Welcome, Guest! - or
Easy to remember!  »  VinNews.com

St. Louis, MO - Appeals Court: Rubashkin Doesn't Deserve New Trial

Published on: September 16, 2011 11:51 AM
Last updated on: September 16, 2011 02:18 PM
By: AP
Change text size Text Size  

St. Louis, MO - A former kosher slaughterhouse executive convicted of financial fraud won’t get a new trial after a federal appeals court upheld a lower court’s rejection of his appeal on Friday.

The U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling in the case of Sholom Rubashkin. The former Agriprocessors manager was convicted of 86 financial fraud charges in 2009 and sentenced to 27 years in prison. His arrest followed an immigration raid at a Postville plant the company once owned.

Immigration charges against him were later dismissed, and a jury acquitted him of violating child labor laws.

Rubashkin claimed, among other issues, that U.S. District Court Judge Linda Reade, who presided over his trial, couldn’t be impartial because she participated in planning the raid.

Reade met with investigators and prosecutors and discussed charging strategies, number of anticipated arrests, logistics and other issues related to the investigation, according to evidence obtained through a Freedom of Information lawsuit brought by Rubashkin’s attorney.

Advertisement:

The American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa filed a brief with the federal appeals court saying Rubashkin should get a new trial because Reade could be biased.

But the federal appeals court said Friday that Rubashkin’s lawyers didn’t ask for the judge to excuse herself during the trial and didn’t object to deadlines set for that type of request.

The court noted that Rubashkin didn’t get the records requested under the FOIA for nearly a year. They came in around the time of his sentencing, but it wasn’t until two months after sentencing that he filed a motion asking for a new trial. Reade rejected that request, and he appealed.

“After studying the lengthy record we find no evidence that the district court’s decision to remain on the case prejudiced Rubashkin’s verdict. We conclude that the district court did not err by denying Rubashkin’s motion for a new trial,” the court said in a 32-page ruling.

Rubashkin’s attorney, Guy Cook, said they would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“This is not justice by any measure,” Cook said. In an email to The Associated Press, he said the appeal court’s opinion “ignores obvious flaws.”

Ruling here PDF



More of today's headlines

Ramallah, West Bank - The Palestinian president said Friday he would ask the U.N. Security Council next week to endorse his people's decades-long quest for statehood... Dallas, Tx - OpEd Editorial printed in Today's Wall Street Journal by Republican Presidential Candidate Rick Perry: The historic friendship between the United States...

 

Total113

Read Comments (113)  —  Post Yours »

1

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:46 PM REALIST Says:

Don't be surprised if the epicenter of the next earthquake is Des Moines.
Harbay shluchim laMakom.

2

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:36 PM omglol Says:

its a very sad news, and we still not giveing up for his released.

3

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:19 PM DeepThinking Says:

Very Sad , thats all i have to say .

4

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:19 PM TheRealJoe123 Says:

I was not expecting this bad news I was sure they would at least knock off some years from his sentence hopefully this is not the end of the road

5

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:17 PM R"L Says:

Which world are we? what a corrupted court system!

6

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:12 PM Anonymous Says:

It was inevitable when Linda Reade herself was on the panel. If ever this is a case of skewed and unfair "justice" this is it.

Supreme Court? Obama can give the Klal a Yom Tov gift & grant him clemency. Let the conviction stand. Just release him.

7

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:08 PM am Says:

this city is rigged with bureaucracy!!!!!!!!!!! and real anti-semitic!!!!!
He should go to the Supreme Court

8

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:06 PM Anonymous Says:

We are winding this thing down. Only one place to go with this and that's the Supreme Court.

Sooner or later his supporters are going to see numerous judges seeing nothing wrong with the verdict.

It's a tragedy for the family.

It's too much punishment for a first time offender - all true.

He's not a dangerous criminal.

But it's time to start winding down the anti-semitic comments. It's not helping and this isn't 18 century Europe under the Czar.

His first lawyer was a bigger problem than the judge.

Good Shabbos.

9

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:05 PM realistic Says:

hashem should help sholom mordche and his family to overcome this tragedy.
kol ma deovid rachmana letav ovid (whatever hashem does, is done to the good).

10

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:02 PM Yossi Says:

Did anyone expect a different outcome when Judge Reade was one of the 3 Judges sitting on the appeal..?

11

 Sep 16, 2011 at 11:59 AM SandraM Says:

It seems the fact that Linda Reade sat with these judges that very morning as well as the day before had its desired impact.
The last time Reade offered to sit on that circuit was 7 years before.
I am skeptical that Rubashkin will get any fairness. It seems that this is an very tangled web that reaches very high.

12

 Sep 16, 2011 at 01:03 PM Sherree Says:

It is quite obvious that Hashem has a plan and we can't see it yet. We are in chodesh Elul and we can't give up. We just have to be mispalel. We know this is NOT the final verdict and we have to keep our efforts doubled and tripled with true tefilah and histadlius. The final verdict is yet to be heard.

13

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:58 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #10  
Yossi Says:

Did anyone expect a different outcome when Judge Reade was one of the 3 Judges sitting on the appeal..?

Where did you get the idea that Judge Reade was on the appeal court?

Not true.

14

 Sep 16, 2011 at 12:35 PM Anonymous Says:

I guess the US Supreme Court is next.

Brocha v'hatzlocha!!

15

 Sep 16, 2011 at 02:58 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

I hope no one reading about this failed appeal will start thinking that Rubashkin is guilty. Nuuuuthhhiiinnngggggg could be further from the truth. This continues to be a case that is a war on shechita against a saint and a tzadik whose only crime was to be born a yid.

16

 Sep 16, 2011 at 02:52 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #12  
Sherree Says:

It is quite obvious that Hashem has a plan and we can't see it yet. We are in chodesh Elul and we can't give up. We just have to be mispalel. We know this is NOT the final verdict and we have to keep our efforts doubled and tripled with true tefilah and histadlius. The final verdict is yet to be heard.

Agreed 100% At this point it would appear that the plan is for a man who committed and was convicted of financial crimes sit in jail for those crimes.

17

 Sep 16, 2011 at 02:38 PM Lawrence M. Reisman Says:

Reply to #10  
Yossi Says:

Did anyone expect a different outcome when Judge Reade was one of the 3 Judges sitting on the appeal..?

Look at the PDF file of the decision. The three judges sitting on the appeal were Riley, Murphy, and Smith. There is no way that a trial judge sits on a court panel reviewing his or her case.

19

 Sep 16, 2011 at 02:18 PM Myron Says:

could have saved a lot of time and money if he'd told the truth and taken the plea bargain. teshuva is always the best way.

20

 Sep 16, 2011 at 02:24 PM MazelKGH Says:

Breaking the law is always risky. If you are willing to take the chance then you must be prepared for all consequences. Just being Jewish no longer qualifies as a reason to support someone. You have to be honest and righteous too. At least that's what we were told about David Weprin. You can't have it both ways.

21

 Sep 16, 2011 at 01:51 PM Elliot Pasik Says:

Reply to #13  
Anonymous Says:

Where did you get the idea that Judge Reade was on the appeal court?

Not true.

On the same day that Rubashkin's oral argument on the appeal was heard, US District Court Judge Reade was, in the morning, a member of two appellate panels that heard other cases. She sat with two judges who, later that day, were deciding Rubashkin's case, and therefore deciding whether she should have recused herself, based on her bias. So Reade had the opportunity to make a positive impression of herself on two appellate court judges. I didn't know that, according to comment 11 above, the last time Reade had volunteered to serve on the appeals court was 7 years before. Probably, none of this is coincidence. Rubashkin's best bet to get before the Supreme Court is on the bias and recusal argument.

Sad. 27 years is way too long.

22

 Sep 16, 2011 at 01:10 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #6  
Anonymous Says:

It was inevitable when Linda Reade herself was on the panel. If ever this is a case of skewed and unfair "justice" this is it.

Supreme Court? Obama can give the Klal a Yom Tov gift & grant him clemency. Let the conviction stand. Just release him.

Any other stories you can make up? Reade wasn't on the panel. And her sitting earlier on the appeals panel had nothing to do with the fact that Lewin talked a big game but to anyone like myself who has an advanced knowledge of the process, this appeal was weak on legal foundation and a lot of hoopla in the media - and got Rubashkin to right where he is now. This case was so badly bungled by the attorneys its pathetic. You want to blame Reade? The boogeyman? Blame the lawyers who took good money and lots of it and who also took 16 to 20 years of Rubashkin's life.

23

 Sep 16, 2011 at 01:21 PM Yossi Says:

Reply to #13  
Anonymous Says:

Where did you get the idea that Judge Reade was on the appeal court?

Not true.

Sorry thats what i remember all along...If you say NOT TRUE i am sure you know the facts....Tooes Leoylom Choyzeir

24

 Sep 16, 2011 at 01:35 PM LoveHashem Says:

Reply to #6  
Anonymous Says:

It was inevitable when Linda Reade herself was on the panel. If ever this is a case of skewed and unfair "justice" this is it.

Supreme Court? Obama can give the Klal a Yom Tov gift & grant him clemency. Let the conviction stand. Just release him.

obama will grant him clemency the same way he granted Pollard clemency. don't hold your breath. He's far from a friend of the Jews.

25

 Sep 16, 2011 at 01:37 PM Bezalel Says:

Reply to #13  
Anonymous Says:

Where did you get the idea that Judge Reade was on the appeal court?

Not true.

District court (trial) judges may serve as substitute judges on circuit court (appellate) panels. Judge Reade served as a substitute judge on the appellate court, along with appellate Judges Lavenski Smith and Diana Murphy, hearing a few cases.

The same exact day, just a few hours later, judges Smith and Murphy, along with judge William Riley, heard the appeal for Rubashkin that questioned judge Reade's actions. That was extraordinarily unethical not only for judge Reade, but also for judges Smith and Murphy.

26

 Sep 16, 2011 at 01:41 PM getitright Says:

i read the entire verdict, they found him wrong on every count. Also saying the court did not err in any decision , going so far as saying he was received the low end with a 324 month sentence,could have been worse.

we know a beis din that says "koulo Chayav" is overturned, as finding a person completely guilty without a chance of anything to help him is flawed.
what can we say just before yom hadin hagadol vanorah ...

anyone listening to the appeal felt he stood a strong chance not just cause his attorney was good but the goverments was lousy and stupid..

apparently powers behind the scenes worked effectively and the pressure on holder not strong enough.

we need the judge of all to help out and bring his might down so we can all read the good news when it happens.

she and her cronies are celebrating but not for long.

