Woman disembarking DCL Dream arrested

[truck1]

Before a ship sails, the passenger manifest is transmitted to the coast guard where the names are checked against lists of persons of interest which seems to include persons with arrest warrants issued. She's lucky that she was allowed to go on the cruise. They could have yanked her before departure. It's not just about terrorists. They're looking for anyone wanted who is leaving the country.

 

It's not as simple as just collecting the fine. The $85 ship has sailed. She has a bench warrant issued for her arrest. She needs to be taken before the issuing judge or a replacement to determine what is to be done. The police don't have the ability to override the judge's warrant. They can refuse to arrest but that's not usually a good idea.

 

DHS/CBP looks also.

 

My million dollar question that I posted on another board is exactly when did someone realize that she has a warrant.

If for example that it was determined that before the ship left that she had a warrant, why was it not taken care of prior to departure?Should it really matter if it was an 85 dollar fine or on a no fly/sail list? How much leeway is there? How easy would it be for a mistake to be made for someone not to sail that actually is allowed to sail and something happens.What does that say about the way that the safeguards are in place? If it was discoverd after the ship left, why did it take so long and how easy is it for someone to slip through tthe cracks with other interests in mind? And Im not thinking terrorism, but more of a dead beat parent slipping out of the country ( I went through this with my daughter. Her biological father wants nothing to do with her, and wouldnt sign a passport to make our lives a little more interesting. Several court dates,an adoption and a lot of paperwork later took care of that) to escape the other parent, etc

[truck1]

Thanks for the clarifications...

 

So if someone had a warrant out in Colorado, they would hold you & bring you to the issuing state? That's amazing, seems like that would cost a fortune..

 

 

Ive seen this happen a few times from Polk County and Pasco Florida. Someone got picked up in a different state, and the agency from the state that has the warrant sends how ever many officers is necessary to bring them back once all of the hoops are jumped through. Im not sure on the hoops but typically from what Ive seen is about a week from the time that a person is arrested out of state, to the time they are brought back to face a judge in the original state.

The case that comes to mind are the 3 kids that stole a car, tried to shoot and kill a Zephyrhills PD officer(who is a friend of my wifes. Basically they robbed a store or bank and the officer saw them and started to pull them over.They waited behind a bldg in the dark for him to come around the corner in his car), and went on a several state robbery spree. They got caught a few weeks later, in the midwest I think, and about a week later they were back in Pasco to face a judge.

[Loonbeam]

Se my post prior about primary and secondary checks. A bench warrant would be a secondary check. Pre-cruise checks are primarily federal or flight risk issues.

 

DHS/CBP looks also.

 

My million dollar question that I posted on another board is exactly when did someone realize that she has a warrant.

If for example that it was determined that before the ship left that she had a warrant, why was it not taken care of prior to departure?Should it really matter if it was an 85 dollar fine or on a no fly/sail list? How much leeway is there? How easy would it be for a mistake to be made for someone not to sail that actually is allowed to sail and something happens.What does that say about the way that the safeguards are in place? If it was discoverd after the ship left, why did it take so long and how easy is it for someone to slip through tthe cracks with other interests in mind? And Im not thinking terrorism, but more of a dead beat parent slipping out of the country ( I went through this with my daughter. Her biological father wants nothing to do with her, and wouldnt sign a passport to make our lives a little more interesting. Several court dates,an adoption and a lot of paperwork later took care of that) to escape the other parent, etc

[Loonbeam]

The issuing state can also choose to waive extradition and keep the warrant active, depending on the situation.

 

Thanks for the clarifications...

 

So if someone had a warrant out in Colorado, they would hold you & bring you to the issuing state? That's amazing, seems like that would cost a fortune..

[wildcatlh]

You left out a crucial detail. The intent to defraud must be present.

 

Also, it's not really a political discussion yet but it's running close to being non-cruise related and board policy discussion related.

 

Not really, no. Most of these regulatory violations (including the CFAA) look at the malum prohibitum rather than the malum in se. Guilty mind doesn't matter much nowadays.

 

I recently read a paper which described this phenomena, and this was included. It regards a 'game' that was used to test junior prosecutors in the US Attorneys' office; they would name a celebrity, and the junior prosecutor would have to figure out what crime they could get them on if they really wanted to.

