I would assume you’d apply the same legal standard to John List who only committed one crime, escaped, and lived a law-abiding, productive life for over 24 years before he was caught via America’s Most Wanted.
All he did was murder his wife, two children, and mother-in-law and disappear before the bodies were discovered.
I was going to say this exactly. In reality if the person is not a harm to personal safety and has rehabilitated himself what is the point of retribution. He didn’t kill anyone. He didn’t get away his crime, his “loot”, however small, was probly recovered by the bank. I think that once he is rehabilitated he should be left alone. I’m sure they evaluated his level of rehabilitation to be sufficient. everyone makes mistakes and everyone should be able to earn the chance for forgiveness od some sort or level.
Again, I don’t think rehablitated is the right word here. More like ‘maitaining a low profile’. Maybe he hasn’t commited another crime. I can’t say.
Hey, if the original judge had sentenced him to probation, I would be ok with that. The same with a suspended sentence. But he bargained for a low sentence(and it was a low sentence), and he should have to serve some of it. That is what’s supposed to happen when you’re caught and sentenced.
Anything less is a complete walk for a bank robbery.
On a different note, what’s up with the cops in Brooklyn that they can’t find somebody whose taking care of mother in Brooklyn foe 17 years? Well, I’m assuming he was taking care of her.
Spriritus Mundi and Freedom2: what world are you living in? Do you really think that the law has precise standards for punishments? Do you think that every crime results in the exact same sentence for everyone that commits it? So this guy didn’t get the same sentence as everyone else that has tried to rob a bank gets, and the reason for the difference was becasue of emotional reasons. How is this different from every other attemted bank robber? Everyone that tries to rob a bank gets a sentence based upon, in part, the judge’s emotions. Should we have automatic sentencing. with absolutely no judge discretiom?
However much time is enough to satisfy the judge.
“You were carrying 1.00 ounces of marijuana. Too bad. If you had been carrying .01 less ounces, you would have had a much lower charge.” How is this any different? If it were not for arbitrary standards, this world would fall apart.
Freedom2
Are you saying that the judge broke the law? That New York judges don’t have the authority to set aside someone’s sentence? If so, do you have a cite? If not, if New York law does give them the power to do this, is not the judge enforcing this law be putting it into practice?
I think you should take your own advice. If you don’t like judicial discretion, you should work to change the law, instead of demanding that people ignore the law.
I don’t know the guy, but “blameless life”? C’mon Jodi! Even if he didn’t get arrested for doing anything illegal in those 17 years, it’s a bit of a jump to say he’s led a blameless life.
He was convicted of a crime. He committed another crime by not serving his time for the first.
I would think that he deserves a little credit for keeping himself out of serious trouble for 17 years, but he should have been given some legal punishment, even if it was something like mild community service.
Good points, The Ryan. If I had been arguing any of those positions I would be forced to concede.
Of course, I was not.
I do argue that consistent application of justice is important for a citizenry to have faith in the integrity of the system. This is not synonymous with removing all judicial discretion. I am all for judicial discretion. That is not synonymous with believing judges never make mistakes.
I think this judge made a mistake.
If the felon in question did indeed have his record expunged, I think this judge made two mistakes.
Well, let’s see?
Do you see the difference now?
bobby_drake2
Statutes of limitation apply to the prosecution of a crime, not to the execution of sentence. I think there is a reason for that. In addition, so far as I know there is no statute of limitations for escaping custody. Perhaps one of the lawyers can clarify that issue.
Well:
So it is different on at least those two fronts, eh?
How do you know I was talking about a law? The fact is that judges do gives varying sentences depending on how much someone was carrying, and the exact scale is not spelled out in any law. I’m sure that there are many judges who, if the amount is small is enough, will dismiss the charges if the accused has a clean record, much like this judge dismissed the charges because of the accused’s clean record. I rather doubt that it is written down anywhere.
That’s ridiculous. The judge in this case wasn’t rewarding the accused for breaking the law; he was rewarding him for not breaking the law.
Same response as to #1.
Nope.
bobby_drake2
Statutes of limitation apply to the prosecution of a crime, not to the execution of sentence. I think there is a reason for that. In addition, so far as I know there is no statute of limitations for escaping custody. Perhaps one of the lawyers can clarify that issue.
Well:
So it is different on at least those two fronts, eh? **
[/QUOTE]
Whoops, I forgot to delete the end of that quote. Sorry about that.
I agree with the judge.
I really don’t see what it’s going to accomplish, either for the people of NY or this poor mook, to throw him in jail or to levy another penalty. The fact that he has been able to abide by the law, or at least smart enough not to get caught, for 17 years indicates that he has learned his lesson.
Zev, I do think the conviction should remain on his record, though.
The justifications of punishment entail four things, which Spiritus mentioned, sorta.
Retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and protection.
Retribution, you got a case. He did, after all, break the law, but retribution is also commonly understood to mean revenge. This was clearly not accomplished either. Two stikes against him: one for the original crime (not proved, but duh…he fled) and one for fleeing.
Deterrence. Uh, deterrence from what? Living a normal, crime-free life? Other bank robbers already saw him get away, punishing him 17 years later isn’t going to serve this purpose. Punishing him for fleeing alone might deter others from attempting to flee, however, so this one is dubious.
Rehabilitation. Seems more rehabilitated than most criminals are assumed to be. Isn’t this guy a picture of what we want our prison system to let go?
Protection. From what? A now law-abiding citizen?
Clearly, we would have legal reason to prosecute, but not much of a justification behind it. I say, to make up for the deterrence issue above, that some mild community service is fine. Truly, he should do something for the banks robbed, though I don’t think that would go over well. Let him go; we’ve got bigger problems than people acting like they should.
[quote]
How do you know I was talking about a law? The fact is that judges do gives varying sentences depending on how much someone was carrying
[/quote[
Well, you said, “If you had been carrying .01 less ounces, you would have had a much lower charge.”
A charge, of course, is specific to a law. Now, if you really meant to say that some judges also abuse discretion in sentencing for drug crimes, then I agree with you. It would be easier, of course, if you actually said what you meant the first time.
Undoubtedly. And I hope they do so wisely. Perhaps you have misundertood “I do not agree with this judge’s use of discretion” to mean “judges should not be allowed to exercise discretion.” I assure you, not only did I not mean the latter, I did not say it either.
The felon benefited from fleeing incarceration after pleading guilty to a crime. That action itself was a crime. He has been rewarded for it, especially if (as has been suggested) he had his record cleared of the initial felony conviction.
Ditto.
I just wanted to say that I still feel crueal and heartless with my position n this thread.
My heart wants to let this guy go, but my head just won’t let me. Feel good legal solutions are not the way to keep the peace. I don’t think this case would bring about the end of the world or anything, but once something comes to your attention, you have to act consistently.
No matter how much it sucks.
You can’t stay on the lam for 17 years and not break more laws in the process. How did he get a job? He had to have created a false identity. What about his taxes? Did he ever get a car? Lie about his identity to a police officer?
I think the guy should spend some time in a minimum security prison, and then remain on probation a LONG time. I agree it sets a bad example to just pardon him - at LEAST give him a suspended sentence.