Which only makes sense. You try to look for and use every advantage you can in life.
Clearly 6 months was far too long to hold someone as well behaved as Brock Turner so they’re letting him go 3 months early.
I believe that it was reported at the time that he would likely serve only three months.
On the other hand, the California legislators have come to the conclusion that mandatory sentences for rape might be useful. I don’t know.
I’m not a fan of mandatory sentencing because that blade cuts both ways and too often comes down handing down heavy sentences for relatively minor incidents. I would support giving the state appeal rights on sentencing the way that defendants do.
That would seem to be a problem of the particular mandatory sentence being set too high for the crime, or the charged crime not fitting the event.
“And you’d better shape up, or next time we’ll slap you on both wrists.”
Looks like Howdy Doody had a son.
They already had that. It just did not cover instances where the victim was unconscious or unable to defend themselves. The legislation closes that loophole. So, not new, just fixes poorly written previous laws.
I caught up on this thread, then got in my car where NPR was doing a piece on the President commuting sentences. They talked to a woman whose sentence was commuted a year ago. She did ten out of twenty years for possession with intent to distribute of cocaine. She left her kids on the outside for a decade. My guess (although it was radio, so I don’t know) was that she was a poor person of color.
Now, I don’t think you should be able to deal narcotics and dance away without any penalty, but twenty years - commuted to ten - for possession with intent and six months - released after three - for RAPE! I could see the blood vessels in my head starting to throb.
More often it’s a matter of the category being too broad. I don’t have a specific cite in front of me so I’ll attempt to reconstruct an example from memory. Someone was sentenced to 20 years under mandatory sentencing for repeat offenders of drug possession. For having a single joint. The same sentence he would have received for having a kilo of heroin.
I personally witnessed a trial where a man was sentenced to 40 years under third strike guidelines. For shoplifting a carton of cigarettes.
I have no interest in being light on criminals, but I do think that the penalty should be appropriate to the specific crime.
She was convicted of a federal crime and he of a state crime. Apples and oranges. And the fact that she was charged by the Feds means there is more to her case than you have stated.
No kidding?! She was charged with possession with intent and he was charged with rape - yes, its apples to oranges, ya think?
Yeah, we have mandatory minimums on the wrong things. Remove them from drug crimes, put them on Rape, Pedophilia, Kidnapping, Manslaughter and Murder.
I agree with the gist of what you are saying, but I would say to reserve them only for the last two.
I dunno, I don’t have a problem with a manmin of 2 or 3 years on a Rape charge. Would certainly have made this piece of shit serve more time.
Where we run into trouble as a society is when we go nutso and put 10 year mandatory minimums on things.
I have long thought anyone guilty of criminally causing the death of another person should never get to rejoin society. You shouldn’t have to run into your mother’s killer in the A&P, or the waiting room at the doctor’s office. If you get convicted of manslaughter, you get a nicer cell and more visitation privileges.
The cases arent comparible because the courts are different. The womans case was adjudicated at the federal level; and her sentence would have been much less had she cooperated with the prosecution. The douchebag rapist was a state charge and his sentence was solely the fault of a bleeding heart judge who didnt want to ‘severely impact’ the life of a young athlete-rapist. This sentence would have been impossible at the federal level because of mandatory minimum sentencing.
YAY!!! He’s free!!!
Ding Dong the Prince is free!
Which Ol’ Prince?
The Rapey Prince!
Ding Dong the Rapey Prince is free!
If they are going to change laws regarding rape, they’ll have to change the definition of rape to include what he did - don’t forget, he wasn’t convicted of rape and there’s no reason to think that, under the law, he did actually rape her. Simply changing the minimum sentence won’t affect cases like this.
To make it clear, the law should be changed to punish this sort of action much more severely, the distinction between penetrating with a penis or another object shouldn’t make that much difference.