Shot dead in the forest

[LoneWolf]

Lonestar,
While I agree with most of what you say, I think a couple of things need to be said.
1. I think nearly all of us here are plain fed up with thte judicial system and its minimal sentencing, or even finding the guilty, guilty.

2. I imagine it is this thinking that pervades our thoughts when we write about "vigalante justice" practices we wish were carried out on these perps.

If the punishements dealt out fit the crime, I see that as much more of a deterent.

[fabsroman]

Lonestar,

You are correct, you did quote my entire sentence. However, I am sure you got my point from what I wrote. I make mistakes too every once in a while.

I also agree with the Lonewolf's post. Too many people are getting too light of sentences. However, being a judge and giving out a sentence is a tough thing to do. I equate it to something worse than refereeing a basketball game, which I did once and hated.

Last Monday, I had a client in front of a judge for sentencing on a Violation of Probation. He was on a one year probation for a DUI and in that one year he plead guilty to a Disorderly Conduct Charge, Driving on a Suspended License, and Malicious Destruction of Property less than $500. The judge sentenced him to 30 days. I asked to provide mitigating circumstances and almost had the judge change his sentence. See, my client is a single father of 2 boys, age 10 and 8, whose mother has absolutely nothing to do with them. He is a small business owner (i.e., granite fabricator) with 10 employees and a $17,000 payroll every two weeks. On top of that, he provided a personal guaranty on the shop's lease meaning that they can come after his house if he doesn't pay the lease. He is also the key employee of the business. He is the only person that has contact with the customers. Now, if you are the judge you have to deal with that. This judge thought about it for 2 minutes while he continued to review the paperwork and then he stuck to his guns.

A US Marshall shot a guy around here and was convicted of manslaughter. He ended up getting 15 years. The short of it is that he and the other guy, an enlisted Navy guy, got into a road rage argument. The Navy guy was drunk and the two ended up getting into a fist fight. The Marshall took out his gun and shot the Navy guy in the ankle. Reading the news articles, it makes it seem as though the Marshall was aiming for the guy's ankle. Mind you, the Marshall had several broken fingers and a broken trigger finger from the melee. After being shot in the ankle, the Navy guy got in his car and tried to leave. The Marshall contends that the Navy guy was trying to run him down and that was why he continued firing at him. Mind you, the death shot entered the Navy guy from the back and came out of his shoulder. So, does 15 years sound about right for killing a 20 year old drunk? The judge thinks so because the Marshall has a wife and two young children.

At the end of the day, we want harder sentencing and better law enforcement personnel, but we don't want to pay more in taxes. Essentially, we want our cake and we want to eat it too.

Our justice system isn't perfect, but it is better than any other out there.

I just read an article in a ABA magazine about how everybody gets pissed off at judges nowadays. At the end of the day, it is rather unfair to the judges. For instance, we are all pissed off about the Public Domain ruling by the Supreme Court, which merely left the situation up to the local and state governments. Hence, we should get in touch with our local and state representatives and have them pass laws limiting when Public Domain can be used to take somebody's property, but we don't. We just get pissed at the Justices.

I have thought about being a judge, but have decided against it. I would throw everybody in jail for fear that the one person I let go might kill an innocent person.

[skeeter@ccia.com]

Fabs....is it true there are people that sit in the courts to monitor sentences handed down such as MAD and a drunk driving case?..I have heard this and if the judge is soft on them, all he?? hits the fan....If this is true, where are those that watch out for the other crimes?...

[fabsroman]

Skeeter,

I have never seen anybody sitting in Court monitoring the sentences. Then again, I am not looking and wouldn't be surprised if sentences weren't monitored by somebody.

For the most part, the Judges are pretty decent with their sentencing in Maryland pertaining to drunk driving offenses. Several years ago, they received a lot of flack about being too lenient, so the legislature fixed that. If a person gets a second drunk driving offense within 5 years of the first one, the Judge must find the person guilty (i.e., Probation Before Judgment is not available) and the person must be sentenced to some jail time.

Generally, everybody gets a PNJ on their first one. The only thing that varies is how long the probation is for. If you blow high, you are looking at 18 months supervised. If you blow barely over the limit, you get 6 months supervised which turns to unsupervised after you complete a alcohol awareness program that can range from 12, 26, or 52 weeks depending on how they assess you.

Further, Court cases are public record for the most part unless a protective order is granted. So, MADD could look up the sentencing on any case any time it wants to.

[Valigator]

The largest group I know is Judicial Watch...it reviews rulings and makes a big stink about the "law gone Bad" so to speak...a judge doesnt want to find his name listed on that website...

Yes there are groups and individuals who moniter certain cases, especially high profile ones...MADD has a entire area devoted to sentencing in drunk driving cases.

Child advocates do the same ..I have sat in more than one courtroom and observed sex offence cases..