Sunday, July 29, 2007

§ 236. Visa issuance

TITLE 6 > CHAPTER 1 > SUBCHAPTER IV > Part C > § 236 Prev | Next

§ 236. Visa issuance
How Current is This?

(a) Definition
In this subsection,[1] the term “consular office” [2] has the meaning given that term under section 101(a)(9) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(9)).
(b) In general
Notwithstanding section 104(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1104 (a)) or any other provision of law, and except as provided in subsection (c) of this section, the Secretary—
(1) shall be vested exclusively with all authorities to issue regulations with respect to, administer, and enforce the provisions of such Act [8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.], and of all other immigration and nationality laws, relating to the functions of consular officers of the United States in connection with the granting or refusal of visas, and shall have the authority to refuse visas in accordance with law and to develop programs of homeland security training for consular officers (in addition to consular training provided by the Secretary of State), which authorities shall be exercised through the Secretary of State, except that the Secretary shall not have authority to alter or reverse the decision of a consular officer to refuse a visa to an alien; and
(2) shall have authority to confer or impose upon any officer or employee of the United States, with the consent of the head of the executive agency under whose jurisdiction such officer or employee is serving, any of the functions specified in paragraph (1).
(c) Authority of the Secretary of State
(1) In general
Notwithstanding subsection (b) of this section, the Secretary of State may direct a consular officer to refuse a visa to an alien if the Secretary of State deems such refusal necessary or advisable in the foreign policy or security interests of the United States.
(2) Construction regarding authority
Nothing in this section, consistent with the Secretary of Homeland Security’s authority to refuse visas in accordance with law, shall be construed as affecting the authorities of the Secretary of State under the following provisions of law:
(A) Section 101(a)(15)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(15)(A)).
(B) Section 204(d)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) (as it will take effect upon the entry into force of the Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect to Inter-Country adoption).
(C) Section 212(a)(3)(B)(i)(IV)(bb) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(3)(B)(i)(IV)(bb)).
(D) Section 212(a)(3)(B)(i)(VI) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(3)(B)(i)(VI)).
(E) Section 212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(II) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(3)(B)(vi)(II)).
(F) Section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(3)(C)).
(G) Section 212(a)(10)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182 (a)(10)(C)).
(H) Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182 (f)).
(I) Section 219(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189 (a)).
(J) Section 237(a)(4)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227 (a)(4)(C)).
(K) Section 401 of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996 [22 U.S.C. 6091].
(L) Section 613 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 [3] (as contained in section 101(b) of division A of Public Law 105–277) (Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999); 112 Stat. 2681; H.R. 4328 (originally H.R. 4276) as amended by section 617 of Public Law 106–553.
(M) Section 103(f) of the Chemical Weapon Convention Implementation Act of 1998 [22 U.S.C. 6713 (f)] (112 Stat. 2681–865).
(N) 801 of H.R. 3427, the Admiral James W. Nance and Meg Donovan Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001 [8 U.S.C. 1182e], as enacted by reference in Public Law 106–113.
(O) Section 568 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2002 (Public Law 107–115).
(P) Section 51 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 (22 U.S.C. 2723).
(d) Consular officers and chiefs of missions
(1) In general
Nothing in this section may be construed to alter or affect—
(A) the employment status of consular officers as employees of the Department of State; or
(B) the authority of a chief of mission under section 207 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3927).
(2) Construction regarding delegation of authority
Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect any delegation of authority to the Secretary of State by the President pursuant to any proclamation issued under section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182 (f)), consistent with the Secretary of Homeland Security’s authority to refuse visas in accordance with law.
(e) Assignment of Homeland Security employees to diplomatic and consular posts
(1) In general
