Support NeoGAF

[Stinkles]

A string of armed robberies.

This is not a string of parking violations. It isn't the ridiculous felony assault charge leveled at the woman earlier in the thread. We should not reward people because they simply haven't been caught yet.

I don't like the sentence but if I had committed a string of armed robberies and then got caught, I wouldn't be surprised to learn I'd spend the rest of my life in jail.

The sentences are harsh to deter this kind of armed crime. The risk the felons put themselves, the public and the employees they target at, is catastrophic. And so then should the consequences be.

 

[Wthermans]

His problem was using a public defender. Gotta pay money if you want "justice" in this country.

If you can throw money at the re-election campaign of the judge presiding over your case, you'll increase your chances of a lesser sentence tenfold.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

A string of armed robberies.

This is not a string of parking violations. It isn't the ridiculous felony assault charge leveled at the woman earlier in the thread. We should not reward people because they simply haven't been caught yet.

I don't like the sentence but if I had committed a string of armed robberies and then got caught, I wouldn't be surprised to learn I'd spend the rest of my life in jail.

The sentences are harsh to deter this kind of armed crime. The risk the felons put themselves, the public and the employees they target at, is catastrophic. And so then should the consequences be.

This. While I agree with many here that the prison system in the US is entirely flawed my heart isn't exactly bleeding for a dude that made the choice to be an armed robber.

 

[Wthermans]

This. While I agree with many here that the prison system in the US is entirely flawed my heart isn't exactly bleeding for a dude that made the choice to be an armed robber.

So you believe armed thieves can never be rehabilitated?

 

[Forever]

So you believe armed thieves can never be rehabilitated?

I don't think the goal of prison should necessarily be rehabilitation, and even if it is, it's not likely to happen in a United States penitentiary, making that argument irrelevant in this context.

 

[Wthermans]

I don't think the goal of prison should necessarily be rehabilitation, and even if it is, it's not likely to happen in a United States prison, making that argument irrelevant in this context.

So instead of fixing the problem you just want to ignore it. Good to know.

You and I have a completely different outlook on prison it seems.

 

[Veezy]

He should be in jail, but shouldn't be locked away from society for the rest of his life.

Indeed. However, I'm concerned about the mental well being of such an individual. If he truly does have a combination of a learn disorder and being bipolar, he needs to receive therapy with the jail time to be properly rehabilitated. Life in prison as a bipolar person with no meds is just asking for him to go insane.

 

[Extra Sauce]

In this case, a 162 years sentence is extreme.

117 years would have made much more sense.

 

[Forever]

So instead of fixing the problem you just want to ignore it. Good to know.

You and I have a completely different outlook on prison it seems.

I don't subscribe to the Scandinavian model, no. In fact I think it's morally abhorrent. If your system is hiring "friends" to keep Anders Breivik company so that he doesn't get lonely, I can't say that justice is being done.

 

[Wthermans]

I don't subscribe to the Scandinavian model, no. In fact I think it's morally abhorrent. If your system is hiring "friends" to keep Anders Breivik company so that he doesn't get lonely, I can't say that justice is being done.

I find locking people in a hole for the rest of their lives to be morally abhorrent.

 

[justjohn]

no sympathy from me. sorry

 

[Hartt951]

Prison Industrial Complex at its finest. Gotta keep the prisoners coming or else there's no money to make.

 

[Wthermans]

Indeed. However, I'm concerned about the mental well being of such an individual. If he truly does have a combination of a learn disorder and being bipolar, he needs to receive therapy with the jail time to be properly rehabilitated. Life in prison as a bipolar person with no meds is just asking for him to go insane.

I agree. Too bad the prison system doesn't want to help turn people into functioning members of society and instead just wants to punish them relentlessly for the rest of their lives (while providing massive kickbacks to the legislative, executive, and judicial sectors of our government).

Given the way our for profit system works in this country, I find it laughable that anyone would feel locking up someone for life in our system is the "moral" thing to do.

 

[Forever]

I find locking people in a hole for the rest of their lives to be morally abhorrent.

You want to assume that every criminal deserves rehabilitation. I disagree. That's it. Of the flaws that exist in our justice system, I don't see one there.

 

[Wthermans]

You want to assume that every criminal deserves rehabilitation. I disagree. That's it. Of the flaws that exist in our justice system, I don't see one there.

There are heinous crimes that are beyond rehabilitation. Armed robbery from a first time offender is not one of them.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

So you believe armed thieves can never be rehabilitated?

I think you need to juxtapose the odds of rehabilitated that type of behavior vs its risk towards the overall damage to society such a person causes. I don't like being shot in the face because I'm working the late shift at the convenience store.

Like I said, I just can't seem to having a bleeding heart for this guy...

 

[Forever]

There are heinous crimes that are beyond rehabilitation. Armed robbery from a first time offender is not one of them.

To reform the system around rehabilitation as you want to would require the assumption that rehabilitation is possible and desirable by default.

