3 ms·

I'm not so sure. If a person has historically been an outstanding citizen, I think that it should be considered when judging someone. Otherwise, why not just ha

• perardi 9y ago
  This is me half-heartedly playing devil’s advocate. I think a lot of other people have caused more harm, but they are going after him and his toys because he’s being such an obnoxious little shit. But that’s a bit of a problem. You get one high-profile conviction of this rent-seeking troll, and not as much attention towards more systemically harmful actors. So, a bit of a “finite legal resources” model and a bit of “bread and circus”. But it’s a half-argued argument. I’m glad to see financial engineering narcissists get karmic Justice.
  • Larrikin 9y ago
    The opposite is supposed to be a component of our judicial system, in that during sentencing leniency can be applied for people that have otherwise been good citizens/are actually apologetic about their crime. It has been thoroughly been abused in that aspect, especially when it comes to sentencing for similar crimes when there is simply a difference of race. But in the case of people being uncooperative and showing no remorse the system was designed to be able to allow the judge to give them the maximum sentence. He did everything possible to ensure that outcome.