Man arrested at New Mexico compound was training kids to commit school shootings

[ArcadiaGP]

Charges dismissed against 3 in N.M. compound case

 

[printcraft]

Just ****ing amazing.

 

[Dead Duck]

What the hell is going on there?
Why can't it be a simple case. Why do I feel they are being led by politics?

 

[HoughMade]

Early reporting, there's more here. These 3 were not the only ones arrested. Generally to be guilty of child neglect, you have to have a duty to provide support for the children. The three who had the neglect charges dismissed, were any of the children theirs? Could the prosecution be gathering evidence for a later indictment? Who knows?

 

[Dead Duck]

It's the reports of letting them go that has me upset.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

"they didn’t have a preliminary hearing in the 10-day time frame required by New Mexico State law for defendants held in custody, according to the official."

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/cl...s-against-3-arrested-at-nm-compound/823179943

 

[DoggyDaddy]

"they didn’t have a preliminary hearing in the 10-day time frame required by New Mexico State law for defendants held in custody, according to the official."

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/cl...s-against-3-arrested-at-nm-compound/823179943

So they went free because prosecutors didn't do their job. Hopefully those prosecutors are no longer employed. If criminal or civil penalties can be brought to bear against the responsible party/parties, I hope that happens as well. Total BS! Didn't have their hearing in time? Fine, then we're holding YOU responsible and charging YOU with aiding and abetting. Your hearing is NOW. They should be (at the least) disbarred along with the pansy-ass judge that set the ridiculously low bond in the first place. Since we don't hang people in this country anymore...

 

[HoughMade]

"they didn’t have a preliminary hearing in the 10-day time frame required by New Mexico State law for defendants held in custody, according to the official."

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/cl...s-against-3-arrested-at-nm-compound/823179943

I assume that if they could, they would.

 

[churchmouse]

"they didn’t have a preliminary hearing in the 10-day time frame required by New Mexico State law for defendants held in custody, according to the official."

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/cl...s-against-3-arrested-at-nm-compound/823179943

So the system is truly broken.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

So the system is truly broken.

They didn't just drop the ball. They spiked it. Gross incompetence on someone's part.

 

[Trigger Time]

Probably half way to another mosque to raise more baby terrorist by now

 

[HoughMade]

5 people were arrested. Apparently the have evidence against 2. The charges against the other 3 were dismissed. Charges can be brought if and when there is sufficient evidence to do so.

 

[Leadeye]

Has to be some sort of bad communication, maybe more will come out as time goes by.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

5 people were arrested. Apparently the have evidence against 2. The charges against the other 3 were dismissed. Charges can be brought if and when there is sufficient evidence to do so.

You're ruining my rabble. Darn you and your eloquent country lawyerly ways.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

5 people were arrested. Apparently the have evidence against 2. The charges against the other 3 were dismissed. Charges can be brought if and when there is sufficient evidence to do so.

Kidding aside, since the charges were dropped, are they free to go wherever they want? Like leave the country? I'm guessing so, but I don't know if there were provisions to keep them in the area (without charges).

 

[HoughMade]

Well, if the charges are dismissed, there is no basis to restrict movement. I truly believe that this wasn’t someone missing a date. That doesn’t seem possible....though stranger stuff has happened. I am assuming that the hearing wasn’t scheduled because they didn’t have the evidence. Granted, this is an assumption based upon speculation. The charges at issue are child neglect charges. They would have to have evidence against these three that they had a duty to care for the children and did not. The second part seems like an easy one, the first one, maybe not so much. Generally speaking, you can’t be held liable for neglecting children that are not yours or that there is no legal duty to care for. Them being in need doen’t cut it. Seems like there may be other charges they could come up with, but I’m not privy to the evidence.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Didn't they order the site where they arrested these people destroyed? This would seem to put that order in a new light, if I am remembering correctly. This whole thing is just odd.

 

[churchmouse]

Has to be some sort of bad communication, maybe more will come out as time goes by.

I truly hope so.

 

[churchmouse]

You're ruining my rabble. Darn you and your eloquent country lawyerly ways.

 

[Trigger Time]

If it aloha snackbars like a duck ....