The Secretary is authorized to assign employees of the Department to each diplomatic and consular post at which visas are issued, unless the Secretary determines that such an assignment at a particular post would not promote homeland security.
(2) Functions
Employees assigned under paragraph (1) shall perform the following functions:
(A) Provide expert advice and training to consular officers regarding specific security threats relating to the adjudication of individual visa applications or classes of applications.
(B) Review any such applications, either on the initiative of the employee of the Department or upon request by a consular officer or other person charged with adjudicating such applications.
(C) Conduct investigations with respect to consular matters under the jurisdiction of the Secretary.
(3) Evaluation of consular officers
The Secretary of State shall evaluate, in consultation with the Secretary, as deemed appropriate by the Secretary, the performance of consular officers with respect to the processing and adjudication of applications for visas in accordance with performance standards developed by the Secretary for these procedures.
(4) Report
The Secretary shall, on an annual basis, submit a report to Congress that describes the basis for each determination under paragraph (1) that the assignment of an employee of the Department at a particular diplomatic post would not promote homeland security.
(5) Permanent assignment; participation in terrorist lookout committee
When appropriate, employees of the Department assigned to perform functions described in paragraph (2) may be assigned permanently to overseas diplomatic or consular posts with country-specific or regional responsibility. If the Secretary so directs, any such employee, when present at an overseas post, shall participate in the terrorist lookout committee established under section 304 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002 (8 U.S.C. 1733).
(6) Training and hiring
(A) In general
The Secretary shall ensure, to the extent possible, that any employees of the Department assigned to perform functions under paragraph (2) and, as appropriate, consular officers, shall be provided the necessary training to enable them to carry out such functions, including training in foreign languages, interview techniques, and fraud detection techniques, in conditions in the particular country where each employee is assigned, and in other appropriate areas of study.
(B) Use of Center
The Secretary is authorized to use the National Foreign Affairs Training Center, on a reimbursable basis, to obtain the training described in subparagraph (A).
(7) Report
Not later than 1 year after November 25, 2002, the Secretary and the Secretary of State shall submit to Congress—
(A) a report on the implementation of this subsection; and
(B) any legislative proposals necessary to further the objectives of this subsection.
(8) Effective date
This subsection shall take effect on the earlier of—
(A) the date on which the President publishes notice in the Federal Register that the President has submitted a report to Congress setting forth a memorandum of understanding between the Secretary and the Secretary of State governing the implementation of this section; or
(B) the date occurring 1 year after November 25, 2002.
(f) No creation of private right of action
Nothing in this section shall be construed to create or authorize a private right of action to challenge a decision of a consular officer or other United States official or employee to grant or deny a visa.
(g) Study regarding use of foreign nationals
(1) In general
The Secretary of Homeland Security shall conduct a study of the role of foreign nationals in the granting or refusal of visas and other documents authorizing entry of aliens into the United States. The study shall address the following:
(A) The proper role, if any, of foreign nationals in the process of rendering decisions on such grants and refusals.
(B) Any security concerns involving the employment of foreign nationals.
(C) Whether there are cost-effective alternatives to the use of foreign nationals.
(2) Report
Not later than 1 year after November 25, 2002, the Secretary shall submit a report containing the findings of the study conducted under paragraph (1) to the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on International Relations, and the Committee on Government Reform of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the Committee on Government [4] Affairs of the Senate.
(h) Report
Not later than 120 days after November 25, 2002, the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall submit to Congress a report on how the provisions of this section will affect procedures for the issuance of student visas.
(i) Visa issuance program for Saudi Arabia
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after November 25, 2002, all third party screening programs in Saudi Arabia shall be terminated. On-site personnel of the Department of Homeland Security shall review all visa applications prior to adjudication.

