Lessons for Sholom Rubashkin: Supreme Court To Hear Appeal Of Iowa Sentence

The questions: Does a felon's efforts at rehabilitation count toward a lighter sentence on resentencing? And how much is too much for a judge to depart from US Sentencing Guidelines?

U.S. Supreme Court to ponder Iowa drug sentence
By LEE ROOD • Des Moines Register

Two Iowa defense lawyers will take an Iowa case before the U.S. Supreme Court next week that could change how federal judges resentence convicts after appeals.

At issue is whether judges can consider a convict's efforts at rehabilitation while his case is on appeal.

The Iowa case embodies fundamental questions about fairness and second chances. Should society reward a convict for working to better himself when freed during an appeal? Or would that be unfair because no such consideration is possible for the initial sentence?

The case involves Jason Pepper, now 31, who was arrested seven years ago in Akron, Ia., on drug charges. He later pleaded guilty. He served his prison sentence and was released. But prosecutors repeatedly appealed his sentence, claiming it was too light.

Today, Pepper is 31. He is married, he has a job, and he has a child on the way. But if the Supreme Court rules against him, he could be headed back behind bars.

The story of how Pepper went from troubled youth to meth addict is a sad one, but not all that surprising anymore in Iowa. Everything that has happened since, though, has been exceptional, according to many who work in the federal justice system.

Pepper's supporters hope his case will finally come to an end as a result of the Dec. 6 arguments before the nation's highest court.

If Pepper wins, he could go down in legal history as someone who stuck his neck out so others might earn a rare second chance in the federal justice system.

"If I wouldn't have fought this, I would have been done by now," Pepper said during an interview at his home in St. Joseph, Ill. "But it will be worth it to me if someone else benefits."
Court fight has been ongoing for seven years

Pepper's story starts in October 2003, when three cars filled with federal agents surrounded the 24-year-old. He was charged with conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine.

In 2004, U.S. District Judge Mark Bennett of Sioux City initially sentenced Pepper to 24 months in prison. That is far below the term specified in controversial federal sentencing guidelines.

The U.S. Supreme Court has said in recent years that the guidelines should be advisory, not mandatory. But federal appeals courts have been split on how to interpret that guidance.

Prosecutors upset with the sentence won an appeal before the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which ordered Pepper to be resentenced.

Bennett stuck with the same sentence, based in part on Pepper's efforts to rehabilitate himself.

Prosecutors appealed the sentence again, contending factors such as rehabilitation should be irrelevant. Again, prosecutors won.

As a result, four years after Pepper's release from prison came a strange twist: He was resentenced to three more years in prison.

The newest justice on the Supreme Court sided with Pepper's defense when she was U.S. solicitor general.

Elena Kagan wrote that no provision in court rules "prohibits a court from considering at resentencing a defendant's efforts at rehabilitation undertaken after his initial sentencing." In fact, she added, a court rule "specifically instructs sentencing courts to consider 'the history and characteristics of the defendant.' "

Pepper's lawyers, Alfredo Parrish of Des Moines and Leon Spies of Iowa City, contend judges must be able to consider a defendant's rehabilitation in extraordinary circumstances. To understand why, they say, you need to consider Pepper's story.

"We heard the tale and thought this was a case that cried out for our best efforts," Spies said. "We were both so sold on Jason and his story that we decided to do it pro bono" - meaning they are donating their services at no cost to him.
After deaths in family, 'world was crumbling'

Pepper moved from his hometown of St. Joseph, Ill., to Akron, in far northwest Iowa, when he was 18. The child of divorced parents, he wanted to be with his older brother and his mother, who had settled in the town of 1,500.

"I hadn't lived with my mom for years," he said. "We were always close, but I didn't get to see as much of her as I liked."

Pepper admits he was drinking and smoking pot by the time he arrived in Iowa. Then he began trying other drugs. He said it didn't help that he was a construction worker, and his boss at the time smoked pot and drank.

He struggled. Then in February 1998, his life took a dive for the worse.

That's when Pepper's older brother, Ben; Pepper's best friend; and another youth all died in a car accident after a run-in with police.