 

"...It would then be up to the junior prosecutors to figure out a plausible crime for which to indict him or her. The crimes were not usually rape, murder or other crimes you'd see on Law & Order but rather the incredibly broad yet obscure crimes that violate the U.S. code like a kind of jurisprudential minefield: Crimes like "false statements" (a felony, up to five years), "obstructing the mails" (five years) or "false pretenses on the high seas" (also five years). The trick and the skill lay in finding the more obscure offenses that fit the character of the celebrity and carried the toughest sentences. THe result, however, was inevitable: 'prison time'"

 

Before a ship sails, the passenger manifest is transmitted to the coast guard where the names are checked against lists of persons of interest which seems to include persons with arrest warrants issued. She's lucky that she was allowed to go on the cruise. They could have yanked her before departure. It's not just about terrorists. They're looking for anyone wanted who is leaving the country.

 

It's not as simple as just collecting the fine. The $85 ship has sailed. She has a bench warrant issued for her arrest. She needs to be taken before the issuing judge or a replacement to determine what is to be done. The police don't have the ability to override the judge's warrant. They can refuse to arrest but that's not usually a good idea.

 

Why is it not a good idea?

 

Police have a lot of leeway as to whom to arrest/not arrest. If there wasn't any, they'd be pretty darn busy with petty crimes.

 

Seriously. I'm trying to get my mind wrapped around this. What is it about "she did something wrong" that leads people to the thought that "any punishment she gets, she deserves"? And why, exactly, would DHS be looking for petty crime warrants? That's far, far away from the mandate for which they were created. Like the PATRIOT Act; we're told it will only be used for the worst of the worst, for terrorists (really! we promise!). Then they start using it on the rest of us, and we have nothing to say.

 

Are we made safer by this woman being in jail, away from her family, possibly being fired from her job? What is gained besides some glib sense of "she deserves it"?

[USU_Aggie]

The original charge was in Florida, the warrant was in Florida, there was no "extradition." They just needed to get her to the correct jurisdiction in the State.

 

PS--You wouldn't extradite someone with a serious felony (murder, rape, etc.) that wasn't in a non-neighboring state?

 

the neighboring state rule is for when we will always do it, no questions asked

[ducklite]

Not really, no. Most of these regulatory violations (including the CFAA) look at the malum prohibitum rather than the malum in se. Guilty mind doesn't matter much nowadays.

 

I recently read a paper which described this phenomena, and this was included. It regards a 'game' that was used to test junior prosecutors in the US Attorneys' office; they would name a celebrity, and the junior prosecutor would have to figure out what crime they could get them on if they really wanted to.

 

"...It would then be up to the junior prosecutors to figure out a plausible crime for which to indict him or her. The crimes were not usually rape, murder or other crimes you'd see on Law & Order but rather the incredibly broad yet obscure crimes that violate the U.S. code like a kind of jurisprudential minefield: Crimes like "false statements" (a felony, up to five years), "obstructing the mails" (five years) or "false pretenses on the high seas" (also five years). The trick and the skill lay in finding the more obscure offenses that fit the character of the celebrity and carried the toughest sentences. THe result, however, was inevitable: 'prison time'"

 

 

 

Why is it not a good idea?

 

Police have a lot of leeway as to whom to arrest/not arrest. If there wasn't any, they'd be pretty darn busy with petty crimes.

 

Seriously. I'm trying to get my mind wrapped around this. What is it about "she did something wrong" that leads people to the thought that "any punishment she gets, she deserves"? And why, exactly, would DHS be looking for petty crime warrants? That's far, far away from the mandate for which they were created. Like the PATRIOT Act; we're told it will only be used for the worst of the worst, for terrorists (really! we promise!). Then they start using it on the rest of us, and we have nothing to say.

 

Are we made safer by this woman being in jail, away from her family, possibly being fired from her job? What is gained besides some glib sense of "she deserves it"?

 

She had 18 years to make it right, she CHOSE not to do so.

 

By the way, this has nothing to do with the Patriot Act, otherwise she would have been picked up when she boarded. It's always been the policy of INS to check for active warrants on anyone who crosses into the US. I had a friend who got picked up coming back into the US from Canada by car 25 years ago on an outstanding warrant.

