Tue
Sep 25 2007
08:17:am
Documents please
By: Fairview Angel  shortURL

Does it never occur to anyone in the GOP to actually prove a point rather than just waxing endlessly about it? This is hardly rocket science, but bare with me;

Her most recent filing with immigration services and the Department of Homeland Security was dated Aug. 8, 2007, and is reportedly valid for 18 months.

As reported by Rick Laney here, (link...)

Mr. Calixto freely admitted that he had no legal status while Ms. Calixto attempted to show Judge Young proof of a work permit.
The work permit was out of date and Judge young made note that both parties were apparently here illegally and could therefore be deported.

As stated by Mike Hickman in a LTTE here; (link...)

This means one of three things. (1) Ms. Calixto showed Mr. Laney a different document other than the one she brought to court or (2) Mr. Laney is not telling the truth or (3) Mr. Hickman is not telling the truth.

If either source (or anyone for that matter) has a copy of Ms. Calixto's work permit, please state you have it and Mr. Neal will hopefully get the document from you for a post.

As of now, if I had to pick between a justice system that deems it needs no court reporter for records or a local reporter who catches hell from the GOP machine including his own boss' - I'll go with Laney. But ultimately I hope we can prove here what seems easily provable.

Topics:

Expendable?

Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 09:22.

Irregardless of the time frame, it appears Ms. Calixto made an effort to be legally documented unlike Mr. Calixto per Mr. Hickman. Should we assume that it's better to be a shadow in the system rather than part of it?

If we want assimilation, we have to be inclusive to those who attempt to follow our currently very convoluted rules. A documented worker pays taxes. If you are paying taxes, your $10 an hour wage becomes $6.70 an hour after the government gets theirs (approximating 33%). The reason many get involved with or follow government is to see where, how and on whom this percentage is being spent (link...). If you are paying your part for things like education and healthcare, you are much less likely to abuse those institutions. Consider it an owner vs. renters mentality.

While her claims of abuse may not have risen to a criminal level, I think our courts should show compassion when deciding those matters. If Judge Young normally deals with divorces, I'd venture a guess this is not the only time he has seen a couple in distress.

These people are human beings. Since the real estate market is dying down, I hope the GOP developer/builders who brought the immigrants here for cheap labor will at least treat them like humans before they tell them to "go back home."

Documents

Submitted by ABlevins on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 16:24.

I have seen the documents that Ms. Calixto brought with her to court. I have also seen the letter sent to her by Homeland Security that her new application is being processed. She did not have to return to have new fingerprints taken as last years will do, her paperwork states. Her work permission card she carries is expired and she is awaiting the new one. This process takes about three months.
We did not think she would need to prove her status in court, so she did not bring the letter. She should have shown her driving permission and Social Security card "for work purposes only", but I doubt that would have been enough to satisfy this judge.
These documents are her personal property and should not be shown for all the world to see.
With all due respect to Mr. Hickman I believe he caved in to political pressure, after all the man has to work in the court.
After hearing Ms. Calixto relate this story in detail for about the fourth time, I am sure she did not understand all that was said and she stated as much many times. She did understand that she would not be heard, that she was told to go back to her country and that when she asked about her USA born children the judge was not concerned for them. She understood that her daughter who has only been to American schools and reads English well, cried when she saw the paper and pleaded to her mother "tell them you can't go back we need you." She damn well understood that.
She will file for divorce in another county, and she will be heard.

Help us end this

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 17:10.

Ms. Blevins,

I appreciated the fact the Ms. Calixto has her right to privacy and thought about that before my post. But the issue is larger, and I hope you can help her see it that way.

Proving a case, like in a civil court, using a preponderance of the evidence doesn't even factor in Blount County. If so, a large percentage of local leaders would have already been removed. The fact is, corrupt forces in this county can only be exposed in the light of the truth, as many here find it easier to think as their GOP masters tell them to think.

I don't care if you blank out everything but her name and the date, it still would end the "debate". For many reasons, I don't trust the Daily Times (not necessarily Laney) and I for damn sure don't trust the local GOP and its leaders.

At any rate, I thank you for your response here and look forward to your response to this second request. I at least hope I have helped clarify my reason for asking for it.

I am hoping to have the

Submitted by ABlevins on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 19:43.