27

 Sep 16, 2011 at 03:13 PM Anonymous Says:

It seems that it isn't going to work to go to the Supreme Court. They would most likely not take the case (they get huge numbers of appeals cases and do not have the time to accept each one), especially as this does not have huge ramifications for the entire country. People from the rest of the USA don't care about one trial, especially as it is not a death penalty case.
It is not anti-semitism at play but a poor choice in a legal team. His lawyers should have filed motions in time and should have requested the judge excuse herself from the case. They did not obey the rules and procedures of the court so they are to blame, not the legal system.

28

 Sep 16, 2011 at 02:02 PM yankelyoffen Says:

Reply to #8  
Anonymous Says:

We are winding this thing down. Only one place to go with this and that's the Supreme Court.

Sooner or later his supporters are going to see numerous judges seeing nothing wrong with the verdict.

It's a tragedy for the family.

It's too much punishment for a first time offender - all true.

He's not a dangerous criminal.

But it's time to start winding down the anti-semitic comments. It's not helping and this isn't 18 century Europe under the Czar.

His first lawyer was a bigger problem than the judge.

Good Shabbos.

Agreed.

I feel terrible for him and his family. No children should be turned into yesomim with their father still alive, and no woman an almanah with her husband still alive. But blaming anti-semitism is childish, shallow and blind to reality.

And to all the fans of Rush Limbaugh and his ilk reading this, lets not forget that the eighth circiut court of appeal is notoriously conservative; this lack of compassion is what you get from people such as these.

29

 Sep 16, 2011 at 06:53 PM Ben Torah Says:

This is another Dreyfus case.

30

 Sep 17, 2011 at 08:15 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #22  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

Any other stories you can make up? Reade wasn't on the panel. And her sitting earlier on the appeals panel had nothing to do with the fact that Lewin talked a big game but to anyone like myself who has an advanced knowledge of the process, this appeal was weak on legal foundation and a lot of hoopla in the media - and got Rubashkin to right where he is now. This case was so badly bungled by the attorneys its pathetic. You want to blame Reade? The boogeyman? Blame the lawyers who took good money and lots of it and who also took 16 to 20 years of Rubashkin's life.

Oy, Shaul from Monsey, you are one ANGRY person. Pray inform us peasants exactly the nature of your inside information so we may prostrate ourselves at the feet of thy greatness...in law, Halacha, rodent extermination & everything else on which you are expert.

Gut Voch, keep up the good fight & try to stay calm, your blood pressure is at stake.

31

 Sep 17, 2011 at 08:52 PM Hershl Says:

If he were a goyishe criminal would you all be so upset?

The man is a yid and a gonef.

He deserves to be punished as much as anyone else.

The fact that he is a frume yid is a shanda far di goyim.

32

 Sep 17, 2011 at 08:56 PM Anonymous Says:

I think that Nat Lewin is one of the best appellate lawyers in the country and made the best possible arguments on behalf of a retrial but the facts of the case were simply not supportive of a reversal. Its very unlikely that the Supreme Court will grant cert in this case so the best possible outcome is for Rubashkin to serve most of his sentence and perhaps get clemency 15 or 20 years from now.

33

 Sep 17, 2011 at 09:12 PM Josh38 Says:

I've known Nat Lewin for a long time and have always thought that if he were half as good a lawyer as he believes he is, he would be an incredible lawyer. But the bottom line is that he's not. While he's no doubt highly intelligent, in cases such as this he lets his emotions get the better of him, and that is a cardinal sin for a litigator. The appellate briefs that he drafted contained far too much hyperbole and positive statements about Rubashkin, when they should have focused more on the legal arguments. The same was true of Lewin's oral argument, which I listened to on audio. The government's attorney did a much better job of sticking to the relevant facts and was more familiar with the case law that the panel focused on. I'm not saying that Lewin caused Rubashkin to lose the appeal but he certainly didn't help. And all that while supposedly collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars (paid for mostly by members of the community at learge).

34

 Sep 17, 2011 at 09:31 PM EsqToo Says:

There was one entity hurt by his crime, and that was the bank. He tried to make it appear that his business was earning a higher profit than it was so that he would qualify for a larger loan--a loan on which the bank earned interest. Ironically, his investigation and arrest, which resulted in bankrupting his business, hurt the bank as well, as he was then unable to repay the loan. Ie, if not for the investigation, the bank probably would have profitted.

The appellate decision devotes a mere 2 sentences, of a 32 pg. opinion, to addressing J. Reade's behavior. That is a travesty. The court reasons that his lawyers missed the deadline for requesting a recusal. However, his lawyers had no knowledge of Reade's questionable conduct at that time, and they were never obligated to file a FOIA request. They only filed the FOIA request after being disturbed by her rulings.

35

 Sep 17, 2011 at 09:32 PM qazxc Says:

Reply to #28  
yankelyoffen Says:

Agreed.

I feel terrible for him and his family. No children should be turned into yesomim with their father still alive, and no woman an almanah with her husband still alive. But blaming anti-semitism is childish, shallow and blind to reality.

And to all the fans of Rush Limbaugh and his ilk reading this, lets not forget that the eighth circiut court of appeal is notoriously conservative; this lack of compassion is what you get from people such as these.

Finally!!!

Someone who "gets it".

The frum olem supported Rudy no matter how many times he intoned the 'few bad apples in every bunch' line when minorities were shot or beaten by some members of the NYPD. Today you guys complain about them being out of control with their bogus tickets.

Same with the frum olem's blind support of the conservative agenda of the Republican party.

Wait until you see what happens with an arch-conservative Republican president signing into law every cut to Medicare, Medicaid, education, and housing program.

You guys will be yelling 'anti Semitism' and Rush and Co. will be laughing all the way to the bank.

36

 Sep 17, 2011 at 09:33 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #33  
Josh38 Says:

I've known Nat Lewin for a long time and have always thought that if he were half as good a lawyer as he believes he is, he would be an incredible lawyer. But the bottom line is that he's not. While he's no doubt highly intelligent, in cases such as this he lets his emotions get the better of him, and that is a cardinal sin for a litigator. The appellate briefs that he drafted contained far too much hyperbole and positive statements about Rubashkin, when they should have focused more on the legal arguments. The same was true of Lewin's oral argument, which I listened to on audio. The government's attorney did a much better job of sticking to the relevant facts and was more familiar with the case law that the panel focused on. I'm not saying that Lewin caused Rubashkin to lose the appeal but he certainly didn't help. And all that while supposedly collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars (paid for mostly by members of the community at learge).

This case is not about Lewin or any of the lawyers who did their best to help SMR. The problem, as many of the prior posters have noted, is that he committed a variety of serious federal crimes and the federal sentencing guidelines dictated the outcome. I very much doubt that Judge Reade is anti-semitic or went Sholmo Mordechai because of the way he looks. No lawyer can change the realities of what his/her client may have done and I'm certain neither Lewin or any of the other lawyers got rich off this case.

37

 Sep 17, 2011 at 09:40 PM qazxc Says:

Reply to #29  
Ben Torah Says:

This is another Dreyfus case.

Your comments display either a poor education, a lack of historic perspective or a complete inability to filter information of agenda based PR claims.

There is a major difference between persecuting an innocent man under the pretext of prosecution and the over-punishment of a guilty one.

SMR's attorneys played a very stupid game of trying the case in the media and lost.

Very sad and very unfair that he ended up in front of a wicked judge who sentenced him for both his crimes and his followers in court and out of court antics but Dreyfus he isn't.

38

 Sep 17, 2011 at 09:49 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #1  
REALIST Says:

Don't be surprised if the epicenter of the next earthquake is Des Moines.
Harbay shluchim laMakom.

It's funny that you call yourself "realist" when youa re obviously so deluded.

Why would there be an earthquake in Des Moines? Because the conviction of a criminal was upheld by the Court?

Are you serious?

39

 Sep 17, 2011 at 09:50 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #2  
omglol Says:

its a very sad news, and we still not giveing up for his released.

maybe you should write in, and the court will take pity after reading your poor English!

40

 Sep 17, 2011 at 09:51 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #4  
TheRealJoe123 Says:

I was not expecting this bad news I was sure they would at least knock off some years from his sentence hopefully this is not the end of the road

why would they knock off any years? this was a hearing for a new trial, not challenging sentencing? Are you paying ANY attention?

41

 Sep 17, 2011 at 09:52 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #5  
R"L Says:

Which world are we? what a corrupted court system!

what's corrupt about it? you feel he deserves a new trial? he is a convicted felon, and the court affirmed this. what's your problem?

42

 Sep 17, 2011 at 10:08 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #34  
EsqToo Says:

There was one entity hurt by his crime, and that was the bank. He tried to make it appear that his business was earning a higher profit than it was so that he would qualify for a larger loan--a loan on which the bank earned interest. Ironically, his investigation and arrest, which resulted in bankrupting his business, hurt the bank as well, as he was then unable to repay the loan. Ie, if not for the investigation, the bank probably would have profitted.

The appellate decision devotes a mere 2 sentences, of a 32 pg. opinion, to addressing J. Reade's behavior. That is a travesty. The court reasons that his lawyers missed the deadline for requesting a recusal. However, his lawyers had no knowledge of Reade's questionable conduct at that time, and they were never obligated to file a FOIA request. They only filed the FOIA request after being disturbed by her rulings.

oh, you fake lawyer, so the only thing he was guilty of a is bank fraud?

Isn't that enough to put him in jail?

43

 Sep 17, 2011 at 10:14 PM SandraM Says:

Reply to #22  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

Any other stories you can make up? Reade wasn't on the panel. And her sitting earlier on the appeals panel had nothing to do with the fact that Lewin talked a big game but to anyone like myself who has an advanced knowledge of the process, this appeal was weak on legal foundation and a lot of hoopla in the media - and got Rubashkin to right where he is now. This case was so badly bungled by the attorneys its pathetic. You want to blame Reade? The boogeyman? Blame the lawyers who took good money and lots of it and who also took 16 to 20 years of Rubashkin's life.

I am surprised at your inability to read. No one said she was on THAT panel, but she was on one with two of the three judges that very morning - this is public record.

I find it your shrillness and hyperbole about the lawyers rather childish and naive. It is clear that this case is highly irregular from the get go. The outcry was a result of that, not the other way around. In fact, it was the govt that began and continued what you call "the hoopla in the media".

Are you related to Reade? Your intensity is strange. Why are you such an angry man, Shaul?

44

 Sep 17, 2011 at 10:24 PM qazxc Says:

Reply to #34  
EsqToo Says:

There was one entity hurt by his crime, and that was the bank. He tried to make it appear that his business was earning a higher profit than it was so that he would qualify for a larger loan--a loan on which the bank earned interest. Ironically, his investigation and arrest, which resulted in bankrupting his business, hurt the bank as well, as he was then unable to repay the loan. Ie, if not for the investigation, the bank probably would have profitted.

