Sunday, August 23, 2020

Lori Loughlin gets two months...

... which is two months too long. 



But most importantly, the sentence really doesn't serve any legitimate purpose.  I wrote about the same issue in the two-week Felicity Huffman sentence here.  Here's a snippet:

With as much subtlety and sophistication as a sledgehammer, social media erupted after Felicity Huffman’s 14-day sentence was announced, with commenter after commenter saying her sentence was way too light. A rich, white woman only received two weeks in jail. The system must be corrupt! Well, the system is corrupt, but not because Huffman’s sentence was too light, but because it was too severe.

But wait, you might be saying, she only received a few weeks; how can that be too severe?

Her sentence is wrong for at least four reasons:

1.    Our criminal justice system still has an unjust “jail-first” mentality. The default sentence for a first-time non-violent offender who accepted responsibility where no one suffered any loss should obviously be something other than incarceration. If that type of offender — with no aggravating factors — isn’t getting probation, then who is? The problem is that we are so tied to putting people in jail, even people we know will never do anything similar again, that our default is some prison. That’s wrong. It’s important to keep things in perspective: Huffman didn’t hurt anyone and it’s not altogether clear that paying someone to take a test should even be a federal crime in the first place.   

2.    Comparisons to other sentences show that those sentences are too high, not that Huffman’s is too low. With no sense of irony, the Huffman prosecutor cited other cases in which defendants received grossly and inappropriately high sentences as a reason to impose prison time on Huffman. For example, the prosecutor pointed to the case of Kelley Williams-Bolar, an African-American woman who originally was sentenced to five years in prison for using her dad’s address to get her kids into a different school district. The sentenced was later suspended to 10 days in jail. Everyone agrees: That sentence — even after it was reduced to 10 days — was obscene. Saying that Huffman should not get a probationary sentence because another prosecutor obtained an unjust sentence in another case demonstrates why we have a mass-incarceration problem. The prosecutor said at the Huffman sentencing: “If we believe in just punishment, we should not put the Williams-Bolars in jail while letting the Huffmans go free.” That’s true, but it means that we shouldn’t put the Williams-Bolars in jail, not that we should put both in prison. 

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Agreed. Time to eliminate jail/prison as the default setting.

Anonymous said...

First time, long time. I am interested in the statement "where no one suffered any loss." I believe we have a racist, xenophobic, narcissist as a president because a substantial segment of this country believes that wealthy, elite coastal citizens play by different rules than they do. That these well-heeled citizens denigrate institutional norms that less-privileged citizens have to follow, be it paying taxes or earning their way into colleges. I believe that when this disparity exploitation succeeds--when parents can bribe an institution with a $500,000 payment and not suffer a significant consequence--then the disparity is exacerbated. In my opinion, the country as a whole does "suffer a loss" when the have/have not dichotomy is exploited without penalty. A giant loss. The answer--less jail for everyone--may be a goal, but until it is, a probationary term simply fuels the outrage the less-privileged base already holds.

Bernie Madoff said...

You think SHE got too much time....geeze what about me?
I got equivalent of life without any discovery or motions. Just plea ya and see ya and wouldn't want to be ya.

Anonymous said...

Who gets probation? Cooperators that are willing to say whatever the government wants said. But we all already knew that answer. And the system grinds away...

Anonymous said...

At least she wasn't shot in the back 7 times.

Anonymous said...

Huffman's mistake was not giving the money as a donation directly to USC. They could have escaped punishment and maybe even had a building named after them. Many well off people give large sums to colleges to fund a chair or other cause and this gets their kids into that college.

Anonymous said...

https://sayevery.name/say-their-names-list

Anonymous said...

8 times.

Anonymous said...

Was he reaching for a weapon?

Anonymous said...

Can someone post the list of rich white women who have been sentenced to minimal jail time?

Anonymous said...

943

No thank you. That is a profoundly stupid idea.

Anonymous said...

I agree it's stupid. It happens so infrequently, not worth it. Black men murdered by police at much higher rate.