Billiken Man

Indeed. These inequities have always been in the justice system and fixing them seems beyond our reach.

I've seen cases where shoplifters served longer sentences than rapists. It's crazy.

Please note that Fastow pled guilty in federal court, where there is no possibility for parole. He'll have to serve the entire 6 years, with perhaps a little time shaved off for good time. The lady in Greenwood should be eligible for parole after doing 1/6 of her time, or approximately two years.

Please note that Fastow pled guilty in federal court, where there is no possibility for parole. He'll have to serve the entire 6 years, with perhaps a little time shaved off for good time. The lady in Greenwood should be eligible for parole after doing 1/6 of her time, or approximately two years.

So you're saying these sentences seems about right to you?

I really can't say as to the Fastow sentence. As a former prosecutor, I am a little nonplussed that the judge went behind the negotiated plea. That always compromises the bargaining power of the prosecutor.

As for the Greenwood woman, the maxium sentence she could have gotten was 30 years on each count. The minimum for first-degree sexual assault is 6 years. That the judge ordered them to run consecutively as opposed to concurrently (which is what usually happens in these cases), is somewhat remarkable, but hardly unprecedented. I would say serving 2 years behind bars for committing two Class A felonies is about right.

I suppose I have to own up to a sexist view, but had the e-mails the teacher exchanged with the student not come to light, I suspect the boy would have been bragging to his friends about his conquest rather than bemoaning his lost virginity and the fact that he was no longer "pure" for his future wife.
My attitude in no way condones the stupidity of the teacher, but do we all really think that thoughts of virginity and purity are foremost in a teenaged boy's mind when sex is the issue? Had I been in the courtroom and he testified thusly, I would, at the very least, have raised an eyebrow.
And to really go off in left field (completely ignoring the Fastow sentence -- that's white collar crime, DBI, so you ought to know better), how much time might a president get if he consistently subverts or ignores constitutional law? From my reading, our good King George only obeys those laws with which he agrees and essentially reinteprets/rewrites the rest.
I wonder how much it would cost to operate Guantanamo in the future for one empire-building prisoner. Of course others in the administration are at least as culpable, perhaps more so, but would we want to detain them all in the same place?