The appellate decision devotes a mere 2 sentences, of a 32 pg. opinion, to addressing J. Reade's behavior. That is a travesty. The court reasons that his lawyers missed the deadline for requesting a recusal. However, his lawyers had no knowledge of Reade's questionable conduct at that time, and they were never obligated to file a FOIA request. They only filed the FOIA request after being disturbed by her rulings.

At best your argument is that yes he committed fraud but he might have been able to pay it back had his business survived. Perhaps Bernie Madoff also started out thinking he'd be able to cover his fraud by paying back with future profits until his scheme grew out of control.

It is also possible that he would have had to keep creating false invoices to borrow more and more and his business would have eventually collapsed under the weight of more debts than it could carry.

Either way, he was guilty of fraud when he took out the loan based on false representations of his company's financial position, regardless of whether or not he paid back every cent, with interest and a bonus.

Very unfair punishment when compared to the punishments handed down for violent crimes and that is where his lawyers should be concentrating their efforts, not on winning an appeal in Hamodia and Yated.

The strategy of fighting the federal prosecutors in front of the cameras against a backdrop of shukeling supporters crying about his tzidkus was doomed to fail before it started and attacking the fairness of the court and packing the courtroom with sichos-learning tehillim zuggers wasn't a brilliant move either.

IY"H, once they stop the persecuted tzaddik yesod olem shenanigans they'll find a way to get his sentence reduced dramatically.

45

 Sep 17, 2011 at 11:11 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #44  
qazxc Says:

At best your argument is that yes he committed fraud but he might have been able to pay it back had his business survived. Perhaps Bernie Madoff also started out thinking he'd be able to cover his fraud by paying back with future profits until his scheme grew out of control.

It is also possible that he would have had to keep creating false invoices to borrow more and more and his business would have eventually collapsed under the weight of more debts than it could carry.

Either way, he was guilty of fraud when he took out the loan based on false representations of his company's financial position, regardless of whether or not he paid back every cent, with interest and a bonus.

Very unfair punishment when compared to the punishments handed down for violent crimes and that is where his lawyers should be concentrating their efforts, not on winning an appeal in Hamodia and Yated.

The strategy of fighting the federal prosecutors in front of the cameras against a backdrop of shukeling supporters crying about his tzidkus was doomed to fail before it started and attacking the fairness of the court and packing the courtroom with sichos-learning tehillim zuggers wasn't a brilliant move either.

IY"H, once they stop the persecuted tzaddik yesod olem shenanigans they'll find a way to get his sentence reduced dramatically.

Your comments are right on point. If his lawyers and advisors adopt some common sense strategies as you suggest, he might get out of prison while he is still alive to see his grandchildren. If they persist in attacking the judge and screaming anti-semitism, he will probably die in jail.

46

 Sep 18, 2011 at 12:31 AM Anonymous Says:

Rubashkin’s lawyer, Nat Lewin, is on Zev Brenner's radio show tonight explaining the remaining options. He says it does not look good and there is only a 1 in a 100 chance that the Supreme Court would argree to hear an appeal of the 8th Circuit’s decision (which rests to a larger degree on their findings of fact rather than legal interpretations and is not the kind of case the Supreme Court takes from the circuit courts). Most importantly, Lewin blamed it all on the prosecution being too agressive and said there are NO issues of anti-semitism here.

47

 Sep 18, 2011 at 02:06 AM Dina_Demalchusa Says:

SMR violated the halachos of geneivas daas, shkeker, chilul Hashem, and dina demalchusa.

He committed crimes for which people go to prison for many years.

I feel sick when I hear him described as a baal bitachon. A baal bitachon does not break the halachah in order to make parnassah.

I agree that 27 years is far too long. And I feel sorry for SMR and his family. But it’s disgusting to attribute the sentence to anti-semitism. There is absolutely no evidence that Judge Reade is anti-semitic. She has a reputation as a strict judge and she strictly followed the federal sentencing guidelines, as is her wont. The problem is not with her; but with the severity of the guidelines.

As we approach the Yemei Hadin, we should all learn mussar from this tragedy.

1. We must not break the halachos of financial dealings. (It is forbidden to deal dishonestly with a goy just as it is with a yid -- Shulchan Aruch C.M. 231 #1, Rambam Hilchos Geneivah 7 #8. Rambam even calls it *to’eivah*!).
We must not make a chilul Hashem.
3. We must not violate the dina demalchusa.

Remember: What is the first question that we are asked after 120 years?

48

 Sep 18, 2011 at 09:26 AM Gmench Says:

Im not qualified to comment on the level of law broken or not. However, from a logical POV the justice system in the USA is severely broken. I read articles all the time of murderers being let off or being sentenced to much shorter terms than Rabashkin. Also, people who intentionally robbed people of much more money than was involved in the Rabashkin case (money that he did not even steal but aledgedly leveraged), and those people got fines and no time or 4 years and small fine... Something is broken here and its a shame. How can America consider itself a beacon of justice and righteousness when its own legal system has no fairness?

49

 Sep 18, 2011 at 09:48 AM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #21  
Elliot Pasik Says:

On the same day that Rubashkin's oral argument on the appeal was heard, US District Court Judge Reade was, in the morning, a member of two appellate panels that heard other cases. She sat with two judges who, later that day, were deciding Rubashkin's case, and therefore deciding whether she should have recused herself, based on her bias. So Reade had the opportunity to make a positive impression of herself on two appellate court judges. I didn't know that, according to comment 11 above, the last time Reade had volunteered to serve on the appeals court was 7 years before. Probably, none of this is coincidence. Rubashkin's best bet to get before the Supreme Court is on the bias and recusal argument.

Sad. 27 years is way too long.

Surprised to see so ridiculous a comment from a smart guy. Reade didn't need to influence the Appellate Judges - the record spoke for itself. The man stole. Period. The Ten Commandments are not multiple choice. My Bible doesn't say Thou Shall Not Steal by creating false invoices, moving money around like a common drug dealer, and take what you have no right to take unless you are a frum guy and give lots of tzedaka with what you steal. That Reade influenced the judges is the kind of close-minded narishkeit that spews from chareidi mouths and if you're that gullible, maybe when you advocate for child safety there's something wrong there to.

50

 Sep 18, 2011 at 09:56 AM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #30  
Anonymous Says:

Oy, Shaul from Monsey, you are one ANGRY person. Pray inform us peasants exactly the nature of your inside information so we may prostrate ourselves at the feet of thy greatness...in law, Halacha, rodent extermination & everything else on which you are expert.

Gut Voch, keep up the good fight & try to stay calm, your blood pressure is at stake.

What don't you get? A gonif got caught. Then he refused a plea deal. Then at trial the evidence was overwhelmingly against him and he lied on the stand. Then he got the low end of the sentencing guidelines and lost on appeal. At the same time, country bumpkins like you gave millions of dollars because you drank the kool aid. You believed there was a war on shechita when there was only a Boro Parker pulling his shtick in Middle America where that shtick doesn't fly.

You can't admit the truth. No one on VIN can. I'm shocked my comments were posted because we all know the VIN editors have been gelded by the beards.

And let me tell you the real tragedy of this case. Rubashkin is no hero. The REAL HEROS are the hundreds of yididn, myself included, who have had lines of credit at their disposal and DIDN'T lie to get access to the money. But you are too blinded by your shtetl mentality to swallow that. Go on blaming Reade, the judges and the boogeyman so you can sleep at night. After all, ignorance is bliss.

51

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:00 AM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #43  
SandraM Says:

I am surprised at your inability to read. No one said she was on THAT panel, but she was on one with two of the three judges that very morning - this is public record.

I find it your shrillness and hyperbole about the lawyers rather childish and naive. It is clear that this case is highly irregular from the get go. The outcry was a result of that, not the other way around. In fact, it was the govt that began and continued what you call "the hoopla in the media".

Are you related to Reade? Your intensity is strange. Why are you such an angry man, Shaul?

No one said? Read comment 10 and then acknowledge that you are mentally deficient.

52

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:19 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #47  
Dina_Demalchusa Says:

SMR violated the halachos of geneivas daas, shkeker, chilul Hashem, and dina demalchusa.

He committed crimes for which people go to prison for many years.

I feel sick when I hear him described as a baal bitachon. A baal bitachon does not break the halachah in order to make parnassah.

I agree that 27 years is far too long. And I feel sorry for SMR and his family. But it’s disgusting to attribute the sentence to anti-semitism. There is absolutely no evidence that Judge Reade is anti-semitic. She has a reputation as a strict judge and she strictly followed the federal sentencing guidelines, as is her wont. The problem is not with her; but with the severity of the guidelines.

As we approach the Yemei Hadin, we should all learn mussar from this tragedy.

1. We must not break the halachos of financial dealings. (It is forbidden to deal dishonestly with a goy just as it is with a yid -- Shulchan Aruch C.M. 231 #1, Rambam Hilchos Geneivah 7 #8. Rambam even calls it *to’eivah*!).
We must not make a chilul Hashem.
3. We must not violate the dina demalchusa.

Remember: What is the first question that we are asked after 120 years?

excellent comment!

53

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:31 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #49  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

Surprised to see so ridiculous a comment from a smart guy. Reade didn't need to influence the Appellate Judges - the record spoke for itself. The man stole. Period. The Ten Commandments are not multiple choice. My Bible doesn't say Thou Shall Not Steal by creating false invoices, moving money around like a common drug dealer, and take what you have no right to take unless you are a frum guy and give lots of tzedaka with what you steal. That Reade influenced the judges is the kind of close-minded narishkeit that spews from chareidi mouths and if you're that gullible, maybe when you advocate for child safety there's something wrong there to.

You just make it all up as you go along, don't you? From SMR to pedophiles. Some stretch of the old imagination there, buddy! Don't confuse us with the facts, isn't that right?

You're still angry. I pity Mrs. Shaul & little Shaulettes, they have a lot of anger to tiptoe around.

54

 Sep 18, 2011 at 11:18 AM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #53  
Anonymous Says:

You just make it all up as you go along, don't you? From SMR to pedophiles. Some stretch of the old imagination there, buddy! Don't confuse us with the facts, isn't that right?

You're still angry. I pity Mrs. Shaul & little Shaulettes, they have a lot of anger to tiptoe around.

You wouldn't know a fact if it was dancing a jig in front of you. Dont waste time posting on VIN, run to give the lawyers more money. There's a .001 percent chance the Supreme Court will grant cert or maybe the 8th circuit will grant a review en banc so go spend another mill on that after all this is a war on shechita.