"They were on Highway 10, near Orange City," Pepper said. "There was a blizzard outside, and they came upon a tractor pulling a manure spreader. They swerved and hit a semi head-on."

Ben had been the only stable force in his young life, Pepper said. "After that, everything, just everything, started going downhill."

Pepper had tried meth before his brother's death. Afterward, he began using it more frequently.

"It was, I don't know, euphoric," he said of the stimulant, one of the world's most addictive drugs. "It was definitely a part of what I was doing to cope.''

About a month after Ben's death, Pepper's mother admitted him to a psychiatric ward for depression. He was suicidal and spent 24 hours on a couch, crying.

Doctors and relatives tried to get him to take antidepressants, but Pepper said he wouldn't.

Then, in 2000, his mother was diagnosed with terminal cancer. Pepper's meth use picked up dramatically.

"My world was crumbling around me," he recalled. "I wound up losing them both within four years. Devastated doesn't begin to describe what I was feeling."

His drug conspiracy conviction was borne of the need to feed an expensive habit, he said.

Pepper did not know how to make methamphetamine, nor could any "mom and pop" lab supply him with enough to stay high. He bought and sold large amounts to keep the cash coming, often dealing from his bicycle in Akron. He became gaunt, weighing only 158 pounds, he said.

On the day Pepper was arrested, he and a friend had purchased 2 ounces of meth for themselves to use and sell, he said. Another friend later came over with cash to buy, supplied by federal agents.

"In hindsight, I think I knew deep down inside what was going on," he said.

Pepper and his friend got high, and then he got on his bicycle to go make some money.

Federal agents had already been to Pepper's home and arrested his friend. The three cars full of agents whirled up and surrounded Pepper, with the agents' guns drawn.

"I remember I just laid down on the ground and felt the biggest relief of my life," he said.
Weaned off drugs, he becomes changed man

Sitting in jail in Sioux City, Pepper began the difficult process of withdrawal.

He slept. He sweated. He gained 60 pounds watching television and eating.

"Honestly, it was horrible," Pepper said. "I started having night terrors. I would wake up drenched in sweat. My body was detoxing. But I also knew I was safe."

He says he did not know what the charge against him entailed, but he was glad to be away from meth.

When Pepper went to trial, he pleaded guilty to a crime that typically carries a mandatory 10-year prison sentence.

Pepper's original lawyer had recommended a steep departure from U.S. sentencing guidelines with hopes the cooperative defendant-turned-witness could get into a boot camp in Pennsylvania.

But Pepper had a $600-to-$800-a-day meth habit when he was arrested, and Judge Bennett ultimately decided Pepper would benefit from a 500-hour treatment program at a federal prison in South Dakota.

Pepper recalled his past behavior - "A lot of it had to do with blaming others" - and how the treatment changed him.

"I learned that you need to take responsibility for the choices you make in life and weigh the consequences of your own decisions," he said. "I also got to take a step back from my personal situation and look at how my actions can be perceived through the eyes of others."

Once released from prison, Pepper became an "A" student in business courses at Western Iowa Tech Community College. He landed a part-time job at a Sioux City farm supply store and was training to become a manager.

But in the meantime, lawyers for the government appealed his case. Federal prosecutors won their quest to have him resentenced in 2005.

Bennett again considered the young man's cooperation with the government in prosecuting the meth ring; the two devastating deaths in Pepper's family; and his subsequent rehabilitation while in prison. Bennett decided Pepper needed no more time behind bars.

But the government appealed again, and the Court of Appeals agreed with prosecutors that Bennett had abused his judicial discretion and ordered him off the case. Chief District Judge Linda Reade picked up the case and sentenced Pepper anew in 2009 to an additional 41 months in prison. He returned to prison in Florence, Colo.

In an unusual fourth ruling on the case, the 8th Circuit sided with Reade, saying rehabilitation could not be considered when judges depart from the federal sentencing guidelines.

Parrish and Spies appealed to the Supreme Court.

