3 ms·
That's really the only other option, yeah, but it's hard to judge whether it's better. There's not really any incentive for leniency, he's the big fish and they
by amenhotep 3y ago
That's really the only other option, yeah, but it's hard to judge whether it's better. There's not really any incentive for leniency, he's the big fish and they want to make an example of him, otherwise what's the point of giving all the subordinates deals? Maybe some contrition would get a perfunctory sentence reduction but I would absolutely trust a legal analysis saying he's already so screwed that trying for a hung jury is worth it.
- JohnFen 3y agoEven if it didn't result in a lighter sentence, it's still better in that there's no downside to doing it and it's worth a shot. Doing what he's done means that there's nearly zero chance of leniency. I'd take even a small chance of leniency over a tiny chance of it. It's also possible, as delusional as it would be, that he really thinks he's in the right here and is standing on principle. If that's the case, then he's doing what he should do.