Terorist?

Status
Not open for further replies.

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
17,496
In this case he probably didn't have much room to do that as he might have with a drug case where for example he might not mention how many ounces were involved.
View attachment 98251
A key word in the statute is "Maliciously". That doesn't include accidental or inadvertent damage, and requires a determination of intent. A sort of hate crime.

The jury must have been convinced that there was indeed malicious intent to do damage. The stories of the incident that I've seen don't provide an explanation of how the jury came to that conclusion.

I also believe that a failure of the system - a judge making a sentencing mistake - should be corrected within the system and not affect the original sentence. If criminals get lucky, that sucks, but that was the outcome of the system. There should not be double jeopardy for sentencing.
 

Brownout

Joined Jan 10, 2012
2,390
Obama didn't directly quote "disparate impact" but instead, "non-violent crimes" as basis of his pardons. Except he couldn't answer why other countless "non-violent" criminals did not receive such favors.
He certainly could. The sentences he commuted were imposed under older, more punitive guidelines. As the law was repaired, improved, made more fair, these old sentences were change to reflect contemporary guidelines.
 

GopherT

Joined Nov 23, 2012
8,009
Prosecutors have every right to appeal a sentence, just like the accused have a right to appeal a verdict. An appeal of a sentence is not double-jeopardy. Double Jeopardy claims on all of these right wing (nearly anti-government web sites) are ridiculous.

The problem with appeals of short sentences is that sometimes the convicted are released before the appeal cases are ready (either side could be the cause). Or it could be the Congress's lack of funding to the judicial branch to allow the number of judges to scale with the population and, therefore, a backlog has been created.
 

dannyf

Joined Sep 13, 2015
2,197
a judge making a sentencing mistake
Not sure if the original judge made a mistake. He ruled on the basis of a 5-yr sentence being cruel and unusual for this type of crimes (thus unconstitutional). The appeals court's argument against that was to list a few "cruel and unusual" punishes - you get life in prison for getting $127 under the false pretense in the great state of texas for example - that have not be ruled unconstitutional.

Basically, it is OK to hand out wrong sentences if other equally wrong sentences are being handed out.

To me, that's a very weak argument.

There should not be double jeopardy
It is not a double jeopardy.
 

ronv

Joined Nov 12, 2008
3,770
Basically, it is OK to hand out wrong sentences if other equally wrong sentences are being handed out.

To me, that's a very weak argument.
The thing that is important is consistency. Think about the guy that got five years and he finds out these guys got six months for the same crime.
If five years is to much for burning down a forest or 125 acres we should reduce the mandatory minimum, then the judge can legally use his discretion.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
17,496
It is not a double jeopardy.
I didn't say it was, in the usual legal sense. I was drawing an analogy and suggesting that the sentence you get after your trial should the most onerous sentence you are subject to. It can be reduced later, but not made worse (for the same crime) unless the sentencing itself is found to be a criminal act (by a bribed judge, for instance).

I know this suggestion favors the criminal over "the people", but it's the responsibility of the people to have a functioning system.

I don't have any dog in the Hammond fight, but I feel it's wrong to let someone out of prison and come back at them later.
 

GopherT

Joined Nov 23, 2012
8,009
I don't have any dog in the Hammond fight, but I feel it's wrong to let someone out of prison and come back at them later.
The appeal was filed long before they left prison. Almost as they entered prison. I don't disagree with your line of thought about one chance to sentence someone - do it once, do it right.

On the other hand, the Hammonds were warned that their penchant for using fires with a half-baked plan to control them would not be tolerated a second time (after the poorly executed 1999 fire). So, when their second fire aLSo got out of control and required intervention by local authorities to control the fire, someone said, that was the last straw. They used the federal land like it was their own instead of leased land. I would press charges and terminate their lease if they were renting land from me.