In July, Reade released Pepper from prison, pending the outcome of his appeal.
Lawyer: 'I don't think this guy got a fair shot'

America's prisons are full of former drug addicts who swear they would lead crime-free, productive lives if given a second chance. But the federal justice system has no parole. Federal judges typically do not get to consider strides inmates have made since their convictions.

"Very rarely do you get to come back to court for a new sentencing in the first place," said Paul Rosenberg, a Des Moines defense lawyer. "One of the issues this case raises is: Is it fair that only those defendants who, by happenstance, are back before the court get to have a second look?

"But the other problem is: Is it really permissible for someone to be sentenced once and then have to come back to court and be sentenced again more severely? Isn't that double jeopardy?"

The Court of Appeals said Pepper's rehabilitation was admirable, but not relevant in his resentencing. Lower courts, the judges said, could not have considered that evidence in granting a lighter sentence than the guidelines recommended because the evidence was not available at the time.

Under the sentencing guidelines, Pepper could have served at least 97 months in prison. Bennett reduced his initial sentence by 75 percent. Prosecutors said Pepper deserved only a 15 percent sentence reduction.

Bennett's second sentence amounted to a 59 percent reduction.

Other defendants in the case - Alexander Blankenship, Felipe Sandoval and Jose Martin Barragan-Torres - were given far longer prison terms of 72, 35 and 90 months.

With his cooperation, time off for good behavior and completion of treatment, Pepper likely faces just eight more months split between prison and a halfway house.

Still, he said he wants to fight.

To Parrish and Spies, the case is "the final bookend" to a series of high court decisions that have poked at the durability of the controversial sentencing guidelines.

Pepper's case, they say, clearly illustrates why rehabilitation must come into play when considering all the facts of a case during rare resentencings.

"I didn't think this guy got a fair shot," said Parrish, who will argue the case.

"Pepper was given a sentence based on these mandatory rules that do nothing more to help people once they get on the right path."

These days, Pepper is married and a father to his wife's 9-year-old daughter. His wife, Hannah, a former high school sweetheart, is pregnant, and their baby is due in the spring.

Pepper said he is doing well in his night work at a Sam's Club near his home in St. Joseph. He's put business school on the back burner because of his demanding job and his appeal.

One day, he hopes to run his own business, perhaps a restaurant.

Pepper said he still drinks at times, but he is certain he would never go near meth again.

"I have been working my butt off to stay on the straight and narrow," he said. "I would rather commit suicide."

He said the most important thing he will get from the Supreme Court justices' decision sometime before next summer is closure.

"After December, I will finally feel like I can move on with the next chapter of my life," he said. "But I just don't think I deserve to have to go back."

Note that Rubashkin's attorneys initially wanted a sentence reduction of more than 90%, and they still cling to that demand. Also note teh US Court of Appeals has already ruled a much less reduction to be incorrect, overturned it, and removed the case from the presiding judge.

Finally, note that the issue with that case is that even though it appears that Bennet has truly been rehabilitated, the law does seem to allow for such a radical departure in sentencing.

Now realize that Sholom Rubashkin – who was sentenced at the low end of the US Sentencing Guidelines – has shown no remorse for what he did, still refuses to cooperate with law enforcement, and has allowed his attorneys and spokespeople to lie about the judge, the court and the prosecutors while playing the antisemitism card.

For those of you who think Sholom Rubashkin was singled out or that his sentence was "antisemitism," take a close look at this case.

Then start lobbying for reform of the US Sentencing Guidelines and for prison reform.

Comments

[Yoel Mechanic]

>Then start lobbying for reform of the US Sentencing Guidelines and for prison reform.

A positive and concrete suggestion.

[Yerachmiel Lopin]

Nice post. Thank you. Yes, US sentencing guidelines are insane. It is about time the orthodox leadership joined the campaign to change the guidelines for the sake of tzedek and for the sake of its constituents that are affected.

Of course, I am more sympathetic to Jason Pepper. He admitted his crime accepted a price and rehabilitated himself. He intuitively grasps a concept tshuvah that seems to be alien to Rubashkin and his supporters.

