|
Post by SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman on May 27, 2014 15:32:15 GMT -5
Seriously people. Criminals have made mistakes. That means they have to be punished and rehabilitated. That doesn't mean they're chew toys for everyone to vent their anger on. Or would you guys be okay with being treated like you're not human if you one day end up breaking the law? I have no tolerance for what he and his friends did. They made the conscious decision to grab some guns, break into a home, threaten the people inside the residence, and steal from them. And I'll answer your last question by saying this: if I ever sink low enough to become the type of scum that commits an armed home invasion, then everyone gets the opportunity to treat me like garbage, because I'm not worthy of their pity or sympathy. Just like this kid. So being a criminal means they have no right to a fair trial and it's okay to screw them over even if it's unlawful? That's going to be a problem considering trials are here to find out if someone is a criminal or not. Justice isn't about petty revenge against criminals, it's about reforming them and making sure they become acceptable members of society. That logic only ends up making already bad people worse by teaching them that yes, violence IS the answer to life problems (or at least the easiest ones) and that since redemption is apparently not an option (because as you said, it's apparently okay to treat someone "like garbage" if they make one mistake in their life), preying on the weak is the next best thing. With a society that thinks that way, it's no wonder so many criminals end up becoming repeat offenders. They are given no incentive to become better people and in fact, they are actually encouraged to become worse. So shoplifters become drug dealers, drug dealers become robbers, robbers become killers, killers become hitmen. But hey, at least we got to treat them like garbage so yay, let's all celebrate our archaic "justice" system.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on May 27, 2014 15:32:52 GMT -5
He's probably only gonna do the minimum of a year anyway. That's six months longer than the original 6 month plea.
You know he's not doing the 15 yrs.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on May 27, 2014 15:33:27 GMT -5
People who talk about how the kid brought the guns are missing the point that according to the article, the judge didn't reject the deal, he accepted it and THEN modified the terms. If he felt it was inappropriate, he shouldn't have accepted it. How can we tell people to abide by law when judges act like Mafiosi? As someone who has had their house robbed before and knows how awful it is, I say screw him. He deserves it. And screw justice and due process as well, then? I've been robbed too but I can tell you I would have defended the robbers if the judge had pulled that shit. The "lock them up and throw away the key" mentality only ends up creating more crime. If he does get the 15 years, the kid will be 31 when he comes out. For half his life, he will have known nothing but prison and violence (remember, maximum security means he gets to hang out with murderers, rapists and gang members). He will have no job qualification and his only skills will be criminal ones. Guess what happens when he comes out after having over half his life wasted by a judge who screwed him over? Hint: it won't involve him being reformed. ...which seems to contradict this: I shed no tears for this punk. He and his friends broke into a home, brandished weapons, terrorized the people inside, made them feel as though they were going to die, and stole from them. He knew what he was getting himself into. Don't want to go to jail for a felony? Don't commit a felony. Simple as that. Yeah, be honest! Like the judge that signed a deal with you and then immediately broke it! Wait, shit... Seriously people. Criminals have made mistakes. That means they have to be punished and rehabilitated. That doesn't mean they're chew toys for everyone to vent their anger on. Or would you guys be okay with being treated like you're not human if you one day end up breaking the law? The judge did not agree to the deal and then modify it. That is not how these work. The DA and defense came to an agreement where the kid would plead guilty to a lesser charge and the DA would ask for a light sentence which the judge is under no obligation to accept. The judge at no point was a part of this deal, he had a defendant plead guilty to 2 felony counts and heard a recommendation on sentencing which he rejected for whatever reasons he has which is well within his legal rights.
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 16,935
Member is Online
|
Post by BRV on May 27, 2014 15:46:37 GMT -5
The judge did not agree to the deal and then modify it. That is not how these work. The DA and defense came to an agreement where the kid would plead guilty to a lesser charge and the DA would ask for a light sentence which the judge is under no obligation to accept. The judge at no point was a part of this deal, he had a defendant plead guilty to 2 felony counts and heard a recommendation on sentencing which he rejected for whatever reasons he has which is well within his legal rights. People act like recidivism only exists in people who go to jail, when in actuality, it also happens when people are given chance after chance because prosecutors and defense attorneys strike deals. The perfect example of this is in today's headlines. Jared Remy, son of Red Sox broadcaster Jerry Remy, pleaded guilty to the murder of his girlfriend, whom he brutally stabbed to death last August. From the Boston Globe in March: So perhaps if the judge in the Utah armed robbery case had been presiding over one of Remy's previous 20 cases, maybe he dismisses the deals and maybe Jennifer Martel is still alive today. I think what people are missing is that nobody is saying that this Utah teenager deserves the entirety of the 15-year sentence. But as unnecessarily harsh as 15 years is, a 180-day sentence for an armed home invasion is a total slap on the wrist, and it's possible that, like Jared Remy, he would see that he could essentially get away with armed robbery without so much as a punishment and like Remy, he'd think, "That wasn't so bad, what's the harm in doing it again?"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2014 16:25:38 GMT -5
That's the biggest crock of shit ever.