And the funniest joke is I remember reading the Yated coverage of the appeal which made Alice in Wonderland sound like the 11 oclock news - I can't wait for the great laughs coming this week.

56

 Sep 18, 2011 at 11:30 AM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #53  
Anonymous Says:

You just make it all up as you go along, don't you? From SMR to pedophiles. Some stretch of the old imagination there, buddy! Don't confuse us with the facts, isn't that right?

You're still angry. I pity Mrs. Shaul & little Shaulettes, they have a lot of anger to tiptoe around.

FACT: Rubashkin committed bank fraud and money laundering, contributing to the most heinous Chillul Hashem in America in recent history. It took a frum murdering lunatic to unseat Rubashkin on the Chillul Hashem chart number 1.

FACT: The Chillul Hashem was worsened by all the chareidi cries of anti-semitism. When Johnny Chochran played the race card we were all sick, but when Boro Park screams it it is just plain grotesque.

FACT: Reade acted lawfully and as she typically does in every single case before her. Guy Cook ignored the record and let his client go to trial because THATS WHERE THE MONEY IS. Guy Cook is more to blame for 27 years than 10 Judge Reade's.

FACT: Millions of dollars in legal fees, mumoin hekdesh, were wasted when a plea deal would half cost a tenth and yielded no more than 12-14 years max.

FACT: When you play out a case in the media, you might as well tattoo yourself on your forehead with the words "I'm here because my case is awfully weak." All the media hoopla helped ZERO.

FACT: If I had represented SMR he'd be going home with enough life left to enjoy his grandkids. And I'm not even a lawyer.

57

 Sep 18, 2011 at 11:51 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #48  
Gmench Says:

Im not qualified to comment on the level of law broken or not. However, from a logical POV the justice system in the USA is severely broken. I read articles all the time of murderers being let off or being sentenced to much shorter terms than Rabashkin. Also, people who intentionally robbed people of much more money than was involved in the Rabashkin case (money that he did not even steal but aledgedly leveraged), and those people got fines and no time or 4 years and small fine... Something is broken here and its a shame. How can America consider itself a beacon of justice and righteousness when its own legal system has no fairness?

"Also, people who intentionally robbed people of much more money than was involved in the Rabashkin case (money that he did not even steal but aledgedly leveraged),"

By not paying his workers when they worked overtime, and/or demanding they work many days "free", he is intentionally robbing people. Or, doesn't that count because they were uneducated, poor Goyim? How about robbing the underage kids who were forced to work in horrbile conditions that will threaten their health for the rest of their lives? Items like working with clorox without gloves on a daily basis.

58

 Sep 18, 2011 at 12:04 PM Anonymous Says:

While I am no attorney nor do I profess to know who would have provided better representation for Mr Rubahkin, I am certain that he could have secured better legal counsel than he did. He should have had the best in the country and he did not! However, having said that we must not loose sight that none of this would have taken place had he operated his business according to the law. While he was not convicted on the illegal workers charges, there were undocumented workers present when the raid took place and he did allow questionable financial practices to occur. The raid was precipitated by DOJ based on the undocumented workers. The fraud charges came later. Why do we think that we are above the law? Not only should we not break the law, we should be able to show the goyim that we follow the Torah which specifically prohibits this repulsive behavior. The major pint is that had he conducted himself in business as he does in religious life none of this would have taken place. No doubt he received an unfair sentence and may Hashem grant compassion to those who have the ability to reduce his sentence. Taking public assistance while being fully employed is the same FRAUD.

59

 Sep 18, 2011 at 01:14 PM SandraM Says:

Reply to #56  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

FACT: Rubashkin committed bank fraud and money laundering, contributing to the most heinous Chillul Hashem in America in recent history. It took a frum murdering lunatic to unseat Rubashkin on the Chillul Hashem chart number 1.

FACT: The Chillul Hashem was worsened by all the chareidi cries of anti-semitism. When Johnny Chochran played the race card we were all sick, but when Boro Park screams it it is just plain grotesque.

FACT: Reade acted lawfully and as she typically does in every single case before her. Guy Cook ignored the record and let his client go to trial because THATS WHERE THE MONEY IS. Guy Cook is more to blame for 27 years than 10 Judge Reade's.

FACT: Millions of dollars in legal fees, mumoin hekdesh, were wasted when a plea deal would half cost a tenth and yielded no more than 12-14 years max.

FACT: When you play out a case in the media, you might as well tattoo yourself on your forehead with the words "I'm here because my case is awfully weak." All the media hoopla helped ZERO.

FACT: If I had represented SMR he'd be going home with enough life left to enjoy his grandkids. And I'm not even a lawyer.

Whatever Rubashkin did wrong pales in comparison to the wrong that was done to him.

The media hoopla was created by the government and the Jewish secular media: to state otherwise is revisionist history at its best.

No matter what you think of Rubashkin, no one deserves to have done to them what was done to him. At a time when anyone with a shred a mercy has their heart going out to him and his family, you list his choose to post judgement call.

Conclusion:
I don't think you are very nice man, Mr. Shaul.

60

 Sep 18, 2011 at 02:41 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #59  
SandraM Says:

Whatever Rubashkin did wrong pales in comparison to the wrong that was done to him.

The media hoopla was created by the government and the Jewish secular media: to state otherwise is revisionist history at its best.

No matter what you think of Rubashkin, no one deserves to have done to them what was done to him. At a time when anyone with a shred a mercy has their heart going out to him and his family, you list his choose to post judgement call.

Conclusion:
I don't think you are very nice man, Mr. Shaul.

Actually criminals do deserve jail. Rubashkin's arrogance got him 27 years. And I can't stop laughing that you actually wrote that the media stir was created by the gov't, that's like saying the Church created the Torah - it just ain't so.

I have tons of mercy for the guy and his family, he should be two years in to 12 instead of 27. He gambled and lost 15 years. He gambled with a judge KNOWN to sentence hard. His lawyers took him for the ride and people like you are as much to blame for his 27 years as anyone because you stoked the fire of conspiracy when there was none. I on the other hand am not to blame for his 27 years because I said from day one that a plea deal was his best chance. I posted here from day 1 that he would lose at trial and I posted that his appeal was a loser. I've been right every time and the 8th Circuit won't grant en banc and the Supreme Court will not grant cert either. So when those events occur at least I spoke the truth and didn't feed the arrogance. So don't point fingers at me - Nat Lewin didn't get 5 minutes taken off SMRs sentence and Guy Cook banked big time off this case. You got issues call them and demand they return their fees.

61

 Sep 18, 2011 at 02:56 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #57  
Anonymous Says:

"Also, people who intentionally robbed people of much more money than was involved in the Rabashkin case (money that he did not even steal but aledgedly leveraged),"

By not paying his workers when they worked overtime, and/or demanding they work many days "free", he is intentionally robbing people. Or, doesn't that count because they were uneducated, poor Goyim? How about robbing the underage kids who were forced to work in horrbile conditions that will threaten their health for the rest of their lives? Items like working with clorox without gloves on a daily basis.

He didn't allegedly leverage anything - he stole.

He hid from the bank payments from customers to inflate the receivables he borrowed against that is LYING and STEALING not leveraging. He created fake phony invoices to borrow against - that is LYING and STEALING. He took payments that he promised the bank he would deposit in a control account and deposited them in other accounts hiding them from the bank that is LYING and STEALING. He washed the cash by paying into the control account from the grocery and the yeshiva using amounts that made those payments look like customer payments and he lied on the books as to where that money came from - I love you chareidim who can't call it like it is it is not LEVERAGING - it is LYING and STEALING.

62

 Sep 18, 2011 at 03:44 PM Macherfresser Says:

Reply to #20  
MazelKGH Says:

Breaking the law is always risky. If you are willing to take the chance then you must be prepared for all consequences. Just being Jewish no longer qualifies as a reason to support someone. You have to be honest and righteous too. At least that's what we were told about David Weprin. You can't have it both ways.

This should be a lession to all yidden not to break the law. Just because he helped many yidden he should serve the time in prison like everyone else that breaks the law. Though the outcome is painful for the community we must understand that shalom rubashkin broke the law and can not make him a celebrity. Upon his release in 2039 we should not celebrate and make a kiddush either, rather the community must learn from his mistakes.

63

 Sep 18, 2011 at 06:29 PM Anonymous Says:

I'm not an attorney, but isn't it immoral for Nate Lewin to keep encouraging SMR that he can win in the Supreme Court? I read a letter that SMR wrote to his family and he is telling them he can be home by Rosh Hashanah. This is in 17 days.

64

 Sep 18, 2011 at 07:11 PM SandraM Says:

Reply to #61  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

He didn't allegedly leverage anything - he stole.

He hid from the bank payments from customers to inflate the receivables he borrowed against that is LYING and STEALING not leveraging. He created fake phony invoices to borrow against - that is LYING and STEALING. He took payments that he promised the bank he would deposit in a control account and deposited them in other accounts hiding them from the bank that is LYING and STEALING. He washed the cash by paying into the control account from the grocery and the yeshiva using amounts that made those payments look like customer payments and he lied on the books as to where that money came from - I love you chareidim who can't call it like it is it is not LEVERAGING - it is LYING and STEALING.

Honey, don't you go call me Charedi or black-hat or anything like that, because I am far from it.

You are a very, very angry man - and its all quite strange to me. You can rant and rave all you want, but it is seems to be much more a reflection of who are, than on what that man did. He has been handed a virtual life-sentence and its a disgrace.

All your protests notwithstanding, you seem to be endorsing just that. Given that you have no expertise in law, your comments are shameful.

The ACLU has endorsed this man's struggle, and for me, that is quite enough.

65

 Sep 18, 2011 at 08:31 PM And now Says:

I hope everyone can learn from his misdeeds and mistakes and teach their children how to live according to Torah, in business dealings and in personal dealings. He'll have time to think about these things in jail and we should do the same. His wife might want to do the right thing as well, and sell off the silver and everything accumulated during his reign at Agriprocessors and donate the proceeds to tzedaka. Then maybe they'll get a miracle at some point.

66

 Sep 18, 2011 at 08:33 PM Herzog Says:

Find fault in every Orthodox Jew? Most Orthodox Jews don't do what Rubashkin did. Self-hating Jews are the Jews who do wrong, in spite of what we're taught by the Torah. Jews who love Jews and Judaism live ethically and honestly. You're attacking the wrong person.

