*********** Background: http://www.politechbot.com/cgi-bin/politech.cgi?name=henson *********** From: xenuat_private Date: 16 May 2001 22:58:41 -0000 Subject: Henson seeks political asylum in Canada Today James Harr appeared for Keith Henson in Riverside Superior Court in Hemet California. It was a confused hearing after Judge Wallerstein notice that Henson was not present. The judge at first issued a bench warrant with a $25,000 bail and then change it to a no-bail bench warrant for Henson, who is seeking political asylum in Canada. He did not rule on the motion to issue a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (http://freehenson.tripod.com/draf-jnov.txt) and after he said he would impose sentence reversed himself and did not rule on a sentence. A probation officer made confused statements about the United States State Department getting involved. The prosecution recommended 200 days in jail and 5 years formal probation, with the defense making no recommendation. Defense counsel was not permitted to withdraw. No further court dates were set. You can contact Keith Henson c/o Gregg Hagglund Telephone: 905-844-6216 2237 Mund's Ave Oakville, ON L6H 3M9 Canada Henson and his Canadian counsel will issue a statement. within a few days. *********** Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 01:26:21 +0200 From: Zenon Panoussis <oracleat_private> To: xenuat_private Subject: Re: Henson seeks political asylum in Canada xenuat_private skrev: > > Today James Harr appeared for Keith Henson in Riverside Superior > Court in Hemet California. It was a confused hearing after Judge > Wallerstein notice that Henson was not present. The judge at first issued > a bench warrant with a $25,000 bail and then change it to a no-bail bench > warrant for Henson, who is seeking political asylum in Canada. It's not gonna work. Requesting asylum is *the* way to make his own presence in Canada difficult for the Canadian state, and to let politics take the upper hand. Canada might be a kind country with a kind government, but not so kind as to jeopardise its relations with the US for Keith's sake by declaring the US a country that does not respect human rights, which is exactly what a country does when it grants asylum to the citizen of another country. The times of the Vietnam draft-dodger refugees are over and even then Canada was bound more by its own (pre-existing) laws than by its actual good will. What's wrong with just a plain ordinary residence permit application, like "I like your country and I want to live here"? What's wrong with a business setup? Employment? What's wrong with any of all those other residence permit possibilities, besides asylum? Besides, when an asylum application is turned down, the refugee is deported to his own country; in Keith's case to the US and straight to jail. When an ordinary application for residence is turned down, the applicant is not deported at all, but is simply requested to leave the country and is free to go anywhere he chooses. Z -- oracle@everywhere: The ephemeral source of the eternal truth... *********** ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if it remains intact. To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 16 2001 - 16:59:58 PDT