Amnesty: "U.S. Mistreats Immigrant Children"

[Chewbacca]

Yeah Cerek, but that person who jumped on the front of the bus should get a fair hearing and be treated with dignity and respect, correct? If this person is a minor (anyone under the age of 18 and not emancipated by a court)we would try and find parents or relatives.

At least a lawyer and housing segregated from non-immigration criminals. Some teens in America are real thugs, and some poor haitian kid trying to reach family and opportunity should be not locked up with a bunch of thugs. Just because they are teenagers does not make them neccessarily mature or make it appropriate they would be housed with non-immigration offenders.

We have laws on how to treat people who break the law, laws based on commonly agreed principles of what is a correct and fair way to determine if that particular somebody broke the law in the first place. We also have laws on how to treat people, ie. human and civil rights.

We should apply our laws in a consistent, fair, and logical fashion or we build a system that is like a castle made of sand instead of a rock-hard pillar of truth.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by John D Harris: quote: Originally posted by Chewbacca: quote: Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: quote: Originally posted by Rokenn: In line with current US criminal procedure I will assume they are illeagal till they can prove otherwise [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Nice potshot, Rokenn. Unfortunately, the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply in this case.

If they enter the country without going through the proper channels, then by definition, they have entered illegally. [/QUOTE]So we can assume a persons legal status without proof? Innocent until proven guilty should apply, lest we deport a whole lot of "innocent" people. [/QUOTE]Innocent until proven guilty ONLY applies to trial, it does not apply to being arrested, or confined in jail and held until trial. If it did then any person holding that postion MUST demand the immedite release of Eric Scott Rudoff(sp?) and allow him to roam free until his trial. Or the release of all arrested persons until their trial comes up. Arrested and convicted are not the same thing. Breaking the law of the land is breaking the law of the land no if ands or buts. [/QUOTE]Your just mincing words here John and you missed my point. Ever hear of probable cause for arrest? Judges demand probable proof of guilt before issuing warrants, right? The burden of proof of guilt lies with the arrestor, not the arrestee from the moment a crime is committed. This way we keeep innocent people from being arrested with-out evidence.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Yeah Cerek, but that person who jumped on the front of the bus should get a fair hearing and be treated with dignity and respect, correct? If this person is a minor (anyone under the age of 18 and not emancipated by a court)we would try and find parents or relatives. At least a lawyer and housing segregated from non-immigration criminals. Some teens in America are real thugs, and some poor haitian kid trying to reach family and opportunity should be not locked up with a bunch of thugs. Just because they are teenagers does not make them neccessarily mature or make it appropriate they would be housed with non-immigration offenders. We have laws on how to treat people who break the law, laws based on commonly agreed principles of what is a correct and fair way to determine if that particular somebody broke the law in the first place. We also have laws on how to treat people, ie. human and civil rights. We should apply our laws in a consistent, fair, and logical fashion or we build a system that is like a castle made of sand instead of a rock-hard pillar of truth.

Prehaps we should have Muderer jails, rapist jails, armed robbery jails, extorsion jails, Drunk driving jails, J-walking jails, disorderly conduct jails, immigration jails etc. The fact is people are arrested for breaking the law and sent to jail, after they are brought in to the jail then if they need to be sent somewhere else they will be. But that might take some time, you know paperwork has to be filled out, and they sure as "pooping" aren't and shouldn't let the arrested have free rain of the jail until then, that would be utter foolishness and stupidity.
We do have laws abouttotreat the incarserated(sp?) and if amnemsty Int'l has any proof where the "HALE" is the investagtion? Where the "HALE" is AI's copy of the complant they filed with the authorities?

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: quote: Originally posted by John D Harris: quote: Originally posted by Chewbacca: quote: Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: quote: Originally posted by Rokenn: In line with current US criminal procedure I will assume they are illeagal till they can prove otherwise [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Nice potshot, Rokenn. Unfortunately, the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply in this case.