[1] So in original. Probably should be “section”.

[2] So in original. Probably should be “ ‘consular officer’ ”.

[3] See References in Text note below.

[4] So in original. Probably should be “Governmental”.
Search this title:

Parallel regulations (CFR)
Your comments

Prev | Next

LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.
Study law abroad: Cornell Paris Institute

* about us
* help
* © copyright

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

The Serpent IN the Garden January 14, 1996 Houston: Inaction Allowed Abuser To Roam For 10 Years.

If this was leaked to the media did the Corpus Christi Caller Times tell us about this pedophile?

Did the Caller publish any stories on this matter?

And the CCISD Board did they inform the community?

The Serpent IN the Garden January 14, 1996 Houston: CCISD board President Henry Nuss AQUIESCED. CCISD eagerly supplied pedophile with young patients - even after he had been publicly charged.

CORPUS CHRISTI - James Plaisted was a respected child psychologist, a deacon in one of the city's largest Baptist congregations and the father of four.

He also was a child molester so brazen he escorted little girls into church and fondled them under his coat while listening to the sermon.

Parents knew. So did church pastors, school officials and state regulators. But few did anything to stop him, and those who tried were remarkably unsuccessful.

It took 10 years to get Plaisted behind bars. Only he knows how many children he molested during that time.

Last month, Plaisted - already serving a two-year federal prison term for luring a Texas patient to Boston to continue molesting her -was brought back to Corpus Christi in chains.

He pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting four girls and was sentenced to 40 years in prison.

State regulators have yet to revoke his license to practice psychology.

""I think the Plaisted case is the model of what happens when the system fights with itself," said Susan Snyder, a Kingsville attorney and former prosecutor who tried to lock up Plaisted in 1992.

""Obviously, there have been safeguards in place to prevent this man all along, but either (state officials) were too lazy or too busy, or too scared of the politics of going and yanking this man's license," Snyder said. ""It's not the legal system failing. It's the people within the legal system that refuse to let the legal system work."

It's not as if no one tried.

Carmen Alvarado, the mother of the first child to accuse Plaisted more than 10 years ago, sought criminal charges against the therapist and filed an ethics complaint with the Texas Board of Examiners of Psychologists. She alleged that Plaisted had fondled her son's penis during a late-night counseling session.

Alvarado called the Parkdale Baptist Church, where Plaisted, 46, was a deacon.

""They said they were leaving it in God's hands," she recalled.

""I don't think they were thinking straight at the time."

She went to other parents. She got no help.

In the end, it was just her son's word against Plaisted, who told a Corpus Christi jury in 1986 that the 6-year-old child was a habitual liar and a pyromaniac who derived sexual excitement from setting fires. It didn't help that a new prosecutor was assigned to the case just before trial.

The jury acquitted Plaisted; his practice continued.

""It made me mad because when I went for help, all I asked was for them to testify," Alvarado recalled. ""We lost because my son was the only witness we had."

""It was a very tough call to make," said another victim's mother. ""And looking back, I really should have crucified him, but I didn't. I chose not to after talking to my attorney. He told me it would just really traumatize my daughter."

The Corpus Christi woman, who asked not to be identified, said she did confront Plaisted and his wife, who were neighbors in 1984, when her daughter was allegedly molested while spending the night with one of Plaisted's daughters.

""He did not deny it," she said. ""He said he could have done it

in his sleep."

Plaisted's wife laughingly added that she and her husband often made love at night, and he would not remember the next morning, the woman said.

The woman, who was also a member of the Parkdale Baptist Church, recalled telling church officials later about Plaisted's molestations.

""But it didn't seem to make any difference," she said. ""The church really backed him up, and a lot of people left the church after that."

Plaisted's attorney, Doug Tinker, refused to allow the Chronicle to interview his client. The criminal defense lawyer, who earlier this year represented Yolanda Saldivar, who was convicted of murdering Tejano star Selena, declined to discuss the Plaisted case.

The victims' families have since sued the church for negligence, but Parkdale's lawyer argues the congregation should not be held responsible for Plaisted's actions.

""It would be the church's wish to get this thing resolved without causing any additional hurt to anyone," said attorney Van Huseman. But he added, ""If a child gets molested in the middle of the service, how does that get to be the pastor's fault?"

