Moco releases accused rapist and ignored ICE detainer

[Anonymous]

They called an off duty ice person

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They called an off duty ice person

If I told my boss that I did not have my phone forwarded to an on duty person I would be fired.

[Anonymous]

They called an off duty ice person that wasn’t even in the area on vacation

[Anonymous]

Sounds like MoCo is making up excuses. I can't believe they did not follow the directions on the detainer request.
I guess they just don't care if an accused rapist is walking their streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like MoCo is making up excuses. I can't believe they did not follow the directions on the detainer request.
I guess they just don't care if an accused rapist is walking their streets.

They called the number provided by ICE. If ICE changes a process, I don't think posting it on a webpage is sufficient. They should notify the police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An illegal alien brought an Ar-15 to his Moco high school and the county didn’t cooperate with ice even then

he broke into a police car and stole an ar-15, shotgun and ammo then brought it to school and he got 2000 $ bail

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An illegal alien brought an Ar-15 to his Moco high school and the county didn’t cooperate with ice even then

he broke into a police car and stole an ar-15, shotgun and ammo then brought it to school and he got 2000 $ bail

Because the county doesn’t care about kids’ safety and it doesn’t care about women’s safety. It prioritizes illegal immigrants over all else.

[Anonymous]

ICE could get warrants. But instead they issue unconstitutional 'detainers'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ICE could get warrants. But instead they issue unconstitutional 'detainers'

removal is civil not criminal so you are wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ICE could get warrants. But instead they issue unconstitutional 'detainers'

They are perfectly legal. Other jurisdictions accept them just fine. MoCo and other sanctuary locales like to protect illegal immigrants end of story.

[Anonymous]

ICE detainers do not provide probable cause. If you're holding someone based on one, you better have some reason to or you're exposed to lawsuits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ICE detainers do not provide probable cause. If you're holding someone based on one, you better have some reason to or you're exposed to lawsuits.

The fact is MOCO called ICE, nobody answered and they gave ICE 6 hours to show up and finally had to release him... but he should not have been given bond... that's a whole other problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ICE detainers do not provide probable cause. If you're holding someone based on one, you better have some reason to or you're exposed to lawsuits.

The fact is MOCO called ICE, nobody answered and they gave ICE 6 hours to show up and finally had to release him... but he should not have been given bond... that's a whole other problem.

6 hours? That’s not a reasonable amount of time to expect ICE to come pick up the guy.

And he should not have been given bond.

[Anonymous]

Another.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ICE could get warrants. But instead they issue unconstitutional 'detainers'

They are perfectly legal. Other jurisdictions accept them just fine. MoCo and other sanctuary locales like to protect illegal immigrants end of story.

It's actually very dangerous, legally, for a jurisdiction to hold based on most ICE detainers. They're not warrants supported by probable cause and jurisdiction that have honored ICE detainers for what turn out to be US citizens have had to pay damages for that. Ignoring them is the right constitutional decision.