Illegal alien murders 92-year-old woman 6 weeks after being released from jail in "sanctuary city"
If you live in flyover country you may not be familiar with so-called "sanctuary city" or "sanctuary state" policies. Under these policies, when an illegal alien is arrested for breaking a law, politicians order state or city police to IGNORE requests from federal immigration officials to notify federal authorities and hold the illegal alien until ICE agents can take him into custody.
When an illegal is arrested, ICE asks the law-enforcement agency holding the illegal to notify them several hours before the agency plans to release the alien, to give ICE time to send agents to take the illegal into custody for a deportation hearing. When a city or state has a "sanctuary" policy, police in that city or state ignore the detainer request and release the illegal back onto the streets.
These policies are never put to a vote of the citizens, but in most cases are simply dictated by a virtue-signalling mayor.
Critics of "sanctuary-city" policies have pointed out that this policy subverts U.S. immigration law, by allowing illegals to escape back into the anonymous general populace. But astonishingly, liberal judges have ruled that even though a person in the U.S. illegally has violated our law, it's perfectly fine for city and state law-enforcement to refuse to help enforce U.S. law, and to release jailed illegals without notifying ICE.
That sounds crazy, because it's absolutely against federal law to affirmatively help someone enter the U.S. illegally. But liberal judges have ruled that it's fine for city or state law enforcement officers to simply fail to help enforce U.S. law.
Bizarre, eh? So liberal judges have ruled that it's okay to subvert immigration law, as long as you don't actively help the illegal escape. And they've further ruled that releasing an illegal from jail, when the illegal is subject to deportation, is NOT helping him escape. Crazy.
But critics also cited another huge down-side to "sanctuary" policies: The high probability that illegal aliens released by such policies would commit serious crimes--murder, rape, selling illegal drugs, robbery--against individual Americans.
Predictably, liberals/Democrat pols sneered that this simply wouldn't happen. They cited stats that "immigrants" commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans. But that was a deliberate effort to mislead: the problem at issue here is NOT ALL immigrants, but illegal immigrants--who commit crimes at a far higher rate than legal immigrants. But no member of the media ever called them out on this misleading stat.
As a result: a week ago in New York City, an illegal immigrant from Guyana, Reeza Khan, viciously attacked, raped and murdered 92-year old Maria Fuertes. Khan attacked the 92-year-old woman so viciously that her spine was broken.
Khan had been arrested last November on assault and weapons charges, but since NYC mayor Bill deBlasio (real name Wilhelm Reich) decreed that NYC was a "sanctuary city," the NYPD ignored the detainer and released Khan. In other words, the only reason Khan had the chance to murder and rape Maria Fuertes was deBlasio's "sanctuary" policy.
Mayor deBlasio--eager to signal his virtue to fellow liberals--claims his order to cops not to honor detainers not only does NOT increase risks to New York residents but actually makes the city safer.
I suspect Maria Fuertes would have had a far different opinion as she was being violently assaulted, raped and murdered by the released illegal alien Reeza Khan. But hey, mayor deBlasio got to signal his virtue, and if a few innocent 92-year-olds are murdered as a result, it's not a problem for him, eh?
As far as I know, so-called "sanctuary" policies have only been decreed in cities and states ruled by Democrats. So if you think it's a great thing for pols to order their cops to release jailed criminal illegal aliens instead of holding them until ICE agents can take them into custody for deportation, vote Democrat.
When an illegal is arrested, ICE asks the law-enforcement agency holding the illegal to notify them several hours before the agency plans to release the alien, to give ICE time to send agents to take the illegal into custody for a deportation hearing. When a city or state has a "sanctuary" policy, police in that city or state ignore the detainer request and release the illegal back onto the streets.
These policies are never put to a vote of the citizens, but in most cases are simply dictated by a virtue-signalling mayor.
Critics of "sanctuary-city" policies have pointed out that this policy subverts U.S. immigration law, by allowing illegals to escape back into the anonymous general populace. But astonishingly, liberal judges have ruled that even though a person in the U.S. illegally has violated our law, it's perfectly fine for city and state law-enforcement to refuse to help enforce U.S. law, and to release jailed illegals without notifying ICE.
That sounds crazy, because it's absolutely against federal law to affirmatively help someone enter the U.S. illegally. But liberal judges have ruled that it's fine for city or state law enforcement officers to simply fail to help enforce U.S. law.
Bizarre, eh? So liberal judges have ruled that it's okay to subvert immigration law, as long as you don't actively help the illegal escape. And they've further ruled that releasing an illegal from jail, when the illegal is subject to deportation, is NOT helping him escape. Crazy.
But critics also cited another huge down-side to "sanctuary" policies: The high probability that illegal aliens released by such policies would commit serious crimes--murder, rape, selling illegal drugs, robbery--against individual Americans.
Predictably, liberals/Democrat pols sneered that this simply wouldn't happen. They cited stats that "immigrants" commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans. But that was a deliberate effort to mislead: the problem at issue here is NOT ALL immigrants, but illegal immigrants--who commit crimes at a far higher rate than legal immigrants. But no member of the media ever called them out on this misleading stat.
As a result: a week ago in New York City, an illegal immigrant from Guyana, Reeza Khan, viciously attacked, raped and murdered 92-year old Maria Fuertes. Khan attacked the 92-year-old woman so viciously that her spine was broken.
Khan had been arrested last November on assault and weapons charges, but since NYC mayor Bill deBlasio (real name Wilhelm Reich) decreed that NYC was a "sanctuary city," the NYPD ignored the detainer and released Khan. In other words, the only reason Khan had the chance to murder and rape Maria Fuertes was deBlasio's "sanctuary" policy.
Mayor deBlasio--eager to signal his virtue to fellow liberals--claims his order to cops not to honor detainers not only does NOT increase risks to New York residents but actually makes the city safer.
I suspect Maria Fuertes would have had a far different opinion as she was being violently assaulted, raped and murdered by the released illegal alien Reeza Khan. But hey, mayor deBlasio got to signal his virtue, and if a few innocent 92-year-olds are murdered as a result, it's not a problem for him, eh?
As far as I know, so-called "sanctuary" policies have only been decreed in cities and states ruled by Democrats. So if you think it's a great thing for pols to order their cops to release jailed criminal illegal aliens instead of holding them until ICE agents can take them into custody for deportation, vote Democrat.
 |
| Reeza Khan, charged with murdering 92-year-old woman |
posted by SF at
2:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home