Plaisted - a Nebraska native who served in the Army in Vietnam -came to Corpus Christi in 1982 with impeccable credentials, having earned his doctorate in clinical and child psychology from Auburn University in Alabama in 1981.

He quickly built a private practice, and over the years, developed a good reputation as an expert on brain dysfunction.

The Corpus Christi school district, along with local pediatricians, eagerly supplied him with young patients - even after he had been publicly charged. Members of the church also sought his help, and he had hospital privileges at the prestigious Driscoll Children's Hospital, a South Texas institution known both for quality care and charity.

Neighbors described Plaisted as pleasant, reserved, well-spoken. He was methodical, they said, and liked to work on projects around the house.

Plaisted recruited some of his victims from broken homes, showering the children with gifts, inviting them and their parents to Thanksgiving dinners. One 9-year-old girl who spent the night with Plaisted's daughter told prosecutors the psychologist molested her on the sofa in his living room while he and the children watched the movie "Home Alone"

on video.

He curried favor with his victims' parents by lending them money and refusing repayment, or by buying them air conditioners and other gifts. One mother even acted as a character witness for the therapist during the Alvarado trial, unaware that her own child was being molested.

""The bottom line is this guy had complaints filed against him at the psychology board - and they are serious - and the board doesn't notify the school about the complaints," said Jerry Boswell, director of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, a group funded by the Church of Scientology (SEE CORRECTION) that documents cases such as Plaisted's. ""And the school is still referring children to this guy."

Corpus Christi school administrators said they used Plaisted infrequently for psychological testing of students, although school records and correspondence indicate he was a consultant from 1983 until he was indicted for child sexual assault in late 1992.

School administrators have identified records of five students referred to him for psychological testing between 1985 and 1992. There are no records prior to 1985.

School board President Henry Nuss, who has served on the board for seven years, said he first heard of the Plaisted case when he was contacted by the Houston Chronicle last week.

""We certainly should be more selective in who we're using," he said.

After Plaisted was charged in the Alvarado case in April 1986, Robert J. Garcia, the school district's special education director, wrote to the state psychology board to ask about the psychologist's record. The agency's executive director replied that Plaisted's license had been suspended, but because the psychologist was in the process of suing to get it back, he remained licensed to practice. The letter gave no details about the nature of the complaints.

""He was given a clean bill of health by the only agency that had anything to say about it," said Dr. Adrian Haston, a psychologist who coordinates the school district's psychological services, and who, years ago, shared an office with Plaisted.

Haston emphasized that none of the schoolchildren referred to Plaisted were molested. ""And we never had anything untoward, any problems of that sort," he said.

Asked why the district would risk using a psychologist once accused of being a child molester, Haston replied, ""This is something the district did, and you can ask the director of special education why."

Garcia said in a recent telephone interview that he could not remember whether he knew about the child molestation charges at the time he wrote to the psychology board.

""All I know is we asked for what his status was and they said he could still practice," he said. ""We knew he was under review, but we didn't know what for.

""Look, the state board of psychologists, they're the ones that allowed him to continue to practice," Garcia added angrily.

""If anyone should be asked as to why this guy was allowed to continue, it should be the state board of psychology."

Pressed for further details, Garcia abruptly ended the interview and hung up the phone.

Although Plaisted was acquitted in August 1986 in the Alvarado case, the psychology board continued its investigation and ruled in November of that year that Plaisted had violated professional standards.

The board officially suspended his license for two years, but said he would be allowed to resume his practice in three months.

Meanwhile, Plaisted challenged the suspension in state district court in Austin, arguing the psychology board had unfairly considered allegations that had not been introduced during his hearing, denying him the opportunity to defend himself against them. The judge agreed, and in January 1987 reversed Plaisted's suspension.

While the board was investigating Plaisted's case, they were contacted by Corpus Christi psychologist George Kramer.

