18 thoughts on “30 Days For Ravi”

  1. It’s rough when it appears that a person is guilty of a crime, but the maximum penalty (10 years) seems so extreme compared to the actual bad act.
    Luckily, here, the judge was able to deviate downward and sentence Ravi to 30 days. That seems closer to the “right” answer.

    Like

  2. I think 10 years and deportation to a place where he doesn’t speak the language would have been way too much. Three months and deportation to Canada would have been perfect but this is better than the max.

    Like

  3. Thirty days fair. Not being deported, unfair. We’d be better off shipping him back to India. I have to suffer through people like him when they are my fellow citizens, but there is no need to have any gratuitous ones around.

    Like

  5. Wikipedia says its is only 11% who can speak English. I’m pretty sure that Canada has a much higher number because I used to watch “The Red Green Show”.

    Like

  7. I’m concerned that if you deport him to Canada, you’d be sentencing him to that Canadian health care system which, based on what I’ve been hearing, might constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
    He made get caught up by one of those Death Panels, and that’s probably worse than Extraordinary Rendition.

    Like

  8. That must be why the Red Green show sticks to pro-Canadian propaganda about fishing and the like.

    Like

  9. And he’d have to learn how to spell neighbour and colour and favourite properly plus say “aboot” for about and “roooof” for roof. Coaching could teach him how to order a double-double at Tim Hortons too.

    Like

  10. Back when Tim Horton’s was conquered by Wendy’s, there were a whole bunch of them in Ohio. There must be some left even now after the Canadian reconquista. I suppose the great Dunkin’ Donuts invasion of recent years has done some damage. Too bad the sandwiches are so horribly bland.

    Like

  11. What this judge suggest as to deportation isn’t relevant for that issue, though. All that matters is 1) whether his crime counts as an “aggravated felony” or 2) A “crime of moral terpitude”, and the maximum _possible_ penalty, not the amount served. So, he may well still be out of luck on that front. The trail judge has very little latitude on the matter. The prosecutor has more, but at an earlier stage. Immigration officials have some latitude, of course, but it will be up to them, not this judge.

    Like

  12. Moral “turpitude,” not “terpitude.” Terpitude is what happens when University of Maryland students go bad.
    Sorry!

    Like

  16. I would say that setting up a camera to spy on your roommate in that situation and showing it to your friends is surely demonstrates “moral turpitude.” Bin him.

    Like

  17. “Moral turpitude” is a semi-technical term, at least as used in immigration law. It normally involves deceit or fraud. There’s a fairly long list of examples one can find in the case law (or hornbooks) but they are not exclusive. I’m not sure if this type of action would count or not, but I’d be a bit surprised if it didn’t count as an aggravated felony. To know that for sure, though, I’d have to look into more details of the case, the charges, the sentences, the possible sentences, etc. than I’m willing to do. For the immigration question, though, the important thing to know is that _if_ this counts as an aggravated felony (and really amazing amount of crimes do, including some that are not felonies) then whether the judge thinks he should be deported or not is irrelevant for the immigration law issue.

    Like

  18. “”Moral turpitude” is a semi-technical term, at least as used in immigration law. It normally involves deceit or fraud.”
    I know someone who quite agonized over the “moral turpitude” question on their immigration forms, wondering if epic youthful copyright violations counted.

    Like

Comments are closed.