4 ms·

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5948804 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5948804 Summary: There's really no chance the dude's goi

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5948804 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5948804 Summary: There's really no chance the dude's going to get all 13 years strung out. Hyperbolic writing at best. It's not a free speech issue because he wrote it on private property.

adventured 13y ago
Graffiti is a trivial crime, and it's an outrage there would even be the suggestion of a 13 year sentence. The best way to deal with graffiti is to gradually increase the financial cost of doing it each time caught. If it goes beyond financial costs, for example if the person is unable to pay as their fees climb with multiple offenses, then the next punishment should be probation, and then when all else is exhausted jail time. Point being, the last resort for this should be jail time. It's a classic example of America's aggressive police state in action. One year for this crime would also be outrageous.
- jsmeaton 13y ago
  Graffiti carries a maximum of a one year sentence. See the update from the City Attorney: 1. This is a graffiti case where the defendant is alleged to have engaged in the conduct on 13 different occasions. The trial judge has already held that, under California law, it is still graffiti even if the material can be removed with water. Most graffiti can be removed. Also, the judge and a different pre-trial judge held that the First Amendment is not a defense to vandalism/graffiti. 2. The defense is trying to make this case into a political statement, which it is not. This is just one of some 20,000 criminal cases that are referred to us annually by the police department. We have prosecutors who decide whether to issue cases. They are professionals. The City Attorney was not involved in deciding whether to issue this case as is typical practice in prosecution offices for most cases. He hadn't heard of this case until it was in the media. 3. The defense is whipping up hysteria about the prospect of 13 years in custody. This is not a 13 year custody case. It is a standard graffiti case compounded by the fact that the defendant is alleged to have done it on 13 separate occasions. Because there were 13 different occasions when the defendant allegedly engaged in the conduct, the law requires them to be set out separately in the complaint. This increases the maximum sentence, but it still is a graffiti case and nothing more. The courts routinely hear graffiti cases and handle them appropriately using judicial discretion. 4. It is not unusual for victims to contact police or prosecutors about a case. Our prosecutors are trained to focus only on their ethical standards in deciding whether to file a case. 5. We prosecute vandalism and theft cases regardless of who the perpetrator or victim might be. We don't decide, for example, based upon whether we like or dislike banks. That would be wrong under the law and such a practice by law enforcement would change our society in very damaging ways.
  - mjn 13y ago
    Most of that is true, but I'm somewhat skeptical of #5. A lot of people write on sidewalks with chalk, and most are not charged with vandalism. I wrote on sidewalks with chalk when I was a kid, and not only on the sidewalks in front of my parents' house. Technically, I got away with a crime. It's not a huge stretch to suspect that the reason for the prosecution in this case is the contents of the chalked message, rather than the mere fact of chalking.
    - gridspy 13y ago
      Yes, but isn't the sidewalk public property? Did you ever walk up someone's driveway and scribble on their house?
      - anigbrowl 13y ago
        Not in California it isn't. The property owner is responsible for the sidewalk. Fall on a poorly maintained sidewalk, and it's the property owner that you will sue for damages. This is one reason homeowner's insurance is mandatory.
    - mpyne 13y ago
      That, and the fact that no one took pictures of you chalking public (not private?) property and no one reported you to the cops? I think there's a big difference between vandalizing private property for 6 months, and occasionally putting chalk on public sidewalks.
- anigbrowl 13y ago
  There is not 13 year sentence, Read the damn law, it's California Penal Code section 640.5-6.
throwaway420 13y ago
Is there reliable definitive information on whether he marked up private or public property?

adventured 13y ago

Graffiti is a trivial crime, and it's an outrage there would even be the suggestion of a 13 year sentence. The best way to deal with graffiti is to gradually increase the financial cost of doing it each time caught. If it goes beyond financial costs, for example if the person is unable to pay as their fees climb with multiple offenses, then the next punishment should be probation, and then when all else is exhausted jail time. Point being, the last resort for this should be jail time. It's a classic example of America's aggressive police state in action. One year for this crime would also be outrageous.

jsmeaton 13y ago
Graffiti carries a maximum of a one year sentence. See the update from the City Attorney: 1. This is a graffiti case where the defendant is alleged to have engaged in the conduct on 13 different occasions. The trial judge has already held that, under California law, it is still graffiti even if the material can be removed with water. Most graffiti can be removed. Also, the judge and a different pre-trial judge held that the First Amendment is not a defense to vandalism/graffiti. 2. The defense is trying to make this case into a political statement, which it is not. This is just one of some 20,000 criminal cases that are referred to us annually by the police department. We have prosecutors who decide whether to issue cases. They are professionals. The City Attorney was not involved in deciding whether to issue this case as is typical practice in prosecution offices for most cases. He hadn't heard of this case until it was in the media. 3. The defense is whipping up hysteria about the prospect of 13 years in custody. This is not a 13 year custody case. It is a standard graffiti case compounded by the fact that the defendant is alleged to have done it on 13 separate occasions. Because there were 13 different occasions when the defendant allegedly engaged in the conduct, the law requires them to be set out separately in the complaint. This increases the maximum sentence, but it still is a graffiti case and nothing more. The courts routinely hear graffiti cases and handle them appropriately using judicial discretion. 4. It is not unusual for victims to contact police or prosecutors about a case. Our prosecutors are trained to focus only on their ethical standards in deciding whether to file a case. 5. We prosecute vandalism and theft cases regardless of who the perpetrator or victim might be. We don't decide, for example, based upon whether we like or dislike banks. That would be wrong under the law and such a practice by law enforcement would change our society in very damaging ways.
- mjn 13y ago
  Most of that is true, but I'm somewhat skeptical of #5. A lot of people write on sidewalks with chalk, and most are not charged with vandalism. I wrote on sidewalks with chalk when I was a kid, and not only on the sidewalks in front of my parents' house. Technically, I got away with a crime. It's not a huge stretch to suspect that the reason for the prosecution in this case is the contents of the chalked message, rather than the mere fact of chalking.
  - gridspy 13y ago
    Yes, but isn't the sidewalk public property? Did you ever walk up someone's driveway and scribble on their house?
    - anigbrowl 13y ago
      Not in California it isn't. The property owner is responsible for the sidewalk. Fall on a poorly maintained sidewalk, and it's the property owner that you will sue for damages. This is one reason homeowner's insurance is mandatory.
  - mpyne 13y ago
    That, and the fact that no one took pictures of you chalking public (not private?) property and no one reported you to the cops? I think there's a big difference between vandalizing private property for 6 months, and occasionally putting chalk on public sidewalks.
anigbrowl 13y ago
There is not 13 year sentence, Read the damn law, it's California Penal Code section 640.5-6.

throwaway420 13y ago

Is there reliable definitive information on whether he marked up private or public property?