Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Indian Turf

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

Tribal courts only have criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians in limited cases of domestic violence. The federal government is responsible for prosecution of major crimes in Indian Country. Tribal courts can sentence citizens/members of federally recognized tribes for 1-3 years depending on the "quality" of their courts (ie, do they meet certain standards for expanded sentencing that was created in the Tribal Law and Order Act).

I'd also like to add that the headline of the article is wrong. The crime did not take place on a reservation. It took place on a piece of restricted Indian land, which is a remnant of the allotment era federal Indian policy. There are no reservations in Oklahoma, with perhaps the exception of Osage County, but even that is not a reservation in the traditional sense.

 

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

The whole idea that Native American land is free from the American legal system drives me bonkers. There's no reason it should be that way.

 

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

Care to explain how it is "free from the American legal system?"

 

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

The fact that you can commit murder on the land and the feds often don't have jurisdiction over it.

 

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

This is simply not true. At all.

 

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

NDJournalist is a noted expert on tribal law. He watched F Troop once.

 

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

OK, then. Explain to me the "different rules they have." Because it's ridiculous that they have any.

 

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

That's such a completely open ended and stupid question I don't even know where to start. It's even worse considering it came after you made an entirely false assertion about criminal jurisdiction in Indian Country that appears to have come from a place of pure ignorance.

If you really want a place to start, you can begin with the United States Constitution:

Yes, the notion that "They" have "different rules" is so ridiculous that even our founding fathers recognized the distinct and separate status of tribal governments (as opposed to foreign Nations and States) in the Constitution.

You can continue with hundreds of years of Supreme Court jurisprudence regarding the role/status of tribal governments in the United States. A good place to start is the Marshall Trilogy of cases (http://outreach.asu.edu/tglf/book/case-law/marshall-trilogy).

If you'd like to learn about the real tragedy, you could do a little research into the declination rates of federal prosecutors regarding crimes committed against American Indians on Indian lands:

http://www.gao.gov/assets/100/97229.pdf

Fortunately, the Tribal Law and Order Act (passed a few years ago) and efforts of the Obama Administration have begun to greatly reduce declination rates. http://www.indianz.com/News/2013/009890.asp

 

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

Seems NDJournalist is confusing state governments, which have limited to no-jurisdiction over Indian lands - depending on the specifics of treaties - and the federal government, which does have jurisdiction over Indian lands.

 

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

Also depending on federal laws such as Public Law 280 (http://www.justice.gov/usao/mn/PL-280%20FAQ.html).

 

Re: Triple Murderer Freed 'Cuz He Killed on Injun Turf

Too bad he didn't read the OP, which clearly states the local judges presume the federal authorities will prosecute. Had I not already known it before (I thought it was common knowledge), I would have figured it out that the feds had jurisdiction.

As for the mug shot ... how many times do you think that guy's nose has been broken? Yikes.