The fairness of multiple charges / enhanced sentencing

Here's another real example of what I mean:
http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/l...gic-Son-in-Woods-Visited-Lover-299486591.html

A woman left her 21 year old quadriplegic son unattended in the woods for 5 days. While obviously absolutely terrible, just have a look at the list of things she was charged with:
aggravated assault, simple assault, reckless endangerment, neglect of a care-dependent person, unlawful restraint, kidnapping and false imprisonment

If we actually stop to take an impartial look at the charges, this is just ridiculous. There should not be so many different laws (each carrying their own punishment) that apply to the same act. Seems many people are simply willing to look the other way because they believe "criminals should be punished".

I believe overlapping laws is really like unintended consequences of a law, because all these individual laws were passed at separate times, and apparently nobody bothered to think about how they would all work together. If we simply had one single law that applied to a potential criminal act, it would be much more obvious to people reading through the books that that law carried excessive punishment.

All these overlapping laws and additive punishment, combined with plea bargaining, give prosecutors too much discretion when it comes to deciding sentencing.
And the truly innocent who refuse to take an 8 year plea bargain, and attempt to prevail in front of a jury, face a ridiculously harsh 30+ year sentence.

 

All I have to say is . . . good. Dangerous people who abuse their 2nd amendment right should be jailed for a very long time. In fact, I think that a life sentence should be for the rest of the perp's life. That person should die in jail, especially those with lengthy records who have proven they are dangerous to society and/or murderers.

 

The issue is not even necessarily about how long the prison sentence is. Just that there should not be so many multiple different laws criminalizing the same act.
Sure, maybe you don't care when it was a murderer, rapist, or bank robber, but prosecutors can throw multiple charges at other people too, people who do not deserve all that.

 

Well, then don't break the law, and you don't have anything to worry about.

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry, but I have very little to no empathy for criminals. They are losers most of the time.

 

You can be arrested, and even found guilty, for all sorts of different reasons, without ever having made the choice to break the law. Many people do not realize this. Some people might have trouble believing it.
And no, I'm not just talking about honest mistakes made by law enforcement. This is a very common misconception.

 

You seem paranoid.

 

It happens much more often than people realize; it's not just some extremely rare occurrence.
Law enforcement can be dishonest for all sorts of different reasons, unethical prosecutors can bring charges for all sorts of different reasons, and judges can often be negligent, apathetic, sometimes even outright hostile.

 

Such as? Why don't give an example of what you're talking about. Are you talking about if the cops framed a person? Because you WERE talking about when you do commit a crime and the cops charge you with multiple other offenses as well.

 

ex felon with a gun is such a "crime". so is a dope user (no other offense) having a gun, so is a guy dealing dope, "in possession" of a gun (the gun is unloaded, in his home, 50 miles from where he is arrested for the dope charge). 80 odd years ago, nobody cared how long your gun barrel was, how many shots it fired with one pull of the trigger, or how much noise it made (or didn't make). you can be convicted of a felony, just for having bought an autoloading rifle, which has or doesn't have, certain parts in it, made (or not made) in the USA, all completely without your knowledge. 200,000 or more owners of various guns/magazines in CA, NY, CT, etc, have been made into felons overnight, with the passage of ridiculous laws. you can be legally carrying a handgun in your car trunk, cross over a line (ie, into NYC) and be an instant felon. you can be committing a felony just by kissing your gf or bf, if they are 17 years old.

 

I know you used to not be able to be charged multiple crimes for the same act... but that seems to have changed as of late

now if you kidnap someone, then later kill them, I think that is two crimes, but if you say stab someone, it would be wrong to charge them with assault and attempted murder as an example as it was one event (action), now you could add lesser charges (not sure what that is called) on to the main charge

another example is hate crimes... i think that should come up during sentencing, not as an actual second charge

really though the criminal benefits from this as they can plead to a lessor of the charges and if they go to trial the max charge is almost always run concurrent with the lessors anyways


.

 

Well, the person in your first example is breaking the law. What other crime would he be charged with . . . because the OP says that when you are charged with one crime, you can be charged with multiple other "things" (whatever).

Well, if the guy dealing dope has a legal gun will he be charged with a crime?

I think it's stupid to charge a person with a felony for owning a certain kind of gun. I can understand how you can be charged for other things with this type of law, such as not only the gun but also the ammunition. That's the only thing I can think of that would be additional off the top of my head at this moment.