I am hoping to have the document we all want to see in a day or two. It seems Ms. Calixto did not understand the importance of some other papers she has. We will be looking at these tommorrow.
As far as I know, Ms. Calixto has not filed a civil suit except relating to the divorce.
Forgive me if I am sometimes passionate about this, but this lady is my friend, and it hurt me to see her treated in such a manner, dismissed like she and her children didn't matter.
I wonder if any of you understand how that court hearing felt to Ms. Calixto.
There she stood in that safe harbor of court, fearing, if only for a few moments, that she might be grabbed and taken away from her children. She's from a third world country where anything can happen. She left the court in tears of fear and humiliation. I have never concerned myself about the political affairs of this county, except maybe to want to scream when they want to build a subdivision on Chilhowee Mountain or put a 4 lane through my backyard.
I feel I will need a long, long shower to get the stink off before we are through with this.
I must add another comment. Ana said to me even after her treatment in court, "What a great country this is. In my country, one could be killed to raise doubt about a judge's decision, and you are not afraid here."

No understanding, just empathy

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 21:05.

I wonder if any of you understand how that court hearing felt to Ms. Calixto

No mam, I think I can't possibly understand that. I do know that a lot of people in church this Sunday professing the meek shall inherit the Earth sure have seemed intent on putting this lady through hell.

You are brave in the stance you have taken for your friend. You should reconsider entering the political affairs of this county. Women that dare to question really get em' worked up down at the courthouse. Just a thought.

Answers

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 09/26/2007 - 08:52.

Ms. Blevins,

I have been following this issue since it came out in the DT. I have a few questions that, if answered, would clear some things up for me. First, and if you have already stated I apologize, but were you there in the courtroom with Ms. Calixto? I only ask because I would like another accoutn of what happened in the courtrrom that day. The LTTE that Mr. Hickman submitted paints a picture, at least in my mind, that is "legally" sound. If the court does not have jurisdiction, it can not hear the case. As I understand it (from the LTTE), that part was just for the divorce. As far as the order for protection, the LTTE states the judge dismissed it based on Ms. Calixto not meeting the burden of proof. I suggest that Ms. Calixto find someway to get the proof necessary to meet the burden of proof and go back to get her oder of protection.

I do not know or do I want to assume what has happened between Mr. & Ms. Calixto. It seems to me that everyone wants to jump on this issue and run with it, and there are two distinct sides. I think before any of us takes a side we need to know "exactly" what happened.

God Bless!

The merits are not the question

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Wed, 09/26/2007 - 11:28.

The issue here is not the merits of the case. The issue is an elected judge told a legal resident to "go back where they came from".

The reason for my post was to find out whether or not anyone took the time to find out Ms. Calixto's status before the Judge arrogantly called her illegal and told her to go back.

What happens next time when the Judge doesn't like the accent of someone before him and tells a "yankee to go back up north?"

Is it his right to be abusive? Or do we hold our Judges to a higher standard?

Facts

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 09/26/2007 - 12:37.

I do appreciate what you are saying. However, I will have to respectfully disagree with you about the merits. There are two issues here, the divorce and the order of proctection. The judge dimissed (according to the LTTE from Mr. Hickman) the order of protection based on burden of proof. As for the divorce issue, that is why we need to know the facts of the case. IF the court did not have jurisdiction, he cannot hear the case. Plain and simple. It could be a murder case and if the court did not have jurisdiction, it will not be heard.
It all hinges on the facts. If you take Mr. Hickman's LTTE and take from it that the judge told them to go get the proper documentation (so the court will have jurisdiction to hear the case), I am not so sure that there is any wrong doing here. Again, that is why we need the facts. We need to hear from the people who were in the courtroom that day.

If it happened the Mr. Laney says, I will admit that it should not have been handled that way.
Who was there?

As far as the judges "right to be abusive", I have a question for everyone. I don't mean to be smart here. Is the judge elected? If he is voted into office, with everyone knowing his demeanor, we cannot say anything about it. Our say is in who gets elected.

Thanks and God Bless!

One Issue

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Wed, 09/26/2007 - 13:03.

that the judge told them to go get the proper documentation

?

The Judge told them to "go back where they came from". Notice I put my version in quotes. No one, even Judge Young, disputes this was said. If he had taken the time to ask them to get proper documentation, we wouldn't be here.

We need to hear from the people who were in the courtroom that day.

We need to make sure our local judiciary follows procedure and uses court reporters so we don't have to rely on second hand accounts.

Is the judge elected?

