children that are wronged everyday in this country with no  shortage of work and just as little pay. 

  You spend  way to much time on Vision2020 defending these people.

  But again, I am not going to argue with you. As you could argue the  number of the dimples on a golf ball only number two, that is what you  do. I am not good at legal argumentation, I cannot even spell half the  time. But I can tell you my opinion is that convicted child molesters  should not go anywhere unsupervised and that terrorists wish harm and  can will bring harm to the US should be set free because of some legal  argument, tell that to victims of 911. Your statements, so frequently  and intensely, as you do on a public forum, in my opinion, is defending  them, not their actions, but them. 

  Best,

  _DJA

Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:  Donovan,

Clearly you don't believe in the accused's right to representation.  I do.  
I am proud to do so.  Do you believe we should have the accused face 
prosecution and confinement or deathwithout a lawyer?  I don't.

Now, I have challenged you to demonstrate why I am wrong in the posts you 
listed.  You took the time to find them and cite them.

PLEASE DEMONSTRATE WHY I WAS MISTAKEN IN MAKING THOSE STATEMENTS AND TAKING 
THOSE POSITIONS.  YOU CLEARLY DISAGREE, SINCE YOU POSTED THE LINKS.  SHOW ME 
AND THE WORLD WHY I WAS WRONG.

I am sick of your lies and false attacks, Donovan.  You claim to attack 
those who attack you.  I did not attack you yesterday, yet you continue to 
demonstrate your utter lack of redeeming value in your posts about me.  Put 
up or shut up.

If you can't do so, retract your statements about me.

J Ford, I apologize for lumping you in with Donovan and Tony in my second 
post today.  I should not have done so.