67

 Sep 18, 2011 at 09:46 PM shmiell Says:

Reply to #50  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

What don't you get? A gonif got caught. Then he refused a plea deal. Then at trial the evidence was overwhelmingly against him and he lied on the stand. Then he got the low end of the sentencing guidelines and lost on appeal. At the same time, country bumpkins like you gave millions of dollars because you drank the kool aid. You believed there was a war on shechita when there was only a Boro Parker pulling his shtick in Middle America where that shtick doesn't fly.

You can't admit the truth. No one on VIN can. I'm shocked my comments were posted because we all know the VIN editors have been gelded by the beards.

And let me tell you the real tragedy of this case. Rubashkin is no hero. The REAL HEROS are the hundreds of yididn, myself included, who have had lines of credit at their disposal and DIDN'T lie to get access to the money. But you are too blinded by your shtetl mentality to swallow that. Go on blaming Reade, the judges and the boogeyman so you can sleep at night. After all, ignorance is bliss.

Shaul, get your facts straight. The crusade against Rubashkin, as well as the media frenzy about/against him has been driven by PETA (with their notorious anti-Shechita agenda) and the Conservative movement (who is out to wreak havoc on the Orthodox kashrus industry) for years. When they saw that they couldn't get anywhere with their "video" , they turned to the "illegal immigrant" tactic (when probably every one of their cleaning ladies is paid cash due to lack of a green card) which got chucked by the court because it was false. (No one else got raided, not their banks, doctors, kid's public schools, etc.) The only thing that stuck was inflating the invoices to get a higher line of credit, which he PAID BACK until they raided him and bankrupted him. Judge Reade added a nice chunk of time to his sentence due to the Iowa "law" (never enforced in the 100 years that it's on the books) requiring payment of cattle dealers within 24 hours. He paid like every other customer. She threw the book at him for offenses which other people who do worse get much less time for, b/c the original plan failed and she had it in for him. This was orchestrated well in advance, and she was a part of it

68

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:00 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #63  
Anonymous Says:

I'm not an attorney, but isn't it immoral for Nate Lewin to keep encouraging SMR that he can win in the Supreme Court? I read a letter that SMR wrote to his family and he is telling them he can be home by Rosh Hashanah. This is in 17 days.

Why should Lewin stop if the rudderless chabad machine and the yated continues to manufacture enough kool aid to raise another half mill for a supreme court fight? He's laughing all the way to the bank. You think his failed effort to get even thirty seconds shaved off of SMRs sentence was free? The guy didn't get one MINUTE of a reduction in sentence but you'll keep bowing because that's what sheep do.

69

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:01 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #64  
SandraM Says:

Honey, don't you go call me Charedi or black-hat or anything like that, because I am far from it.

You are a very, very angry man - and its all quite strange to me. You can rant and rave all you want, but it is seems to be much more a reflection of who are, than on what that man did. He has been handed a virtual life-sentence and its a disgrace.

All your protests notwithstanding, you seem to be endorsing just that. Given that you have no expertise in law, your comments are shameful.

The ACLU has endorsed this man's struggle, and for me, that is quite enough.

So hire the man to teach your kids business ethics. No skin off my back. HaHaHa!

70

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:06 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

You are the lunatic. I love the Torah Rubashkin chose to ignore. And I will never defend what he did because what he did was as against halacha as you driving your car on shabbos and you eating your ham sandwich. In your farkrumpte world maybe 612 or 611 is enough. But that is no more Judaism than islam. (note in debating on blogs - the dude that ends up referencing hitler is sterile of thought and is always the L - O - S - E - R! Loser! Hahaha!!! loser!

71

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:09 PM DrPaulMaasRisenhoover Says:

Reply to #17  
Lawrence M. Reisman Says:

Look at the PDF file of the decision. The three judges sitting on the appeal were Riley, Murphy, and Smith. There is no way that a trial judge sits on a court panel reviewing his or her case.

Judge Reade sat on the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit as a justice ad interim thereon on the same day, same courthouse, and with judges on the same panel who later that afternoon adjudicated the appeal. Judge Reade was not on the Circuit panel that decided the appeal, but she did sit with two of the panel judges in another Circuit panel earlier in the day. Judges are not judges of a panel, but the of Court, and Judge Reade was indeed a judge of the Circuit Court on that day.

72

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:12 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #67  
shmiell Says:

Shaul, get your facts straight. The crusade against Rubashkin, as well as the media frenzy about/against him has been driven by PETA (with their notorious anti-Shechita agenda) and the Conservative movement (who is out to wreak havoc on the Orthodox kashrus industry) for years. When they saw that they couldn't get anywhere with their "video" , they turned to the "illegal immigrant" tactic (when probably every one of their cleaning ladies is paid cash due to lack of a green card) which got chucked by the court because it was false. (No one else got raided, not their banks, doctors, kid's public schools, etc.) The only thing that stuck was inflating the invoices to get a higher line of credit, which he PAID BACK until they raided him and bankrupted him. Judge Reade added a nice chunk of time to his sentence due to the Iowa "law" (never enforced in the 100 years that it's on the books) requiring payment of cattle dealers within 24 hours. He paid like every other customer. She threw the book at him for offenses which other people who do worse get much less time for, b/c the original plan failed and she had it in for him. This was orchestrated well in advance, and she was a part of it

Shmiel your chareidi so I can't waste more time on you. The bank LOST 27 million. And Reade gave him the LOW END of the sentencing guideline for what he stole. Here's some advice - quit the kolel you are in where you suck the community dry, go back to first grade public school, sit there for 12 years, learn English, read the record and at least then when you come on here you'll come off like a liar instead of a moron in this great land called America. Then when you realize how wrong you are maybe you'll do teshuva for supporting the largest Chillul Hashem ever perpetrated in America.

PETA? Blame felafel too. But don't blame the goniff chas vsholom, oy tisk that would be a shanda.

73

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:14 PM shmiell Says:

Reply to #56  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

FACT: Rubashkin committed bank fraud and money laundering, contributing to the most heinous Chillul Hashem in America in recent history. It took a frum murdering lunatic to unseat Rubashkin on the Chillul Hashem chart number 1.

FACT: The Chillul Hashem was worsened by all the chareidi cries of anti-semitism. When Johnny Chochran played the race card we were all sick, but when Boro Park screams it it is just plain grotesque.

FACT: Reade acted lawfully and as she typically does in every single case before her. Guy Cook ignored the record and let his client go to trial because THATS WHERE THE MONEY IS. Guy Cook is more to blame for 27 years than 10 Judge Reade's.

FACT: Millions of dollars in legal fees, mumoin hekdesh, were wasted when a plea deal would half cost a tenth and yielded no more than 12-14 years max.

FACT: When you play out a case in the media, you might as well tattoo yourself on your forehead with the words "I'm here because my case is awfully weak." All the media hoopla helped ZERO.

FACT: If I had represented SMR he'd be going home with enough life left to enjoy his grandkids. And I'm not even a lawyer.

There is plenty of Chillul Hashem much bigger than this. It seems that in your lexicon, Chillul Hashem is only such when commited by a Chareidi.
There was plenty of antisemitism here, especially in his treatment in prison.
The momon hekdesh was spent legitimately, as per the halochos of Pidyon Shevuyim. Big tzaddikim throughout history used to ransom people who were guilty of much worse. I am not condoning his "cooking the books" but there is no need to lock him up for life, when much bigger violent criminals get away with a slap on the wrist; the manager of the same bank he "defrauded" did a much bigger genaiva, and got only 13 months. We all know of cases where Yidden were given excessively strict sentences (most recently Jonathan Pollard) and there is clearly a bias here as well.
The media coverage in the Yated and HaModia was mostly to counteract the extremely hateful biased coverage in the secular media (both "jewish" and gentile) and to provide the religious community with an overview of the real facts.
And, based on what you have been saying about him and frum people ingeneral, if you were his lawyer it sounds like you would find a way to bring back the electric chair for him

74

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:17 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #67  
shmiell Says:

Shaul, get your facts straight. The crusade against Rubashkin, as well as the media frenzy about/against him has been driven by PETA (with their notorious anti-Shechita agenda) and the Conservative movement (who is out to wreak havoc on the Orthodox kashrus industry) for years. When they saw that they couldn't get anywhere with their "video" , they turned to the "illegal immigrant" tactic (when probably every one of their cleaning ladies is paid cash due to lack of a green card) which got chucked by the court because it was false. (No one else got raided, not their banks, doctors, kid's public schools, etc.) The only thing that stuck was inflating the invoices to get a higher line of credit, which he PAID BACK until they raided him and bankrupted him. Judge Reade added a nice chunk of time to his sentence due to the Iowa "law" (never enforced in the 100 years that it's on the books) requiring payment of cattle dealers within 24 hours. He paid like every other customer. She threw the book at him for offenses which other people who do worse get much less time for, b/c the original plan failed and she had it in for him. This was orchestrated well in advance, and she was a part of it

Shmiell, when SMR wasrunning his criminal enterprise was it just coincidence that our meat prices went up before yom tov?

And if there is such a war on shechita in the real world and not just between your gekrozeled payis thenwhy was your cholent so chock full of flyshe? I guess those dumb goyim at peta and the frye conservative hobgoblins who created this war aren't doing to good of a job. Last I checked theres puhlenty of fleish to go around.

75

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:34 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #73  
shmiell Says:

There is plenty of Chillul Hashem much bigger than this. It seems that in your lexicon, Chillul Hashem is only such when commited by a Chareidi.
There was plenty of antisemitism here, especially in his treatment in prison.
The momon hekdesh was spent legitimately, as per the halochos of Pidyon Shevuyim. Big tzaddikim throughout history used to ransom people who were guilty of much worse. I am not condoning his "cooking the books" but there is no need to lock him up for life, when much bigger violent criminals get away with a slap on the wrist; the manager of the same bank he "defrauded" did a much bigger genaiva, and got only 13 months. We all know of cases where Yidden were given excessively strict sentences (most recently Jonathan Pollard) and there is clearly a bias here as well.
The media coverage in the Yated and HaModia was mostly to counteract the extremely hateful biased coverage in the secular media (both "jewish" and gentile) and to provide the religious community with an overview of the real facts.
And, based on what you have been saying about him and frum people ingeneral, if you were his lawyer it sounds like you would find a way to bring back the electric chair for him

I would havegotten him 12 to 15 max, whatever the feds were offering. Not a day more, and he'd be going home with time to enjoy his grandkids. I would have made him show remorse in court, I wouldn't for one second play the game in the media, I wouldn't have let one tanya zugging shuckler into the courtroom, and if I had to I would have taped his mouth shut and grabbed him by the hair and yank his head up and down when the judge asked if he accepted the plea.