Kramer, who had hired Plaisted in 1982 before Plaisted was licensed, told the board to subpoena records of the state Department of Human Resources. It did, and found other instances of alleged molestation by Plaisted.

In April 1989, the board reached an agreement with the psychologist that allowed him to keep his license if he agreed to be supervised for 11/2years. Plaisted was to treat children only in the presence of an associate or in a location where he could be observed by a television monitor. He also was to pay to have Corpus Christi psychologist Joseph Horvat supervise his casework.

Horvat met with Plaisted weekly, but after a year - convinced that Plaisted was doing nothing wrong - he recommended the supervision be terminated six months early. The board decided to continue the supervision.

""I have found no evidence in any way, shape or form of any behavior on his part which could be in any way construed as unprofessional or unethical," Horvat wrote to the board.

Included in one of his reports to the board was a review of Plaisted's treatment of an 8-year-old girl - a child Plaisted was later charged with molesting.

The board's general counsel, Barbara Holthaus, acknowledged past actions taken by the agency were inadequate.

""With hindsight, of course it wasn't appropriate, because look at what happened," Holthaus said. But she said the board has since added lay people to its ranks and has a new, tougher state law giving it better enforcement powers.

""Now, if we get a report that a psychologist is molesting a client, we can go before a judge and say we want to temporarily suspend the license," she said.

Holthaus said the board has filed a motion to revoke Plaisted's license, but Plaisted is fighting it.

""It's all kind of moot, because he's incarcerated," she said.

Soon after Plaisted completed his board-ordered supervision, Corpus Christi police received new information from state child welfare workers that Plaisted had been molesting girls at his office, in church and at home in his hot tub.

Former detective Eric Michalak, who now works in Colorado, remembered taking the Plaisted case to a Nueces County assistant district attorney for prosecution.

""He wanted to get a warrant for the doctor and arrest him, because we had very strong evidence against him," Michalak said. ""We had multiple victims and you had a guy in the position he was in, where he had access to all these victims.

You would want to take quick action rather than let it go on for so long."

The prosecutor was overruled by then-District Attorney Grant Jones, Michalak said. ""(Jones) just said, `We're not getting a warrant. We're taking our time.' He wanted the kids reinterviewed by one of the prosecutors.

""Any time you go after someone like that, there's a lot of politics that come into play," Michalak added. ""Instead of stepping in right then, and bringing it out in the open and taking it to a grand jury (for indictment), they delayed."

Jones contends that any delay in prosecution was an effort ""to tie the case down tight. We didn't want to lose him twice,"

said Jones, on whose watch Plaisted was acquitted in the Alvarado case.

Jones called it ""outrageous" the psychology board still hasn't revoked Plaisted's license.

""They should have done it in 1986," he said. ""What they want to do is wait around until you go to trial and you convict him, and then they come in behind your conviction and revoke his license. Well, what's he doing in the meantime? He could be out in the community molesting kids for two years."

Michalak said the case was finally taken to the grand jury several months later after he leaked the information about Plaisted's investigation to the local media.

""It was taking too long, and it wasn't being handled like another case," he said. ""And it was because he was so prominent in the community."

Plaisted was finally indicted in Corpus Christi in October 1992. He posted bond, closed his practice in Corpus Christi, and negotiated an agreement with the psychology board to place his license on inactive status until he could prove his innocence.

He then moved to Boston, where he enrolled in Boston University Law School and successfully completed his first year of studies by May 1994.

While in law school, Plaisted began calling a former patient - the girl whose treatment Horvat had reviewed in Corpus Christi. Plaisted convinced the girl's mother - who was also a patient of his - to bring the girl to Boston for additional therapy.

Plaisted's plans were foiled when a policeman setting up a speed trap in his neighborhood accidentally intercepted on his police radio a sexually explicit telephone call between the girl and Plaisted, who was using a cordless phone.

FBI agents were called in, six other calls were taped, and Plaisted was arrested on June 3, 1994, after he met the girl, then 13, and her mother at the train station and took them to a budget motel.

