Inauguration performer's killers (one on probation for unlawful use of firearm, sentenced 12 days prior)

this will probably be deleted because everyone is arguing guns elsewhere.. but this is EXACTLY where the problem lies.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/11/jus...google_cnn

Quote : Chicago (CNN) -- The teenager who police say shot and killed Chicago honor student Hadiya Pendleton was on probation for unlawful use of a firearm, Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy said Monday night. Police said Ward and Williams were gang members seeking revenge against the people who had shot Williams in July. McCarthy said Ward was sentenced to two years' probation in January 2012 for unlawful use of a firearm. The charges come 12 days after Hadiya was shot to death at a park in what her godfather, Damon Stuart, described as an "ideal community" on Chicago's South Side.

This scenario fits the exact typical characters statistics of the vast majority of gun homicides. I posted this prior and posted all the statistics. Look for it if you want to question the percentages. But gun homicides are typically committed by minorities in an urban area with no more than a H.S. education in gang related incidents. If I knew their family income I would cite that too (but I don't).

Notice the one statement that I could only find in this particular article (most others didn't mention it or weren't specific at all about it). One was just sentenced to two years probation for unlawful use of a firearm, 12 days before shooting the girl!! I'm sure stricter gun control laws would've stopped these gang members from killing .. If we truly wanted to fix the problem maybe we'd start being harsher to people who break the law. Obviously the probation didn't make them hesitate in shooting someone who wasn't the person they meant to kill.

Quote from DJPlayer : this will probably be deleted because everyone is arguing guns elsewhere.. but this is EXACTLY where the problem lies. http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/11/jus...google_cnn This scenario fits the exact typical characters statistics of the vast majority of gun homicides. I posted this prior and posted all the statistics. Look for it if you want to question the percentages. But gun homicides are typically committed by minorities in an urban area with no more than a H.S. education in gang related incidents. If I knew their family income I would cite that too (but I don't). Notice the one statement that I could only find in this particular article (most others didn't mention it or weren't specific at all about it). One was just sentenced to two years probation for unlawful use of a firearm, 12 days before shooting the girl!! I'm sure stricter gun control laws would've stopped these gang members from killing .. If we truly wanted to fix the problem maybe we'd start being harsher to people who break the law. Obviously the probation didn't make them hesitate in shooting someone who wasn't the person they meant to kill.

Do statistics say this works? How harsh and what laws?

What's their punishment now?

Quote from bonkman : Do statistics say this works? How harsh and what laws? What's their punishment now?

Are you familiar with the term "plea bargaining"?

Quote from nobama : Are you familiar with the term "plea bargaining"?

Uh...so get rid of plea bargains?

Inauguration performer's killers (one on probation for unlawful use of firearm, sentenced 12 days prior)

The charges come 12 days after Hadiya was shot to death at a park in what her godfather, Damon Stuart, described as an "ideal community" on Chicago's South Side.

Maybe I am misreading these two statements but they seem contradictory.

Quote from roughnready : Uh...so get rid of plea bargains?

DJ said:

Quote : If we truly wanted to fix the problem maybe we'd start being harsher to people who break the law.

If we severely limit plea bargains, we would severely limit the "revolving door" and the joke that the current judicial system has become.

Quote from nobama : If we severely limit plea bargains, we would severely limit the "revolving door" and the joke that the current judicial system has become.

Plea bargains are a pretty crucial part of the criminal justice system. 90-95% of criminal convictions are from plea bargains. If you think all of these cases should go to trial, it would likely cost local and federal government trillions of dollars, not to mention the cost of building more prisons.

Quote from roughnready : Plea bargains are a pretty crucial part of the criminal justice system. 90-95% of criminal convictions are from plea bargains.

Have you seen plea-bargaining in progress? Very often criminals walk away with a slap on the wrist compared to the crimes they had committed due to "plea-bargaining". So the prosecutor makes a deal to let them off the hook if they plead guilty to a much lesser charge with reduced or no jail time instead of their original crimes, then the prosecutor can claim a high "conviction rate" or clearance rate.

Many street criminals will up-front tell you that they don't care that they are arrested and charged with a crime - they say their liar lawyer will just get them off easy like he did last time....

Quote from roughnready : If you think all of these cases should go to trial, it would likely cost local and federal government trillions of dollars, not to mention the cost of building more prisons.

You are exactly correct, but we are getting what we don't pay for, which is criminals going through the revolving door of the justice system and back out on the street to commit more crimes.