His lawyers had every bit of evidence before the trial. They knew Reade sentences hard. They knew that the conviction rate at the trial level in federal court for these crimes is OVER 80% and success on appeal you take that remainind 20% or so and that number shrinks by a factor of ONE HUNDRED.

NO SIR. I don't care what anyone says about me but I can assure you that if I were the lawyer SMR would be 2 years in to 12 and NOT 27. Guy Cook knew from day 1 that SMR had public support and the pockets were deep - he let his client go to trial because that's WHERE THE MONEY is. SMR could have pled this out for UNDER 100 k. YOU DO THE MATH, or get someone to explain it to you in yiddish.

76

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:42 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #73  
shmiell Says:

There is plenty of Chillul Hashem much bigger than this. It seems that in your lexicon, Chillul Hashem is only such when commited by a Chareidi.
There was plenty of antisemitism here, especially in his treatment in prison.
The momon hekdesh was spent legitimately, as per the halochos of Pidyon Shevuyim. Big tzaddikim throughout history used to ransom people who were guilty of much worse. I am not condoning his "cooking the books" but there is no need to lock him up for life, when much bigger violent criminals get away with a slap on the wrist; the manager of the same bank he "defrauded" did a much bigger genaiva, and got only 13 months. We all know of cases where Yidden were given excessively strict sentences (most recently Jonathan Pollard) and there is clearly a bias here as well.
The media coverage in the Yated and HaModia was mostly to counteract the extremely hateful biased coverage in the secular media (both "jewish" and gentile) and to provide the religious community with an overview of the real facts.
And, based on what you have been saying about him and frum people ingeneral, if you were his lawyer it sounds like you would find a way to bring back the electric chair for him

Please don't babble about pidyon shvuyim, Reb Elyashiv says black and white it is a chesed but not pidyon shvuyim to try to free a man in the US convicted of a crime he committed. How much have you given for real pidyon shvuyim causes like Gilad Shalit that the yated and hamodia ignore? Oh wait, Shalit is not frum so he doesn't count in your heilige velt. Ask 10 out of 10 Satmer to donate for Shalit they'll spit in your face.

77

 Sep 18, 2011 at 10:48 PM shmiell Says:

Reply to #74  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

Shmiell, when SMR wasrunning his criminal enterprise was it just coincidence that our meat prices went up before yom tov?

And if there is such a war on shechita in the real world and not just between your gekrozeled payis thenwhy was your cholent so chock full of flyshe? I guess those dumb goyim at peta and the frye conservative hobgoblins who created this war aren't doing to good of a job. Last I checked theres puhlenty of fleish to go around.

Shaul, FYI I work full-time, and when I was in Kollel I never took a Kollel check; I supported myself through tutoring, teaching English, and other side work; I never "sucked the community dry". I also speak and read English quite fluently, thank you, and attended an out-of-town public school for several years. The "records" you refer to are full of bias. I have to do some digging to find the source, but I also recall reading somewhere that Reade has some connection to the conservative movement. If you'd do some reading yourself, you'd see that there is quite a battle against Shechita on both sides of the Atlantic, and now they're going after Mila as well.
Wake up and smell the coffee, and while your at it brush your teeth, as your fangs are showing and your breath reeks of "self-hating-judaism" both from your bias in this case, and from the spiteful stereotypes which you espouse, which is true sinas chinam and a chilul Hashem as well.
For someone who "won't waste time" on chareidim, you sure seem to spend a lot of it bashing them. Pour yourself a good stiff shot of something and chill out!

78

 Sep 18, 2011 at 11:49 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #77  
shmiell Says:

Shaul, FYI I work full-time, and when I was in Kollel I never took a Kollel check; I supported myself through tutoring, teaching English, and other side work; I never "sucked the community dry". I also speak and read English quite fluently, thank you, and attended an out-of-town public school for several years. The "records" you refer to are full of bias. I have to do some digging to find the source, but I also recall reading somewhere that Reade has some connection to the conservative movement. If you'd do some reading yourself, you'd see that there is quite a battle against Shechita on both sides of the Atlantic, and now they're going after Mila as well.
Wake up and smell the coffee, and while your at it brush your teeth, as your fangs are showing and your breath reeks of "self-hating-judaism" both from your bias in this case, and from the spiteful stereotypes which you espouse, which is true sinas chinam and a chilul Hashem as well.
For someone who "won't waste time" on chareidim, you sure seem to spend a lot of it bashing them. Pour yourself a good stiff shot of something and chill out!

Then how could you be so stupid as to compare a guy that took a plea deal for 13 months, pleaded guilty, and made full restitution to someone who went to trial and lost? There's no antisemitism, fangs shmangs you just refuse to admit der emes.

79

 Sep 19, 2011 at 10:21 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #59  
SandraM Says:

Whatever Rubashkin did wrong pales in comparison to the wrong that was done to him.

The media hoopla was created by the government and the Jewish secular media: to state otherwise is revisionist history at its best.

No matter what you think of Rubashkin, no one deserves to have done to them what was done to him. At a time when anyone with a shred a mercy has their heart going out to him and his family, you list his choose to post judgement call.

Conclusion:
I don't think you are very nice man, Mr. Shaul.

your conclusion is as on-point as your ridiculous logic.

What was the wrong done to him? that he got an extremely harsh judge sentencing him? That's the chance you take when you commit massive fraud. sometimes you get off easy, sometimes not.

Nothing was done to him that he didn't cause himself. because he got a harsh sentence doesn't make him innocent.

And stop picking on Shaul! He happens to be right!

80

 Sep 19, 2011 at 10:22 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #63  
Anonymous Says:

I'm not an attorney, but isn't it immoral for Nate Lewin to keep encouraging SMR that he can win in the Supreme Court? I read a letter that SMR wrote to his family and he is telling them he can be home by Rosh Hashanah. This is in 17 days.

it's not your business what you THINK is being discussed between Rubashkin and his lawyer.

81

 Sep 19, 2011 at 10:24 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #64  
SandraM Says:

Honey, don't you go call me Charedi or black-hat or anything like that, because I am far from it.

You are a very, very angry man - and its all quite strange to me. You can rant and rave all you want, but it is seems to be much more a reflection of who are, than on what that man did. He has been handed a virtual life-sentence and its a disgrace.

All your protests notwithstanding, you seem to be endorsing just that. Given that you have no expertise in law, your comments are shameful.

The ACLU has endorsed this man's struggle, and for me, that is quite enough.

those that have facts on their side argue the point, like Shaul does.

Those that don't, use ad hominem personal attackes on the commenter, as you do.

"the man has been handed a virtual life sentence" because he got caught doing massive frauds (plural). nothing "happened" to him, it was a result of his own crimes. why are you attacking Shaul for that?

82

 Sep 19, 2011 at 10:29 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #71  
DrPaulMaasRisenhoover Says:

Judge Reade sat on the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit as a justice ad interim thereon on the same day, same courthouse, and with judges on the same panel who later that afternoon adjudicated the appeal. Judge Reade was not on the Circuit panel that decided the appeal, but she did sit with two of the panel judges in another Circuit panel earlier in the day. Judges are not judges of a panel, but the of Court, and Judge Reade was indeed a judge of the Circuit Court on that day.

and who cares?

what is your point? what difference does this make?

83

 Sep 19, 2011 at 10:31 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #73  
shmiell Says:

There is plenty of Chillul Hashem much bigger than this. It seems that in your lexicon, Chillul Hashem is only such when commited by a Chareidi.
There was plenty of antisemitism here, especially in his treatment in prison.
The momon hekdesh was spent legitimately, as per the halochos of Pidyon Shevuyim. Big tzaddikim throughout history used to ransom people who were guilty of much worse. I am not condoning his "cooking the books" but there is no need to lock him up for life, when much bigger violent criminals get away with a slap on the wrist; the manager of the same bank he "defrauded" did a much bigger genaiva, and got only 13 months. We all know of cases where Yidden were given excessively strict sentences (most recently Jonathan Pollard) and there is clearly a bias here as well.
The media coverage in the Yated and HaModia was mostly to counteract the extremely hateful biased coverage in the secular media (both "jewish" and gentile) and to provide the religious community with an overview of the real facts.
And, based on what you have been saying about him and frum people ingeneral, if you were his lawyer it sounds like you would find a way to bring back the electric chair for him

interesting, your comment about chillul hashem - YES, it is when a frum-looking person does crimes like this that is the chilul hashem.

Nobody said "how could a religious man do this?" when Madoff was tried. but they DID say it when Rubashkin was.

And the fact that guys like you still make him a lamed-vovnik is an even bigger chillul Hashem.

84

 Sep 19, 2011 at 10:33 AM SandraM Says:

Reply to #77  
shmiell Says:

Shaul, FYI I work full-time, and when I was in Kollel I never took a Kollel check; I supported myself through tutoring, teaching English, and other side work; I never "sucked the community dry". I also speak and read English quite fluently, thank you, and attended an out-of-town public school for several years. The "records" you refer to are full of bias. I have to do some digging to find the source, but I also recall reading somewhere that Reade has some connection to the conservative movement. If you'd do some reading yourself, you'd see that there is quite a battle against Shechita on both sides of the Atlantic, and now they're going after Mila as well.
Wake up and smell the coffee, and while your at it brush your teeth, as your fangs are showing and your breath reeks of "self-hating-judaism" both from your bias in this case, and from the spiteful stereotypes which you espouse, which is true sinas chinam and a chilul Hashem as well.
For someone who "won't waste time" on chareidim, you sure seem to spend a lot of it bashing them. Pour yourself a good stiff shot of something and chill out!

I have to concur, Shaul. You are one angry man.

Like I said before, your contempt for this man in face of the ridiculous sentence that he has been handed is very strange. Its quite obvious to one and all that this is a huge travesty of justice.

Blaming on it his lawyers is also really weird. Is it "transference" that your are subconsciously engaging in? I have a hunch it just may be. Whatever it is, you should definitely get the proper guidance to deal with it.

85

 Sep 19, 2011 at 11:11 AM Shaul in Monsey Says:

I have no contempt for the man whatsoever, I just won't defend his actions as they were against halacha and the law here in America.

Grow some brains. SMR needs to start acting CONTRITE. He is NOT a victim. The victim in this case are the wonderful Dierberg Family of St. Louis, the owners of the bank Rubashkin defrauded. Wonderful Jewish family with deep communal and charitable roots yet no one in BP knows their name or cares that they exist. They lost 27 MILLION dollars while Rubashkin was billing meat to Zoldan's on 13th Avenue.