""The mother wasn't aware" of the molestations, said Adolfo Aguilo, an assistant Nueces County district attorney. ""The mother had a borderline personality disorder - she developed dependency on people -and unfortunately for her the person she developed a dependency on was Dr. Plaisted."

Sgt. Michael Harpster, a police detective from suburban Boston who helped arrest Plaisted, described him as ""very congenial, almost shy."

""He'd answer questions very courteously, but he didn't show any outward signs of knowing the seriousness of the situation," Harpster said.

Last January, Plaisted was sentenced by a federal judge in Boston to a two-year prison term after he pleaded guilty to transporting a minor across state lines to engage in illegal sexual activity.

The Corpus Christi conviction and sentence came almost a year later.

In the end, Plaisted admitted molesting four victims. But prosecutors say no one will ever know how many others failed to come forward.

""I imagine there could be several other victims. Through his practice and the church he probably had access over the years to thousands of children," said Aguilo, the Corpus Christi prosecutor who eventually secured Plaisted's guilty plea.

""To me, any kid that came in contact with this guy was a victim in some way or another," added Michalak.

When Plaisted was sentenced last month, it was a bitter emotional meeting for many of his young victims and their parents, who had been called as witnesses in case Plaisted decided against the plea bargain.

Parents said Plaisted stood up straight, held his head high and looked the judge in the eye. And when he saw the relatives of his former victims, he acted as if he were attending a reunion of old friends, they said. One parent said Plaisted looked as if he thought they were there as supporters or character witnesses.

""He turned around and gave the families a big smile," Alvarado said. ""I couldn't believe it."

Alvarado, who sued Plaisted in civil court, has received a settlement for an undisclosed amount. Her son, now a teen-ager, is still struggling with his past abuse, she said, and she continues to feel betrayed by those who would not join her in speaking out years ago.

""I told them if they had helped me in the beginning, none of this would have happened," she said.

Plaisted timeline

Key dates in the career of Dr. James R. Plaisted:

January 1983: Licensed to practice psychology in Texas.

October 1984: Investigated by Texas Department of Human Resources for allegedly molesting a neighbor's child.

April 1986: Charged in criminal case for allegedly fondling a boy during therapy.

August 1986: Acquitted by jury in Corpus Christi.

October 1992: Indicted for sexual abuse of three Corpus Christi girls.

December 1992: Closed Corpus Christi office; moved to Boston to begin law school.

June 1994: Arrested by FBI agents for luring a 13-year-old former Corpus Christi patient to Boston.

January 1995: Indicted by Corpus Christi grand jury on three counts of aggravated sexual assault for incidents years earlier involving the same girl.

January 1995: Sentenced to two years in federal prison in Boston case.

Dec. 7, 1995: Sentenced to 40 years in state prison by a Corpus Christi judge after pleading guilty to five counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child.

Saturday, July 14, 2007

essenceofpinocchio: Sonias makes PRO CHOICE Statement to Censor instead of Admitting her wrong and Apologizing

Why was the sub-thread deleted?

Sonias: You have earned the Pinocchio Award for your prevarication and cheating!

This sub thread was deleted at the Democratic Underground because SONIAS found herself in checkmate. In poor taste she chose to flip the board over in the interest of Censoring her defeat.

23. I would normally say welcome to DU dannoynted1

But seeing that you have disabled your profile, i.e. hiding like a coward, combined with your support of republicans on a Democratic board makes you stick out like the troll you probably are. Go back to freeperville dannoynted1!


36. How is it.......

you call my Lioness names from behind a keyboard and of all things; because her profile is disabled?

We are here with our real identities acknowledged, our good name precedes us. Support of republicans? Maybe you mistake us for our elected Democrats who support the Delay Brothers and are frequently absent when it is time to vote on bartered legislation trade outs. Now back to the ad hominem attack, your reasoning is fallacial as it implies we are hiding our identities as if we have something to fear. Ridicule and attempts to discredit are only last resort attempts of futility. Sonia, you are wrong and you should apologize.
"For the Lord will not forsake his people; he will not abandon his heritage; for justice will return to the righteous, and all the upright in heart will follow it."

