[Vision2020] Sunil is a Wonderful Man

Joe Campbell joekc at adelphia.net
Sat Sep 16 16:19:32 PDT 2006


You have said such such comments about Sunil, and they are both false and damaging. You can only get around this by playing fast and loose with the terms "defending" and "supporting." The general public fails to see much of a difference between these terms and you know that. Get a grip, buddy!

Everything you've said about Sunil proves one thing and one thing only: You have never met the man. Get to know the man and then tell us what you think. I have gotten to know him and I think that he is a wonderful man.

There are other things to note but they'll have to wait for another day.

Best, Joe

---- Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote: 

 I never stated that Sunil supports terrorism and  child molestation, that is preposterous, re-read what I wrote. I said  he defends those that do. 
  The definition of slander is the  saying of something that is false and damaging. If it is true, it isn't  slander. Sunil himself admits to defending convicted child molesters:
"It is true that I defend convicted child molesters at sentencing 
hearings that occur after a client has been convicted by a jury"

       Sunil Ramalingam-- http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2006-September/035436.html

 I am not going to try and argue with you. For you are  the master of convincing the jury that the Sun really rises in the West  depending on ones point of view. 
 I am sure that you can  argue that I got the context wrong in some of your posts, but after 20+  such posts over 2.5 years it is hard to write all them off. 
FYI,  I did support Sami Omar. He was living in UI Family Housing at the time  he was abducted. I represented Family Housing in the UI student  government at the time. I defended Sami in student council and even  brought his family there, which was even aired on public  television.  I kept in contact with John Dickinson about what was  going at the trial in Boise. That case is different, because it was a  domestic case and there was no evidence whatsoever that Sami was a  terrorist, in fact it all pointed in the opposite direction. Further,  Sami was not saying he was planning on killing Americans when he gets  out like those detained overseas. And, at least one member of Sami's  family was born right here in Moscow. 
 I don't think the  government can detain someone forever without at least trying to find  out if someone is guilty. But letting them go if they say "Death to  America" is just to risky when they are capable of acting on it. 
  My disagreement with you Sunil, is that you clearly are brilliant, yet  rather than using your talents to defend victims in our society, you  use your wit and experience to defend convicted child molesters. 
  I am not arguing you are not doing your job, or you are not good at it.  I am arguing that your job should be something more productive and  meaningful then the release of child molesters and the scum of the  earth when you know they are guilty. 
 I am sure you with  your big brain will justify that in your own mind. But I think anyone  with a heart will ask WHY the child molesters get a good lawyer and  trial when there are so many other more deserving and wronged people  with their rights being stepped on. They should be a higher priority to  you and any lawyer concerned about justice. 
Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:  Tom,

It is true that I defend convicted child molesters at sentencing hearings 
that occur after a client has been convicted by a jury (or a judge in 
juvenile cases) at the sentencing hearing and in subsequent legal 
proceedings, or at a post-conviction hearing filed by a client who is 
usually in prison.  If a convicted child molester is charged with a new 
crime, then I may defend that person.  As a public defender I don't judge my 
clients; there is no shortage of people ready to do this (regardless of how 
much or how little information they have about the crime or the criminal) 
and it's not my place or job to do so.  I try to represent them to the best 
of my ability, and I don't apologize for this.

I have never represented a convicted terrorist as a lawyer, though I would 
were I to be appointed to do so or if I were retained to do so.  I did 
represent a witness in Sami al Hussein's case, and am happy I was able to 
offer him assistance.  Perhaps Donovan would like to insult me for doing so.

As one who believes our judicial system has underlying principles, I believe 
that all people who are held have the right to due process and a fair and 
proper hearing.  I do not believe that we have the right to imprison people, 
no matter what we label them, forever, or to try them in kangaroo courts.  
This is a defense of legal principle and human rights.  I consider it a 
defense of our country, and the notion that we have enduring principles 
These are beliefs that Donovan neither shares nor supports.  He is a fan of 

Though Donovan does not support the Iraq war, he appears to find the Bush 
Administration infallible once they arrest or confine a Muslim.  At that 
point he believes it is appropriate to hold that person indefinately.  I 
find this position shameful and disgusting, and Donovan finds me repugnant 
because of this, I am willing to live with the loss of his approval.

It is interesting to note the subject line of Donovan's most recent post.  
He has claimed he only attacks those who attack him.  Most recently he 
incorrectly made fun of Keely's spelling; I asked him if he wanted the same 
done to him.  Since we all post all too quickly, we all make spelling 
errors, and few of us would really want to have our own posts criticized for 
our typos.  This is the point I was making.

Donovan, in the thoughtful and Christian response we have all learned so 
well, responds by attacking my character in a way that has the smallest germ 
of truth but is intended to be a slur.  I have written him offline and 
pointed out that hatred of Middle Easterners has often resulted in racial 
slurs and threats being directed towards me; I have told him that I consider 
his calling me a defender of terrorists could actually be harmful to me.  
You see the effect (or is it 'affect' Donovan?) my request has had on him.

Of course, this is the man, or aging adolescent, who has suggested it would 
benefit the gene pool if children were to die playing in construction sites 
that should be off-limits if their parents fail to provide proper 
supervision, so I would be foolish to expect better of him.


>From: "Tom Hansen" 
>To: "'Donovan Arnold'" ,        "'Sunil 
>Ramalingam'" ,        
>Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Sunil and His Defense of Terrorists and 
>ConvictedChild Molesters
>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 07:05:37 -0700
>Arnold -
>Your statement, here on a public listserve, that Sunil Ramalingam defends
>convicted child molesters and convicted terrorists, reflects upon your lack
>of maturity and sense of decency, and in virtually all litigious circles
>maybe considered libelous.
>Name ONE convicted child molester which Sunil has defended!
>Name ONE convicted terrorist which Sunil has defended!
>Failing either of these requests, you owe Sunil a VERY meaningful and VERY
>public apology.
>Tom Hansen
>Vandalville, Idaho

 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com

Why keep checking for Mail? The all-new Yahoo! Mail shows you when there are new messages.

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list