Received: by ns.vvm.com (mbox lminor) (using VVM Mail vvm-pop (v1.01 1999/02/01) Tue Jun 6 06:16:20 2000) X-From_: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun 5 21:24:48 2000 Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mail014.mail.onemain.com (SMTP-OUT001.ONEMAIN.COM [63.208.208.71]) by ns.vvm.com (8.10.1/8.9.3) with SMTP id e562OmH06300 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 21:24:48 -0500 Received: (qmail 27991 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2000 02:24:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kate) ([209.162.48.18]) (envelope-sender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) by mail014.mail.onemain.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 6 Jun 2000 02:24:40 -0000 Message-ID: <01ac01bfcf5e$57592a40$0431a2d1@kate> From: "kate" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Linda Minor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Fw: Davidians' Sentences Set Aside Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 19:24:26 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ns.vvm.com id e56BJgH15680 ----- Original Message ----- From: American Patriot Friends Network <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: American Patriot Friends Network <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 2:29 PM Subject: Davidians' Sentences Set Aside > THIS MESSAGE POSTED APFN MESSAGE BOARD; > http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/mbs.cgi/mb1075995 > > Davidians' Sentences Set Aside > > By RICHARD CARELLI > =A9 The Associated Press > > WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court today set aside the lengthy prison > sentences given to five Branch Davidians who survived a 1993 siege at > the sect's Waco, Texas, compound. The court ruled that a federal judge > misused an anti-gun law to increase their punishment. > > The unanimous decision makes it harder for courts to find lawbreakers > deserve extra time behind bars because they used or carried machine gun= s > during their crimes. > > A federal law subjects anyone who used or carried a "firearm" during a > violent or drug-related crime to five years in prison. The term jumps t= o > 30 years for anyone who used or carried a "machine gun" during that > same crime. > > Federal appeals courts had split on whether determining use of a machin= e > gun is an element of the offense a jury must find beyond a reasonable > doubt, or merely a sentencing factor a judge gets to determine by a > preponderance of the evidence. > > The nation's highest court said use of a firearm must be determined by > the jury. > > "We believe Congress intended the firearm type-related words it used > ... to refer to an element of a separate, aggravated crime," Justice > Stephen G. Breyer wrote for the court. > > Five Davidians were convicted in 1994 in the killings of four federal > agents during a botched Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms raid on > the compound outside Waco. > > The raid led to a 51-day standoff that ended when flames swept through > the compound. David Koresh and some 80 followers died during the > inferno, some from the fire and others from gunshot wounds. > > A federal jury acquitted the five Davidians of murder and > conspiracy-to-murder charges but convicted them of voluntary > manslaughter. Each was sentenced to 10 years in prison for that > conviction. The jury also found them guilty of using firearms. > > The presiding judge tacked on 30-year sentences for four of them and a > 10-year sentence for the fifth after finding that each had used a > machine gun. > > Renos Avraam, Brad Eugene Branch, Jaime Castillo and Kevin Whitecliff > drew the 30-year sentences; Graeme Craddock the 10-year term. Craddock > also was sentenced to a consecutive 10 years for using a hand grenade. > > The jury never had been asked to determine what types of firearms the > five had used. The judge made that determination during sentencing. > > In appealing their sentences, the Davidians relied heavily on a decisio= n > in which the justices last year said carjackers cannot be given tougher > sentences unless a jury, not a judge, determines that victims were > seriously injured during that federal crime. > > The case presumably will return to a federal trial court where new > sentencing hearings will be conducted. Today's decision did not suggest > appropriate new sentences. > > The case is Castillo vs. U.S., 99-658. > > On the Net: For the decision: http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/ Click > on "this month's decisions" or http://www.supremecourtus.gov > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I want to extend my heartfelt gratitude and congratulations to Steve Halbrook > who argued this case for the Davidians in the Supreme Court. Bless you Steve > and let's get them ALL out of there!~ > ~Sharlene~ > > Here is Steve Halbrook's summary of today's > Supreme Court opinion in Castillo v. U.S.: > > June 5, 2000 > > U.S. SUPREME COURT IN WACO CASE UPHOLDS RIGHT > TO JURY TRIAL OF FIREARM TYPES IN GUN CONTROL ACT > > The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously decided today in Castillo et al.= v. > United States that firearm types defined in the federal Gun Control Act are > elements of offenses that must be alleged in the indictment and decided= by > the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The case involves the 30-year sentences > imposed on Branch Davidians who escaped from the tragic fire near Waco, > Texas, in 1993. They were charged with and convicted of carrying or us= ing a > "firearm" in a crime of violence during the BATF raid. 18 U.S.C. =C2=A7 924(c) > makes this a 5-year offense, but the sentencing judge decided that > "machineguns" were used and imposed a 30-year sentence. > > Stephen P. Halbrook argued the case for the imprisoned Davidians in the > Supreme Court on April 24. Today's 9-0 opinion, authored by Justice Breyer, > held that whether a gun is a "firearm," "machinegun," or other listed weapon > is an element of the offense and not a sentencing factor. The Court agreed > at the outset that "treating facts that lead to an increase in the maxi= mum > sentence as a sentencing factor would give rise to significant constitutional > questions. . . . Here, even apart from the doctrine of constitutional doubt, > our consideration of =C2=A7 924(c)(1)'s language, structure, context, h= istory, and > such other factors as typically help courts determine a statute's objectives, > leads us to conclude that the relevant words create a separate substant= ive > crime." The statute provides that whoever, during and in relation to a= ny > crime of violence, "uses or carries a firearm, shall be sentenced to > imprisonment for five years, and if the firearm is a . . . machinegun, = . . =2E > to imprisonment for thirty years." > > First, this language can be read "as simply substituting the word > =E2?