Quote from nobama : Have you seen plea-bargaining in progress? Very often criminals walk away with a slap on the wrist compared to the crimes they had committed due to "plea-bargaining".

So you know for a fact that they had committed those alleged crimes simply because they were charged with them?

How convenient. Why even bother to have any trial?

Quote : So the prosecutor makes a deal to let them off the hook if they plead guilty to a much lesser charge with reduced or no jail time instead of their original crimes, then the prosecutor can claim a high "conviction rate" or clearance rate.

You keep referring to "crimes" that haven't actually been proved beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

In addition, you also conveniently gloss over the fact that the prosecutor may lose at trial, thereby letting the alleged criminal off without even that slap on the wrist.

Quote : Many street criminals will up-front tell you that they don't care that they are arrested and charged with a crime - they say their liar lawyer will just get them off easy like he did last time....

Street criminals showing inappropriate bravado? No way!

Quote : You are exactly correct, but we are getting what we don't pay for, which is criminals going through the revolving door of the justice system and back out on the street to commit more crimes.

Perhaps that has more to do with how they spend their time in prison as opposed to how long they spend in prison.

Quote from smegalicious : So you know for a fact that they had committed those alleged crimes simply because they were charged with them?

You betcha, many of the ones I'm referring to, but not "simply because they were charged". Many of them were caught in the act.

Quote from smegalicious : How convenient. Why even bother to have any trial?

We gotta give the lawyers something to do....

Quote from smegalicious : You keep referring to "crimes" that haven't actually been proved beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

The slimeball defendant doesn't need to have the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt if the slimeball defendant pleads guilty with a plea-bargain. He gives up his right to a trial.

Quote from smegalicious : In addition, you also conveniently gloss over the fact that the prosecutor may lose at trial, thereby letting the alleged criminal off without even that slap on the wrist.

True for some, but many are bargained away that would have been slam dunks.

Quote from smegalicious : Street criminals showing inappropriate bravado? No way!

Once in a while they might say something that is actually true....

Quote from smegalicious : Perhaps that has more to do with how they spend their time in prison as opposed to how long they spend in prison.

Many don't even make it to prison, even though they should, if it weren't for plea-bargaining.

Quote from nobama : You betcha, many of the ones I'm referring to, but not "simply because they were charged". Many of them were caught in the act.

Simply because they were "caught in the act" doesn't mean that they were caught doing what the prosecution alleges.

The police burst into a room as one man shoots another man in the chest. Was the shooter caught in the act of murder? Manslaughter? Self-defense?

Quote : We gotta give the lawyers something to do....

Your thinly-veiled disdain for the civil rights of the accused is duly noted.

Quote : The slimeball defendant doesn't need to have the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt if the slimeball defendant pleads guilty with a plea-bargain. He gives up his right to a trial.

You miss the point. You weren't referring to the crimes to which the defendant plead guilty, but to the original criminal charges against him:

So the prosecutor makes a deal to let them off the hook if they plead guilty to a much lesser charge with reduced or no jail time instead of their original crimes, then the prosecutor can claim a high "conviction rate" or clearance rate.

Those original "crimes" were never proven in a court of law. They are merely *charges* levied against the accused.

Quote : True for some, but many are bargained away that would have been slam dunks.

Go to law school. Become a prosecutor. Then you get to make those calls.

FWIW, not everyone shares your belief that the accused are just-about-nearly-almost-always guilty. Or that trials are mainly for kicks & giggles.

Quote : Many don't even make it to prison, even though they should, if it weren't for plea-bargaining.

Jail/prison would have been a more accurate term. Given our current population of inmates, I'd say there were still "many" of them who end up there, despite the use of plea-bargaining.

Quote from smegalicious : Simply because they were "caught in the act" doesn't mean that they were caught doing what the prosecution alleges. The police burst into a room as one man shoots another man in the chest. Was the shooter caught in the act of murder? Manslaughter? Self-defense?

True in general. I'm speaking of certain specific situations that I'm aware of.

Quote from smegalicious : Your thinly-veiled disdain for the civil rights of the accused is duly noted.

More accurately a thinly-veiled disdain for some (not all) liars lawyers.

Quote from smegalicious : You miss the point. You weren't referring to the crimes to which the defendant plead guilty, but to the original criminal charges against him: So the prosecutor makes a deal to let them off the hook if they plead guilty to a much lesser charge with reduced or no jail time instead of their original crimes, then the prosecutor can claim a high "conviction rate" or clearance rate. Those original "crimes" were never proven in a court of law. They are merely *charges* levied against the accused.