[CampbellScot]

the cost associated with holding this woman, transporting her etc. is absolutely outrageous in comparison to the offense and amount of money she owed. How absolutely STUPID. She had 18 years to make it right...okay. But no one knows how this came about. It makes the most sense that she had no idea she owed such a small amount and that is why she didn't pay it. If this family can afford a cruise, I imagine an $85 fine could have been easily paid. It blows my mind how absolutely sanctimonious people get about stuff like this. Does anyone honestly believe that handcuffing this woman and putting her jail for the offense of an unpaid fine makes sense? People can get into drunken violent brawls and be released the NEXT day on their own recognizance. As a young woman she shoplifted a pack of cigarettes and a fine was not paid. She is still sitting in jail. How does this make sense? How? It doesn't. At all.

 

When I think about how many real criminals walk free b/c of overcrowding in jails across the country I am just aghast that this wife and mother was handcuffed and put in jail for a forgotten fine of $85?! WHAT?!

 

Lord protect us all from youth and forgetfulness.

 

I mean REALLY.

[ducklite]

the cost associated with holding this woman, transporting her etc. is absolutely outrageous in comparison to the offense and amount of money she owed. How absolutely STUPID.

 

There is absolutely no sense in any of this. there is no common sense being applied to the situation. When I think about how many real criminals walk free b/c of overcrowding in jails across the country I am just aghast that this wife and mother was handcuffed and put in jail for a forgotten fine of $85?! WHAT?!

 

Lord protect us all from youth and forgetfulness.

 

I mean REALLY.

 

She will have additional charges levied against her and there will be fines associated with them. I was young once, I never stole anything, and when I got a traffic ticket I paid the fine. In full and on time.

[CampbellScot]

She will have additional charges levied against her and there will be fines associated with them. I was young once, I never stole anything, and when I got a traffic ticket I paid the fine. In full and on time.

 

:rolleyes:

 

The point is, the response to this woman's offense is massively blown out of proportion. It makes no sense whatsoever.

 

folks need to get off the sanctimonious high horse.

[ducklite]

:rolleyes:

 

The point is, the response to this woman's offense is massively blown out of proportion. It makes no sense whatsoever.

 

folks need to get off the sanctimonious high horse.

 

Florida doesn't let people slide. We have way too many cretins here to begin with. If we let one go, what's next, the kid toucher can go their merry way because they became a brain surgeon?

 

There's nothing sanctimonious about it, she committed a crime, she didn't show up in court 22 years ago, as a result she was convicted in abstentia, she didn't pay her fine, it caught up to her. Why should they let someone who didn't show up 22 years ago walk away a second time?

 

By the way, there was another similar case recently where a woman who didn't pay her fines years ago had a bench warrant out on her. She was pulled over on a traffic stop and the warrant came back. She too was hauled off to jail.

[wildcatlh]

Florida doesn't let people slide. We have way too many cretins here to begin with. If we let one go, what's next, the kid toucher can go their merry way because they became a brain surgeon?

 

There's nothing sanctimonious about it, she committed a crime, she didn't show up in court 22 years ago, as a result she was convicted in abstentia, she didn't pay her fine, it caught up to her. Why should they let someone who didn't show up 22 years ago walk away a second time?

 

By the way, there was another similar case recently where a woman who didn't pay her fines years ago had a bench warrant out on her. She was pulled over on a traffic stop and the warrant came back. She too was hauled off to jail.

 

BUT WHY IS THAT A GOOD THING?

 

That's all I'm asking. Just stop with the "she shouldn't have done it". Stop with the "it's the law". The law, as they say, is... well, I don't know what kind of language I'm allowed to use here, so lets say that "the law is another word for 'donkey'".

 

I don't care if there's another woman this happened too. That's as dumb as this.

 

And the fact that you'd compare non-payment of an $85 fine to a child molester is just incomphrehensible to me.

 

We have far too many cretins here in Florida, yes. Where we differ is in who we consider to be cretins. Why consider this woman to be a cretin? The mind boggles.

 

One more thing: We have, in the United States, by far the highest incarceration rate in the world. It's not even close. Is that a good thing, or a bad thing? Are Americans show criminal tendencies at a rate exceeding every other country in the world, or do we have too many laws? Laws that you, or me, may violate without even knowing it?