[Menachem Mendel lll]

"Rubashkin's attorneys initially wanted a sentence reduction of more than 90%"

Since nothing happens without The Abishter I want Rubashkin's attorneys not to fuck with Adoni's will.

So let it be written so let it be done.

Rot in Hell.

Moshiach Uber Alles!

[effie]

It was a 7 year sentence for drug dealing. He should shut up and do the time.

[effie]

I looked at the briefs. Pepper ultimately was sentence to 65 months for conspiracy to sell more than 500 grams of meth. Whiner.

[sam]

again Linda Read! the evil bitch has no heart – here is a productive member of society who has, despite all his troubles, repaired his life and she wants to send him back to prison to comply with the guidelines!

[effie]

Oh, piss off, sam! The law says that a judge can not consider this type of evidence to reduce a sentence. Reade followed the law. And what troubles? He was doing what we expect every citizen to do - get a job and obey all laws. He does not merit a gold star for it. The original sentence for his level of drug dealing was not extreme.

[WoolSilkCotton]

Sam, I heard he was selling drugs to Chasidic children. Does that change your mind about him?

[sam]

WoolSilkCotton, I don't care whom he sold drugs to. He clearly presents no danger to anyone, he did time, he is productive and doesn't belong in prison. Only a nazi-bitch like Read and assholes like you and 'effie' think this guy belongs in prison today.

And effie, we will see what "the law says" when the US Supreme Court renders its judgment, won't we? If this issue was as clear-cut as your feeble mind comprehends, the Supreme Court wouldn't agree to hear this case in the first place.

[sam]

Besides, if this Jason Pepper was being sent back to prison by an orthodox judge, you two morons would be tripping over yourselves to run to his defense, all the while decrying the evil 'fruma' judge. Assholes!

[WoolSilkCotton]

Sam, his lawyers already made those arguments, and lost. Hopefully, he will move next door to you when he eventually gets out.

What about nazi war criminals who live as model citizens here in the USA, so many years after WWII? Why the relentless pursuit to send them to prison? Because it's a little more personal?

It's funny how frumma like you were always so 'tough' about 'law and order', and voted republican.
I guess that was ok until recent years, when more and more frumma found themselves ending up in prison with long sentences.
Now, suddenly, we need 'sentencing reform', because the frumma are on the receiving end.

[sam]

"Hopefully, he will move next door to you when he eventually gets out."

I'll have him as a neighbor over you and your ilk any day!

[WoolSilkCotton]

Sam, you are too stupid to realize there are plenty of orthodox judges at all levels of the court system, who are highly respected and tough on criminals.
It must be difficult for you when orthodox judges give long sentences to frumma crooks. Your head would probably explode, condemning the judge as a 'self hating Jew', blah blah blah.

And now, Sam, you are willing to let any criminal free just as long as your hero Rubashkin gets out, too.

[sam]

It's funny how frumma like you were always so 'tough' about 'law and order', and voted republican.

No one ever realized that by "law and order" these people meant draconian sentencing for non-violent criminals. They always talked about the Willi Hortons of this world. No one intended to throw away common sense when the voted republican.

[sam]

And now, Sam, you are willing to let any criminal free just as long as your hero Rubashkin gets out, too.

No, you primitive moron. I am not willing to let ANY criminal free. I just don't want those that do not pose any danger to others languishing in prison for many years.

And what with this stupid baal-tshuva pronunciation "frumma"?

[nachos]

No, you primitive moron. I am not willing to let ANY criminal free. I just don't want those that do not pose any danger to others languishing in prison for many years.

And what with this stupid baal-tshuva pronunciation "frumma"?

Posted by: sam | November 28, 2010 at 11:46 AM
Sam, who says that Rubashkin doesn't pose a danger to anyone?

[nachos]

The whole Postville fiasco was hardly victimless.

[WoolSilkCotton]

Being a crystal meth dealer apparently isn't a danger to anyone either, as long as the victims are not frumma yidden.

And yes, Sam, the correct pronunciation is 'frumma'. I was raised on the yiddish language, and had to learn to speak English when I started grammar school.
'Frimma' is for those who also say 'toyrah' and 'geet shabbess'.

