Who is right? The sheriff or the prosecutor?

[radcen]

Who is right? The sheriff or the prosecutor?

Theft of game hens could cost Ark. sheriff his job - Yahoo! News

I only have this news story on which to base my opinion, but I feel the sheriff is correct here.

1) He paid for his crime in that her served his sentence.
2) He was open about it during his campaign. The voters knew about it (or should have), and they elected him anyway.

I question the prosecutor's reliance on the phrase "infamous crime" in this situation. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a personal grudge here, but the news story doesn't indicate as much.

 

[liblady]

Who is right? The sheriff or the prosecutor?

Theft of game hens could cost Ark. sheriff his job - Yahoo! News

I only have this news story on which to base my opinion, but I feel the sheriff is correct here.

1) He paid for his crime in that her served his sentence.
2) He was open about it during his campaign. The voters knew about it (or should have), and they elected him anyway.

I question the prosecutor's reliance on the phrase "infamous crime" in this situation. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a personal grudge here, but the news story doesn't indicate as much.

doesn't matter. by law, the prosecutor is correct. perhaps the law should be changed.

 

[radcen]

doesn't matter. by law, the prosecutor is correct. perhaps the law should be changed.

Is the prosecutor correct? Note that the text of the law gives very specific examples right before it ends with a standard vague example, and it is the standard vague example that he is using. This suggests that what qualifies as an "infamous crime" is debatable and not all-inclusive. What's the Arkansas legal definition of "infamous crime"?

 

[Ikari]

Who is right? The sheriff or the prosecutor?

Theft of game hens could cost Ark. sheriff his job - Yahoo! News

I only have this news story on which to base my opinion, but I feel the sheriff is correct here.

1) He paid for his crime in that her served his sentence.
2) He was open about it during his campaign. The voters knew about it (or should have), and they elected him anyway.

I question the prosecutor's reliance on the phrase "infamous crime" in this situation. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a personal grudge here, but the news story doesn't indicate as much.

The Sheriff is right. I don't see how this is "infamous", stealing chickens essentially. It was over 30 years ago, people still elected him. Done and done. It sounds like to me perhaps the sheriff did something to piss off the DA and he's taking this route as a form of retribution.

 

[radcen]

"It was just a mistake that I made when I was 21," Cassell said.

I just hope the sheriff remembers this when doing his job.

 

[MaggieD]

doesn't matter. by law, the prosecutor is correct. perhaps the law should be changed.

What?? You call a misdemeanor crime committed 30 years ago infamous? What on earth do you call a John Gacy? This prosecutor is an idiot. A complete bumbling idiot. Perhaps the sheriff jilted his sister. :rofl

 

[liblady]

What?? You call a misdemeanor crime committed 30 years ago infamous? What on earth do you call a John Gacy? This prosecutor is an idiot. A complete bumbling idiot. Perhaps the sheriff jilted his sister. :rofl

sorry, but in this case it's the law. the prosecutor may well be an idiot, but that doesn't matter. and no, I didn't call the crime infamous, but who knows? maybe it was infamous in their little podunk.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

If he was such a stickler for the law he would have brought this up and pushed against him before he was elected and in office for over a year.

Perhaps - since he ignored it - he decided that it didn't matter *by* ignoring it.

 

[radcen]

sorry, but in this case it's the law. the prosecutor may well be an idiot, but that doesn't matter. and no, I didn't call the crime infamous, but who knows? maybe it was infamous in their little podunk.

Not so fast. Depending on the Arkansas legal definition of "infamous", it may NOT be the law.

 

[MaggieD]

sorry, but in this case it's the law. the prosecutor may well be an idiot, but that doesn't matter. and no, I didn't call the crime infamous, but who knows? maybe it was infamous in their little podunk.

The whole point of this post is whether or not the law is being interpretted correctly. "It's the law?" OP! Why did you even post this, you scalliwag!

 

[Ockham]

Sounds like the prosecutor and the Sheriff had a spat and the prosecutor decided to make this an issue. The Sheriff should kick the prosecutors ass and escort him to the county line with his belongings... ( I say that facetiously )

 

[liblady]

The whole point of this post is whether or not the law is being interpretted correctly. "It's the law?" OP! Why did you even post this, you scalliwag!

you're right.......i didn't realize "infamous" was part of the law in question. my bad.

 

[radcen]

Sounds like the prosecutor and the Sheriff had a spat and the prosecutor decided to make this an issue.

I suspect this is the case, though I have nothing on which to base that other than 'gut feeling'.

 

[Ockham]

I suspect this is the case, though I have nothing on which to base that other than 'gut feeling'.

It's all I could come up with too...

 

[Ikari]

Sounds like the prosecutor and the Sheriff had a spat and the prosecutor decided to make this an issue. The Sheriff should kick the prosecutors ass and escort him to the county line with his belongings... ( I say that facetiously )

I have that same feeling. There's no information to say that's true or not; but if this were contention it should have been brought up during the Sheriff's campaign. He openly admitted it and such as well during that time. The People still elected him. I'm not for infinite punishment once court mandated punishment has been fulfilled and I see no reason why this Sheriff should be barred from his office when all he did was commit a misdemeanor over 30 years ago.

 

[Caine]

Oh noes.... He stole game hens..... Hens that were already going to be shot... and killed....for fun....

That was totally infamous....

:roll:

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Who is right? The sheriff or the prosecutor?

Theft of game hens could cost Ark. sheriff his job - Yahoo! News

I only have this news story on which to base my opinion, but I feel the sheriff is correct here.

1) He paid for his crime in that her served his sentence.
2) He was open about it during his campaign. The voters knew about it (or should have), and they elected him anyway.

I question the prosecutor's reliance on the phrase "infamous crime" in this situation. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a personal grudge here, but the news story doesn't indicate as much.

When is stealing chickens an infamous crime?

 

[radcen]

When is stealing chickens an infamous crime?

Maybe it was Foghorn Leghorn. Ya know... the timing is about right. :2razz:

 

[Simon W. Moon]

I would side with the sheriff except that he committed the crime while he was a deputy sheriff and it involved hijacking a shipment of hens.

If he had taken some from a neighbor's coop or something like what a kid might do I'd see it differently.

However, apparently the ARSC sees things differently from me.
.
.

Small-time theft (campaign signs in one case) has been held a disqualification by the Supreme Court.​

Prosecutor wants Searcy County sheriff removed | Arkansas Blog

 

[radcen]

I would side with the sheriff except that he committed the crime while he was a deputy sheriff and it involved hijacking a shipment of hens.

If he had taken some from a neighbor's coop or something like what a kid might do I'd see it differently.

However, apparently the ARSC sees things differently from me.
.
.

Small-time theft (campaign signs in one case) has been held a disqualification by the Supreme Court.​

Prosecutor wants Searcy County sheriff removed | Arkansas Blog

The fact that he was a deputy at the time does bother me, and would probably cause me to not vote for him to begin with, but... I do not feel he should be barred. I believe that if we as a society say a person has "paid their debt to society" by serving their sentence in full, then we should actually live by what we say, and leave his election open to the voters. Anything less, such as this law, is hypocritical, IMO.

I do think that the word "infamous" is vague enough that it could still be challenged in court and not necessarily follow the same verdict as the other case cited.