 

I'm done with this discussion. It's not worth it. I'm just going to leave you with this exchange from A Man For All Seasons:

 

Alice More: Arrest him!More: Why, what has he done?Margaret More: He's bad!More: There is no law against that.Will Roper: There is! God's law!More: Then God can arrest him.Alice: While you talk, he's gone!More: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law!Roper: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast– man's laws, not God's– and if you cut them down—and you're just the man to do it—do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake.

[theotherchad]

What a great quote! A Man for All Seasons? I need to netflix that! :)

[Emperor Norton]

Thanks for the clarifications...

 

So if someone had a warrant out in Colorado, they would hold you & bring you to the issuing state? That's amazing, seems like that would cost a fortune..

 

Thats why it depends on the crime, time and distance. The person is still arrested and held until the local leos can find out what the jurisdiction that issued the warrant wants to do.

[ducklite]

BUT WHY IS THAT A GOOD THING?

 

That's all I'm asking. Just stop with the "she shouldn't have done it". Stop with the "it's the law". The law, as they say, is... well, I don't know what kind of language I'm allowed to use here, so lets say that "the law is another word for 'donkey'".

 

I don't care if there's another woman this happened too. That's as dumb as this.

 

And the fact that you'd compare non-payment of an $85 fine to a child molester is just incomphrehensible to me.

 

We have far too many cretins here in Florida, yes. Where we differ is in who we consider to be cretins. Why consider this woman to be a cretin? The mind boggles.

 

One more thing: We have, in the United States, by far the highest incarceration rate in the world. It's not even close. Is that a good thing, or a bad thing? Are Americans show criminal tendencies at a rate exceeding every other country in the world, or do we have too many laws? Laws that you, or me, may violate without even knowing it?

 

I'm done with this discussion. It's not worth it. I'm just going to leave you with this exchange from A Man For All Seasons:

 

She had every chance in the world for 22 years to make it right and chose not to. She thumbed her nose at the State of Florida. It bit her in the ass. Had she shown up for court and paid her fine, we wouldn't be having a conversation.

 

You are trying to make her into a victim. She's not a victim, she's a convicted criminal who is now paying her dues.

[Tonka's Skipper]

She had every chance in the world for 22 years to make it right and chose not to. She thumbed her nose at the State of Florida. It bit her in the ass. Had she shown up for court and paid her fine, we wouldn't be having a conversation.

 

You are trying to make her into a victim. She's not a victim, she's a convicted criminal who is now paying her dues.

 

 

The bottom line is this.......end of story!:D

[Capt_BJ]

Florida Today 25 Jan:

 

"A woman arrested on a warrant as she finished a family cruise vacation at Port Canaveral last week has resolved her case and been released from custody.

 

***** ****, who now lives in Connecticut, failed to serve 50 hours of community service on a 1991 theft conviction in Orange County, according to a court document used to obtain the arrest warrant. The warrant was issued in 1999, and has been pending since. She served seven days in custody following her arrest on Jan. 17, according to documents, satisfying the warrant and closing the case.

 

 

...

 

The database frequently used to check passenger names is the FBI’s National Crime Information Center, which is available to all law enforcement agencies and includes information on wanted and missing people, suspected terrorists and other crime information. The database — which at the end of 2011 included 11.7 million records — includes information on warrants for felony and some misdemeanor crimes.

 

...

 

Court documents supporting the 1999 warrant issued in {this} case say she failed to complete the 50 community service hours and, if found by law enforcement in Florida, she should be held in Orange County jail for that 50-hour period. She was picked up after the cruise, was taken to Brevard County jail and then transferred to Orange County.

The release order issued Wednesday says that **** ended up spending seven days in jail, instead of the 50 hours she was ordered to complete. The case, after nearly 22 years, is now closed.

 

Earlier media reports that Hall was held for not paying a fine are incorrect, officials said. Records show that **** did pay an $85 fee on Tuesday, but officials say that was not the reason she was held in custody.

 

"

 

it wasn't the fine that burned her . . .

[Loonbeam]

Ah yes, that adds a whole different element to the story.

 

Florida Today 25 Jan:

 

"A woman arrested on a warrant as she finished a family cruise vacation at Port Canaveral last week has resolved her case and been released from custody.

