57 ms·
This was all gone over with Aaron Swartz's case though. Normal guidelines for sentencing in U.S. Federal trials is for concurrent sentences for charges stemming
by mpyne 13y ago
This was all gone over with Aaron Swartz's case though. Normal guidelines for sentencing in U.S. Federal trials is for concurrent sentences for charges stemming from the same crime.
Prosecutors only have 1 trial for each given crime due to the principle of double jeopardy so they have to charge the suspect with everything they think they can prove in case one of the charges gets thrown out on a technicality.
The flip side to that is that typically any conviction(s) on those same charges results in concurrent prison sentences. IANAL so I don't know what types of cases end up in the atypical sequential sentencing but I don't see how this case could possibly end up with sequential sentencing, unless maybe Barrett threatened a cop's family or something like that.
- malandrew 13y agoBut that's the problem. The goal isn't to put them in jail for any possible thing that can stick. When someone commits a crime (from which other crimes can stem), the purpose of bringing them to court is to get justice for that crime (not all the other incidental crimes). With that in mind, if the suspect is shown to be not guilty of that crime that prompted the trial in the first place then they should be freed. The prosecution should not being going out and looking for anything that sticks. The entire premise of our legal system was founded upon the idea that it is better to let 100 criminals go free than let one innocent person rot in jail. Throwing several additional charges in the hope of getting a plea bargain is antithesis to the original intention of the system.
- flyinRyan 13y agoThis doesn't explain situations like Brown's mother being charged. That's clearly just being vindictive and showing other would-be journalists how far the state will go if you out them.