Sunil

>From: Donovan Arnold 
>To: Sunil Ramalingam , vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Sunil and His Defense of Terrorists and 
>ConvictedChild Molesters
>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 14:02:45 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Jackie,
>
>  I never stated that Sunil supports terrorism and  child molestation, that 
>is preposterous, re-read what I wrote. I said  he defends those that do.
>
>   Keely,
>
>   The definition of slander is the  saying of something that is false and 
>damaging. If it is true, it isn't  slander. Sunil himself admits to 
>defending convicted child molesters:
>
>
>"It is true that I defend convicted child molesters at sentencing
>
>hearings that occur after a client has been convicted by a jury"
>
>        Sunil Ramalingam-- 
>http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2006-September/035436.html
>
>
>   Sunil,
>
>  I am not going to try and argue with you. For you are  the master of 
>convincing the jury that the Sun really rises in the West  depending on 
>ones point of view.
>
>  I am sure that you can  argue that I got the context wrong in some of 
>your posts, but after 20+  such posts over 2.5 years it is hard to write 
>all them off.
>
>FYI,  I did support Sami Omar. He was living in UI Family Housing at the 
>time  he was abducted. I represented Family Housing in the UI student  
>government at the time. I defended Sami in student council and even  
>brought his family there, which was even aired on public  television.  I 
>kept in contact with John Dickinson about what was  going at the trial in 
>Boise. That case is different, because it was a  domestic case and there 
>was no evidence whatsoever that Sami was a  terrorist, in fact it all 
>pointed in the opposite direction. Further,  Sami was not saying he was 
>planning on killing Americans when he gets  out like those detained 
>overseas. And, at least one member of Sami's  family was born right here in 
>Moscow.
>
>  I don't think the  government can detain someone forever without at least 
>trying to find  out if someone is guilty. But letting them go if they say 
>"Death to  America" is just to risky when they are capable of acting on it.
>
>   My disagreement with you Sunil, is that you clearly are brilliant, yet  
>rather than using your talents to defend victims in our society, you  use 
>your wit and experience to defend convicted child molesters.
>
>   I am not arguing you are not doing your job, or you are not good at it.  
>I am arguing that your job should be something more productive and  
>meaningful then the release of child molesters and the scum of the  earth 
>when you know they are guilty.
>
>  I am sure you with  your big brain will justify that in your own mind. 
>But I think anyone  with a heart will ask WHY the child molesters get a 
>good lawyer and  trial when there are so many other more deserving and 
>wronged people  with their rights being stepped on. They should be a higher 
>priority to  you and any lawyer concerned about justice.
>
>   Best,
>
>   _DJA
>
>Sunil Ramalingam  wrote:  Tom,
>
>It is true that I defend convicted child molesters at sentencing hearings
>that occur after a client has been convicted by a jury (or a judge in
>juvenile cases) at the sentencing hearing and in subsequent legal
>proceedings, or at a post-conviction hearing filed by a client who is
>usually in prison.  If a convicted child molester is charged with a new
>crime, then I may defend that person.  As a public defender I don't judge 
>my
>clients; there is no shortage of people ready to do this (regardless of how
>much or how little information they have about the crime or the criminal)
>and it's not my place or job to do so.  I try to represent them to the best
>of my ability, and I don't apologize for this.
>
>I have never represented a convicted terrorist as a lawyer, though I would
>were I to be appointed to do so or if I were retained to do so.  I did
>represent a witness in Sami al Hussein's case, and am happy I was able to
>offer him assistance.  Perhaps Donovan would like to insult me for doing 
>so.
>
>As one who believes our judicial system has underlying principles, I 
>believe
>that all people who are held have the right to due process and a fair and
>proper hearing.  I do not believe that we have the right to imprison 
>people,
>no matter what we label them, forever, or to try them in kangaroo courts.
>This is a defense of legal principle and human rights.  I consider it a
>defense of our country, and the notion that we have enduring principles
>These are beliefs that Donovan neither shares nor supports.  He is a fan of
>expedience.
>
>Though Donovan does not support the Iraq war, he appears to find the Bush
>Administration infallible once they arrest or confine a Muslim.  At that
>point he believes it is appropriate to hold that person indefinately.  I
>find this position shameful and disgusting, and Donovan finds me repugnant
>because of this, I am willing to live with the loss of his approval.
>
>It is interesting to note the subject line of Donovan's most recent post.
>He has claimed he only attacks those who attack him.  Most recently he
>incorrectly made fun of Keely's spelling; I asked him if he wanted the same
>done to him.  Since we all post all too quickly, we all make spelling
>errors, and few of us would really want to have our own posts criticized 
>for
>our typos.  This is the point I was making.
>
>Donovan, in the thoughtful and Christian response we have all learned so
>well, responds by attacking my character in a way that has the smallest 
>germ
>of truth but is intended to be a slur.  I have written him offline and
>pointed out that hatred of Middle Easterners has often resulted in racial
>slurs and threats being directed towards me; I have told him that I 
>consider
>his calling me a defender of terrorists could actually be harmful to me.
>You see the effect (or is it 'affect' Donovan?) my request has had on him.
>
>Of course, this is the man, or aging adolescent, who has suggested it would
>benefit the gene pool if children were to die playing in construction sites
>that should be off-limits if their parents fail to provide proper
>supervision, so I would be foolish to expect better of him.
>
>Sunil
>
>
> >From: "Tom Hansen"
> >To: "'Donovan Arnold'" ,        "'Sunil
> >Ramalingam'" ,
> >Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Sunil and His Defense of Terrorists and
> >ConvictedChild Molesters
> >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 07:05:37 -0700
> >
> >Arnold -
> >
> >
> >
> >Your statement, here on a public listserve, that Sunil Ramalingam defends
> >convicted child molesters and convicted terrorists, reflects upon your 
>lack
> >of maturity and sense of decency, and in virtually all litigious circles
> >maybe considered libelous.
> >
> >
> >
> >Name ONE convicted child molester which Sunil has defended!
> >
> >
> >
> >Name ONE convicted terrorist which Sunil has defended!
> >
> >
> >
> >Failing either of these requests, you owe Sunil a VERY meaningful and 
>VERY
> >public apology.
> >
> >
> >
> >Tom Hansen
> >
> >Vandalville, Idaho
> >
>
>
>=======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>=======================================================
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Why keep checking for Mail? The all-new Yahoo! Mail shows you when there 
>are new messages.

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1&cent;/min.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060916/18fd22cb/attachment-0001.htm 