reply on: Subjective Justice — Can Bad People Be Good Judges ? \ stacker news ~BooksAndArticles

145 sats \ 12 replies \ @siggy47 8 Jul \ on: Subjective Justice — Can Bad People Be Good Judges ? BooksAndArticles

I don't have a pat answer. I can say this, though. I practiced criminal defense in federal courts in the days when Federal Sentencing Guidelines gave judges very little discretion in imposing a sentence. Lawyers basically did a mathematical analysis of various factors to predict what your client's sentence would be. The motivation in implementing the guidelines was to prevent inconsistent sentences based on an individual judge's sentencing habits. The result was a draconian system where non violent defendants were sentenced to decades long sentences, usually in drug cases.

67 sats \ 4 replies \ @0xbitcoiner OP 8 Jul

That was totally unfair for non-violent crimes, don't you think? I guess things are different now, but I bet some judges still do it.

45 sats \ 3 replies \ @siggy47 8 Jul

It was very unfair. What got most of the publicity was that rock form cocaine was treated much more harshly than powder. It was considered as targeting African Americans. It was really ridiculously unjust. There are other examples that I can't recall now.

54 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 8 Jul

What if Keith Hernandez consumed crack?

No need to answer

13 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 8 Jul

If he was smoking at Shea Stadium he would have wound up at Queens Supreme Court and had been released without missing a game. NY state courts never adopted guidelines, and simple drug possession was treated leniently.

54 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 8 Jul

Especially in September and October

Mitigating circumstances your honour 👨‍⚖️!

54 sats \ 6 replies \ @Bell_curve 8 Jul

This helps. Punishment doesn’t fit the crime. A judge with discretion could have imposed a sentence commensurate with the non violent crime but he would also have to ignore federal sentencing guidelines.

13 sats \ 5 replies \ @siggy47 8 Jul

Yes, and I want to emphasize that a judge could not ignore federal sentencing guidelines UNLESS a defendant cooperated, and the prosecution agreed that the defendant had provided valuable assistance to the government. A judge had to set forth how the guidelines were calculated. The government could object to a more lenient sentence than was mandated. I should mention that today these guidelines have been loosened.

54 sats \ 4 replies \ @Bell_curve 8 Jul

Understood

Judges call balls and strikes. The problem is that my strike zone changes on Monday and Friday. And other judges have a different strike zone.

13 sats \ 3 replies \ @siggy47 8 Jul

I think the real lesson was that no two cases and defendants are alike. The guidelines were instituted to remove discretion and prevent unfairness. In practice, the average sentence was lengthened substantially, and just about all defendants wound up doing some jail time. It took Congress years to correct it.