If they enter the country without going through the proper channels, then by definition, they have entered illegally. [/QUOTE]So we can assume a persons legal status without proof? Innocent until proven guilty should apply, lest we deport a whole lot of "innocent" people. [/QUOTE]Innocent until proven guilty ONLY applies to trial, it does not apply to being arrested, or confined in jail and held until trial. If it did then any person holding that postion MUST demand the immedite release of Eric Scott Rudoff(sp?) and allow him to roam free until his trial. Or the release of all arrested persons until their trial comes up. Arrested and convicted are not the same thing. Breaking the law of the land is breaking the law of the land no if ands or buts. [/QUOTE]Your just mincing words here John and you missed my point. Ever hear of probable cause for arrest? Judges demand probable proof of guilt before issuing warrants, right? The burden of proof of guilt lies with the arrestor, not the arrestee from the moment a crime is committed. This way we keeep innocent people from being arrested with-out evidence. [/QUOTE]I'm not mincing words, ever hear of sombody being arrested for drunk driving when they are stopped by the police? Do you seriously think the police officer had to call up a judge and get an arrest warrant? What about a shoplifter? or anybody caught in the act of commiting a crime? Being on caught on U.S. soil illegaly is being caught in the act of commiting a crime! NO ARREST WARRANT is needed. The fact is guilty until proven innocent ONLY applies to the attitude to be taken at trial, the state MUST prove guilt inorder to be convicted not arrested. Ask the estemmed lawyer TL.

[ 06-24-2003, 11:44 PM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

[Chewbacca]

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?o...7EA89273D2B041

Here is a couple of different news article on the topic.

This one is multi-faceted-

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0619-02.htm

Published on Thursday, June 19, 2003 by OneWorld.net New Studies Reveal Poor U.S. Treatment of Asylum Seekers, Children by Jim Lobe WASHINGTON - Less than a month after an internal Justice Department audit found widespread abuse of hundreds of Muslim immigrants detained after the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and the Pentagon, two new reports released this week are charging that the detention of unaccompanied immigrant children and asylum seekers is causing serious harm to innocent people who need protection rather than prison. In one study, Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) found that the mental health and well-being of asylum seekers detained by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) after arriving in New York area airports was generally "extremely poor and worsened the longer the individuals were in detention." "Asylum seekers typically suffered tremendous indignities--torture, rape--at the hands of their own government," said Dr. Allen Keller, a co-author of the report, 'From Persecution to Prison.' "We should be offering protection rather than making worse their already fragile state of health by indiscriminately detaining asylum seekers." At the same time, Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) charged in a report released here Wednesday that about one- third of all children in the custody of U.S. immigration authorities spend at least some time in jail-like facilities designed to hold young offenders, where they may be subjected to shackling, strip searches, solitary confinement, and verbal abuse from guards and other detainees. "It is appalling that many officials don't understand the difference between a juvenile offender and an unaccompanied child and that they deny these fragile young asylum seekers respect and rights," said William Schulz, AIUSA's executive director. "This is grossly unfair to children whose only 'offense' is seeking safe haven in the U.S. Many have fled dangerous situations, including child trafficking, abusive families and armed rebel forces," he said. "when we treat these children harshly, they are further traumatized, and our country's credibility as a protector of rights is eroded." Both reports come amid renewed controversy over harsher immigration-detention policies adopted by the administration of President George W. Bush in the wake of the 9-11 attacks. Washington has largely set the pattern for other western countries that have become much less hospitable to asylum-seekers and other immigrants over the past 19 months. Earlier this month, the Justice Department's Inspector General issued an report that was unexpectedly critical of the "harsh conditions" under which more than 700 immigrants were detained -- for up to several months -- after September 11, even though almost all of them were never suspected of any involvement in terrorism. The two new reports may add fuel to the fire. The PHR report, which the group described as the "first systematic and comprehensive scientific study of the mental health of asylum seekers held in detention," was based on extensive interviews with 70 men and women currently or formerly detained in two INS facilities and three country jails in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Their ages ranged from 15 to 52, and the majority were from Africa, although the group also included seven from Eastern Europe, four from Asia, three from Latin America, and two from the Middle East. The median length of the detention at the time of the interview was five months. Many had been victims of torture in their home countries. Grievances began with their arrival at U.S. airports where they reported verbal abuse by INS personnel, who often failed to inform them of their right to asylum. Once transported to detention facilities, the study participants reported feeling degraded and being treated like criminals. More than half of the detainees reported experiencing verbal abuse while in detention, including being called criminals and liars and being yelled at in circumstances which they didn't understand. For those who had suffered physical abuse or imprisonment in their home countries, the situation often worsened pre-existing psychological problems, including post-traumatic stress, which can be greatly exacerbated by solitary confinement. "I have great fear, I feel like I'm reliving it at times," said one woman who had been beaten and raped in prison in her country of origin. "When I think about what happened to me--I feel the pain in my body again, like it's happening to me--to experience what I experienced before arriving to this country and then being put in prison, that added to my suffering." In some cases, unaccompanied children were sent to adult detention facilities after being sent for dental evaluations, a questionable test for determining age. The Amnesty study, entitled 'Why Am I Here? Children in Immigration Detention,' was based on interviews with past and current detainees and on a survey of 115 facilities used by the INS to house unaccompanied children, 33 of which completed the survey. Roughly half of those that took part in the study said they house unaccompanied immigrant minors in the same cells as juvenile offenders. More than half said they use solitary confinement as punishment. In only 13 percent of facilities did children receive weekly psychological counseling, and only a third of the centers reported that they routinely explain to children why they have been detained and that they have the right to judicial review of their detention, according to the report. The Amnesty report also cited cases in which child detainees have been transferred to adult facilities on the basis of a dental exam. "The next morning, they told me I was going a better place, but they were lying," said one girl identified as Fantis S., a former child detainee from West Africa, who spoke at Wednesday's press conference. "They chained and handcuffed me and took me to the adult prison in York, Pennsylvania. There, they strip-searched me, made me put on an orange jump suit and cut off all my hair, just like a criminal." In fact, Fantis was 16 years old at the time, as reflected in the documentation she carried with her when she was detained. To address the problems of unaccompanied minors, Senators Dianne Feinstein and Sam Brownback recently introduced the Unaccompanied Alien Child Protection Act, which was endorsed by Amnesty. Copyright 2003 OneWorld.net

