Judge sentencing the Shoe Bomber - good speech

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Prodigal, Jun 25, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/reidjudge.html

    And if you can't open the link -

    U.S. District Court Judge William Young made the following statement in sentencing "shoe bomber" Richard Reid to prison. It is noteworthy, and deserves to be remembered far longer than he predicts. I commend it to you and to anyone you might wish to forward it to.

    January 30, 2003, United States vs. Reid. Judge Young: Mr. Richard C. Reid, hearken now to the sentence the Court imposes upon you.

    On counts 1, 5 and 6 the Court sentences you to life in prison in the custody of the United States Attorney General.

    On counts 2, 3, 4 and 7, the Court sentences you to 20 years in prison on each count, the sentence on each count to run consecutive with the other. That's 80 years.

    On count 8 the Court sentences you to the mandatory 30 years consecutive to the 80 years just imposed. The Court imposes upon you each of the eight counts a fine of $250,000 for the aggregate fine of $2 million.

    The Court accepts the government's recommendation with respect to restitution and orders restitution in the amount of $298.17 to Andre Bousquet and $5,784 to American Airlines.

    The Court imposes upon you the $800 special assessment.

    The Court imposes upon you five years supervised release simply because the law requires it. But the life sentences are real life sentences so I need go no further.

    This is the sentence that is provided for by our statutes. It is a fair and just sentence. It is a righteous sentence. Let me explain this to you.

    We are not afraid of any of your terrorist coconspirators, Mr. Reid. We are Americans. We have been through the fire before. There is all too much war talk here and I say that to everyone with the utmost respect.

    Here in this court, where we deal with individuals as individuals, and care for individuals as individuals, as human beings we reach out for justice, you are not an enemy combatant. You are a terrorist. You are not a soldier in any war. You are a terrorist. To give you that reference, to call you a soldier gives you far too much stature. Whether it is the officers of government who do it or your attorney who does it, or that happens to be your view, you are a terrorist.

    And we do not negotiate with terrorists. We do not treat with terrorists. We do not sign documents with terrorists. We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice.

    So war talk is way out of line in this court. You are a big fellow. But you are not that big. You are no warrior. I know warriors. You are a terrorist. A species of criminal guilty of multiple attempted murders.

    In a very real sense Trooper Santigo had it right when you first were taken off that plane and into custody and you wondered where the press and where the TV crews were and he said you're no big deal. You are no big deal.

    What your able counsel and what the equally able United States attorneys have grappled with and what I have as honestly as I know how tried to grapple with, is why you did something so horrific. What was it that led you here to this courtroom today? I have listened respectfully to what you have to say. And I ask you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable hate led you to do what you are guilty and admit you are guilty of doing. I have an answer for you. It may not satisfy you, but as I search this entire record it comes as close to understanding as I know.

    It seems to me you hate the one thing that is most precious. You hate our freedom. Our individual freedom. Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose.

    Here, in this society, the very winds carry freedom. They carry it everywhere from sea to shining sea. It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are here in this beautiful courtroom. So that everyone can see, truly see that justice is administered fairly, individually, and discretely.

    It is for freedom's sake that your lawyers are striving so vigorously on your behalf and have filed appeals, will go on in their, their representation of you before other judges. We are about it. Because we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties. Make no mistake though. It is yet true that we will bear any burden, pay any price, to preserve our freedoms.

    Look around this courtroom. Mark it well. The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here. Day after tomorrow it will be forgotten. But this, however, will long endure. Here in this courtroom and courtrooms all across America, the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice is in fact being done.

    The very President of the United States through his officers will have to come into courtrooms and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged, and juries of citizens will gather to sit and judge that evidence democratically, to mold and shape and refine our sense of justice.

    See that flag, Mr. Reid? That's the flag of the United States of America. That flag will fly there long after this is all forgotten. That flag stands for freedom. You know it always will.

    Mr. Custody Officer. Stand him down.
     
  2. I love the speech but this pargraph stood out above all for me. Todays front page tomorrows chip paper.......


    Look around this courtroom. Mark it well. The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here. Day after tomorrow it will be forgotten. But this, however, will long endure. Here in this courtroom and courtrooms all across America, the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice is in fact being done.





    Mr. Custody Officer. Stand him down.[/quote]
     
  3. Not strictly true.
     
  4. If he said that in the UK he'd be laughed out of his court; we do treat with terrorists. We do sign documents with terrorists. We hunt them down one by one and bring them to Office.
     
  5. Great speech and good sentence - 30 years + 80 years to be served consecutively! Our UK imprisoned terrorists will all be out in less thn 20 years.
    whf
     
  6. Sixty

    Sixty LE Moderator Book Reviewer
    1. ARRSE Cyclists and Triathletes

    Typical mawkish US bullsh*t. I'd imagine any British judge who started the whole 'do you see that flag' & 'sea to shining sea' schmaltz would be laughed out of court.

    Sentence seems reasonable enough though for multiple attempted murders.
     
  7. Hard to keep a straight face when reading this. He is of course right in most things he says but it is all so american that it becomes laughable.
     
  8. "They hate freedom." It's easy to chew on phrases like that. But the reality is complex - the response is not, but the genesis is more complicated than many of us want to admit.

    A speech like this is not even remotely intended to permeate the consciousness of the person being sentenced, but to get the speaker into the history books.
     
  9. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    Its a pity our judges don't make speeches like this but we are too sophisticated here in Blighty, too sophisticated to believe in anything, to care about anything. Too pc to be judgmental.

    Although we had a CO of 1 R IRISH who had a fair stab at such oratory.

    I liked then way he mentioned the 5 years supervision after release.
     
  10. An English judge making such a speech would be soon find himself hauled before the Lord Chancellor. Our judges are extremely careful to remain politically neutral (even if the effect of their judgements may not sometimes be so regarded). The same goes for defendants, and counsel for that matter. Any attempt at political speeches in an English court is inadmissible and is not permitted.

    The reason for this is that the courts in England and Wales are careful to preserve their constitutional separation from the government of the day and to avoid any suggestion that their function is in any way an extention of the political process.

    Long may it continue.
     
  11. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    In what way was it a Political speech? In fact it makes the point that even the President must present evidence before the courts if he wants something.
     
  12. Great speech, although I do suspect the motives of the Judge who delivered it - it sounds a little along the lines of something you'd hear in a Hollywood blockbuster such as 'A few good men'. It was a good read all the same.

    Sadly, I think the only regret Mr Reid will be feeling, is that he didn't commit his crime under the jurisdiction of the UK and its laws. That way he'd be out in about 6 or 7 years. :roll:
     
  13. Schaden

    Schaden LE Book Reviewer

    Typical sep posturing bs.
     
  14. Sixty

    Sixty LE Moderator Book Reviewer
    1. ARRSE Cyclists and Triathletes

    In this way?

    It's not like he was declaring that the US courts do not negotiate and so on. He was pontificating about government policy ergo, it's political.
     
  15. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    In that all things are politics. Its not partisan politics. True though no British judge could say that with a straight face.