 

***** ****, who now lives in Connecticut, failed to serve 50 hours of community service on a 1991 theft conviction in Orange County, according to a court document used to obtain the arrest warrant. The warrant was issued in 1999, and has been pending since. She served seven days in custody following her arrest on Jan. 17, according to documents, satisfying the warrant and closing the case.

 

 

...

 

The database frequently used to check passenger names is the FBI’s National Crime Information Center, which is available to all law enforcement agencies and includes information on wanted and missing people, suspected terrorists and other crime information. The database — which at the end of 2011 included 11.7 million records — includes information on warrants for felony and some misdemeanor crimes.

 

...

 

Court documents supporting the 1999 warrant issued in {this} case say she failed to complete the 50 community service hours and, if found by law enforcement in Florida, she should be held in Orange County jail for that 50-hour period. She was picked up after the cruise, was taken to Brevard County jail and then transferred to Orange County.

The release order issued Wednesday says that **** ended up spending seven days in jail, instead of the 50 hours she was ordered to complete. The case, after nearly 22 years, is now closed.

 

Earlier media reports that Hall was held for not paying a fine are incorrect, officials said. Records show that **** did pay an $85 fee on Tuesday, but officials say that was not the reason she was held in custody.

 

"

 

it wasn't the fine that burned her . . .

[wildcatlh]

So she spent 7 days in jail on what was supposed to be 50 hours. I'm sure she'll be reimbursed for all that extra time she spent in jail, right?

 

Right?

[Tonka's Skipper]

So she spent 7 days in jail on what was supposed to be 50 hours. I'm sure she'll be reimbursed for all that extra time she spent in jail, right?

 

Right?

 

 

Of course not, she didn't do the 50 hours public service..I sorry they din't reqiure it to be done.

 

AKK

[ducklite]

So she spent 7 days in jail on what was supposed to be 50 hours. I'm sure she'll be reimbursed for all that extra time she spent in jail, right?

 

Right?

 

Actually the first few days were waiting on transfer to the proper jurisdiction. No credit for that.

[Host Mick]

Florida doesn't let people slide. We have way too many cretins here to begin with.

 

No kidding. A board that I frequent has a recurring feature where a news article with a bizzare crime is linked to and the challenge is to "Guess the State". The answer is always Florida.

[UNV-IT!!!]

Actually the facts are clear as she admitted to all of it in a televised interview.

 

She was arrested for shoplifting.

 

She didn't appear in court.

 

She was found guilty.

 

She didn't pay her fine.

 

She didn't complete her community service.

 

She was arrested on a bench warrant.

 

http://www2.nbc26.tv/news/2013/jan/22/mother-arrested-while-getting-cruise-ship-1991-the-ar-5421584/

 

We don't agree on everything. But I'm 100% with you on this one.

[wildcatlh]

"An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself" - Thomas Paine

 

Always with the "she did the crime, she has to do the time". I've said before (and ducklite, despite what you say, I promise you this is the only name I've ever posted here with). Prosecutors used to go for justice, and cops used to be all about protecting and serving. Neither is true anymore.

 

Even if I accept everything you've said as true, the fact of the matter is that she was supposed to spend 50 hours in jail and ended up spending 7 days. Don't give me this "It doesn't count because she wasn't in the right prison!" stuff. That's exactly what I'm talking about in the above quoted paragraph.

 

There's a shameful sense of "justice" in this country, and many people in this thread are shining examples as to why.

[ducklite]

"An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself" - Thomas Paine

 

Always with the "she did the crime, she has to do the time". I've said before (and ducklite, despite what you say, I promise you this is the only name I've ever posted here with). Prosecutors used to go for justice, and cops used to be all about protecting and serving. Neither is true anymore.

 

Even if I accept everything you've said as true, the fact of the matter is that she was supposed to spend 50 hours in jail and ended up spending 7 days. Don't give me this "It doesn't count because she wasn't in the right prison!" stuff. That's exactly what I'm talking about in the above quoted paragraph.

 

There's a shameful sense of "justice" in this country, and many people in this thread are shining examples as to why.

 

Call it accrued "interest." Frankly she's lucky that she got off like she did. The law would have allowed the judge to convict her of a number of other crimes based on unlawful flight and failure to appear and impose more time and more fines.