Maybe, Sam, you need to learn yiddish, and the many words the yiddish language has to describe religious crooks. There are plenty such words among us non-frumma yidden who know the language, and who know frumma yidden all too well.
It's like the 40 words the Eskimos have to describe ice.

BTW, the vast majority of republicans are not criminals and have little or no sympathy for dangerous criminals, unlike the frumma velt where every frummer criminal is always innocent forever, and has the full support of the orthodox leadership. Don't expect more lenient sentences from any politician for drug dealers or financial swindlers like your hero Sholom Mordecai.

If Pepper wants to continue pursuing his appeal through the court system, he is legally entitled. If you commit a serious crime, expect to serve time. It is not enough to say 'look what a good boy I am now'. It just doesn't work that way. Sure, you can make such arguments for a reduced sentence, and I'll leave that to his attorneys, but 'promising to be good from now on' doesn't cut it, or otherwise, we might as well all try our hand at selling crystal meth.

[sam]

idiot, you were raised "on the Yiddish language" like I was raised on Chinese.

The word is "frum" (or "frim"). Or you can say "er iz a frumer (frimer) yid". It only sounds like "frumma" to you because the language is foreign to you.

[sam]

‎פֿרום pious, devout, religious, observant (adj.) frum

Approximate pronunciation (Northern Yiddish / Southern Yiddish): froom

Base Form: pious, devout, religious, observant | frum | פֿרום

Comparative: more pious, more devout, more religious, more observant | frumer | פֿרומער

Superlative: most pious, most devout, most religious, most observant | frumst | פֿרומסט

here is a link for you, you lying cretin:
http://www.yiddishdictionaryonline.com/

[Shmarya]

idiot, you were raised "on the Yiddish language" like I was raised on Chinese.

The word is "frum" (or "frim"). Or you can say "er iz a frumer (frimer) yid". It only sounds like "frumma" to you because the language is foreign to you.

You appear to be confusing pronunciation with spelling, which any linguist will tell you is foolish.

[WoolSilkCotton]

Sam,

Your dictionary says nothing about the plural form.

Frumma is plural. Frummer is singular male. Frumma can also be singular female.

examples: frumma yidden, frummer mann, frumma frau

And by the way, Sam, fuck you.

[Isa]

Wowey Zowey!!!!
I am learning Yiddish today at Failed Messiah!!

BTW Rubashkin really deserves some Old style Texas chain gang work.

None of this sit of your behind and WHINE in some posh Federal prison

[Dave]

Sholom Rubashkin is a thief and scumbag.

That being said, the federal sentencing guidelines are ridiculous. Five years would be a fair sentence for Mr. Rubashkin.

[Menachem Mendel lll]

Sam

My mameh loshen is Yiddish.

According to the 2011 edition of the Kurvenik's Handbook, it is acceptable (litvackish Yiddish excluded) to call a "religious" or "frum" man: a gazlen mit a bord.

[sam]

'plural form' - make me laugh, moron!
the form is the same, these are ajectives:

singular: "er iz frum, zi iz fum"
plural" "zei zainen frum"

singular: "er iz frumer, zi iz fumer"
plural" "zei zainen frumer"

pathetic.

[sam]

Scott at 1:20 PM said: "You appear to be confusing pronunciation with spelling, which any linguist will tell you is foolish."

Firstly, I was quite clearly addressing the pronunciation in my original comment. I know this WRONG pronunciation exists and I know WHO speaks that way too:

sam at 12:23 PM – "And what with this stupid baal-tshuva pronunciation "frumma"?

Secondly, as you can plainly see from this ignorant moron's comment, actually believes that "frumma" and "frummer" are two DIFFERENT words.

Thirdly, we have already established here that you do not know any Jewish language, you do not need to provide further proof.

[WoolSilkCotton]

Wrong, asshole.

Fill in the blanks with the correct suffix for the adjective:

frum___ mann

frum___ frau

frum___ yidden

BTW, you are also wrong above.