I hope they do charge an ADULT with a crime for having a 17-year-old girlfriend or boyfriend. WTH? Also, that is still not more than one charge.

- - - Updated - - -

Good! Those kinds of people should be in a jail for a very long time anyways. If you kidnap AND stab and/or otherwise kill a person, that is two separate crimes. Why would THAT by unfair?

 

I'm not going to explain in this thread, because I do not want to get too far off topic, and this issue really deserves its own separate discussion.

One book you might read to have some idea what I'm talking about is Three Felonies a Day, by Harvey A. Silverglate, it's about prosecutors who try to stretch laws to go after innocent people, and do not care. You could also watch this hour and a half long video here: Licensed to Lie, by Sidney Powell

That is all I am going to say on this topic in this thread.

 

that is not what happens though, those addl charges are almost always run concurrent with the highest charge they are found guilty of... sometime they are allowed to make a plea deal to a lessor of the charges

it's really a lawyer game, this way both the defense and the prosecution both can claim a win, the defense got the highest charge dropped, but still a win for the da as they got a guilty verdict of something too

I agree with you about the kidnapping, I added that to my post as well (was even in the quote you replied too)

.

 

But that's what this thread is about . . . it's totally on topic.

 

So? I don't see a problem with that. As far as I'm concerned, a person who kidnaps and attempts to murder or does murder a person should be in jail for the rest of his or her natural life, none of this 25 years stuff. A life for a life, and I AM anti death penalty, so I would like to see them get LWOP, meaning they die in jail, or at least are only released when they are too old and harmless. Maybe allowed to go to a locked psychiatric facility or locked nursing home or something.

 

So...... I agree with you... they should be in Prison for the rest of their life if they attempt to or actually succeed in killing someone

I think the place to make that happen is during the sentencing phase of the attempted murder charge, ect....

it really makes no sense to charge someone twice for the same action, in fact that is not allowed (other then hate crime laws, which as I said should be taken into account during sentencing, not be an addl charge)

I believe this is a lawyer game, so both sides win at trial (neither side loses), and the criminal sadly many times ends up with less time because of this

I knew a guy charged with a drunk driving and leaving the scene of an accident, he plead guilty to leaving the scene (not sure exact name of charges), thus never getting the drunk driving, this was a win for the DA and the Defense

.

 

If you don't see it than it's very clear you have no knowledge of constitutional law. This has been one of the greatest on-going debates in const. law.

 

About the drunk driving and leaving the scene. Both of these things are against the law. I do not see a problem with charging the person with BOTH crimes. I really don't understand what point you are trying to make here. If you actually have some examples of a person being charged unfairly, then post it. So far, I'm not convinced with whatever it is you are trying to convince people of.

 

It's a complicated topic, one I am not going to get into in this thread because it really deserves a good discussion. But it's not just some rare phenomena. In fact, it's almost routine in the court system. If you were a lawyer with any actual experience, you would know this.

Here's some more information, if you feel like reading about it:

Charge Stacking: Gambling with People's Lives

extremes of stacked federal gun mandatory sentences

 

Other than the weapons examples, I have yet to see any good examples of "stacking" charges. All of the charges that have been mentioned by people here on this thread seem perfectly legitimate to me. Like I said, don't commit crimes, and you wouldn't have a problem.

Does railroading happen? And overzealous or sometimes corrupt prosecutors? Sure it does. Is it the norm? No.

 

Federal prosecutors CAN charge you with a separate crime for EVERY single rd of ammo that you illegally possess. if they tried, they'd get laughed out of court, but sooner or later, one won't care about that.

 

Stacking Charges forces the Innocent to Plead Guilty

http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2012/09/plea-bargaining-and-innocent-defendant.html
http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-92015.html
http://personalliberty.com/the-art-of-prosecuting-the-innocent/
http://www.fathersmanifesto.net/falling.htm

 

This is about plea bargaining. This has nothing to do with what I was asking about, which is about additional charges being stacked on top of the original charges, which may or may not be related to the original crime. The only one that I've seen demonstrated so far is the gun charge, where you can also be charged with ammo.

 

That's what this man thought:
http://www.theroot.com/articles/cul...8_years_after_judge_finds_clerical_error.html

After robbing two video stores, he pled guilty and was sentenced to what he thought was a 16 year sentence. He was released after 10 years and began piecing back together his life. Six years later, he was informed the court had made a clerical error and he had been mistakenly released. The numerous charges would not run concurrently, and he had to serve 98 years in prison!

 

Are we supposed to feel sorry for this person? Lol.