6 ms·

>Of course, there is also no possibility of someone being sentenced to life in prison for stealing a piece of pizza in NZ either, which has happened and does ha

>Of course, there is also no possibility of someone being sentenced to life in prison for stealing a piece of pizza in NZ either, which has happened and does happen frequently here in the US. I can't find a single example of this. Some people are convicted for long sentences for violating 3 strikes rules, which are questionable, but I think you have exaggerated more than a little here. [EDIT] [Added] The comment below mentions this case, but the guy only did 6 years: http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/10/local/la-me-pizzathief10-2010feb10 http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/10/local/la-me-pizzathi... I looked around and there just are not many, if any cases like the OP describes. His comment is an exaggeration to say the least, and may even been an absurd exaggeration based on something he vaguely remembers from 1995.

graeme 14y ago
I read 'frequently' as meaning 'much more than it should'. I'm guessing he was referring to three strikes violations leading to jail time for pizza-stealing. I googled 'stealing pizza jail' and came up with one example, which of course was from California. Doesn't seem like it happens often, but there are enough stories of long jail time for comparably petty offences. http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Stealing-one-slice-of-pizza-results-in-life-3150629.php http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Stealing-one-slice-of-piz... I also found this odd story from spain, which is a more serious incident of pizza thievery, with a knife: http://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2011/04/25/pizza-theft-malaga/ http://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2011/04/25/pizza-thef...
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- mikeash 14y ago
  I find the characterization of that California crime as "stealing one slice of pizza" to be wildly misleading. It conjures the image of someone sneaking up and nicking a piece while everybody's attention is diverted, or similar. The punishment isn't so much for the actual theft as for the threat of violence that was used to carry it out. I'm not sure that threat deserves life in prison, but it's much more serious than the headline makes it sound, and I don't think it deserves to be called "petty".
  - pyre 14y ago
    According to the article he was convicted of "felony petty theft." > Williams, who testified in his own defense during his trial, > testified that some of the children nodded their heads "yes" > when he asked them for a slice of pizza and that he thanked > them for it. > But a 13-year-old boy in the group testified: "I was scared." Sounds like implicit intimidation. I think that if there were claims that he threatened violence, it would have been quoted in the article. > While petty theft is typically a misdemeanor charge, Williams' > earlier convictions allowed prosecutors to upgrade it to a > felony. They used his earlier convictions to upgrade a misdemeanor to a felony, then claim "3 felony convictions" == "life sentence".
    - mikeash 14y ago
      > Sounds like implicit intimidation. I think that if there were claims that he threatened violence, it would have been quoted in the article. This confuses me a bit. I would personally put "implicit intimidation" under the category of "threatened violence", and it seems that the state agreed.
      - pyre 14y ago
        If you look (by your nature) intimidating and give someone a grim look, they could be intimidated (especially a 13 year old). Does that mean that you should treat this the same as if he had said aloud, "I'll break your bones if you don't give me that piece of pizza?" [This is all speculation anyways since we don't really have the full story.]
        mikeash 14y ago
        There are really two separate questions here which are getting tangled up. The first question is what crime he was convicted of. The answer to that seems pretty clear: theft with assault or intimidation. The second question is what he actually did. The answer to that is much less clear. But the second question doesn't really matter to this specific discussion, although it's obviously highly important in the grand scheme of things. He was sentenced based on the crime he was convicted of, so it was theft with assault or intimidation which got him a life sentence, and characterizing it as "stealing a slice of pizza" is tremendously misleading. Whether he did something that deserves to be considered that crime is another question, but a completely different discussion. If I get life in prison for a murder I didn't commit, I still got life "for murder", and it would be wrong to characterize it as e.g. harsh sentencing for a lesser crime.
downandout 14y ago
Yes, I was referring to 3 strikes sentences. In Nevada, for example, 1 in 6 prisoners - over 2,500 people - are serving life sentences. A significant portion of these are sentenced under a wild "habitual offender" statute that enables life sentences for even non-violent repeat offenders. The Nevada version of the three strikes law makes its more famous cousin in California look tame and completely rational by comparison. And there is also stuff like this, which was not a habitual case... http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7d0_1272286354 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7d0_1272286354 . That video is a pretty chilling look at how quickly and non-chalantly courts in the US are willing to take away a person's life for relatively minor offenses. Call me crazy, but I don't think that the statement "She is getting a greater penalty for having a boy touch her breast than if she killed him" should ever have to be uttered by an attorney in a court in the "land of the free".

