4 ms·

FWIW, that probably shouldn't be taken into consideration either? I'd argue they should "clean room" the sentence by having a second judge read an assessment of

by saurik 4y ago

FWIW, that probably shouldn't be taken into consideration either? I'd argue they should "clean room" the sentence by having a second judge read an assessment of the evidence by the first judge and have them conduct the sentencing, lest sentences be more about how people look than what they did (and allowing laws to continue to be overly harsh but with enough last minute exceptions that no one "important" has reason to complain).

akira2501 4y ago
Your behavior before, during, and after the crime are incredibly relevant to your sentencing. The court is trying to determine the best course of action to prevent repeating the behavior and minimize future potential harms, these things must be considered. This is not a "one size fits all" or "strictly by the numbers" question, and we are not benefited as a society by treating it that way.
- 3a2d29 4y ago
  Based on this argument, shouldn’t Ross’ murder-for-hires be included in sentencing then? Clearly he didn’t just build a drug website, he was fine ending lives for it. A slap on the wrist (even if his family thinks he is a good guy) wouldn’t deter him much, it would seem.
  - akira2501 4y ago
    They didn't charge him with them, but if you read the sentencing transcript [1] you can see it was definitely considered those facts and the specific facts of each murder for hire plot when arriving at a judgement. And the first judge very much agreed with your assessment. [1]: https://freeross.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sentencing_2015-May-29.pdf https://freeross.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sentencing_2...
- randombits0 4y ago
  Then why is Liberty wearing a blindfold? Unequal is not justice.
  - akira2501 4y ago
    That's because she weighs facts without prejudice, not that she ignores them entirely; which, is likely why she also has the scales. Or are you suggesting the message is truly "justice is completely blind?" If a defendant has been convicted and then goes on to hold the court publicly in contempt gets a harsher sentence than someone who is truly reticent and has taken actions to attempt to restore their victims even before sentencing.. I don't see how justice has been unequally applied. The two defendants _are_ unequal. That's the point.
    - randombits0 4y ago
      But the offense against the people is the same. Don’t impose social engineering at the sentencing level. It’s not up to the judge. The judge is an idiot, just like us. Now I understand your position and even agree with it to a point, the idea that justice is blind means judgment is without consideration of undue influence. Like many things, balance is the best approach. Minimum sentences came about when the prior sentences were perceived to be unreasonable. Don’t get me started on prison reform, though. Blind or not, US prisons are inherently unconstitutional.
HWR_14 4y ago
For what it's worth, although it has some judgement call inputs, sentencing at the federal level usually adheres to a guideline formula. I believe that also happened in this case.

by saurik 4y ago

akira2501 4y ago

Your behavior before, during, and after the crime are incredibly relevant to your sentencing. The court is trying to determine the best course of action to prevent repeating the behavior and minimize future potential harms, these things must be considered. This is not a "one size fits all" or "strictly by the numbers" question, and we are not benefited as a society by treating it that way.

3a2d29 4y ago
Based on this argument, shouldn’t Ross’ murder-for-hires be included in sentencing then? Clearly he didn’t just build a drug website, he was fine ending lives for it. A slap on the wrist (even if his family thinks he is a good guy) wouldn’t deter him much, it would seem.
- akira2501 4y ago
  They didn't charge him with them, but if you read the sentencing transcript [1] you can see it was definitely considered those facts and the specific facts of each murder for hire plot when arriving at a judgement. And the first judge very much agreed with your assessment. [1]: https://freeross.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sentencing_2015-May-29.pdf https://freeross.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sentencing_2...
randombits0 4y ago
Then why is Liberty wearing a blindfold? Unequal is not justice.
- akira2501 4y ago
  That's because she weighs facts without prejudice, not that she ignores them entirely; which, is likely why she also has the scales. Or are you suggesting the message is truly "justice is completely blind?" If a defendant has been convicted and then goes on to hold the court publicly in contempt gets a harsher sentence than someone who is truly reticent and has taken actions to attempt to restore their victims even before sentencing.. I don't see how justice has been unequally applied. The two defendants _are_ unequal. That's the point.
  - randombits0 4y ago
    But the offense against the people is the same. Don’t impose social engineering at the sentencing level. It’s not up to the judge. The judge is an idiot, just like us. Now I understand your position and even agree with it to a point, the idea that justice is blind means judgment is without consideration of undue influence. Like many things, balance is the best approach. Minimum sentences came about when the prior sentences were perceived to be unreasonable. Don’t get me started on prison reform, though. Blind or not, US prisons are inherently unconstitutional.

HWR_14 4y ago

For what it's worth, although it has some judgement call inputs, sentencing at the federal level usually adheres to a guideline formula. I believe that also happened in this case.