Teen turns down plea deal for 25 years in prison, gets 65 years instead

there are real problems with how this system favors the state over the defendant, and it can be especially coercive on juveniles sitting in custody before they see an attorney. While there is no doubt that minority status correlates with harsher sentences, its not so certain how much a role race actually plays in at the negotiating table as opposed to economic status. if you are assigned a public defender, or are too poor to pay for any private investigative hours, or legal research, you are at a serious disadvantage. The public defenders office is one of the most underfunded in government.

 

Sure he committed murder....that's without question. Left-wingers never complained when Charles Manson was convicted of murder and rotted away in prison until he died. He also never had the gun or knife in his hand during the Tate-LaBianca murders but he was responsible nonetheless!

 

The more criminals that get shot committing crime the more innocent people benefit.

The people that allow mass killers to get weapons and commit mass murders are the liberals who have a policy of not arresting criminals with a history of violence.

 

Liberals were the one's writing him love letters while he was in prison.

 

No its conservatives that want to shove automatic rifles in the hands of criminals and the criminally insane so that gun sellers can profit and the NRA can pay off politicians. their David Duke/ Donald Trump wing wink if its a black or Hispanic kid that dies.

We can go on like this forever.

 

Looks like Alabama’s law says that if you are in a group of people who commit a crime and one of the group ends up dead because of their act than everyone in the group is guilty of murder.
Tough law, but it’s the law of the land there.
And when I was 15 I knew that forcing myself into someone’s house is wrong and illegal, that’s why the perp was tried as an adult.

 

Yeah....the cult of celebrity has a strange hold on some people!

 

I understand what the law says, so I don't blame the jury for applying it as directed by the judge. Its the legislature ( they wrote the law and sentencing guidelines), prosecutor he decided exactly what charges to bring and what to recommend) and the Judge( just wow) that are the problem in the sentencing stage.

 

The OP involved a story about a 15 year old who participated in an armed robbery. One of the members of his crew went after a cop, which was recorded on his PRD. Shot 4 times with the officers shotgun, the guy died.

Pleading not guilty, his trial took place when he was 18.

Missed anything?

The subject of the OP claims he didn't agree to what happened and was afraid if he didn't do as told by his crew, and as his lawyer suggested.

Missed anything?

He didn't take the plea deal, and as a result, rather than 25 years, he gets 65.

And the question is, because he was Black, he is going to be treated different, and should have buckled under. Instead, he was sentenced to 65 years as a message to his "community".

Missed anything?

It's always about exploiting Blacks. How they aren't treated the same. BS.

This happens all the time to every other race.

Enough with this BS.

Bottom line. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. And in this case, if they offer to lighten your sentence, perhaps because you're Black, take the offer.

 

Thank you. I think concerning race it may have been true about one particular area I was looking into - but that was a few years ago and I do not at the moment remember where it was, but I can believe at times or in some places it can be so. Another poster Woogs pointed out that it was probably much more to do with whether you have money and I notice you say that too. I think it is now pretty recognised that this system is not one of justice.

Plea Bargaining in the United States: A Perversion Of Justice

My interest in starting this thread was that given his sentence rose from 25 years to 65 and that he is only one of 3% of American cases to ever reach court and that 10% of your people who are innocent apparently plead guilty, is there any possibility he is being used as an example to make sure that no one else dares to demand to go to court?

Chris Hedges was pointing out that in reality in the US you have imprisonment without trial - according to him particularly of black people. As he and many others have been pointing out with politics as they are this leaves you, the US, particularly vulnerable if you do move towards a more authoritarian/fascist era particularly as this, one of the main safeguards is not looking like it is working as such. They believe everything is there for imprisonment without trial for anyone who such people may want to put there.

 

Totally different situation.

 

The accused was offered a plea deal.

He said "no".

Do the crime do the time.

 

I don't think so...in both cases, the individual convicted of murder was not the one who actual did the killing. The law is quite clear in both cases!