Rubashkin's only chance now is a presedential pardon and it will probably take the second term of the next president to get there. But that doesn't mean pressure can't be put on Obama. He could pardon the man tomorrow if he wanted - it will require hard lobbying and a definite show of remorse and contrition on SMRs part - two things he is sorely lacking. If Nat Lewin were half as good a lawyer as he thinks he is and honest (an oxymoron for sure) he wouldn't take another penny because this case will not get cert at SCOTUS and it will not get en banc review in 8C.

So posers like Sandra can whine all they want it won't affect me one bit.

86

 Sep 19, 2011 at 11:14 AM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #84  
SandraM Says:

I have to concur, Shaul. You are one angry man.

Like I said before, your contempt for this man in face of the ridiculous sentence that he has been handed is very strange. Its quite obvious to one and all that this is a huge travesty of justice.

Blaming on it his lawyers is also really weird. Is it "transference" that your are subconsciously engaging in? I have a hunch it just may be. Whatever it is, you should definitely get the proper guidance to deal with it.

Your post demonstrates such a pathetically and utter lack of knowledge of the justice system in America you should be ashamed. Go peel potatoes for kugel that's about all you could possibly be good for.

The lawyers in this case - Cook and Lewin - got paid. And what did SMR get? 27 years. The feds offered 12 to 15. Let's see if you can figure out what is a longer sentence...12 or 27 duh methinks its 27. Cook should have done what a good lawyer would have done - make his client understand that in front of Reade and based on the evidence and the sentencing guidelines a loss could mean 25 years plus. And that's EXACTLY what happened. My genius amazes me.

87

 Sep 19, 2011 at 12:18 PM SandraM Says:

Reply to #86  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

Your post demonstrates such a pathetically and utter lack of knowledge of the justice system in America you should be ashamed. Go peel potatoes for kugel that's about all you could possibly be good for.

The lawyers in this case - Cook and Lewin - got paid. And what did SMR get? 27 years. The feds offered 12 to 15. Let's see if you can figure out what is a longer sentence...12 or 27 duh methinks its 27. Cook should have done what a good lawyer would have done - make his client understand that in front of Reade and based on the evidence and the sentencing guidelines a loss could mean 25 years plus. And that's EXACTLY what happened. My genius amazes me.

Actually, I don't make potato based dishes, as they are high in carbohydrates - and I when I cook, I tend to go gourmet, not traditional; but that's neither here nor there.

I never claimed to have any knowledge of the justice system, but some things are pretty obvious. If the ACLU and six attorney generals have agreed that this is a travesty of justice, that's good enough for me. I don't need to be a genius to figure that one out.

You however, have no expertise in law - by your own admission - yet claim to know better than all the attorneys. Arrogance and anger are strongly related psychologically, and are sometimes caused by low self-esteem. I am not saying that this is your problem, but it very well maybe.

88

 Sep 19, 2011 at 12:43 PM RealOMG Says:

Shaul, a long time ago I gave up and stopped arguing with idiots, it will not change one iota.

89

 Sep 19, 2011 at 12:55 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #88  
RealOMG Says:

Shaul, a long time ago I gave up and stopped arguing with idiots, it will not change one iota.

OMG, I hear ya. Thanks. Let it be on the record.

90

 Sep 19, 2011 at 01:12 PM Amoratzim! Says:

Reply to #87  
SandraM Says:

Actually, I don't make potato based dishes, as they are high in carbohydrates - and I when I cook, I tend to go gourmet, not traditional; but that's neither here nor there.

I never claimed to have any knowledge of the justice system, but some things are pretty obvious. If the ACLU and six attorney generals have agreed that this is a travesty of justice, that's good enough for me. I don't need to be a genius to figure that one out.

You however, have no expertise in law - by your own admission - yet claim to know better than all the attorneys. Arrogance and anger are strongly related psychologically, and are sometimes caused by low self-esteem. I am not saying that this is your problem, but it very well maybe.

SandraM:

Well, the "travesty of justice" you describe that is goods enough for you is apparently good enough for the justice system as well, and good enough for me!

So far, your opinion, the ACLU and six attorney generals' opinions have resulted in what? He is still sitting, right? Well, if the legal system still has him sitting despite YOUR opinion, I guess THAT'S good enough for me.

And so far, all I see is a very harsh sentence, but nothing illegal about what happened to him. So far, SandraM, the ONLY illegalities seem to have been committed by your hero.

So instead of slandering right-thinking people who realize a criminal was correctly put in jail but got a much harsher than normal sentence, put the blame where it belongs: If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!

91

 Sep 19, 2011 at 01:15 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

"six attorney generals have agreed that this is a travesty of justice"

There you go again, distorting history just like a holocaust denier.

6 attorneys general objected to a LIFE SENTENCE. Thats it and thats all. SMR DID NOT GET A LIFE SENTENCE. They said that a life sentence would be a travesty of justice. This was back when the feds were looking for SMR to be sentenced to life. But then, in a genius move that made Cook look like a limp noodle, the feds refiled their recommendation to 25 years, thus completely obviating the attorney generals letter. So you are plain and simple either a liar or grossly inept at reading English - the attorneys general letter you referred to was specific in what it said vis a vis the sentencing guidelines and how they applied to Rubashkin IF HE GOT LIFE. They NEVER defended what Rubashkin did and they were unanimous that jail was warranted. The letter specifically was critical of the feds for seeking life, and they revised that position, plain and simple. You are wrong once again.

92

 Sep 19, 2011 at 05:07 PM SandraM Says:

Reply to #90  
Amoratzim! Says:

SandraM:

Well, the "travesty of justice" you describe that is goods enough for you is apparently good enough for the justice system as well, and good enough for me!

So far, your opinion, the ACLU and six attorney generals' opinions have resulted in what? He is still sitting, right? Well, if the legal system still has him sitting despite YOUR opinion, I guess THAT'S good enough for me.

And so far, all I see is a very harsh sentence, but nothing illegal about what happened to him. So far, SandraM, the ONLY illegalities seem to have been committed by your hero.

So instead of slandering right-thinking people who realize a criminal was correctly put in jail but got a much harsher than normal sentence, put the blame where it belongs: If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!

Hero? Who speaks of heroes? Goodness, graciousness, can we object to a huge travesty of justice without having to make someone our hero?

The legal system in the United States is the WORST in the developed world; it has the most people in jail per capita from all First world countries. The US legal system is an absolute disgrace and this latest case is just the cherry on top of a very, very rotten cake.
If your thought process was not obscured by hate, that would be clear to you.

93

 Sep 19, 2011 at 05:16 PM SandraM Says:

Reply to #91  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

"six attorney generals have agreed that this is a travesty of justice"

There you go again, distorting history just like a holocaust denier.

6 attorneys general objected to a LIFE SENTENCE. Thats it and thats all. SMR DID NOT GET A LIFE SENTENCE. They said that a life sentence would be a travesty of justice. This was back when the feds were looking for SMR to be sentenced to life. But then, in a genius move that made Cook look like a limp noodle, the feds refiled their recommendation to 25 years, thus completely obviating the attorney generals letter. So you are plain and simple either a liar or grossly inept at reading English - the attorneys general letter you referred to was specific in what it said vis a vis the sentencing guidelines and how they applied to Rubashkin IF HE GOT LIFE. They NEVER defended what Rubashkin did and they were unanimous that jail was warranted. The letter specifically was critical of the feds for seeking life, and they revised that position, plain and simple. You are wrong once again.

Sorry, 27 years is a life-sentence.

Now, comparing me to a holocaust denier, that is just sweet.

Get help for your anger, Shaul.

94

 Sep 19, 2011 at 07:48 PM Herzog Says:

Reply to #93  
SandraM Says:

Sorry, 27 years is a life-sentence.

Now, comparing me to a holocaust denier, that is just sweet.

Get help for your anger, Shaul.

Sandra, 27 years is not a life sentence. The term "life sentence" has a specific meaning -- that person is imprisoned until he/she dies.

95

 Sep 19, 2011 at 10:09 PM shredready Says:

Reply to #12  
Sherree Says:

It is quite obvious that Hashem has a plan and we can't see it yet. We are in chodesh Elul and we can't give up. We just have to be mispalel. We know this is NOT the final verdict and we have to keep our efforts doubled and tripled with true tefilah and histadlius. The final verdict is yet to be heard.

why if it is an all out was against schita don't they bother empire, Hebrew national, and many others

could it be

the others do not commit fraud pay they workers and deal honestly with everybody including the government and not only yidden

and what is with reb smr and his holy family many of them father brothers are convicted felons

how many crimes does a frum person have to commit before he loses the title of holy and reb
or is financial crime simply not an issue with the frum

97

 Sep 19, 2011 at 11:17 PM RealOMG Says:

Reply to #12  
Sherree Says:

It is quite obvious that Hashem has a plan and we can't see it yet. We are in chodesh Elul and we can't give up. We just have to be mispalel. We know this is NOT the final verdict and we have to keep our efforts doubled and tripled with true tefilah and histadlius. The final verdict is yet to be heard.

Ok I will grant you, that the final verdict is not yet in, but when would you give up after Ne'ila? This year, next year? or 27 years from now.

98

 Sep 20, 2011 at 08:09 AM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Funny how the Rubashkin supporters are all such big believers and baalei bitachon yet they can't accept that if Rubashkin is in jail for 27 years, maybe that's the ratzon Hashem?

99

 Sep 20, 2011 at 09:54 AM Herzog Says:

Reply to #98  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

Funny how the Rubashkin supporters are all such big believers and baalei bitachon yet they can't accept that if Rubashkin is in jail for 27 years, maybe that's the ratzon Hashem?

From the comments to a VIN article about Obama taxing the rich:
"Millionaires have become wealthy only because the Ebeshter made it possible for them have hatzlacha. For the government to tax away their money (as compared to having them voluntarily donate money to tzadakah) is going against the Ebeshter's will."

See, it's all about US deciding what's God's will and what is the work of bad guys. Forget Rubashkin maybe being a bad guy. He's a good guy because, you know, he gave to the causes THEY like in THEIR community. And of course God's on their team, as well.

Talk about moral relativism.

100

 Sep 20, 2011 at 11:48 AM BBBBB Says:

Reply to #91  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

"six attorney generals have agreed that this is a travesty of justice"

There you go again, distorting history just like a holocaust denier.

6 attorneys general objected to a LIFE SENTENCE. Thats it and thats all. SMR DID NOT GET A LIFE SENTENCE. They said that a life sentence would be a travesty of justice. This was back when the feds were looking for SMR to be sentenced to life. But then, in a genius move that made Cook look like a limp noodle, the feds refiled their recommendation to 25 years, thus completely obviating the attorney generals letter. So you are plain and simple either a liar or grossly inept at reading English - the attorneys general letter you referred to was specific in what it said vis a vis the sentencing guidelines and how they applied to Rubashkin IF HE GOT LIFE. They NEVER defended what Rubashkin did and they were unanimous that jail was warranted. The letter specifically was critical of the feds for seeking life, and they revised that position, plain and simple. You are wrong once again.

shaul
this is from wikipedia (probably controlled by charaidi gekrazelta pais people)

To date, 45 members of Congress have written to Attorney General Holder to investigate this case. The case was argued before the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals on June 15, 2011. On 16 September the court ruled against Rubashkin.