Weed is likely to lock you to your couch covered in dorito dust whilst having some rather odd conversations.
But there is no chance in hell being stoned factored in to his decision to hold someone up at gunpoint, if anything it should have stopped it from happening by making him too lazy to bother.
If he replaced the word Marijuana with Alcohol I'd perhaps understand to some degree.
|
|
Johnny
Don Corleone
Achievement Unlocked: TLDR - Read the longest post in board history.
Posts: 1,671
|
Post by Johnny on May 27, 2014 16:32:37 GMT -5
Everyone in that news story is a moron. The kid, the dad, the lawyer, the judge. Morons everywhere!
|
|
|
Post by Zaq "That Guy" Buzzkill on May 27, 2014 17:41:38 GMT -5
Please, please tell me that the 19 year old that got the sentence from the judge he agreed to wasn't white and the one that was given 15 years isn't black. While that would make tossing this sentence easy, I really don't want to see that be the reason right now. He looks pretty white to me. And from what I can gather, they were both white. It's gotta be something else. I'm putting my money on it being a personal vendetta involving a legal member's son or daughter. How do you know he's white under all that fur?
|
|
jagilki
Patti Mayonnaise
Nobody notices him; No, we noticed him
f*** Cancer
Posts: 33,594
|
Post by jagilki on May 27, 2014 17:50:43 GMT -5
Looking at the picture, I blame Justin Bieber.
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hurricane on May 27, 2014 18:57:15 GMT -5
If we don't get additional information indicating why this one kid was singled out, then the judge is a piece of crap. Then there's the weirdness of still trying teens as adults. The kids were assholes, they deserve punishment before the law, but barring some kind of justification there's no way this should stand. Just smacks more of the hard on we have, culturally, for criminal punishment. I'd feel different if the kid got stupid and went with his friends on a trip that ended up being a robbery... but the son of a bitch took the time to go and collect guns and bring them, he had a LONG TIME to think about what was going down. To me, that makes all the difference. This wasn't a "i made a bad choice in the heat of the moment". This is "I had plenty of time to think about the bad shit I was going to do". This kid needs a lot of professional help before it's too late. Hopefully he can get help and not "learn how to be even worse" in prison. That's the problem: he likely won't get it. When you're in maximum security lock up, the best you can basically do is be isolated from the general population, and he won't likely have that cover for more than a couple of years. Our collective vengeance obsession and lack of good rehabilitation in our prisons just leads to the incarceration-release-readmittance cycle going on, and on, and on. Big reason why we have 5% of the world's population, but 25% of the world's prison population. So co-signed, on everything. We as a nation (the United States) have such a woody for being "tough on crime," it's sickening. Don't delude yourself, we don't rehabilitate anyone - we haven't had serious mental health programs since the sanitariums were shut down in the eighties, and the prisoner rehabilitation programs we do occasionally have are usually the first on the chopping block when the budget gets tight. We're probably the only first world country that punishes drug users with hard time and a criminal record, rather than treating them... and WE TAKE PRIDE IN THIS! I'm not saying the kid's a saint. Hell, I'm not saying any one of them are particularly decent, but there's something almost nauseating seeing so many people in this thread practically slapping the judge on the back for giving a legal minor a fifteen year stint - one that, having spent one year less time in prison than he has ALIVE, will make him the poster child for coming out of prison a better criminal, assuming he comes out of prison alive at all. Why we as Americans are so bloodthirsty is beyond me, and it bugs the shit out of me.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,359
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on May 27, 2014 21:17:43 GMT -5
As someone who has had their house robbed before and knows how awful it is, I say screw him. He deserves it. Listen, when I was 3 I was on the receiving end of an armed home invasion like these pieces of excrement carried out. My mom, step-father, and step-father's uncle were all tied up while they tossed the house, waving their guns around and threatening to kidnap me if they did not get what they wanted (both cash and drugs, if we are being honest). In their fervor to find my mom's stash one of the thieves overturned a couch that landed right on top of my relatively frail body (I have LG-MD, so there never has been too much meat on my bones, but especially not when I was 3). In short, it was a horrible experience and it basically is my earliest memory. I know how traumatic an experience it can be. I don't think that they should have gotten a light sentence, but being a trial lawyer, both prosecution and defense, is damned hard and important work. I do not want any judges running rogue accepting a guilty plea and giving a far stiffer penalty than the prosecution agreed to. It reeks of abuse of power. As a judge you can reject the plea deal and either force them to work out a better deal or go to actual trial. The fact that the judge did neither of those basically neutered the prosecutions ability to negotiate future plea deals, and that means that enforcing the law becomes much, much, much more expensive. Prosecutors have to spend more and the county pays more for public defenders. That is unacceptable. That is my problem with it all, despite the sympathy I feel for the victims of the crime itself.
|
|
|
Post by rapidfire187 on May 27, 2014 21:29:39 GMT -5
Lol @ blaming it on weed. f*** that kid. I hope they throw the book at him.
