"DOJ REFUSES TO TAKE $25K FORFEITURE ORDER (warfa net) CASE

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by KK7HO, Jun 3, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-3
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-2
  1. KK7HO

    KK7HO Ham Member QRZ Page

    SEE LETTER BELOW .... Attorney Kane's letter.jpg
     
  2. N1OOQ

    N1OOQ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Ok, so in English, that means what?
     
    K3XR likes this.
  3. WF7A

    WF7A Subscriber QRZ Page

    It's confusing to be sure (especially for us non-legal-wise folk).

    Any way you look at it, it's important to Google magic.
     
  4. KA9JLM

    KA9JLM Ham Member QRZ Page

    SOL, I think.
     
  5. W9BFZ

    W9BFZ Ham Member QRZ Page

    From what I gather, the FCC levied a huge fine against him but can't collect because the DOJ won't go after him.
     
  6. W2AI

    W2AI QRZ Lifetime Member #240 Life Member Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Apparently, the FCC legal Counsel has sent a [private] e-mail to a DOJ attorney. The case involves going before another U.S. District Court Judge to enforce the Liability forfeiture issue imposed by the FCC.
     
  7. KK7HO

    KK7HO Ham Member QRZ Page

    What is going on is that that the Dept. of Justice has declined to go to court to prove the $25k dollar Forfeiture Order is valid. You see legally the Commission has zero power to impose a fine - so they issue Forfeiture Orders - which if challenged, must be proven and substantiate... and must go to the Dept. of Justice for case review, a trial, a win, and then the debt is owed. For some reason congress did not want to give the commission the power to be judge and jury. So if challenged, all monetary penalties will go to trial IF the DOJ finds merit to defend it. It is entirely up to the DOJ whether to persue the case, or drop it. In this case they apparently found it not worthy of trial.

    However, because this case is out of the way now - the ALJ's previous stay is removed and the 17 Year OLD CASE regarding his license renewal/character can proceed to an ALJ hearing.

    Trying a case that old in my opinion is not enforcement. This is something that should have been and could have been done back in 2009 or so. At a minimum the Commission could have issued clarification regarding the issues and been done with this a long time ago.

    In fact, previous ALJ in this license renewal/character case said that the commission's case is weak.
    NOW however there is a new - old ALJ so anything could happen.

    It will be interesting. But at 17 years old, it's not real enforcement of anything.
     
    N5AL, N6PJB and W4RAV like this.
  8. K3XR

    K3XR Ham Member QRZ Page

    "Justice delayed is justice denied."
     
    NL7W and N2EY like this.
  9. KY5U

    KY5U Subscriber QRZ Page

    Actually not. The other Judge will rule on the FCC's refusal to re-issue his license.
     
    NL7W and KA4DPO like this.
  10. WZ7U

    WZ7U Ham Member QRZ Page

    If Billy gets it back I wonder how the felon clause will hold up under pushback...
     
    KA4DPO likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page