Discover what's new & improved in the MyFitnessPal app!
We’re dedicated to helping you achieve your health and nutrition goals. And our newest features and updates? They do just that. Learn how we're making tracking your progress easier, faster, and more motivating than ever.

Did this man get too much time?

Options
135

Replies

  • doorki
    doorki Posts: 2,611 Member
    Options
    Career criminal POS. Glad he's gone forever. We need more of this type of sentencing.

    So you are up for higher taxes to pay for the increased prison population?
  • gym_king_carlie
    gym_king_carlie Posts: 528 Member
    Options
    It sounds harsh, but aggravated robbery in a pizza hut? a food chain where family's go? on numerous occasions? maybe I am abit old fashioned but if you put any children in danger you deserve all you get.
    and his record justifies the sentencing, he is a danger inside so surely he is a danger outside too, I wish in the UK we would be harsher on thugs like that.
  • melindasuefritz
    melindasuefritz Posts: 3,509 Member
    Options
    he doesnt even deserve 1- if he didnt kill anybody
  • odusgolp
    odusgolp Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    Wasn't there a really sh*tty Tom Cruise movie that charged people for future crimes?? We should clearly go on that.

    Minority Report;) Thanks Shredded Tweet!
  • AIZZO4
    AIZZO4 Posts: 404 Member
    Options
    The guy committed 9 armed robberies. hmmmmmmmmm..........................................he was armed, because??? Had a gun??? Was convicted of a of a at least one prior offense so here is a felon with a gun. Back ground checks??? hmmmmmmmm..........violent while incarcerated??? hmmmmmm........................

    You look at this guy's history, and the current crimes he's admitted and therefore been convicted of and you ask if the sentence is extreme?

    Have you ever heard of anyone leaving prison that's been rehabilitated?? Not me.

    I'd give him consecutive prison sentences rather than concurrent sentences.

    Yes, I know a lot of people who have been "rehabilitated." You just don't hear about those people.
  • ShreddedTweet
    ShreddedTweet Posts: 1,326 Member
    Options
    Wasn't there a really sh*tty Tom Cruise movie that charged people for future crimes?? We should clearly go on that.

    Minority Report;) Thanks Shredded Tweet!

    Great minds OdusGulp! ;)
  • _noob_
    _noob_ Posts: 3,306 Member
    Options
    I think we'd need to read all the court documents and see all the evidence that the jury had available to even make an informed opinon here.
  • xLexa
    xLexa Posts: 482 Member
    Options
    Sounds to me like they're punishing him for crimes he hasn't committed (yet), as opposed to the crimes he already did... which doesn't sit well with me at all.
    This, if the DOC would pull their heads :explode: .....wait you said respectable :grumble: .... ok let me reload

    The DOC should put more emphasis and use a little more of the funds it has on making an "honest" and "dilligent" attempt to re-direct these kids (because that's what he is a kid) give them the "opportunity for a second chance" I say that sarcastically becasue our 8th district has that on a poster in thier office, I'd love to spit on that poster. Its a big juicy lie.

    They push them through the system, do what the paperwork says they have to do, and that's it.

    Prevent employee burnout and don't have Parole officers serving for 30 years....they are de-sensitized to new people and situations, put people in there who truly want to make a difference. Not everyone in jail/prision is a bad person, they just need that "opportunity" sometimes.

    Eh..

    Completely agree, with both of you.
  • UrbanLotus
    UrbanLotus Posts: 1,163 Member
    Options
    Former criminal defense attorney here...from the facts you have stated, I think its fine*. They are punishing him for what he did do, not what he might do.

    As far as this...
    3. I have read about murderers getting less time then he has.

    Its not a comparative thing. Each system has sentencing guidelines which dictate how much time each crime gets (a base offense level), and then many many other factors are taken into account (both mitigating and aggravating) - like criminal history, whether a firearm was involved, whether the defendant is remorseful, etc etc. There is a numerical calculation - starting with the base offense level, and then increasing or decreasing based on the other factors, that gives you the sentence range. So you cannot compare by saying murderers get less...its a case by case basis determined by numerous factors, and each jurisdiction has its own set of sentencing guidelines. Furthermore, each charge carries its own sentence...you may not think 9 life sentences is fair, but he committed 9 crimes, each of which carries a sentence.

    *I also don't think it makes sense for people to judge criminal sentences...aside from the fact that generally lay people do not know how the law, people in the field, myself included, don't pass judgment like this because we do not have all the information. I wasn't in the courtroom, I haven't seen the evidence, I don't know.
  • Ascolti_la_musica
    Ascolti_la_musica Posts: 676 Member
    Options
    Depends on what the end goal is: Restitution, Punishment, Incapacitation or Rehabilitation.

    It sounds like the prosecutor had incapacitation in mind. I'm not sure that was warranted in this case.

    Rehabilitation should always be the goal. It does not sound likely at this time. His character is too volatile.

    The reason that some people take smaller punishments for seemingly bigger crimes often has to do with their character (or perceived character) and circumstance. A woman who murders her abusive spouse is not as likely to kill anyone else as a teenager who shoots someone for looking at him the wrong way.

