[Vision2020] Sunil and His Defense of Terrorists and ConvictedChild Molesters

Sunil Ramalingam sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
Sat Sep 16 17:22:37 PDT 2006


Clearly you don't believe in the accused's right to representation.  I do.  
I am proud to do so.  Do you believe we should have the accused face 
prosecution and confinement or deathwithout a lawyer?  I don't.

Now, I have challenged you to demonstrate why I am wrong in the posts you 
listed.  You took the time to find them and cite them.


I am sick of your lies and false attacks, Donovan.  You claim to attack 
those who attack you.  I did not attack you yesterday, yet you continue to 
demonstrate your utter lack of redeeming value in your posts about me.  Put 
up or shut up.

If you can't do so, retract your statements about me.

J Ford, I apologize for lumping you in with Donovan and Tony in my second 
post today.  I should not have done so.


>From: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
>To: Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>, vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Sunil and His Defense of Terrorists and 
>ConvictedChild Molesters
>Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2006 14:02:45 -0700 (PDT)
>  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.
>   Keely,
>   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-- 
>   Sunil,
>  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 
>  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.
>   Best,
>   _DJA
>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 
>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 
>As one who believes our judicial system has underlying principles, I 
>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 
>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 
>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 
>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 
>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 
> >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 
> >public apology.
> >
> >
> >
> >Tom Hansen
> >
> >Vandalville, Idaho
> >
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           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