…Did you read the thread? Did you somehow not notice the complaint is that we don’t? When a white guy trying to overthrow the government doesn’t get convicted of anything that earns a penalty remotely comparable to a black guy doing anything, that’s not really rule of law.
A reduction in sentences that only helps one subset of the population is not a step toward prison reform.
If I could look at this sentence as a sign of reform – an indication that everyone prosecuted by the US attorney or sentenced by this judge will be imprisoned less, then I would view this as positive. But when only a subset of society gets lighter sentences without that spreading to the population as a whole, then that decreases accountability and fairness in exchange for hypothetical reforms that aren’t actually realized.
To convince me this isn’t just a perpetuation of a justice system that punishes people based on who they are rather than their actions, I’d need to see some evidence that this sentence is reflective of what everyone (not just conservative white men) will recieve from this court.
These are mitigating circumstances I was hoping for, re: the seemingly light sentence.
This, plus he will likely lose his job & residence, etc. and it sucks for anyone, no matter the cause. Given the circumstances, the sentence seems appropriate.
Too bad that those who do far less get far more than this, but that’s another topic entirely.
As for the Ring-Leaders, Enablers, & Financiers, heads had better roll!
FWIW, here’s a former federal prosecutor’s take on the sentence:
I take issue with the idea in the summary that the judge’s sentence is somehow a vindication of the Justice Department. The judge is not a member of that department anymore, and it was the Justice Department that chose weaker charges as a basis for prosecution in the first place.
The judge was somewhat constrained by the sentencing guidelines, but he was a bit naive (in the way that members of the establishment are toward white defendents) in believing that this scumbag’s expressions of remorse were sincere instead of self-serving.
If these insurrectionists keep getting punishments like this it’s going to come back and bite us all in the arse in the next decade.
From nymag’s coverage
Because Hodgkins was the first felony sentencing — two misdemeanors have already been handed out — prosecutors and defense attorneys have been awaiting the sentence “as a benchmark for hundreds of other Capitol riot cases and as a potential aid to plea negotiations that have been handicapped by a lack of guideposts to what defendants can expect if they accept plea bargains from prosecutors,” notes Politico. Federal law requires the 20 judges involved in Capitol- nriot cases to “avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct.”
Other rioters have done worse, but wrist slapping en-masse seems likelier by the day.
And hopefully be off-limits for the extremists, knowing that he ratted them out.
Unfortunately, not according to the WaPo:
Nor did he enter a cooperation deal with prosecutors.
I expect the majority of the “rank and file” idiots will get sentences from eight to, say, sixteen months, depending on whether they are smart enough to show remorse and plead guilty, or whether they aggravate the court by insisting they’re the good guys, repeating QAnon conspiracy junk, etc. In any case, this will seriously limit the possible defenses the rest of the rioters can attempt; you can’t really argue you were doing nothing wrong, when someone doing the exact same thing as you has plead guilty and been sentenced for a crime.
At the same time, I expect the people who actually engaged in looting or destroying the place, attacked the Capitol police, tried to get at the Senators and Pence, etc. will get much harsher sentences.
Huh, I thought he had done a cooperation deal. Must have misunderstood something, clearly. My apologies!
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.