11 September 2004

Around the Web

1. Mr. District Attorney has completed his week.

2. KEMPLOG discusses the extra punishment of those who dare clog dockets with an actual jury trial.

3. Stop the Bleating on the false results out of FBI labs as to the matching of metallurgical elements in bullets.

4. For some reason you aren't allowed to swing your pet alligator at your girlfriend. Go figure . . .

5. Manifest Destiny mapped out. It's not got anything to do with criminal law but it's neat.

2 comments:

Melissa said...

#4 is why criminal law is so much fun.

Rusty said...

It's disappointing that KEMPLOG doesn't allow comments. I'm forced to lay my opinion upon you. Although I understand the argument that defense counsel and judges make that increasing what we ask for in terms of sentences after trial amounts to a "jury tax," the fact is that it is in the interest of reducing our case loads, relieving clogged court dockets, and encouraging defendants to simply accept the consequences for their actions and move on with life that causes us prosecutors to make substantially better sentencing recommendations in exchange for a guilty plea. It does not serve the best interests of the justice system to give someone who refuses to acknowledge guilt and forces the court to allocate precious resources to their case (even in the many trials where it was just a matter of not liking my offer in the face of overwhelming evidence) to sentence the defendant to a deal equal to or better (for them) than the deal I offered. As a prosecutor, I'm duty-bound to treat like individuals similarly. It is shocking to see judges who will give out light sentences (especially post-trial) often, as it appears, on a whim, and in the process undermining my ability to manage case loads and court dockets by negotiation, as the incentive for plea disappears when judges will not take into account the fact that initial plea offers do consist of a "non-jury discount" from what we'd really like to impose as a sentence...