    Money, unfortunately, also tends to be a factor. Look at all the celebrities who get ridiculously long/short sentences because the judge wanted to make an example of them, or because the right person got their pockets lined.
  • vkc1978
    vkc1978 Posts: 63 Member
    Options
    My opinion is biased since i live and raise kids in FW, and dont commit armed robberies, but im gonna say 'No, it is not too much time.'
  • UsedToBeHusky
    UsedToBeHusky Posts: 15,228 Member
    Options
    The sentences are running concurrently, which means he only got one life sentence. And I have heard of other armed robbers receiving a life sentence so, in my personal opinion, no... the jury was fair and just in their decision.

    Remember that a life sentence equates to like 30 years so if he is a young guy, he will get out in plenty of time to live a normal life. The problem is usually, by the time they are released, guys like him have no idea how to live a normal life.
  • AlongCame_Molly
    AlongCame_Molly Posts: 2,835 Member
    Options
    Sounds to me like they're punishing him for crimes he hasn't committed (yet), as opposed to the crimes he already did... which doesn't sit well with me at all.

    And yet they do it all the time. Why else would they take flight risk in to consideration when discussing bail? ("He HASN'T run before, but he MIGHT...") The justice system isn't always black and white, there are things to consider such as criminal history (which this guy had) and believe it or not, even likelihood to break the law again factors in.

    It sounds like 9 life sentences was extreme, but none of us were on that jury, and they didn't come to that determination on the fly. There most likely was more evidence that the press hasn't yet/won't/can't release that made the jury ask for the maximum sentence.
  • MM_1982
    MM_1982 Posts: 374
    Options
    I think the punishment is suffice. Even though it didn't say it in the story, chances are he had a stolen gun. Any violent crime committed with a stolen gun will generally yield a VERY harsh sentence. You can't legally buy a gun if you have an arrest history (which he did), so I'm assuming it's stolen.

    Chances are he had the option for a guilty plea, but didn't take it.
  • Mother_Superior
    Mother_Superior Posts: 1,624 Member
    Options
    Not sure what I think. Not enough info to go on. Just because murderers and pedophiles get less time doesn't mean he shouldn't be punished less severely, it just means that they should be punished more severely. I don't know if multiple life sentences are warranted in this specific case. I do know that my first impulse is to say that if someone ever put a gun in my wife's face for any reason, I would want that person in prison for the rest of their life, or worse. But admittedly, that's a knee-jerk reaction. It's a complex issue to be sure.
  • _DaniD_
    _DaniD_ Posts: 2,186 Member
    Options
    In Canada he would have gotten community service.
  • MinnieInMaine
    MinnieInMaine Posts: 6,400 Member
    Options
    I think there has to be WAY more detail to this story than this short article provides. Based on the article, sure, it does kind of sound like the sentence was too severe. BUT if he threatened people's lives, held them hostage or performed any many or ofher horrid activities during these robberies the sentence may very well be justified. Really hard to say without hearing the whole story.
  • radiantsunshine40
    radiantsunshine40 Posts: 48 Member
    Options
    Too often those rehabilitated ARE NOT KNOWN BUT those who are REPEATED OFFENDERS ARE!
    More times than not their last ACTS ARE CRIMINAL ---- EVEN DEADLY!!

    Although, he didn't shoot or physically harm any one...He had the means too! Thankfully....he wasn't pushed that far!
    Having said....His punishment FIT EACH ROBBERY.....HE WAS ARMED! Seemingly harsh but reasonably suited because of the potential that EACH ROBBERY could have escalated ---my 2 cents (smiles)
    The guy committed 9 armed robberies. hmmmmmmmmm..........................................he was armed, because??? Had a gun??? Was convicted of a of a at least one prior offense so here is a felon with a gun. Back ground checks??? hmmmmmmmm..........violent while incarcerated??? hmmmmmm........................

    You look at this guy's history, and the current crimes he's admitted and therefore been convicted of and you ask if the sentence is extreme?

    Have you ever heard of anyone leaving prison that's been rehabilitated?? Not me.

    I'd give him consecutive prison sentences rather than concurrent sentences.

    Yes, I know a lot of people who have been "rehabilitated." You just don't hear about those people.
    [/quote]
  • UrbanLotus
    UrbanLotus Posts: 1,163 Member
    Options
    The sentences are running concurrently, which means he only got one life sentence. And I have heard of other armed robbers receiving a life sentence so, in my personal opinion, no... the jury was fair and just in their decision.

    Remember that a life sentence equates to like 30 years so if he is a young guy, he will get out in plenty of time to live a normal life. The problem is usually, by the time they are released, guys like him have no idea how to live a normal life.

    Yes to the first part, in practice he is only serving one life sentence. But on the second part, it depends on the jurisdiction - there is no parole in my state so a life sentence literally means a life sentence, you are there till you die. Most jurisdictions are moving towards this.
  • MM_1982
    MM_1982 Posts: 374
    Options
    And most people convicted of first degree murder DO get life sentences. I bet Jodi Arias gets the electric chair in less than 10 years.