• dlpkl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    9 months ago

    Because their claim is bullshit and they were trying to defraud a system used for cases of actual persecution.

    • m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      her ex-roommate at Colorado State University threatened her with a gun

      the case against the roommate was dismissed a few months later and a judge declined to keep the protection order in place

      claimed the ex-roommate continued to stalk her, and said police did not respond to her calls for action

      Considering the case is now quite publicized, I would be worried for this person’s safety if sent back to the US and the current political climate regarding transgenders.

      • dlpkl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        Lmfao this is a joke right? It’s this person’s responsibility to find new accomodations, and move if they need to. You can’t just fucking claim asylum because you have a stalker. Absolutely ridiculous argument.

        • m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Are you living under a rock or something?

          You think this person will be safe in the US after all this media circus?

          • dlpkl@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            9 months ago

            Stop being disingenuous. There are plenty of states in the US that are very LBGT friendly. This person was in Colorado, which has extremely lax gun laws, so of fucking course they’re at risk of gun violence. And it’s not state-sponsored violence, it was a personal conflict. They have many, many options to ensure their safety in the US, including changing their name and moving. Both of which are easier than moving to Canada.

            • DariaBloodworth@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Doesn’t matter. The Supreme Court of Canada held in Ward that persecutors need not be affiliated with the state. Hell, even state complicity isn’t necessary.

        • DariaBloodworth@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Kinda hard to do when he starts attending your new residences with a gun. He tracked me down to two other residences before I fled the country.

      • Evkob@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Just a minor note, you shouldn’t call trans people “transgenders”, gramatically it’s the same as calling black people “blacks” and can come off as rude.

      • DariaBloodworth@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        her ex-roommate at Colorado State University threatened her with a gun

        That statement alone just shows how the court fucked up.

        I never went to CSU. My roommate wasn’t at CSU. CSU Police Department was simply the PD physically closest to the house. That’s why CSU PD called the Fort Collins Police Service to investigate. The Tribunal’s Record clearly shows that none of my immigration forms say I went to CSU, nothing in my claim would indicate I was affiliated in any way with CSU, the only thing CSU-related in my file is the witness statement form Fort Collins Police Service had me fill out. And only because they didn’t want to go out to their car to get one of their forms. All the other PD forms in the Tribunal’s Record, including the trial records, clearly indicate that FCPS was the arresting agency.

        Granted, there are many, many more examples of how the court fucked up in making that decision. For example, the claim that the RAD insisted on a standard of perfect protection - an argument that the RAD decision itself rebutted by stating that they were only evaluating it from the standard of operational adequacy. Operationally adequate protection needs to yield actual results, as required by Moran Gudiel.

    • PuddingFeeling [she/her]@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Well she is being actively targeted by her ex-roomate and ex-land lord and the cops won’t do anything to stop them. Trans people are at a heighten risk of being murdered and us lawmakers are criminalizing being trans so this is persecution.

      • dlpkl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Being targeted by a single person doesn’t make someone applicable for asylum. And there are about 49 other states this person can move to if they actually cared about finding a solution. We shouldn’t put this person on the same level as victims of state-sponsored genocide, political prisoners, and others. There are other plenty of other cases of people not receiving police protection from stalkers, just because they’re trans doesn’t means that’s why.

        • DariaBloodworth@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          No, there aren’t “49 other states this person can move to”. Because all 50 states have the same problems if not worse: a pattern of systematic delegitimization and dehumanization of transgender people. I moved to Colorado because of its track record on transgender rights. It was the best of the 50 options and I still got threatened with a gun.

          And “a single person”? Don’t make me laugh. That’s just the incident that showed me that enough was enough. That’s not even the first time I’d been held at gun point. I’d been discriminated against, beaten with a fireplace poker, tortured, and the police didn’t do shit. Not just in one state. Not just in two states. Not in three. Not in four. Not in five. Colorado is state # 6 that I had lived in.

          • dlpkl@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Oh please, you saw it as a quick way to immigrate and you leapfrogged over everyone with a legitimate asylum claim. I have no sympathy and no remorse for my country kicking your ass to the curb.

            • DariaBloodworth@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              “leapfrogged”? I’m almost 5 years in, no PR, and still going through the process. Not to mention, my claim is legitimate too.

    • forrgott@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      Right, because only people you approve of can be persecuted. Whatever, dude…

      • dlpkl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Because it doesn’t take an academic to understand the difference between a domestic dispute being taken advantage of and someone who’s being cleansed by a regime.

        If this person was a trans person from Afghanistan then that absolutely would have been a justified refugee claim.

        • forrgott@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          As much as I’d like to concede the point, it sure sounds like more than a run of the mill domestic dispute. However, I will say other than that, I can see the basis of your argument.

    • DariaBloodworth@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s literally not. And nothing I’ve said to the RPD, RAD, or Federal Court was untrue in any way. In fact, in neither the RPD decision (which isn’t available), the RAD decision nor the Federal Court decision was there ever a negative credibility determination.