 

I wonder who rejected the offer...the dumb perp or his dumb lawyer. The worst case of making a stupid choice that I've seen in a long time!

 

I don’t agree. Plea deals exist to shorten the time someone goes through the court system. In plea deal you will always be offered a much lighter sentence than what you could get in court. The reasoning here is that if you are guilty, which you should be well aware of, it might make more sence for you to quickly plead guilty and take a lighter sentence over going through court and risk a harsher sentence. Obviously, if you are not guilty you should never take a plea deal and go to court.

 

It's a hell of a deal for the obviously guilty who have a good amount of evidence against them. And yes, if truly innocent, fighting it out in court is the way to go. It's a great addition to the legal process!

 

the plea agreement system is supposed to be another avenue towards justice, not a bonanza for the 'throw away the key' club. This is why we have the most ludicrously expensive prison system in the world. No sense of perspective. A fifteen year old who had absolutely no control over this firefight between one of his friends and a cop or what each would do with their weapon, not plead guilty and will now take up space for 65 years until he is 80 years old because neither the judge nor the prosecutor could see the difference between his actions and those two parties.

 

Of course they were different situations. Manson was running a cult and arranged it all. This guy was 15 and apparently not involved and just terrified. Manson was not even there at the scene. That is why this guy has been found guilty by a law which is only relevant in Alabama simply because he was there at the scene. Because the police shot one of them dead, then according to Alabama law given that had there not been a crime and had not the person who he killed come running at him with a gun, the policeman would not have shot the person. The murderer cannot be the policeman as he has been cleared so they need to find someone else. Hence this boy although he had absolutely nothing to do with the killing and apparently was just shivering in terror is himself accused and convicted of being the murderer.

Anyway I am not going to discuss the ins and outs of the case. That is not what I set this thread up for. It was just that the lack of knowledge in you trying to compare this guy with Manson was beyond credibility.

 

He had control. He chose to join the group. If he simply said no to that he’d never be a part of this incident.

 

No, we don't. People in our group pick up an AR15 and run barefoot to mass shootings to engage liberal policy failures.

The Florida shooting happened because liberal law enforcment and liberal policy makers at the school system agreed not to arrest a violent, mentally ill person so that he would be precluded from purchasing a firearm.

Then the Florida shooting got a bunch more kids killed because their liberal sheriffs department decided to hide outside instead of engaging the shooter.

Liberal policies of coddling criminals and creating free fire zones for them is responsible for all of it.

 

delete

 

It is ridiculous. For some crimes you can plead guilty in Scotland and in those in which you can, you can get a maximum of one third off the maximum available sentence. What they get is still decided in court.

This guy's sentence rose from 25 to 65 years. That screams punishment for going to court to me.

According to research in the US 10% of people who accept plea bargaining are innocent.

Your system apart from for the very rich is in reality imprisonment without trial and if as I have said you move more into an authoritarian/fascist culture then this is the perfect system for them and yes I know that is the wish of many on the board, though they don't like to use those words.

 

I do not agree with laws that say if a cop kills a suspect, the other suspects are guilty of murder of the person the cop killed

if it was a good legal kill, then neither the cop or other parties not doing the killing should be charged with murder

 

I agree, people ask why innocent people plead guilty, this story tells it all

 

You clearly did not read past the word 'control' or find its context relevant. I put those other words there for a reason. Presence itself does not remotely justify a sentence of 65 years on conduct of a 15 year old. Nor does a refusal to accommodate the demands of the prosecutor for 'quick and clean'. Its beyond stupid and either the judge or the prosecutor could have mitigated . You cannot find a murder without the cop being the primary party to the murder. The same killing with the same set of facts cannot be declared as justifiable homicide for the cop who shot and and murder for the person standing by depending on the convenience of the DA's office. Was it a good kill or a bad kill? Maybe an appeal will produce some fruit.