Your first set uses frum as an adjective. Your second set uses frum as a noun, when, in fact, it's an adjective and you left out the noun 'yid'. As such, in the second set, using frum alone without adding the word yid, yidena, or yidden makes these phrases derogatory to those who understand the nuance.

singular: "er iz a frumer, zi iz a fruma"
plural" "zei zainen fruma"

Not exactly a complement to the people you're referring to. But that's ok with me. Go ahead and refer to an elderly religious couple with those terms, and watch their reaction.

MM3, awesome as always!

[OMG]

Sam, I personally don’t know WSC, but I am inclined to believe his description of himself, first, myself I was raised in Williamsburg in the heart of the Satmar community. Being born into a Yiddish household is not something that someone would claim as an achievement, without actually being so. Secondly, his transliteration of frumma is spot on, depending on where your parents come from, Russian, Poland, Hungary, or Latvia, but we all understand essentially what it represent. That said, l vehemently disagree with your pronunciation “I don't care whom he sold drugs to” I do and if it would be your child who bought drugs and OD’ed on the said drugs, you would certainly care. Regardless what the outcome of this case would be, Rubashkin is far from a model ex con, he never ever took responsibility, or showed any remorse, and to top it off, his cronies dealt the anti-Semitic card from the bottom of the deck.
P.S. WSC continue the good work.

[sam]

I am done debating with the ignorant. The guy wants everyone to believe that "fruma" and "frumer" are two different words. He is wrong and he is a recalcitrant asshole to boot.

The word "fruma" is a common mispronunciation of the word "frumer", typically by BTs. And ff course there is not such sentence as "zei zainen fruma".

[WoolSilkCotton]

Thanks, OMG.

I remember in grammar school (public school) when the teacher was reviewing the days of the week, and when she pointed to the end of the week and asked what day that was, I blurted out "Shabbos"!

[WoolSilkCotton]

Sam, kindly supply a source of a yiddish on line dictionary that mentions the plural form of 'frum'.

The sentence "zei zainen fruma" is exactly what I'd say when a group of black hats are taken away in handcuffs.

[harold]

A week attempt to bring Sholom Rubashkin's name to this blog for everyone to beat up on.

[effie]

"And effie, we will see what "the law says" when the US Supreme Court renders its judgment, won't we? If this issue was as clear-cut as your feeble mind comprehends, the Supreme Court wouldn't agree to hear this case in the first place."

You're wrong again. Reade followed the law and the decision was affirmed on appeal. If the USSC decides that the law violates a constitutional principal, that is a different story. But as it stands, Judge Reade was applying the correct law correctly.

[Yoel Mechanic]

Will you guys lay off of WSC. His story is quite plausible about growing up with Yiddish. He didn't say he was a Yiddish novelist (look at how native English speakers in America make spelling & grammar anomolies, or don't know things you would presume everyone ought to know). Moreover, Yiddish is not a standardized national language where one can say "This is the norm according to some governmental agency and speech bureau" Debates about which grammatical or pronunciation variant is more "correct" is merely an argument about status and expediency.

[OMG]

WSC, are you a PS 16 alumni? I used to live across the street, on Shabbat morning on the way to the shul on Bedford Ave corner Ross St. I used to linger and watch hardball, at the PS 16 baseball field, going back more than 50 years.

[OMG]

Let me clarify, before a few Satmers jump on me. The baseball field was on Lee Ave between Wilson and Taylor St. and the old Satmer shul used to be on Bedford Ave. corner Ross St.

[WoolSilkCotton]

Thanks Yoel. If I was pro-Rubashkin, I'm sure Sam would have no problem with my grammar.

It would be nice if there was a Federal Bureau of Yiddish, perhaps as a division of the U.S. Department of Education, or maybe the FBI.