45 bias corrupted old shtetel style charady mentality congress members!!!!!!!! what a shame .
The 6 A Gs where only against life sentence .(which should be fine with you since he risked going to trail!! )
they were fine with 27 years for a 53 year old man, life sentence!! that's the problem what a magic word it is.
let me tell you something, the only logic explanation to your views, you don't believe one word youre saying just instigating others for fun (poor herzog who buys in to your believes)
Now please don't start with my lack of English, grammar, spelling, etc.or my gekrazelta pais, you sound like a broken record player............

101

 Sep 20, 2011 at 08:17 PM SandraM Says:

"An annoying fleck of dark lint on a white carpet". Deep. Poetic, almost.

Yes, you are angry, Shaul. You are one angry man.

102

 Sep 20, 2011 at 09:11 PM Herzog Says:

Reply to #100  
BBBBB Says:

shaul
this is from wikipedia (probably controlled by charaidi gekrazelta pais people)

To date, 45 members of Congress have written to Attorney General Holder to investigate this case. The case was argued before the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals on June 15, 2011. On 16 September the court ruled against Rubashkin.

45 bias corrupted old shtetel style charady mentality congress members!!!!!!!! what a shame .
The 6 A Gs where only against life sentence .(which should be fine with you since he risked going to trail!! )
they were fine with 27 years for a 53 year old man, life sentence!! that's the problem what a magic word it is.
let me tell you something, the only logic explanation to your views, you don't believe one word youre saying just instigating others for fun (poor herzog who buys in to your believes)
Now please don't start with my lack of English, grammar, spelling, etc.or my gekrazelta pais, you sound like a broken record player............

First of all, BBBBB, I don't "buy into" others' beliefs, I have plenty of my own. I think the only brainwashing here has to do with people who pretend that a criminal is a virtuous man.

Sandra, I'm with Shaul, and I'm neither dark, angry nor a man. You're ridiculous.

103

 Sep 21, 2011 at 01:17 AM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #100  
BBBBB Says:

shaul
this is from wikipedia (probably controlled by charaidi gekrazelta pais people)

To date, 45 members of Congress have written to Attorney General Holder to investigate this case. The case was argued before the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals on June 15, 2011. On 16 September the court ruled against Rubashkin.

45 bias corrupted old shtetel style charady mentality congress members!!!!!!!! what a shame .
The 6 A Gs where only against life sentence .(which should be fine with you since he risked going to trail!! )
they were fine with 27 years for a 53 year old man, life sentence!! that's the problem what a magic word it is.
let me tell you something, the only logic explanation to your views, you don't believe one word youre saying just instigating others for fun (poor herzog who buys in to your believes)
Now please don't start with my lack of English, grammar, spelling, etc.or my gekrazelta pais, you sound like a broken record player............

Right, and I'm sure they wrote that NOT to cowtow to their constituents. Your point?

If you have issues lobby against the sentencing guidelines.

Just know that Reade did nothing antisemitic and nothing out of the ordinary. Your hero didn't get 13 months because he gambled for trial and lost.

104

 Sep 21, 2011 at 11:56 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #93  
SandraM Says:

Sorry, 27 years is a life-sentence.

Now, comparing me to a holocaust denier, that is just sweet.

Get help for your anger, Shaul.

Sorry, 27 years is 27 years. It may seem like a life sentence, but it is not. sentences don't depend on how old you are or in what health, and don't get shortened because people believe you are frum.

If you are frum, you don't cheat in business.

However, "holocaust denier" was someone saying something in the heatr of the moment. Obviously, it doesn't apply here.

105

 Sep 21, 2011 at 11:58 AM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #97  
RealOMG Says:

Ok I will grant you, that the final verdict is not yet in, but when would you give up after Ne'ila? This year, next year? or 27 years from now.

which part of the plan can't you see? because it is pretty clear to the rest of us!

And why do think this CAN'T be the plan? it can, and it is!

106

 Sep 21, 2011 at 12:01 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #100  
BBBBB Says:

shaul
this is from wikipedia (probably controlled by charaidi gekrazelta pais people)

To date, 45 members of Congress have written to Attorney General Holder to investigate this case. The case was argued before the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals on June 15, 2011. On 16 September the court ruled against Rubashkin.

45 bias corrupted old shtetel style charady mentality congress members!!!!!!!! what a shame .
The 6 A Gs where only against life sentence .(which should be fine with you since he risked going to trail!! )
they were fine with 27 years for a 53 year old man, life sentence!! that's the problem what a magic word it is.
let me tell you something, the only logic explanation to your views, you don't believe one word youre saying just instigating others for fun (poor herzog who buys in to your believes)
Now please don't start with my lack of English, grammar, spelling, etc.or my gekrazelta pais, you sound like a broken record player............

BBB,

It doesn't matter what 45 or 45,000 people say, it only matters what the jury and judge decided., and they decided guilty.

The judge decided 27 years. is that illegal? if so you have nothing to worry about.

If legal, too bad then, right? it's not up to wikipedia to decedie whether he sits or dsoesn't, it is up to the court, and the court just decided again YOU ARE WRONG!

get over it. the first step is admitting you have a problem! Denial of the facts will not help you!

107

 Sep 21, 2011 at 12:02 PM to SandraM and Shaul: Says:

Reply to #101  
SandraM Says:

"An annoying fleck of dark lint on a white carpet". Deep. Poetic, almost.

Yes, you are angry, Shaul. You are one angry man.

SandraM,

a person with facts attacks the argument.

A person with the fact against him/her, attacks the person making the aragument

108

 Sep 21, 2011 at 01:01 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #98  
Shaul in Monsey Says:

Funny how the Rubashkin supporters are all such big believers and baalei bitachon yet they can't accept that if Rubashkin is in jail for 27 years, maybe that's the ratzon Hashem?

Replace 'Rubashkin' in that sentence with 'Yosef Hatzadik'. How does it read now?

109

 Sep 21, 2011 at 02:20 PM Shaul in Monsey Says:

Reply to #108  
Anonymous Says:

Replace 'Rubashkin' in that sentence with 'Yosef Hatzadik'. How does it read now?

That is one great vort.

It's really amazing how these little specs of truth called details are thrown around here and there like they are facts and then people build entire attitudes upon them which in turn lead to actions. This one got 13 months, and this one did that and Rubashkin is a victim. Hardly.

What Rubashkin did was far worse then some guy standing on 13th Avenue eating Kentucky Fried Chicken is oiver yet that guy would be stoned and his great grandkids wouldn't get shidduchim from mamzeirim yet Rubashkin is a hero. MY HEROES are all the anonymous frum people with access to these same kinds of bank lines who DON'T LIE AND STEAL to get that money. I've been there and I know how easy it can be sometimes but either you abide by the Torah or you don't.

Is 27 years too many? YES. BUT RUBASHKIN KNEW THAT RISK AND TOOK IT by going to trial. The same arrogance and poor judgment that led to the original crimes led to the sentence. NOT JUDGE READE, NOT PETA, NOT ICE, NOT THE TRUSTEE AND NOT POSTVILLE. You can extract any part of this equation and still get the same end result UNLESS RUBASHKIN HIMSELF HADN'T DEFRAUDED the Dierberg's bank.

110

 Sep 21, 2011 at 03:58 PM Anon Says:

Reply to #108  
Anonymous Says:

Replace 'Rubashkin' in that sentence with 'Yosef Hatzadik'. How does it read now?

Why? Did Yosef do the same kinds of criminal things that Rubashkin did?

111

 Sep 23, 2011 at 09:28 AM Anonymous Says:

I don't understand.

Are people here still claiming that Rubashkin is innocent?

112

 Sep 23, 2011 at 01:41 PM Anonymouss Says:

#111 You say "I don't understand"
- that is correct,
The case for Rubashkin is not inferring he is innocent or perfect- it is stating he is a first time white collar offender that was given an excessive sentence, given his life history and character.
Advocacy is requesting a fair and impartial trial.

113

 Sep 24, 2011 at 08:48 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #112  
Anonymouss Says:

#111 You say "I don't understand"
- that is correct,
The case for Rubashkin is not inferring he is innocent or perfect- it is stating he is a first time white collar offender that was given an excessive sentence, given his life history and character.
Advocacy is requesting a fair and impartial trial.

Then why are people calling him a martyr and hero and that he should be immediately released?

Why aren't people just asking for a fair sentence?

114

 Sep 25, 2011 at 12:13 PM Anonymouss Says:

Reply to #111  
Anonymous Says:

I don't understand.

Are people here still claiming that Rubashkin is innocent?

113
Rubashkin was in business for decades and has no previous record. Murderers and rapists get less of a sentence than he got.
He also had an open home and built institutions for his community and cared very much for all people. We are looking at the whole person- his clean history his character his family. We thinking people are asking for true justice.
He deserves a fair sentence and that is what everyone is asking for.

115

 Sep 27, 2011 at 04:57 PM Anon Says:

Reply to #114  
Anonymouss Says:

113
Rubashkin was in business for decades and has no previous record. Murderers and rapists get less of a sentence than he got.
He also had an open home and built institutions for his community and cared very much for all people. We are looking at the whole person- his clean history his character his family. We thinking people are asking for true justice.
He deserves a fair sentence and that is what everyone is asking for.

Sorry, but using ill-gotten money for your OWN community actually doesn't reduce your sentence in our society. It's amazing. If we were talking about a goy, you'd never defend him saying, "Sure, he may have lied and cheated and broke the law, but he gave money to his community!" This says nothing good about his community, that they refuse to call him guilty because he poured money into what THEY care about.

116

 Sep 27, 2011 at 06:15 PM Anonymous Says:

Reply to #111  
Anonymous Says:

I don't understand.

Are people here still claiming that Rubashkin is innocent?

At no point did I say he is innocent. Please re read.
I said he has a prior clean history. And Jew or Non Jew alike I would advocate for this case. Murderers and rapists have gotten lesser sentences in this country. All people are asking justice is to weigh the sentence to befit the nature of the crime.

117

Sign-in to post a comment

Click here to sign-in.

Scroll Up
Advertisements:
Sell your scrap gold and broken jewelry and earn hard cash sell gold today!