(no message)
Circle back when you have read all court filings associated with the case.
have a seat at the table when sentence reform comes about. We are told that democracy is dying. Here's one way to revive it: Support ballot initiatives in the various states lengthen sentences for violent offenses. Something tells me that you will not support such efforts and will instead call for us to instead listen to the experts and their recommendations, which have always worked swimmingly. Oh, and you'll undoubtedly throw in some bastardized version of a verse from the Book of Matthew.
We don’t have “one size fits all” justice in America, especially for the wide spectrum of homicide cases.
You are a very strange person.
reflects what many of us have long observed of you: You live in a cloistered little world where everyone else thinks as you do, and you take that to mean that your beliefs are "nromal." They're not. The circumstances in this case were not typical of manslaughter cases. I don't know if is attorneys managed to find a Bronx Jury or if the prosecution did a lousy job in the murder case, but five years with three years suspended is awful. Can you tell me how this belief is "strange?"
And no one here has almost 40 years of experience with sentencing and criminal justice.
5 years is plenty of justice for someone convicted of involuntary manslaughter.
And as I predicted, you would retreat to "trust the experts." You really are a rumdum. Do you know how often I can predict what you will write before you write it? And I haven't had clairvoyant abilities in years.
are a bad, wicked person. End of story.
I don't need to list board members who fall into this category. We know who they are. Most importantly, they know who they are.
That being vigilante "justice." And once that begins, putting the toothpaste back in the tube is going to be a problem.
(no message)
Consent Management