Perhaps I should write to my congressman. I could nominate H*Y*M*A*N K*A*P*L*A*N as the first Director of the FBY.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyman_Kaplan

[WoolSilkCotton]

OMG, I am a native of Newark, NJ (the old Jewish Weequahic section made famous by Philip Roth) and attended Chancellor Avenue School, same as Mr. Roth.

http://www.oldnewark.com/memories/weequahic/index.htm

My daughter recently moved to Williamsburg, a bit north of the Satmar section. It's amazing how the neighborhood has come back to life!
I enjoy visiting her and walking down to shop on Lee Avenue.
I can only imagine what is was like there as a child years ago! Oh well, times change, and sometimes for the better.

All the best to everyone for a great week, and a sizzling start to a wonderful and Freilichen Chanukah. I hope Sam is ok with that phrase!

[sam]

I hear you, Yoel.

[A E ANDERSON]

The anti-Semitic element in the Rubashkin case lies in the Iowa establishment's treatment of an otherwise esteemed, white collar businessman as some sort of criminal gang capo, a narcotrafficante, etc.

Because he didn't fit the lilly white, white bread, upper middle class, corporate elite profile of a white collar offender owing to the subjective views of Iowa law enforcers and prosecutors, fuelled by the RCF rhetoric of this blog, PETA and certain organised labour elements, he was singled out for unfair, uncharacteristic and unusual (albeit otherwise legal) treatment.

This anti-Semitic animus toward him filtered up from law enforcers to the trial judge by route of a year's worth of ex parte meetings, telephone calls and other documents not made available to the defence.

Agri made efforts to bring itself into the 21st Century, by hiring -- to the best of its limited understanding -- lawyers, PR experts and others to troubleshoot what had become a collection of difficult and troubling issues, ranging from immigration compliance to animal treatment during slaughter.

Because of its negative perception of Rubashkin and that alien outpost of Hasidic Jews in lilly white, Anglo-Saxon Iowa -- I maintain this initial perception is anti-Semitic, he was never given the fair shake or invitation to cooperate that any other business similarly situated would have received. Indeed, Agriprocessors OVERTURE to cooperate was rebuffed!

I don't think there is much room to compare a meth dealer peddling around on a bicycle to Rubashkin and the complex nature of the mostly technical offenses alleged against this businessman.

I also believe that Rubashkin made the situation worse for himself.. not by failing to cooperate (he was unable to as his offer and any good will that came with it had been rebuffed by the feds) but by what appeared to be his sanctimonious behaviour at trial, during sentencing, at farbrengens, and to this day in the form of hasidic epistles from his jail cell.

Still, I believe he was the victim of at least anti-Semitic animus, and should be retried accordingly.

[OMG]

Posted by: A E ANDERSON | Canterbury, New Zealand, residing halfway around the world, doesn’t necessary give you a bird eye’s view of our legal system as a whole or this Agri and Rubashkin fiasco. First, you need to understand that Agri’s real problems didn’t emanate from the PETA and the Labor issues in the plant. The fact is that PETA always have some business in their crosshair, with no consequence to the said business. Secondly, PETA was only working to get a more animal friendly slaughter method. In regards to labor, I don’t understand why you would even allege that they were the cause of the raid, when Rubashkin’s witness testified, that labor leaders were the ones who gave them the heads-up that a raid is coming forth in the next few days. Agri’s real problem was that during 2008, you had a vocal Republican conservative group, who put pressure on Congress, and the Executive branch to crack down on illegal immigrants. The real dichotomy was that the Republican’s who for years Rubashkin supported, they were the ones who pushed for the raid, and all the fraud charges derived from the raid. In conclusion, you are wrong when you pontificate about our legal system, when you are halfway around the world.

[Mr. Apikoros]

Sam, Sam, der Scheisshaus Mann:

Rubashkin was a productive member of society in much the manner that Al Capone was, except that Capone gave a thirsty nation beer, while the Meat Messiah gave a hungry nation overpriced meat. Capone, btw, didn't employ serfs to do his dirty work.

[Mr. Apikoros]

BTW, Sam, "frum" is an adjective meaning sanctimonious. In German, of which Yiddish is a dialect, the word is "fromm." Thus the feminine and plural endings in German are "fromme," and in Yiddish, "frumme."

Many adjectives are coopted as nouns, and "frum" is no exception. The noun is "frumbag," meaning a sanctimonious windbag of a scumbag such as yourself.

