3 ms·

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

• 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]