Yes, so was DC mayor Marion Barry. Does an election make someone infallible?

we cannot say anything about it.

You can not/will not say anything about it. I and others will scream from the mountaintops if that's what it takes. Ever heard of a recall?

Confusion

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 09/26/2007 - 14:16.

FA,
You said "The Judge told them to "go back where they came from". Notice I put my version in quotes. No one, even Judge Young, disputes this was said. If he had taken the time to ask them to get proper documentation, we wouldn't be here." Mr. Hickman, in his LTTE, wrote "strongly suggested that both parties return to their respective home countries, get legal and come back so that his court would, perhaps, then have subject matter jurisdiction to dissolve the marriage." I find these to be two distinctly different statements. The way you say it implies that all the judge wanted them to do. However, the other statement is an instructional statement helping the Calixto's.
As far as asking them about their status, Mr. Hickman wrote "Judge Young asked both parties under what status they were here in America. Mr. Calixto freely admitted that he had no legal status while Ms. Calixto attempted to show Judge Young proof of a work permit.
The work permit was out of date and Judge young made note that both parties were apparently here illegally and could therefore be deported." Again, I am going off of one person's account, but this is evidence of the judge asking them about their status.

Do you know the procedures about having reporter in the courtroom? I have read, and please forgive me because I cannot remember where, that there is something about the type of case it is as to whether or not a reporter is required. I would like some clarification on that.

"Does an election make someone infallible?" No an election does not make someone infallible. However, you are trying to compare one person who clearly broke the law (drugs) to another person who is trying to follow the law (subject matter jurisdiction). I can't follow your comparison. I apologize it confuses me a little.

Yes, you are correct about saying something about it. That should not have written.

Thanks and God Bless!

Who will tell the truth? The

Submitted by ABlevins on Wed, 09/26/2007 - 20:38.

Who will tell the truth? The lawyer who has to work in the court every day? The court officer who works there every day? The secretary who works for the judge? The few people in left in the courtroom waiting to be heard? Or the two people who were denied due process.
I do hope the truth will be told. Now is not the time to reveal everything one may know in a public forum. This issue has became bigger than this one incident.

An undocumented worker also

Submitted by ABlevins on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 19:45.

An undocumented worker also pays taxes if he is working under false papers. He never files for a tax return. If he is paid cash his employer is avoiding paying taxes.
When the demand for construction workers goes so will the worker. He will go to Florida for field work or another area of the country where he can work.

A logical look at it

Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 09:36.

Which makes more sense?
Laney's version or Hickman's version? Sure they both have their own agendas. Laney wants to sell newspapers. Hickman wants what is best for his client.
I have to admit I was concerned about what had happened. Everyone has a right ot be heard and protected. God loves us all!

After reading Mr. Hickman's explaination I feel that his version is closer to the truth than what has been reported in the newspapers.

I am very interested in seeing what comes of this.

If you read Laney's

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 09/27/2007 - 11:58.

If you read Laney's articles, you'd know he doesn't just want to sell newspapers. Follow his stories. You'll see he is someone with integrity who cares about what is right--not what is popular or politically correct according to the Blount Co. "network."

How blind should it be?

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 09:48.

You better hope that our court system is telling you the truth, because without court reporters, you have nothing else but "their" word.

I respect faith, but doubt is what gets you an education.

Wilson Mizner

Just the courts?

Submitted by mello on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 09:55.

(link...)

Where are the good guys?

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 10:15.

Tangled webs of deception - who can we trust? It gives new meaning for when you hear someone say they were tangled up in the legal system. (Not a plea for Copeland - just the process)

Why do those in Blount with gavels, guns, and Attorney at Law after their names have such hard time understanding the law? If you are on the right side of these issues speak up here. Many of us citizens are asking, "If I had a pressing legal matter, would I want to bring before any of Blount's judicial institutions?"

I for one would suffer in silence before being subject to a process that seems to have no bounds of its hubris.

mello has all the answers to

Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 10:27.

mello has all the answers to everything in this beautiful county. Ask her to answer your questions since this is her platform. still awaiting for any good news to be posted on this blog page.

It's everyones platform - you're here

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 10:34.

The Mayor and Sheriff Anounce Major Budget Cuts!

That would be good news if were not a joke. Mello cites sources. Do you have a problem with someone shaking your foundation with the facts?

aw shucks

Submitted by mello on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 12:50.

I ain't got no answers. I got lots of questions.

