Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
Wait a minute now. We're disregarding the consequences, remember?
There was no premeditation for the death, but we're not talking about the death, just the invasion of privacy.
The invasion of privacy was absolutely, 100% premeditated and designed to humiliate.
If a crime which is premeditated and designed to foster just the type of reaction that the statute was enacted to avoid, yet that crime isn't punishable to the fullest extent allowed by the statute, just exactly what would be?
If you don't like the statutory scheme, contact your local congressman. But I see no way this kid can't get the maximum penalty allowed under the statute. There's just no justification for this invasion of privacy and every factor introduced is an aggravating, rather than mitigating factor. Every additional fact surrounding the invasion of privacy serves to make the invasion worse.
It's a different approach to reviewing a 'proper' sentence, but in my mind the result comes out the same.
|
By your standard there is no possiblity to issue a sentence other than the maximum.
We all have our opinions. My opinion is that there is no way in hell these two young, bright kids get anywhere near 5 years in prison. Nor do they deserve 5 years in prison. Any defense attorney worth his salt will see to it they are sentenced accordingly.