[Mr. Apikoros]

Had Rubashkin been tried and convicted of the many involuntary servitude violations of which he was clearly guilty as hell, the 27 years he got would have been considered a light sentence.

My quarrel with the government is that they didn't want to spend the money to try Rubashkin for those crimes. They should have made an example of him, so that the many Chinese, Korean, Filipino, and Vietnamese sweatshops which do much the same thing would sit up and take notice.

[Yechiel]

WSC
You hurt every time you see a 'frumma'. Too bad - we are here to stay; your species is slowly disappearing. I wonder why...
Yes, I know that our community is also losing a few losers who can't cope... but we continue to thrive B"H in spite of our shortcomings.

[Mr. Apikoros]

I'd vastly prefer to be a Christian than your brand of Jew.

BTW, how many Nobel Prizes has your "species" won?

[Isa]

From Mr Apikoros...
"Rubashkin was a productive member of society in much the manner that Al Capone was"

Can you imagine Capone whining from Alcatras about something like ' I forgot to pay my taxes so let me pay my taxes'

[itchiemayer]

Yechiel - The dismissiveness with which you referred to the "losers" in your community that "can't cope" troubles me. You should be crying over their loss, or at the very least be sobered by it. Instead you condescendingly refer to them as "losers".

[ca]

WSC, I like the FU you threw in. It was really the only answer you needed to give once the nasty uncalled for BT comment came in. The reason I don't speak Yiddish is because mother and father spoke a different Yiddish from each other. My father's side of the family convinced my mother that she couldn't speak Yiddish so she just stopped. In any event you clearly won the argument.

MM III, your comments are always extremely well said.

[Mr. Apikoros]

Sam, you're a linguist. A cunning one.

[WoolSilkCotton]

Thanks, CA. The BT comment exposed what I had discovered years ago to be under the surface of so many interactions with FFB's.

They give you that saccharine schpiel about how BT's are so great and how G-d considers them higher than tzaddikim, etc., but they just quietly mistrusted and resented us.
So many BT's left Chabad over the years because we believed the initial hype about how great we were to have become religious, only to discover that, behind our backs, we were a standing joke to the FFB crowd.

I know Sam made that comment just to lash out and try to hurt my feelings, and he succeeded, but he also exposed his true feelings about BT's.
He lost whatever regard I had for him as a FFB Lubavitcher who was just frustrated over the Rubashkin fiasco.

Yechiel's comments, also in a similar attempt just to hurt my feelings, is capably addressed by Itchie. Kudos, Itchie.

[sam]

WoolSilkCotton,

I have every right to detest the ingrate BT's like you. For one, I am not an FFB (while I came to Lubavitch as a kid, I am sill technically a BT). Secondly, BTs like you are an embarrassment to me and make me feel ashamed of the BT badge.

Secondly, I am not particularly 'frustrated' over Rubashkin (perhaps I should be). What I find incredible more than the crazy sentence he was give is the total and complete lack of compassion to him from the likes of you, you sick fuck.

[WoolSilkCotton]

Sam, focus on controlling your own feelings and behavior, and worry less about trying to control what I think and do.

Perhaps if more Lubavitchers, including Rubashkin, had spent more time controlling their feelings and actions, they would be more understanding of others, have better insight, and less likely to violate American laws.

When Lubavitchers, including Rubashkin, start showing some compassion for the victims of his crimes, I predict you will see a lot more compassion from others, especially those who count, like judges and juries.

It remains puzzling to me why a frum guy like yourself lets fly with the obscenities and vulgarity so readily. Is it that closely beneath the surface? I've noticed that propensity from other frumma, too. Low-class folks who don't speak English also seem to learn the obscenities first and foremost, before they can even utter a coherent English sentence. There's a common denominator there about which you ought to be concerned.

[sam]

WoolSilkCotton,

I have always believed that one must speak the language ones audience understands best, if you catch my drift. (And again with the stupid BT "frumma" – I see I have wasted my time).

[WoolSilkCotton]

Sam, good luck to you in all your future endeavors.