[Chewbacca]

John, that cop has probable cause because of poor driving and/or a breathalyzer. You can't arrest someone with-out cause.

I am sitting here innocent til proven guilty of every crime I haven't committed.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: John, that cop has probable cause because of poor driving and/or a breathalyzer. You can't arrest someone with-out cause. I am sitting here innocent til proven guilty of every crime I haven't committed.

NO DODO! But You don't seem to want to understand that being caught on U.S. Soil illegaly is being caught in the act of commiting a crime and therfore by nature gives the arresting officer probable cause to place the person under arrest. No way around it Chewbacca that's the facts plain and simple. You CAN NOT be caught on Canadian soil in the act of being an illegal alien in the U.S.A. You can not be caught on U.S. soil in the act of being an illegal Alien to the UK.

As for you sitting there innocent of any crime unitl proven guilty. guess what so are the people sitting in jail until they are convicted in a trial by either a jury of their peers or a judge if they so elect to waive their right to a jury trial.

Guess what else the police can arrest anybody they want to for what ever reason they want too. But the fact is to do so would be stupid and would leave the officer open for proscution and law suits.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Here is a couple of different news article on the topic. This one is multi-faceted- http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0619-02.htm

A very interesting article, Chewbacca. It is - indeed - multi-faceted. There were a couple of paragraphs that particularly caught my interest....

