3 ms·

Not his first time. He was already a registered sex offender. Seems he didn’t learn his lesson.

by alphabettsy 3y ago

Dylan16807 3y ago
I don't think the first time or not distinction should change your sentence by more than... let's say a year.
- boomboomsubban 3y ago
  He plead guilty to violating the terms of his probation, meaning he committed the crime knowing what the penalties would be.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    How is this relevant to how long sentences should be? I'm glad he didn't waste the court's time very much, I guess.
    - boomboomsubban 3y ago
      Because the crime he committed and primarily was sentenced for was breaking his probation. Presumably his probation terms included "don't commit crimes" so the cyberflasher law is only relevant as it was the crime he did to break his probation
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        The punishment for breaking probation should mostly be going back to prison. Over five years is way too much for that. Either way, if that's the case then this story is extremely misleading.
        Sirizarry 3y ago
        Probation is a privilege that a prisoner needs to apply for. It could be argued that even though he was previously convicted perhaps he didn’t know the exact consequences and so leniency can be given. However, by violating probation, he has proven to be intentionally malicious and a danger to society even more so then before. I think a few extra years for that is definitely justified
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        People usually do felonies in an intentionally malicious way. The base punishment should already take care of that. Think of it this way: If someone on probation intentionally shoplifts, and gets a full punishment for shoplifting, and their probation gets cancelled, how much extra punishment should they get on top of that? I'd say some, but not years. And I don't think the extra a punishment should be a multiplier, I think it should be largely independent of the specific crime. Different amounts for misdemeanor and felony, probably, but neither one should be huge.
      - uaserussia 3y ago
        [flagged]

Not his first time. He was already a registered sex offender. Seems he didn’t learn his lesson.

Dylan16807 3y ago

I don't think the first time or not distinction should change your sentence by more than... let's say a year.

boomboomsubban 3y ago
He plead guilty to violating the terms of his probation, meaning he committed the crime knowing what the penalties would be.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  How is this relevant to how long sentences should be? I'm glad he didn't waste the court's time very much, I guess.
  - boomboomsubban 3y ago
    Because the crime he committed and primarily was sentenced for was breaking his probation. Presumably his probation terms included "don't commit crimes" so the cyberflasher law is only relevant as it was the crime he did to break his probation
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      The punishment for breaking probation should mostly be going back to prison. Over five years is way too much for that. Either way, if that's the case then this story is extremely misleading.
      - Sirizarry 3y ago
        Probation is a privilege that a prisoner needs to apply for. It could be argued that even though he was previously convicted perhaps he didn’t know the exact consequences and so leniency can be given. However, by violating probation, he has proven to be intentionally malicious and a danger to society even more so then before. I think a few extra years for that is definitely justified
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        People usually do felonies in an intentionally malicious way. The base punishment should already take care of that. Think of it this way: If someone on probation intentionally shoplifts, and gets a full punishment for shoplifting, and their probation gets cancelled, how much extra punishment should they get on top of that? I'd say some, but not years. And I don't think the extra a punishment should be a multiplier, I think it should be largely independent of the specific crime. Different amounts for misdemeanor and felony, probably, but neither one should be huge.
    - uaserussia 3y ago
      [flagged]