Monday, July 02, 2007

For those of you who are "In the Know"

Quantum meruit: Ask no more and give no less than honesty, courage, loyalty, generosity, and fairness

Corpus Christi Watchdog Authority: "nobody knows Mikal Watts better than Corpus Christi." But does Mikal Watts know us (the people of Corpus Christi)?

The Kenedy Pasture Company: A Civil Action in the Making?


A Civil Action in the Making?

Why must we flex our muscles?

Nueces County, CCISD, 105th Judicial District Attorney; how many kids were locked up without an attorney?

  • There is no excuse for violating the basic human rights afforded under the United States Constitution.
  • How many kids were locked up by a court of nonrecord?
  • Not even with a parent's consent unless the parent has been given the opportunity to consult with counsel.
  • How many children taken into custody were advised of their Miranda Rights?
  • Oh yeah, Plaisted and every CCISD kid for whom, he provided service

What do we want?

Go do some homework, we want responsive representation with transparent operation.

We want to not be railroaded for tardies or for absences when the District does not practice due diligence in interdicting but is very diligent in recording the events and adamantly prosecutes and collects half of the fine. When the people cant pay the kids are picked up from class and taken in handcuffs to the court of nonrecord. The Parent is contacted and ordered to appear immediately. When the Parent arrives he or she is told to pay or your kid goes to jail and sometimes the parent is threatened and / or locked up as well. I have never seen a kid who has been provided counsel but I have witnessed many a kid go to jail.

And this from non responsive legislators who have enabled the School Administration to blame the parent when they allow children in their custody to roam at large unaccounted for and the District in coordination with the Courts of non record get paid (profit) from it.


"Court Appointed Rolodex's". Nanotechnology and "Confessing Error" in a dog and pony show who operate like they are in a Kangaroo Court.

Nanotechnology at work right before our eyes finally an acknowledgment of what has been going on for quite a while now. The information in those "Court Appointed Rolodex's", there is gold in them hills. And this is going to start becoming available when? and for who? We have came to a narrowing of the road here in this alligning of energy fields. I can see it now we got Mikal who who is the adversary of my adversary John Cornyn. We also have the Honorable Judge Manuel Banales who needs to align with Mr Watts and vice versa. Does he want to run for mayor unopposed? I would rather see him correct the errors and run for Governor or Ascend to the Texas Supreme Court. Now, John Cornyn has "Confessed Error" and I assure you it wasn't out of fairness but in the essence of knocking the checkers off of the Table because he was going to lose. And Carlos Valdez & John Hubert "Confess Error" on appeal from the 105th. Hubert & Valdez "confess error" so they can conceal Mary Cano. And that is as painless as it gets.


CCCT Political Pulse

Mikal Watts seeks to round up list of Democrats for self, others

By Jaime Powell

A Monday noontime fundraiser at Vietnam restaurant for U.S. Senate hopeful Mikal Watts was a who's who of the local bar association and judiciary, including five district judges. Watts, who is living in San Antonio, told the crowd that "nobody knows Mikal Watts better than Corpus Christi."

Watts, a Democrat, who is seeking the seat held by Republican Sen. John Cornyn, asked the gathering to dig through their Rolodexes and e-mail address lists because he hopes to compile a statewide database to reach Democratic voters that can be used by all Texas Democrats.

"That way, when Judge (J. Manuel) Bañales runs for mayor he can use it," Watts joked, to uproarious laughter from the crowd and a big grin from Bañales, who was sitting on the front row.


If you need an attorney.....if he is any good he will tell you watt an "Ander's Appeal" is? If he tells you not to worry about it.........FIRE HIM !!!