Somali Pirates Who Fired On U.S. Navy Are Not Really Pirates

by Andy McCarthy - August 20th, 2010 - National Review

Putting federal judges in charge of national security — what could go wrong?

Federal judge Raymond A. Jackson has dismissed piracy charges against six Somali men who are alleged to have fired on U.S. naval warships on the Indian Ocean. Why? Because the attacks failed to ravage our vessels — indeed, they were captured and brought to Judge Jackson’s civilian court in Virginia. According to Judge Jackson (appointed to the bench by President Clinton in 1993), to be prosecuted for piracy (under Section 1651 of the federal penal code), pirates have to succeed in carrying out a robbery on the high seas. If they try but we capture them, they can’t be charged.

Makes perfect sense, right?

What annoys me about the author of this article is he actually tries to excuse the judge - blaming his ruling on actions of the legislature that fell short of specifically describing an attempt as piracy. The argument is that if the legislature had been more specific, a judge seeking to subvert justice would not have had the room to do so. This is non sense. These corrupt judges will merely make up some different excuse to destroy justice. It is the judges who are corrupt.

What is very likely to happen is that this will become a precedent that will allow bank robbers who fail and rapists who are stopped and murderers whose victims survive to avoid justice as well. I mean if you try but fail, you haven't committed a crime, right? This judge said so.

Clearly this judge does not think these "poor Somalis" should be held accountable. After all we are a rich nation and we have not given them all the food and clothing and middle class comforts they deserve, so how can you charge them with a little thing like taking what they want by force?

There is no justice in America. The courts are corrupt.