|
|
|
Post by Piccolo on May 27, 2014 22:27:13 GMT -5
For everyone who knows something about law, does 1-15 years mean that he's up for parole after 1? Because 1 year isn't that much more than 210 days or whatever. Or would you guys be okay with being treated like you're not human if you one day end up breaking the law? How am I going to "end up" breaking into someone's house with guns and threatening them to give me their possessions? That's not something I could just stumble into. Also, since he did bring deadly weapons to the crime, a judge rejecting a less-than-one-year plea deal isn't stripping him of his humanity. It's just saying that threatening people in their own home with a firearm is something that deserves a stiffer penalty than 200-some days.
|
|
Toxik916
Hank Scorpio
Sacramento Proud
Posts: 6,207
|
Post by Toxik916 on May 27, 2014 22:45:20 GMT -5
f*** that douche. As far as I'm concerned the judge shouldn't have even allowed a plea bargain. If you do a home invasion with a gun you are a grade A piece of shit and don't get any sympathy.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on May 27, 2014 23:04:20 GMT -5
f*** that douche. As far as I'm concerned the judge shouldn't have even allowed a plea bargain. If you do a home invasion with a gun you are a grade A piece of shit and don't get any sympathy. Here's the ting, the whole "no plea bargains" thing is a fine argument except that roughly 95% of all felony cases end with a plea bargain. The prosecutor is an elected official, so he or she will (right or wrong) always go through a lens of "padding stats" especially if they are up for re-election. The prosecutor offered the plea because that means a guaranteed conviction. The defense attorney went for one because, well, in this case not to do so would be asinine. The defendants were all dead to rights guilty, no question. I can as a psychologist look at state of mind and competency, but as a guy with a BS in criminal justice, I know that the system is really more about backroom deals than it is jury trials. Said it before, but I've seen judges (again, rightly or wrongly) turn down plea deals when they feel that someone's crime was worthy of jail time and the plea deal was for none. This kid, and he IS a kid, went in not because he didn't know what he was doing not because he was tricked. If he had been there, not brought the guns, and everything else went the same, the judge would have most likely gone ahead with the deal. juvenile defendant, first time offender, it happens all the time. The thought is, "OK, he's young, we can work for rehabilitation, plea it down to probation or some time in county or a juvenile facility". But, and this is the thing, he brought the guns. He allowed those weapons (loaded or not) to be wielded by his buddies during the robbery. If the argument is that he had no way of knowing the weapons would be used, then the judge's first question, and mine if I'm interviewing in either professional capacity, is why bring them? Yes, I want to see the kid rehabilitated, I would love to see him learn from this and maybe even try to help others learn from his actions. However, as overcrowded as our prisons are, there is still a family who was held at gun point. They were robbed and traumatized, and no matter how good a kid he is at home, that doesn't undo the psychological damage to those who were victimized. He brought weapons, he gave those weapons to his friends. Yes, peer pressure and a desire to be accepted most likely played a part in these decisions. It's an immature act by a kid, but for every action there are, and must be, consequences. He took a deal, same one his buddies took, and the only differentiation that I can find is the one I mentioned. He brought weapons to the party, and then facilitated their use by passing them out.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,359
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on May 28, 2014 0:37:19 GMT -5
f*** that douche. As far as I'm concerned the judge shouldn't have even allowed a plea bargain. If you do a home invasion with a gun you are a grade A piece of shit and don't get any sympathy. To me it is not about him. It is about fairness for all in the legal process and maintaining the integrity of the plea bargain system. The judge did not just screw the kid (and he is a kid); he screwed the prosecutor and the county's residents who will need to pay more for their legal system since most defendants might feel the need to take their chances with an actual trial since plea bargain deals cannot be trusted in his court. He screwed each and every jury member forced to sit in on trials that could have been avoided with plea deals and he screws their employers since those people have to take off of work in order to serve in these superfluous trials.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2014 1:05:14 GMT -5
Sounds like he provided the weapons, hence the judge handing down more time to him.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on May 28, 2014 12:09:34 GMT -5
He should have considered that before robbing people. His father's comments made me laugh.
Yes, that sweet little robber. Such a nice boy. So soft and tender.
|
|
|
Post by Zaq "That Guy" Buzzkill on May 28, 2014 17:31:51 GMT -5
Yes, that sweet little robber. Such a nice boy. So soft and tender. You have no idea how hilarious this comment is out of context.
|
|
jagilki
Patti Mayonnaise
Nobody notices him; No, we noticed him
f*** Cancer
Posts: 33,594
|
Post by jagilki on May 28, 2014 17:48:09 GMT -5
2 or 3 years back we had a case in town slightly similar (but different enough). There was no changes to the plea agreements, but the parents were having the same reaction.
In this case an older guy passed away and three teens decided to break in and rob his house, stealing around 10 or 12 antique guns.
The parents of all three kids blamed the other kids and their sweet innocent angel of a child just made a "mistake". But the other two kids, they were the scum of the earth.
|
|