Welcome to PatsFans.com

Patrick already planning changes to Melissa's bill.

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by cupofjoe1962, Aug 3, 2012.

  1. cupofjoe1962

    cupofjoe1962 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,676
    Likes Received:
    49
    Ratings:
    +129 / 20 / -16

    Well the friend of violent felons Govenor Patrick finally signed Melissas bill even though the legislature rejected his "safety valve amendment" that would allow judges some leeway in the three strikes provision of the bill.

    Patrick plans to make changes to the bill in the next session.

    Why does he feel he needs to protect three strike - violent felons ????

    Yeah... Put it in the Judges hands....
    Maybe he will appoint Judge Maria Lopez (remember her) to review each
    three strike violent felons's history to see how she can help.
     
  2. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,762
    Likes Received:
    271
    Ratings:
    +487 / 20 / -17

    Probably because he trusts the judgment of most judges, and recognizes that our legal system is not always fair. Giving judges some discretion provides a safety valve in those cases where a conviction is made because of poor legal representation or the way someone carries themselves (or even appears). Or do you think, he has a soft spot for violent murderers and rapists?
     
  3. cupofjoe1962

    cupofjoe1962 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,676
    Likes Received:
    49
    Ratings:
    +129 / 20 / -16

    We are not talking about a two strike non violent felon who got caught stealing a DVD
    for his third offense.

    We are talking about 3 strike - violent felons.

    Do I think Patrick has a soft spot for violent murderers and rapists.

    Did you ever hear of Benjamin Laguer?

    Benjamin Laguer brutally raped his 59 year old neighbor after trying to strangle her with a telephone cable, and even after Deval Patrick spent his own money to provide LaGuer with a DNA test which proved his guilt he said he still found the man “eloquent” and “charming.”
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2012
  4. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,762
    Likes Received:
    271
    Ratings:
    +487 / 20 / -17

    Joe, I understand what you're saying, and in fact that's my point too. No judge or no one wants people like Benjamin Laguer out on the streets, and our system worked to prevent that. Obviously, Laguer fooled Patrick with his charm and eloquence. But, just as there are Laguers, there are others who lack charm and eloquence, and can't even defend their innocence. Giving judges some discretion can protect the innocent, though on rare occasion it can also serve the guilty. Giving judges no discretion prevents the rare instance of helping an evil person and prevents the rare instance of severely punishing an innocent person. Almost all judges are pretty good at their jobs.
     
  5. cupofjoe1962

    cupofjoe1962 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,676
    Likes Received:
    49
    Ratings:
    +129 / 20 / -16

    I hear what you are saying.... but we are not talking about a one time
    conviction..... How many innocent people do you believe have been convicted of three different VIOLENT felonies?

    The majority of Judges are probably good at their job.
    Then again this is Massachusetts and I can't help but wonder how many
    judges echo the views of Maria Lopez.

    Let me refresh your memory of Judge Maria Lopez.

     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2012
  6. 1960Pats

    1960Pats 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    89
    Ratings:
    +268 / 16 / -32

    #75 Jersey


    I used to work with a pedophile who was convicted of molesting an 11 year old boy. All he got from the judge was a couple of years probation. On the first day that he could he took off and moved to Florida.
     
  7. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Maneuvers like this one make it very easy to believe that yes, he does. Your argument fails because you seem not to realize the "3 strikes" nature of the bill. I can understand guarding against a guy getting hosed by poor legal representation or whatever once or twice.

    But if that guy has committed his 3rd crime, he is clearly a habitual repeat offender who deserves to be put away.
     
  8. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    41,248
    Likes Received:
    255
    Ratings:
    +988 / 2 / -9

    Patrick Is A Flaming Crazy Liberal

    Crazy Flaming Liberals Love Criminals
     
  9. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but this bill does nothing to prevent a judge from setting aside a guilty jury verdict. I must confess I haven't been following it terribly closely, but I still believe that if a judge thinks the accused is innocent then he can still make the unilater declaration of "not guilty."
     
  10. Drewski

    Drewski In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,208
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +305 / 0 / -1

    No Jersey Selected

    I tend to agree with ya here Wolf.

    What's that old saying, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
     
  11. cupofjoe1962

    cupofjoe1962 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,676
    Likes Received:
    49
    Ratings:
    +129 / 20 / -16

    I am sure Deval is probably estatic over this Judges most recent sentence.

    Probation for multiple sexual assaults on a child.

    Brookline Rabbi Gets Probation For Sex Assaults « CBS Boston

     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2012
  12. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    42,737
    Likes Received:
    282
    Ratings:
    +711 / 20 / -30

    Anecdotal evidence are not trends and indicators of nothing except individual acts...

    The reality is that to keep someone incarcerated for life is a very serious and very expensive alternative, many prison systems are facing the responsibility of caring for and protecting old inmates.

    Personally do not care for mandatory minimums or three strikes rules and the Supreme Court has similar concerns, in December of 2007 he Supreme Court that federal sentencing guidelines should be treated as “advisory” and not at all mandatory. Justices Alito and Thomas were the only dissenters.

    U.S. Supreme Court decision in June 2004 (Blakely vs. Washington), in which the Court ruled that only juries—not judges—can determine aggravating factors and thereby add time to prison sentences.

    In June 2012, the United States Supreme Court held in Miller v. Alabama that the Eighth Amendment’s ban on 'cruel and unusual' punishment prohibited the imposition of mandatory life-without-parole sentences on juveniles.

    Mandatory minimums are very expensive and create a lot of strain on our prison systems, and may be unconstitutional.... need to think this whole thing through. For every person who falls through the cracks there are a bunch more doing unreasonable sentences...

    "in too many sentences mandatory minimums are unwise and unjust".. Anthony Kennedy..
     
  13. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,434
    Likes Received:
    156
    Ratings:
    +356 / 7 / -4

    Patters, like others here, I don't understand the opposition to this one. I don't like many "3 strikes" laws because they aren't limited to violent felonies, like this supposedly is. Is there any issue with the felonies covered? Because if there isn't, I don't see a problem with no parole after 3 convictions.

    (even in a case of bar fights, which I don't think would rise to a felony count anyway, the law just says no parole, right? not that there's a minimum 25 year sentence or anything? so the sentence would still be based on the 3rd crime's sentencing?)

    (otoh, I don't think laws should have names attached -- seems to me that it's too much of an attempt to tug at emotions than make a rational appeal -- but that doesn't mean this law is a bad one)
     
  14. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,626
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    Agree with entire post. This version of 3-strikes is not life like they do in Calif. I think the felonies are limited to violent ones, which I totally disagree with. It lets white collar criminals off too easily, and their crimes can do just as much harm as an armed robber.
     
  15. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,434
    Likes Received:
    156
    Ratings:
    +356 / 7 / -4

    getting OT, but I don't agree with this. There certainly could be an argument for a similar law addressing white-collar criminals, but I don't think it could be crafted easily.

    In terms of harm, I don't want to minimize the harm some white collar criminals do, but they don't physically hurt or kill their victims. They cause real harm, yes, and impact lives -- but violent offenders cause both physical and mental damage that I don't think white-collar criminals can be compared to.
     
  16. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,556
    Likes Received:
    293
    Ratings:
    +908 / 14 / -29

    hear......hear......well put

     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>