Judge throws the book! Not!
Contributors to this thread:Community
From: spike78
13-Jul-17
spike78's Link
Here in MA if you break a child's bones by beating them so bad you might get a few years in jail. Damn this lib judge threw the book!
From: spike78
13-Jul-17
Notice how the charges of A+B of police officers didn't really affect the sentence. That's how much the libs care.
From: bad karma
13-Jul-17
Well, that was a plea agreement between the prosecutor and defense counsel. The court can reject such an agreement, but they don't often do. There may have been something about the case that warranted such an agreement. Although, I can't quite imagine what that was. So, I'm not sure you can blame the judge.
From: spike78
13-Jul-17
Bad karma if those charges carry 10 years why not plea for 5?
From: petedrummond
13-Jul-17
Non lawyers dont understand multiple factors in prosecuting cases. And we cant make you understand.
From: spike78
13-Jul-17
Yeah Pete I get it, they go for the plea for a guarantee win. It seems like every case here goes to plea bargain so they can A) Run through all the cases quicker and B) Give all these losers a break. Am I getting close or not as intelligent as a lawyer? Don't make it like I'm some kind of idiot Pete.
From: petedrummond
13-Jul-17
Like i said
From: petedrummond
13-Jul-17
Ok. Maybe they could not prove it. Basketballs dont break legs. Two year olds dont testify. Baby momma may be complicit. Maybe he takes fall for her. Maybe he snitches on a homicide. You need to serve jury duty. Nothing is simple.
From: spike78
13-Jul-17
They have the neighbor as a witness with him abusing the child. He's hiding from the police for what reason since he hardly has a record? He resists arrest and assaults the cops for what reason? But your right after all OJ got off.
From: bad karma
13-Jul-17
There's almost always something that does not make the papers. To convict, the prosecution must prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. If one element is weak, rather than try the case, they may offer enough of a plea bargain to settle it. And, with a lot of criminals, putting them on probation is a guaranteed prison sentence because they can't keep from getting high, or doing some stupid new offense.
From: longbeard
14-Jul-17
Pete with all do respect to your superior IQ, when there is a child involved there should be no wiggle room such as back room plea deals. And yes you lawyers could never make us non lawyers understand, I get that, because it seems we non lawyers could never give lawyers the gift of common sense either
From: bad karma
14-Jul-17
Yes, there certainly should be wiggle room. Not all cases brought against people for child abuse are true. I've seen several go to trial that should not have. How about "why didn't you tell your father this conduct was objectionable?" "I didn't want to wake him." That one was only $40k to defend.
Or the one where the jury was out 20 minutes and acquitted a good man on a sexual assault on a child case. Only cost him about $30k to defend that one.
Or the one where the children finally admitted that the father, a firefighter, coached the kids to tell a fake story resulting in criminal charges against the mother so he could win the custody battle. Father got two felony charges for that one.
Some cases are a lot stronger than others. Having the ability to plea bargain can make a lot of sense.
From: petedrummond
14-Jul-17
Like i said originally you dont understand and i cant make you unferstand. You want simple answers to complex questions and there aint any. Life is not a sound bite.
From: Bowfreak
14-Jul-17
Pete doesn't have the ability to explain something and everyone else is an idiot. Makes sense....
From: petedrummond
14-Jul-17
Like i said originally you dont understand and i cant make you unferstand. You want simple answers to complex questions and there aint any. Life is not a sound bite.