The beauty of our gracious host's website is that we get to ask questions and share info. Funny how the same questions that fall upon deaf ears suddenly take on new meaning when read with open eyes.

Good news? Hummm... let's see... good news... good news.... good news...

Great points. I read the

Submitted by bizgrrl on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 11:43.

Great points. I read the letter to the editor this morning as well. I was a little surprised at the attorney's statements. I wonder if/when we will find out the truth.

Check the dates

Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 12:44.

If she had a document dated August 8th, why would she bring anything other than that to court on September the 7th?

Mr. Hickman, a little help?

She went to court for an

Submitted by ABlevins on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 16:28.

She went to court for an order of protection not to prove her status.

Ask Yourself This

Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 12:45.

Ask yourself who would have more reason to lie, a reporter at a newspaper that typically supports Republicans and has an editor who is great friends with Judge Young, or an attorney who has to stand in Judge Young's courtroom every week? My guess is that RL had to fight every step of the way for this story to ever make it into the newspaper. Maybe, if people continue to write letters to the editor, and the state investigation of Young heats up, RL will feel obligated to reveal his other sources on the story - I'll bet a year's salary there are people at the Blount County Justice Center praying that day never comes.

Bingo.

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 09/27/2007 - 12:01.

Bingo.

"What a great country this

Submitted by R. Neal on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 20:14.

"What a great country this is. In my country, one could be killed to raise doubt about a judge's decision, and you are not afraid here."

This is very moving, on many different levels. Is there any wonder why they want to come here, and stay here? This needs to be memorialized and preserved somehow.

Outside looking in

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Tue, 09/25/2007 - 21:01.

It certainly helps remind me of the ideals and virtues many are trying to preserve here at Blount Views. I think the materialism that filled the void where once liberty, justice and independence were, is on it's way to reversal. You can't fill the shopping cart of freedom with anything on the Target shelves.

Has the "SEND THEM ALL BACK" group noticed?

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 09/26/2007 - 18:40.

Has the "SEND THEM ALL BACK" group noticed that their hero, Judge Dale Young, actually awarded a WIN to the ILLEGAL immigrant over the LEGAL immigrant in this case? He dismissed the request of the LEGAL immigrant who was seeking protection from the ILLEGAL immigrant. The beauty of Blount County is that a judge who ignores the legal immigrant can actually become the HERO of the "SEND THEM ALL BACK" crowd. And they wonder why the rest of the country laughs at us. What a pathetic little county we live in. I only hope the state takes care of him for us all.

Take a longer look

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Wed, 09/26/2007 - 20:28.

There is a big difference between needing a little work and being pathetic. A hope of brighter days will be hard to see from your current view.

Are they out there

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Tue, 10/02/2007 - 12:56.

Before the 30 days are up when Judge Young gets to have his say, can we make another attempt here of letting citizens see the document in question. If not, I'm going to imagine the judge will say she didn't have them. It would be nice to end the "debate" before it starts.

The form is I- 797 Notice of

Submitted by ABlevins on Tue, 10/02/2007 - 15:54.

The form is I- 797 Notice of Action a Notice to Form I-821 Applicants
Case Type is 1821 TPS
On 2 Aug 2007 Dept of Homeland Security rec'd her I-797. She is waiting to recieve her new card still today. She says the process always takes about 90 days.
We also have a "Notice of Entry of Appearence as Attorney or Representative" US Dept. of Justice filed on 07/14/2007 Form G-28
She has a Notice of Approvel of TPS re-Registration and Eligibility on Employment Authorization from 29 June 2006.
She has done everything she needed to do to keep her TPS status current and has no fault by delays of government red tape.
What the judge will say is that she didn't understand what was said and much of the legal mumble jumble that was said she did not understand.
Her husband has an about 85% grasp of the English language and he has not disputed anything she has stated. Of course he will not speak out publicly due to his status.
We have had no goal in all this mess but to speak out about something that we felt was not right. To assume certain things about a person because of the color of their skin or the language they speak is not right, especially in a court of law.

Thanks

Submitted by Fairview Angel on Tue, 10/02/2007 - 17:23.

The government taking it's time with paper work? Say it ain't so!

Thanks for the clarification. And for that matter, when the GOP does march out Judge Young, please don't let him go unanswered.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

    State News

    Wire Reports

    Home » Blogs » Fairview Angel's blog
    Home » Blogs » Fairview Angel's blog
    Copyright (C) All Rights Reserved