graeme 14y ago

I read 'frequently' as meaning 'much more than it should'. I'm guessing he was referring to three strikes violations leading to jail time for pizza-stealing. I googled 'stealing pizza jail' and came up with one example, which of course was from California. Doesn't seem like it happens often, but there are enough stories of long jail time for comparably petty offences. http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Stealing-one-slice-of-pizza-results-in-life-3150629.php http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Stealing-one-slice-of-piz... I also found this odd story from spain, which is a more serious incident of pizza thievery, with a knife: http://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2011/04/25/pizza-theft-malaga/ http://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2011/04/25/pizza-thef...

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
mikeash 14y ago
I find the characterization of that California crime as "stealing one slice of pizza" to be wildly misleading. It conjures the image of someone sneaking up and nicking a piece while everybody's attention is diverted, or similar. The punishment isn't so much for the actual theft as for the threat of violence that was used to carry it out. I'm not sure that threat deserves life in prison, but it's much more serious than the headline makes it sound, and I don't think it deserves to be called "petty".
- pyre 14y ago
  According to the article he was convicted of "felony petty theft." > Williams, who testified in his own defense during his trial, > testified that some of the children nodded their heads "yes" > when he asked them for a slice of pizza and that he thanked > them for it. > But a 13-year-old boy in the group testified: "I was scared." Sounds like implicit intimidation. I think that if there were claims that he threatened violence, it would have been quoted in the article. > While petty theft is typically a misdemeanor charge, Williams' > earlier convictions allowed prosecutors to upgrade it to a > felony. They used his earlier convictions to upgrade a misdemeanor to a felony, then claim "3 felony convictions" == "life sentence".
  - mikeash 14y ago
    > Sounds like implicit intimidation. I think that if there were claims that he threatened violence, it would have been quoted in the article. This confuses me a bit. I would personally put "implicit intimidation" under the category of "threatened violence", and it seems that the state agreed.
    - pyre 14y ago
      If you look (by your nature) intimidating and give someone a grim look, they could be intimidated (especially a 13 year old). Does that mean that you should treat this the same as if he had said aloud, "I'll break your bones if you don't give me that piece of pizza?" [This is all speculation anyways since we don't really have the full story.]
      - mikeash 14y ago
        There are really two separate questions here which are getting tangled up. The first question is what crime he was convicted of. The answer to that seems pretty clear: theft with assault or intimidation. The second question is what he actually did. The answer to that is much less clear. But the second question doesn't really matter to this specific discussion, although it's obviously highly important in the grand scheme of things. He was sentenced based on the crime he was convicted of, so it was theft with assault or intimidation which got him a life sentence, and characterizing it as "stealing a slice of pizza" is tremendously misleading. Whether he did something that deserves to be considered that crime is another question, but a completely different discussion. If I get life in prison for a murder I didn't commit, I still got life "for murder", and it would be wrong to characterize it as e.g. harsh sentencing for a lesser crime.

downandout 14y ago

Yes, I was referring to 3 strikes sentences. In Nevada, for example, 1 in 6 prisoners - over 2,500 people - are serving life sentences. A significant portion of these are sentenced under a wild "habitual offender" statute that enables life sentences for even non-violent repeat offenders. The Nevada version of the three strikes law makes its more famous cousin in California look tame and completely rational by comparison. And there is also stuff like this, which was not a habitual case... http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7d0_1272286354 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7d0_1272286354 . That video is a pretty chilling look at how quickly and non-chalantly courts in the US are willing to take away a person's life for relatively minor offenses. Call me crazy, but I don't think that the statement "She is getting a greater penalty for having a boy touch her breast than if she killed him" should ever have to be uttered by an attorney in a court in the "land of the free".