Originally posted by Chewbacca. -snip- At the same time, Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) charged in a report released here Wednesday that about one- third of all children in the custody of U.S. immigration authorities spend at least some time in jail-like facilities designed to hold young offenders, where they may be subjected to shackling, strip searches, solitary confinement, and verbal abuse from guards and other detainees. -snip-

So now Amnesty International has gone from the implication in the Reuters article that abuse and detention in jail was arbitrarily applied to most (if not all) of the 5,000 unaccompanied children to the reality that roughly 1/3 are held in "jail-like facilities". This could mean anything from a holding cell to the hotel that young Jimmy from the first article was detained in. It's interesting how the actual statistics seem to shrink rapidly when exposed to the light of scrutiny. Amnesty International is making broad claims of widespread abuse, yet their own statistics don't back that claim up.

I've already addressed the issue of prisoners being shackled. I will readily concedet that strip searches and verbal abuse seem to be nothing more than an abuse of power. As for the solitary confinement, it is consistently mentioned as a punishment - not as a mandatory interment condition. In deference to the cases cited in Grojlach's opening article, I admit that the type of "misconduct" and the punishment warranted by that misconduct do seem to be grossly out of proportion in some case (not necessarily all..but at least some).

Originally posted by Chewbacca: The PHR report, which the group described as the "first systematic and comprehensive scientific study of the mental health of asylum seekers held in detention," was based on extensive interviews with 70 men and women currently or formerly detained in two INS facilities and three country jails in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Their ages ranged from 15 to 52, and the majority were from Africa, although the group also included seven from Eastern Europe, four from Asia, three from Latin America, and two from the Middle East.

Now this particular fact was very revealing...or so I thought. The PHR report is verifying the claims of Amnesty International based on the interviews of 70 former immigrants. I'm not a statistics expert, so I could be wrong, but 70 does not sound large enough to be a "representative example" for 5,000 immigrants. Yet PHR is extrapolating the data gathered from these 70 individuals and using it to justify accusations against the treatment of 5,000 other people...many of whom are not even being held in the same geographic area...much less the same facility...as the 70 subjects from the study.

Another factor that seems to keep popping up is the age of these "children"...so far, I don't recall seeing an interview done or incident cited involving ANY "child" under the age of 16...an age in which many of these "children" would be considered adults in the countries they are fleeing from. I'm sure the 5,000 mentioned by AI does include a proportionate share of toddler's and young children...but the fact is, there has not been a single allegation of abuse cited involving any children this young. Just an observation on my part.

Now...before many of you start believing I am a total ogre...I want to say that this article also contradicted the assumption I've held throughout this thread...that this situation involved the numerous aliens that try to enter the country illegally.

From MY interpretation of the article provided by Chewbacca, it appears that these are people who ARE trying to "follow the proper protocol" for entering the country and being granted asylum. They aren't trying to "sneak across the border" or ride over in a boat. They are coming on airplanes and seeking the proper authorities once they disembark.

So I have to stand corrected on the false assumption I've carried throughout this thread. Given these circumstances, I have to concur (at least to a degree ) with Chewbacca & Grojlach. It is a gross injustice to treat someone this way when they are trying to follow the proper protocol, but may just be unaware of what that protocol is.

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: quote: Originally posted by Rokenn: In line with current US criminal procedure I will assume they are illeagal till they can prove otherwise [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Nice potshot, Rokenn. Unfortunately, the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply in this case.

If they enter the country without going through the proper channels, then by definition, they have entered illegally. [/QUOTE]Nice way to take a quote out of context Cerek. I thought you were better then that.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Rokenn: quote: Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: quote: Originally posted by Rokenn: In line with current US criminal procedure I will assume they are illeagal till they can prove otherwise [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Nice potshot, Rokenn. Unfortunately, the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply in this case.

If they enter the country without going through the proper channels, then by definition, they have entered illegally. [/QUOTE]Nice way to take a quote out of context Cerek. I thought you were better then that. [/QUOTE]I quoted nothing "out of context" Rokenn. I quoted the entirety of your response to Morgeraut. I did not include Morgeraut's comments a second time for two reasons.

1) My post came immediately after yours, so anyone wishing to see what "context" you made the comments in only had to scroll up one or two posts.

2) The mods are constantly reminding us to avoid "nested quotes". Since Morgeraut's comments were somewhat long and were in close proximity to my own post, I saw no reason to quote them again.