.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
17,496
Yeah, the jury would have known the sentencing rules? They had no problem giving them a guilty verdict with the expectation they would be sentenced in accordance with the rules.
 

ronv

Joined Nov 12, 2008
3,770
Yeah, the jury would have known the sentencing rules? They had no problem giving them a guilty verdict with the expectation they would be sentenced in accordance with the rules.
Maybe they did, maybe they didn't know the time involved. Defense would have wanted it known, prosecution - not so much I think.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
17,496
Now that I think about it, knowing the sentencing should have no bearing on the determination of guilt, so I doubt there is a formal process for informing jurors. It might tend to encourage nullification, and I gather judges hate that.
 

dannyf

Joined Sep 13, 2015
2,197
the jury would have known the sentencing rules?
They may or may not. All the jury did was to convict them of a crime. Sentencing under those conviction is the responsibility of the judge.

The appeal process is long by design. So if we didn't allow the ability to send the convicted back to jail if they lost on appeal, we would have created a powerful incentive for anyone to appeal.

That is however separate from if the sentencing is a just one. On the Hammond case, the government sounds vindictive, at least.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
17,496
Potentially the only person in the room that had full knowledge of both guilt-or-not and sentencing was the judge, and he chose the sentence he did. As much as I hate judges going around the law, he seems to have made the best decision he could at that moment. The easy thing for him would have been to follow the rules. This whole event may be tough on his career.
 

hp1729

Joined Nov 23, 2015
2,304
Terrorists? think not. Are there Christian terrorists? Would the people be sanctioned by some Christian church to qualify? Are the acts of individuals not sanctioned by anyone still terrorists?
Does just claiming to be associated with a cause really make them associated with the cause?
Is what is going on in Oregon really deserve the credibility of being called terrorists?
I think we are doing right by this one. Just wait them out. Responding otherwise just gives them publicity. Do you arrest the guy walking down the street talking to himself?
 

GopherT

Joined Nov 23, 2012
8,009
Do you arrest the guy walking down the street talking to himself?

In some places they are and some places they are not. Even depends on how they look as they pass the cop. The problem is, there is only one option when arrested - to treat them like criminals and bring them to jail.

In the 1970s and 80s, there was a more frequently used middle-ground, "psych evaluation". They were brought directly to the emergency room and through to the psych ward for evaluation. Most States also ran State Mental Health Facilities, an option outside of prison. Now, a huge portion of the people who would have been in state mental hospitals are called Homeless.
 

ronv

Joined Nov 12, 2008
3,770
In some places they are and some places they are not. Even depends on how they look as they pass the cop. The problem is, there is only one option when arrested - to treat them like criminals and bring them to jail.

In the 1970s and 80s, there was a more frequently used middle-ground, "psych evaluation". They were brought directly to the emergency room and through to the psych ward for evaluation. Most States also ran State Mental Health Facilities, an option outside of prison. Now, a huge portion of the people who would have been in state mental hospitals are called Homeless.
I remember those. They called them State Hospitals. Guess I'll Google.
The people that talk to God make me nervous whether they are Muslim or Mormon.
 
Last edited:

ronv

Joined Nov 12, 2008
3,770
State Hospitals:
Sounds like we privatized them not thinking that mentally ill people often don't want or are unable to afford treatment.
So here they are wandering around with a 9mm. Sweet.
 

GopherT

Joined Nov 23, 2012
8,009
State Hospitals:
Sounds like we privatized them not thinking that mentally ill people often don't want or are unable to afford treatment.
Some states have been lobbied into participating in the Prison Industry as well - outsourcing the management of prisons. Then the management companies continue lobbying to increase businesses (size of their market) by encouraging longer prison sentences for some crimes, giving prison wardens the right to extend sentences, or they increase the opportunity to commit a crime within their own jurisdiction (more market growth) by not managing public areas in the prison to encourage inmate-on-inmate violence and, extended sentences. Lots of games can be played to grow a market that would seem to have limited growth as crime rates drop.
 

ronv

Joined Nov 12, 2008
3,770
Some states have been lobbied into participating in the Prison Industry as well - outsourcing the management of prisons. Then the management companies continue lobbying to increase businesses (size of their market) by encouraging longer prison sentences for some crimes, giving prison wardens the right to extend sentences, or they increase the opportunity to commit a crime within their own jurisdiction (more market growth) by not managing public areas in the prison to encourage inmate-on-inmate violence and, extended sentences. Lots of games can be played to grow a market that would seem to have limited growth as crime rates drop.
Sounds like Arizona. :D
 

Thread Starter

shortbus

Joined Sep 30, 2009
10,045
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top