~machinegun' for the initial word =E2?~firearm'; thereby both incorporating by > reference the initial phrases that relate the basic elements of the cri= me and > creating a different crime containing one new element, i.e., the use or > carrying of a =E2?~machinegun' during and in relation to a crime of violence." > The structure clarifies any ambiguity in that carrying or using a firea= rm is > clearly an offense, and the machinegun language appears in the same sentence > without being broken up into subsections. > Second, "we cannot say that courts have typically or traditionally u= sed > firearm types (such as =E2?~shotgun' or =E2?~machinegun') as sentencing factors . . > . ." The Court emphasized that "the difference between carrying, say, = a > pistol and carrying a machinegun . . . is great, both in degree and kin= d." > Several provisions of the Gun Control Act distinguish firearm types in > defining offenses. Here, machinegun use is punishable by six-times greater > imprisonment than firearm use. > > Third, determination of the issue by the jury rather than a judge d= oes > not complicate a trial or risk unfairness. Indeed, "in determining whether a > defendant used or carried a =E2?~firearm,' the jury ordinarily will be = asked to > assess the particular weapon at issue as well as the circumstances unde= r > which it was allegedly used." Leaving it to the judge to decide whethe= r a > machinegun was used "might unnecessarily produce a conflict between the judge > and the jury." Where two weapons are allegedly used, the jury may deci= de > that only one=E2?"such as a pistol=E2?"was used. "A judge's later, > sentencing-related decision that the defendant used the machinegun, rat= her > than, say, the pistol, might conflict with the jury's belief that he actively > used the pistol, which factual belief underlay its firearm =E2?~use' conviction." > "There is no reason to think that Congress would have wanted a judge's views > to prevail in a case of so direct a factual conflict, particularly when the > sentencing judge applies a lower standard of proof and when 25 addition= al > years in prison are at stake." > > Fourth, the legislative history does not support the government. T= he =C2=A7 > 924(c) firearm offense was enacted in the Gun Control Act of 1968, whic= h was > amended with the machinegun clause in the Firearms Owners' Protection A= ct of > 1986. Among other sponsors and supporters, Rep. Volkmer explained that the > latter amendment "includes stiff mandatory sentences for the use of firearms, > including machineguns and silencers, in relation to violent or drug > trafficking crimes." Such statements "show only that Congress believed that > the =E2?~machinegun' and =E2?~firearm' provisions would work similarly"= and > "seemingly describe offense conduct, and, thus, argue against (not for) the > Government's position." > > Fifth, "the length and severity of an added mandatory sentence that turns > on the presence or absence of a =E2?~machinegun' (or any of the other l= isted > firearm types) weighs in favor of treating such offense-related words a= s > referring to an element. Thus, if after considering traditional interpretive > factors, we were left genuinely uncertain as to Congress' intent in thi= s > regard, we would assume a preference for traditional jury determination= of so > important a factual matter." The Court refers to several precedents holding > that the "rule of lenity requires that ambiguous criminal statutes be > construed in favor of the accused." > > For the above reasons, the Court reversed the judgment of the U.S. Court > of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and remanded the case for proceedings > consistent with the opinion. The effect of this is that the defendants= ' > 30-year sentences for machinegun use must be vacated and that they shou= ld be > resentenced to 5-years imprisonment for firearm use, the charge on whic= h they > were indicted and convicted. > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > Davidians' Sentences Set Aside > http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20000605/pl/scotus_davidians_1.html > > APFN WHY WACO PAGES: > http://www.apfn.org/apfn/wacopg.htm > > "Beyond The Voice Of Reason," > http://www.alamanceind.com/nation/nation_6.html > > "The concrete residue on the inside block walls are > indicative of explosive activity within the room > consistent with the charge that blew through the top of > the room, from the outside in." > http://www.alamanceind.com/nation/nation_5.html > > CLINTON DISBARMENT + RECORD OF LIES AND DECEPTIONS: + > http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/mbs.cgi/mb1075995 > > The Law: Life Is a Gift from God > http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/mbs.cgi/mb1075995 > > WAITING FOR THE KNOCK! > http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=3D1999-11-25-001-05-NW-LF > > Info for Christians 'Wake up the mighty men!" > http://www.ordination.org/contents.htm > > Good news!! We have a choice! > http://www.ordination.org/homeschool.htm > > APFN FAST SEARCH: anti-gun law > 206 documents found - 0.0502 seconds search time > http://www.ussc.alltheweb.com/cgi-bin/search?type=3Dphrase&query=3Danti-g= un+law& exec=3DFAST+Search > > If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of > civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. > -Thomas Jefferson, 1816 > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > Re: Alaska 261/Egyptair 990/spraying of civilians? > Dear Sir, > > I would highly encourage you to do research on the above topics, > and disperse them to a sleeping American populace. > > Start with the following: > http://www.cbjd.net/orbit/project/md-80.html > http://www.trufax.org/w12.html#261 > > God Bless, > Capt.D.A. Wheeler/Airline Transport Pilot - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + > P L E A S E F O R W A R D > http://www.apfn.org > + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + >
