Thursday, April 23, 2009

Raymond "Chuck" Foster, KKK Imperial Wizard

Raymond "Chuck" Foster is being charged with 2nd Degree Murder in St. Tammany Parish Louisiana. He pleaded non guilty in March.

At 5 foot 4 inches tall with a long beard and wide frame, weighing about 300 pounds, the accused leader of the Bogalusa Sons of Dixie Knights must make an impressive appearance.

He is accused of killing a 43-year-old Oklahoma woman, who was recruited on the internet but later tried to back out of an initiation rite to join his organization. I wasn't able to find out exactly what that initiation might have been. Perhaps someone can inform us.

According to the CNN report, there was a shaving of her head involved in the ritual, but I'll bet there's more to it. One thing for sure, Mr. Foster who has a history of criminal activity, including a manslaughter charge under his belt, is no stranger to violence.

After the shooting, Foster removed a knife from his pocket and rolled over the victim and began a process of trying to remove the bullet from her body ... because he was trying to destroy evidence where law enforcement would not be able to piece these things together.

This week, the Imperial Wizard's son, Shane Foster was declared incompetent to stand trial. He's being charged with obstruction of justice. From

Dr. Michelle Garriga, who was appointed by the court to examine Foster and did so on March 16, testified Tuesday that Foster does "not have a factual understanding" of the law or its procedures.

She said he has "cognitive deficits," "an ignorance of legal understanding" and that he is "mildly mentally retarded or a little above that."

Garriga, who works in the Eastern Louisiana Mental Health System's forensic division, said Foster does not understand the role of judges, attorneys, jurors or defendants; does not comprehend the difference between guilt and innocence; and is not aware of his legal rights.

In Louisiana the severity of sentencing is legendary. For example, "obstruction of justice charges carry a maximum of 40 years in prison." I realize that's the max, but it strikes me as somewhat severe. How about you?

If the obstruction penalty is heavy, you can imagine what dear old dad is facing.

A second-degree murder conviction carries an automatic sentence of life in prison without the benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence.

No wonder they're still executing people in Louisiana. What's your opinion? Do those sentence guidelines sound severe to you? What about the son's supposed incompetence and "borderline" mental retardation? Do you think all that is just a ploy to avoid accountability?

One idea occurred to me, I don't know if you'll like it, but the son is just 21 years old and is totally immersed in the hate culture. Is that his fault? Doesn't his father bear some of the responsibility for that? I say yes. I wouldn't mind if the senior Mr. Foster were charged with child abuse as well as murder.

What's your opinion?


  1. Wow Sympathy for Klansmen?

    Jesus Mike. You're breaking from your mold! You don't show sympathy for people who murder with guns. Just other methods.

    I blame the "Availability of Guns" for the Klu Klux Klan!

    1. You really have no sense of the irony in your comment, do you?

    2. You really have no sense of the irony in your comment, do you?

  2. The potential 40-year sentence for obstruction of justice is intended to give the judge a lot of discretion... And that's a problem. It's exactly the kind of law-by-personal-preference that I think is so messed up about may-issue concealed carry permits. The law should give judges limited discretion, and prescribe specific penalties for specific crimes.

    That said, life imprisonment for deliberate murder? Absolutely. The great majority of violent crimes are committed by people who have long standing records of violence; a significant portion of murders are committed by people who've murdered before. We have the crime rate we have in part because we let murderers back on the streets. If you're interested in saving lives, putting murderers away for life will do much more than decreasing the numbers of guns out there, and without burdening innocent people.

    The son is another case. I understand the need to treat people with reduced competence differently from ordinary criminals, but the reason he's a threat to innocent people doesn't change the fact that he is a threat to innocent people. Put him away in a safe, therapeutic environment until he's competent to function safely in society. If that day never comes, it's unfortunate but beats the alternative.

  3. I like the idea of charging him with child abuse - even though I know this won't happen. Ruining a child by denying them basic knowledge is unforgivable.

    BTW, which part of Rome do you reside? We travel to Italy often - family in Siena. But when in Rome we usually stay in Trastevere.

  4. Pandora - He's 21, he's no longer a child.

    Also, how exactly would you like the prosecution to prove "child abuse?"

  5. The only problem with judicial discretion is it swings both ways. You can have a "hanging judge" that will hand our agregious sentences for crimes that may offends the judge's personal sentiments, just the same as you'll get a bleeding heart judge who (like MikeB) thinks all violent thugs are "good boys" who are "turning their lives around" and hand out scores of paroles. The parole system becomes overloaded (like it is here in Mass) so there is almost no oversight of parole violations, and the "good boy" goes from charges of criminal threat, assault, and illigal posession of drugs and weapons, to murder. No matter what you can't bring a muder victim back, and society is at risk with all the unmonitored ticking timebombs on the streets.

    Statues are rarely voted on or monitored, and can either tie the judge's hands in a serious case, or more often encourage plea bargains to sidestep the statute.

    Personally the only solution is to make judges elected officials. That way if the populace wants bleeding heart justice and more creeps walking around, or if they want to send a strong message to those who prey on the weak...or anything in between, it's essentially the populace's call.

    The end result may not be horribly different, but at least it puts the power to the people, rather than just one person behind the bench.

    Pandora: Good luck at finding Mike in Italy. Just sayin'...

  6. Pandora, Thanks for the comment and for visiting my site. I love yours which I only recently discovered.

    Next time you're here I'd love to meet you for a coffee in Trastevere. Please send me an e-mail about that whenever you like.

