Economic Meltdown (seconda parte)
#41
(08-14-2011, 01:45 AM)kandrathe Wrote: I'm saying that his punishment was too harsh, and that the authorities put two old men in federal prison for the "crime" of not following the Government's rules for shipping flowers

You're not going for the "it's just flowers" nonsense, I hope?

Only Norris ended up in jail (his accomplice fled to Peru). Not for "shipping flowers", but for violating 18 USC 371 (conspiring to commit offense or to defraud the United States, max 5 years), 18 USC 545 (smuggling, max 20 years) and 18 USC 1001 (making false statements, max 5 years), and 5 other offenses. I'm all for less harsh punishment, but it looks as if this Norris got away rather easily.

(08-14-2011, 01:45 AM)kandrathe Wrote: which after proper licensing of the greenhouse made what they did not a crime at all

In case you didn't know: having a license to sell cultivated plants has no bearing on the selling of other plants, collected from nature. The use of cultivated and thus licensed plants to cover up the smuggling was in fact part of the case against these men.

(08-14-2011, 01:45 AM)kandrathe Wrote: Our government is in mortal fear of old men growing flowers, and a natural foods distributor.

Either that, or they just needed a lot of guys to load up all the orchids, raw milk, eggs, paperwork, and other evidence Wink
Reply
#42
(08-14-2011, 01:14 PM)Zenda Wrote:
(08-14-2011, 01:45 AM)kandrathe Wrote: I'm saying that his punishment was too harsh, and that the authorities put two old men in federal prison for the "crime" of not following the Government's rules for shipping flowers
You're not going for the "it's just flowers" nonsense, I hope?
We should reserve incarceration for dangerous people. I would have opted for house arrest, or extended probation barring him from importing for 5 years. Let him run his flower business, but penalize him for his bad import behavior.

(08-14-2011, 01:14 PM)Zenda Wrote: Only Norris ended up in jail (his accomplice fled to Peru). Not for "shipping flowers", but for violating 18 USC 371 (conspiring to commit offense or to defraud the United States, max 5 years), 18 USC 545 (smuggling, max 20 years) and 18 USC 1001 (making false statements, max 5 years), and 5 other offenses. I'm all for less harsh punishment, but it looks as if this Norris got away rather easily.
Actually, I'm kind of glad Arias is living out his remaining years at home in Peru. He made a mistake, but he shouldn't have to sit in a US federal prison for 2 years. There are worse offenders, and rather than get the *real* bad guys, they are throwing the book at two old foolish men.

Yes, Norris tried to hide his importation of unlicensed plants. But, as we've seen in recent politically motivated (special prosecutor e.g. Ken Starr) federal "perjury" trials, it's quite easy to convict a person if you want to convict them. Just put them under oath, and get them to talk for many hours, then investigate every little thing they say until you find a prevarication or exaggeration.

It's much like this latest Anthony murder trial in Florida. The reason the prosecutors lost the case is due to their over reach in charging the mother. She was obviously guilty of neglect, but not so clear on any abuse. Rather than go for the 5 year sentence, plus the lying to police charges, they focused on trying to prove premeditated murder which resulted in an overly cautious jury. I've seen it up close and personal serving on juries here in Minnesota. Too often the prosecutors are on a witch hunt, and I'm not sure why. Perhaps it furthers their career, or they really believe that by bending the system they are serving justice.

(08-14-2011, 01:14 PM)Zenda Wrote:
(08-14-2011, 01:45 AM)kandrathe Wrote: which after proper licensing of the greenhouse made what they did not a crime at all
In case you didn't know: having a license to sell cultivated plants has no bearing on the selling of other plants, collected from nature. The use of cultivated and thus licensed plants to cover up the smuggling was in fact part of the case against these men.
Wrong. The difference was merely the CITES classification based on genus/species. Arias was licensed to collect and grow CITES species by Peru, just not licensed to export them to the US.


(08-14-2011, 01:14 PM)Zenda Wrote:
(08-14-2011, 01:45 AM)kandrathe Wrote: Our government is in mortal fear of old men growing flowers, and a natural foods distributor.
Either that, or they just needed a lot of guys to load up all the orchids, raw milk, eggs, paperwork, and other evidence Wink
Yeah, I like to do heavy lifting in full battle Kevlar, and wielding an M16.
”There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet (1.5.167-8), Hamlet to Horatio.

[Image: yVR5oE.png][Image: VKQ0KLG.png]

Reply
#43
(08-14-2011, 06:31 PM)kandrathe Wrote: Arias was licensed to collect and grow CITES species by Peru, just not licensed to export them to the US.

No, Arias could ship as many CULTIVATED slipper orchids to the US, as he and Norris wanted (because CULTIVATED plants never fall under CITES regulations). But they didn't want to wait the years needed to grow those plants, because black market prices would fall once CULTIVATED plants became available.

As for your supposed 'legalization' of Phragmipedium Peruvianum: it never happened. Reread your own Wiki-quote and see it's about the commercial availability of CULTIVATED plants. All Phragmipedium species have always been, and still are, protected by CITES (as category I, the highest).

(08-14-2011, 06:31 PM)kandrathe Wrote: it's quite easy to convict a person if you want to convict them. Just put them under oath, and get them to talk for many hours, then investigate every little thing they say until you find a prevarication or exaggeration.

So it's not just the government, but also the whole justice system that's out to get you? I don't envy you Confused

(08-14-2011, 06:31 PM)kandrathe Wrote: Yeah, I like to do heavy lifting in full battle Kevlar, and wielding an M16

In Norris' case, there were 6 officials with only side-arms. None had M16 rifles. According to yourself, US citizens have been carrying guns for 200 years, so why shouldn't US officials do the same?

(08-14-2011, 06:31 PM)kandrathe Wrote: There are worse offenders

You are right on that one, and I'm prepared to leave it at that. After all, we're not talking about someone like Warren Jeffs here.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 21 Guest(s)