You'll have to forgive me, I guess I am certainly missing your point. Once the guilty defendant accept the "deal" and pleads guilty, he forfeits his right to trial on any of the crimes that he has committed, no matter what the actual *charges* are, and they were never proven in a court of law because he never went to trial, but had plead out on the bargain.

Quote from smegalicious : Go to law school. Become a prosecutor. Then you get to make those calls.

Nah, there are other professions in the field of the law that are more satisfying and rewarding IMHO.

Quote from smegalicious : FWIW, not everyone shares your belief that the accused are just-about-nearly-almost-always guilty. Or that trials are mainly for kicks & giggles.

I'm not sure what you're talking about... If they weren't guilty, they wouldn't have been arrested in the first place, and there has to be a trial before they can be pronounced guilty and sentenced....

Quote from smegalicious : Jail/prison would have been a more accurate term. Given our current population of inmates, I'd say there were still "many" of them who end up there, despite the use of plea-bargaining.

And many go right out the revolving door with probation, deferred sentencing, charges dismissed, etc.

Please don't misunderstand me, I fully realize that in the legal system plea-bargaining is necessary because of many reasons including the fact that most jurisdictions don't have the resources, facilities, personnel, time and money to try every case. However I believe that it is absolutely true that many cases are bargained away for convenience and a lawyer sort of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" situation between the PA and the PD. It goes "against the grain" to see guilty individuals going through the system repeatedly and getting off lightly repeatedly - but that's our system.

Quote from nobama : More accurately a thinly-veiled disdain for some (not all) liars lawyers.

Because resorting to repeated group smears constitutes "thinly-veiled"?

Quote : You'll have to forgive me, I guess I am certainly missing your point. Once the guilty defendant accept the "deal" and pleads guilty, he forfeits his right to trial on any of the crimes that he has committed, no matter what the actual *charges* are, and they were never proven in a court of law because he never went to trial, but had plead out on the bargain.

You erroneously refer to the defendant's supposed "original crimes", which, as you concede, were never proven in a court of law. Therefore, you cannot legitimately refer to them as actual "crimes", but mere criminal charges levied against the accused. You are trying to essentially "convict" him for those "original crimes" despite any such legal standing to do so.

Quote : Nah, there are other professions in the field of the law that are more satisfying and rewarding IMHO.

I didn't know bitching about how other people do a job for which you are not qualified constituted a "legal profession"...

Quote : I'm not sure what you're talking about... If they weren't guilty, they wouldn't have been arrested in the first place, and there has to be a trial before they can be pronounced guilty and sentenced....

Wow. Thank you for so succinctly demonstrating your inherent bias in all things related to criminal justice.

All people arrested are guilty.

And the trial is not an attempt to have an impartial panel determine the truth, but merely a formality in order to get to sentencing those who are guilty because they have been arrested.

You do more in a single post to disrespect this country & the principles upon which it was founded than a 100 high school English teachers stomping on 100 U.S. flags.

Quote : Please don't misunderstand me, I fully realize that in the legal system plea-bargaining is necessary because of many reasons including the fact that most jurisdictions don't have the resources, facilities, personnel, time and money to try every case. However I believe that it is absolutely true that many cases are bargained away for convenience and a lawyer sort of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" situation between the PA and the PD. It goes "against the grain" to see guilty individuals going through the system repeatedly and getting off lightly repeatedly - but that's our system.

So you want to ban a practice that you acknowledge is "necessary" to the system? Sounds on par with all of the other ridiculous claims you make.

Quote from DJPlayer : This scenario fits the exact typical characters statistics of the vast majority of gun homicides. I posted this prior and posted all the statistics. Look for it if you want to question the percentages. But gun homicides are typically committed by minorities in an urban area with no more than a H.S. education in gang related incidents. If I knew their family income I would cite that too (but I don't). Notice the one statement that I could only find in this particular article (most others didn't mention it or weren't specific at all about it). One was just sentenced to two years probation for unlawful use of a firearm, 12 days before shooting the girl!! I'm sure stricter gun control laws would've stopped these gang members from killing .. If we truly wanted to fix the problem maybe we'd start being harsher to people who break the law. Obviously the probation didn't make them hesitate in shooting someone who wasn't the person they meant to kill.

This is the issue. We allow violent people back on the streets, those people commit the majority of the "gun violence," and then the gun control lobby cries for more gun control laws. This was illegal, and we allowed a knowingly violent guy out on probation who then--shocker--killed someone. Stricter penalties for violence would have saved this person's life. Gun bans would not since he was already prohibited from owning a gun.