ST Alpha - "Yeah we actually met with the judge. He explained it at the time as....." (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 160

In response to "Perfect example. Was the judge not IN the courtroom for the entire trial? What the hell could possibly take 17 months after a guilty verdict??? " by Turd Ferguson

Yeah we actually met with the judge. He explained it at the time as.....

Posted by Volnelk Nov 19 '24, 10:24

There is basically a grid with crimes and sentences and then as judge you need to weigh the other factors unique to the case to adjust the number up or down. Like repeat offenders vs first time. Seriousness of the crime. Community impact etc.

They have to look at comps around the country and what similar offenders got for similar findings.

The fact that it took so long astounded me. One of the reasons that it didn't really matter in this case is everyone, including the defendant knew he was going away for years anyway. It wasn't like he was going to find out two years later that he got one year of time.

He ended up getting 17 years.

Responses:

Another department has to investigate and write up a probation report checking previous crimes not allowed in the courtroom during trial -- nm - zeitgeist Nov 19, 11:13
There could be defense motions for a new trial etc pushing things back, but 17 months does seem a bit much. - Bayronmax Nov 19, 11:06 1
- Depending on timing, it might have been affected by covid-related backlog -- nm - Roger More Nov 19, 11:39

Post a message top

Yeah we actually met with the judge. He explained it at the time as.....

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.