January 23, 2008, - 10:43 am

Sympathy for the Devil: Even More Outrageous Behavior By Bush’s Liberal Padilla Judge; Gives Padilla Far Less Than Sentencing Minimum

By Debbie Schlussel
Yesterday, I wrote about President George W. Bush’s liberal judge, Marcia Cooke, who gave piddling sentences to three convicted terrorists, including Abdullah Al-Muhajir a/k/a Jose Padilla, after they were convicted by a jury. As I told you, Ms. Cooke went out of her way to issue sympathetic ruling after sympathetic ruling to Al-Muhajir/Padilla’s defense lawyers, and I sadly correctly predicted she’d go soft on him.
Well, it’s even more outrageous than I thought. Not only was she soft in sentencing the three terrorists, but she gave them LESS than the federally-mandated minimum sentence for the crimes for which they were convicted. And she made a statement at sentencing that she felt bad for the “inhumane” way this Islamic terrorist was treated by America and that she saw no evidence he and his defendants were terrorists because not one American was killed by them.

marciacooke.jpghearts.jpgjosepadilla.jpg

Judge Marcia Cooke Hearts Terrorist Padilla/Al-Muhajir

Um, hello . . .? If we would have caught Mohammed Atta before he got on that plane, would she say the same thing about him? Probably. No evidence? Yes, a lot of non-terrorists fill out Al-Qaeda job applications, right? (Al-Muhajir/Padilla’s application was part of the evidence presented in court).
Read this absurdity:

In deciding against life sentences for the three men — which prosecutors had sought — U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke said no evidence linked them to acts of terrorism.
“There is no evidence that these defendants personally maimed, kidnapped or killed anyone in the United States or elsewhere,” she said.
Cooke also said she arrived at Padilla’s sentence after considering his long detention at a Navy brig in South Carolina.
“I do find that the conditions were so harsh for Mr. Padilla … they warrant consideration in the sentencing in this case,” the judge said.

Um, isn’t “I Feel Your Pain,” a Clinton sentiment? This woman is nauseating. Incredibly, many Bill Clinton appointees are far tougher. Today’s Wall Street Journal reports on how the judge significantly departed downward from the minimum sentence mandated by the federal sentencing guidelines, something that is usually reserved for cases in which the defendant helped the government with testimony or provided valuable information in another case, which Padilla and his defendants didn’t do. The WSJ gets the gender of the judge wrong (it’s a she, not a “he”) and doesn’t mention her sorry name (did the WSJ forget the first of the “five Ws” of reporting–“Who”?:

The sentence fell short of the life term prosecutors sought, and sentencing guidelines suggested a range of 30 years to life. The judge said her decision was intended, in part, to compensate for the “harsh conditions” Mr. Padilla, a U.S. citizen, endured during three years he was held without charge, as an “enemy combatant.”

Gimme a Break!
The government can appeal her downward departure from the sentencing guidelines, which federal judges are required to follow by law, but as the wimps that they are at DoJ, they won’t.
Desperate But Not Serious–America’s War on Terror. The terrorists are laughing at us.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 Responses

Another reason to screen your judges before you hire them. I’m sure this isn’t the first “soft on bad guys” judgement she’s ever rendered. I’m not a lawyer, but what is supposed to happen to a judge that departs from the minimum sentencing guidelines, in a case as serious as this one? Is there any action that can possibly be taken against her? Please advise.
[S: THERE IS A WAY TO COMPLAIN ABOUT FEDERAL JUDGES, TO THE COURT OF APPEALS THAT IS ABOVE THEM, BUT NOTHING EVER HAPPENS. OR CONGRESS CAN IMPEACH THEM, WHICH WON'T HAPPEN WITH HER. THE GOVERNMENT CAN APPEAL THE SENTENCE TO THE COURT OF APPEALS, BUT HASN'T ANNOUNCED PLANS TO. D.O.J. OFFICIALS ARE WIMPS. DS]

samurai on January 23, 2008 at 11:13 am

As I said when I saw Mcain doing well in the primaries: WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE! WHATS WRONG WITH PEOPLE?

samurai on January 23, 2008 at 11:21 am

The reality of political correctness and blind obeisance to “diversity,” results in the appointment of this (alleged) judge by the President who said he would fight (and presumably kill) those responsible for 9/11 and, presumably again, all the Islamofascist acts of war against the West prior to that, going way back to the Munich Olympics, 1972.
As with the situation in Israel, the more liberal our leaders become (and like you, samurai, I cannot understand who the hell the people who vote for these wimps, appeasers and surrendercrats are), the more rapidly we capitulate to our enemies. And unlike our squishy-soft leaders and their judicial appointees, our enemies will show us no mercy whatsoever. That’s NO mercy, folks — zero, zip, nada, nichts.

theendisnear on January 23, 2008 at 2:47 pm

No doubt da judge being a member of a minority can relate to Mr Padilla. Padilla being a minority member has experienced the heavy hand of “The MAN”. The minority experience supersedes doing the right thing and following laws that may conflict with their status as oppressed people of the USA.

TheOmegaMan on January 24, 2008 at 12:34 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field