- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Messages
- 4,166
- Reaction score
- 29,202
This logic is inherently flawed. A simpler example:Again, the Sheriff asked for assistance. The FBI assisted. In the course of that assistance, the FBI discovered that elements existed that make this crime a violation of a federal statute or statutes, which then supersedes state laws for similar crimes. That means, by definition, that federal jurisdiction now applies and now leads. A federal judge issuing a federal warrant explicitly confirms that.
The law you reference is no longer germane to this case (if it was applied), and the only way it would be again (if it was used) is if or when federal jurisdiction is surrendered because of, for example, the FBI upon further investigation could not confirm, to a prosecutable degree, one or more elements that established federal jurisdiction. They would then 'give it back' to the state in which the crime occurred for the state to move forward (if the state has a similar statute).
The FBI, if requested again, would then assist.
JMO.
If these guys were involved in the ransom scheme, for instance, the FBI would have all sorts of authority and jurisdiction whether requested or not. They would be able to get a federal warrant for whatever involving that. Them doing so would not mean that Pima county is no longer leading the kidnapping investigation. It would not mean anything other than the FBI got a federal warrant for… something that is unclear.
We are in that situation now. We have no idea what was in the warrant or what crimes were alleged in it. It is completely premature to claim that the investigation is now being led by FBI.
And all of that is aside from the FBI already having federal jurisdiction in the first place.
JMO