    Weer'd, Why is it you can never characterize my position on anything accurately. Your saying I think "all violent thugs are "good boys"" is a gross exaggeration.

    I don't think anyone is seriously saying the father should be charged with child abuse, but recognition of the fact that growing up in the environment that this 21-year-old "kid" grew up in didn't give him much by way of choice. And that I blame on the father.

  7. "Weer'd, Why is it you can never characterize my position on anything accurately. Your saying I think "all violent thugs are "good boys"" is a gross exaggeration."

    If by "gross exaggeration" you mean "Accurate", YES!

  8. MikeB,

    The great thing about the Internet is it leaves a permanent record.

    In this case, it is fairly easy since everything is on your own blog.

    Your saying I think "all violent thugs are "good boys"" is a gross exaggerationIsn't that Weer'd's opinion? Shouldn't he be allowed to say his opinion and not have to back things up?

    Now, let's look at whether or not it is a gross exaggeration.

    had he not been there armed with a concealed gun at an A.A. meeting, young Kayson would have done a penny-ante stick up and been on his way, probably to shoot dope in some Columbia alleyway later that night, and no one would have died.Sympathy for an attempted armed robber - 1

    Kastner recommends that Fritzl remain in psychiatric care for the rest of his life, regardless of the outcome of his prosecution.

    I don't know what happened since then, but it sure seems like they're trying him like any other "sane" criminal. I guess Austria has its own difficulties in delineating between those offenders who have diminished capacity and those who should be held fully responsible for their actions.
    Sympathy for a vile incestous father - 1

    I go even further and say the no white collar criminal belongs in jail.Words fail me again, even after reading that several times.

    Everyone probably remembers who Anna Nicole is from the time of her headline-grabbing inheritance case after the death of her billionaire husband, J. Howard Marshall. Just in case, you can find all those gory details as well as those of her titillating modelling career on Wikipedia.

    What I find interesting in this story is the question of personal responsibility. If she was an adult person, who took drugs willingly, and that caused her death, how can the boyfriend and the doctors be held responsible?
    Sympathy for people who enabled Anna Nicole's addiction and eventual death.

    Young Lucille is certainly no expert, and I've never claimed to be one, but interestingly we both say the same thing. If there had been no gun available, this incident might not have happened, at least it might not have had such devestating results.Sympathy for Teah Wimberly who gunned down her classmate and former friend, in school - that protected gun free zone.

    Over and over and over again - you show sympathy and concern for the most vile criminals. Unless they use firearms. Should I list the things you say about them?

    CNN reports on the story of a lady in Virginia who confessed to killing two women nearly 42 years ago. She explained that she'd shot the women because they had taunted her for being a lesbian...The story of Sharron Smith though, is not that of a spurned lover, but rather one of a bully-victim lashing out.Murderer as a victim - 1

  9. Meanwhile a Dad who was robbed by his own son, and made the tough decision to call the police on his own child, and because of that call the stolen guns were quickly recovered before anything dangerous could have been done, deserves to go to prison.

    Obviously for no other reason than for having the audacity of owning guns.

    Sorry Mike, your Bias is as thick as my wrist.

    1. Now look at who is soft on criminals. If I were you I wouldn't cast aspersions on someone's wrist until taking into account the dimensions of his own head.

  10. Weer'd, You lost me on that last comment. Was there a link to a story?

    To you and Bob, I'll repeat. Saying that I say ALL criminals are really good boys is a gross exaggeration.

    What I do say is leniency is often appropriate. I say mitigating circumstances like childhood abuse and parental influence like in this case of the KKK father and son, should be considered.

    Why do you have to mischaracterize those reasonable ideas? Wouldn't it be enough to discuss where the line is drawn rather than write me off as someone who says "all violent thugs are "good boys?"

  11. "Weer'd, You lost me on that last comment. Was there a link to a story?"

    yeah but you'll have to dig through your own archives to find it. You were the one who told me about it. You made a whole post about it.

    Still you advocated the same fate to the German father of that school shooter, so consistency is your game.

  12. Now I understand. I remember the story well. But once again you mischaracterize me and exaggerate what I said. I don't believe I said the dad "deserves to go to prison." That's you putting words in my mouth. The following quote is from what I really did say in a post called School Shooting Thwarted.

    "I say the gun-loving father has plenty of responsibility. Not only were the guns NOT secured properly, but he raised a boy so damaged that at the tender age of fifteen he wanted to kill his classmates and himself. Shame on you too, dad."Now, Weer'd, don't you think it's about time you abandoned the tactic of exaggerating and distorting my position in order to better attack it. If you have such a winning argument, as you claim, why not just make YOUR point without trying to damage mine?

    1. Looks like he gets upset whenever he believes guns are being impugned. In turn, he has to make you out to some sort of criminal-loving nut. He chooses to make personal attacks and intentionally mischaracterize and misconstrue your opinions rather than actually have to struggle to write an honest response. It demonstrates a real lack of respect for you and for everyone else reading or posting here.

    2. Jonathan, I've enjoyed your two comments today. You should try some of our more recent posts. You'll see the characters have changed but the tactics remain pretty much the same.

  13. ""Now, Weer'd, don't you think it's about time you abandoned the tactic of exaggerating and distorting my position in order to better attack it."

    You'll note that the story mentions the Son broke into a GUNSAFE he was not allowed acess too to STEAL the guns.

    I'm not the one exaggerating.