In this particular case, life in prison might be excessive in a punitive sense. One could favor reducing his sentence, but that doesn't (and wouldn't, if it happened) require any sort of rehabilitative component. Prison should be punishing, not nurturing, not a place you go to to "get help" for your problems.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

There are heinous crimes that are beyond rehabilitation. Armed robbery from a first time offender is not one of them.

"...seven armed robberies at fast-food restaurants, a Walgreens pharmacy and other commercial establishments in the Miami area from August to October of 2010."

At least 7 offenses of armed robbery. First time caught.

Like I said, my sympathy meter is at: 0

Poor choices yield poor results. Dude should have been asking for job applications instead of asking for the contents of the register.

 

[Hartt951]

Prison should be punishing, not nurturing, not a place you go to to "get help" for your problems.

Why is that? What happens to the criminals when you release them back into the world without helping them?

 

[Wthermans]

To reform the system around rehabilitation as you want to would require the assumption that rehabilitation is possible and desirable by default.

In this particular case, life in prison might be excessive in a punitive sense. One could favor reducing his sentence, but that doesn't (and wouldn't, if it happened) require any sort of rehabilitative component. Prison should be punishing, not nurturing.

I believe that in holding 1/4 of the world's prison population, a good majority of them could be rehabilitated. But our prison system doesn't work like that. It demeans the prisoners and makes them feel worse than an animal. Why do you believe the US has more cases of suicide watch than any other country? Our prison system is inhumane, immoral (profit should never be tied to punishment, time has shown it will and does get abused), and counterproductive to society.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

To reform the system around rehabilitation as you want to would require the assumption that rehabilitation is possible and desirable by default.

In this particular case, life in prison might be excessive in a punitive sense (I can't say for sure since the article doesn't have enough details). One could favor reducing his sentence, but that doesn't (and wouldn't) require any sort of rehabilitative component. Prison should be punishing, not nurturing.

I don't agree. It's MORE detrimental to a society for that to take place. Especially for short term prison sentences. Think about it outside of the desire to see a bad guy suffer. Look at the big picture: If someone is going to prison for 5 years, it makes all the sense in the world to attempt to rehabilitate them in those 5 years. Therapy, anger management, education/vocation training...etc. Why? Because when they get released in 5 years they're going to be driving next to us. Working next to us. Shopping next to us. It's better for everyone that they have the tools they need to have a chance at a legit life rather than them being released angry, bitter, sad with no tangible skills and that much more likely to re offend.

In this specific case this dude is going away for life so oh well. But for those on shorter jail terms it really is a benefit to society to focus on rehabilitation.

 

[LakeEarth]

Prison should be punishing, not nurturing, not a place you go to to "get help" for your problems.

I thought that's the whole POINT of prisons. Self reflection, time to mature, and to serve your time and come out a better man. Not to come out a pissed off person with new found criminal contacts.

Sure there are psychopaths, and people who will never learn, but that's another deal.

 

[Wthermans]

"...seven armed robberies at fast-food restaurants, a Walgreens pharmacy and other commercial establishments in the Miami area from August to October of 2010."

At least 7 offenses of armed robbery. First time caught.

Like I said, my sympathy meter is at: 0

Poor choices yield poor results. Dude should have been asking for job applications instead of asking for the contents of the register.

I don't have sympathy for him being punished for committing armed robbery. I do have sympathy (and outrage) at the fact that because of some poor decisions he is effectively locked away with the key thrown away.

 

[Wthermans]

I don't agree. It's MORE detrimental to a society for that to take place. Especially for short term prison sentences. Think about it outside of the desire to see a bad guy suffer. Look at the big picture: If someone is going to prison for 5 years, it makes all the sense in the world to attempt to rehabilitate them in those 5 years. Therapy, anger management, education/vocation training...etc. Why? Because when they get released in 5 years they're going to be driving next to us. Working next to us. Shopping next to us. It's better for everyone that they have the tools they need to have a chance at a legit life rather than them being released angry, bitter, sad with no tangible skills and that much more likely to re offend.

In this specific case this dude is going away for life so oh well. But for those on shorter jail terms it really is a benefit to society to focus on rehabilitation.

This is the key thing. You know what happens if you don't attempt to rehabilitate prisoners and provide them with skills to succeed in life after their sentence? They learn skills from the other prisoners that will most likely land them right back in jail. It's a horrible cycle that can only be stopped with proper therapy and rehabilitation.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

I don't have sympathy for him being punished for committing armed robbery. I do have sympathy (and outrage) at the fact that because of some poor decisions he is effectively locked away with the key thrown away.

I respect your views. But I disagree with the latter. He didn't make ONE mistake. He made SEVEN. Seven armed robberies. I truly believe if he didn't get caught someone would be dead.

He made his choices. He knew the risks and he took them. Society is safer with him locked up.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

This is the key thing. You know what happens if you don't attempt to rehabilitate prisoners and provide them with skills to succeed in life after their sentence? They learn skills from the other prisoners that will most likely land them right back in jail. It's a horrible cycle that can only be stopped with proper therapy and rehabilitation.

Now we definitely agree here. But armed robbery is fucking serious shit. It should be punished seriously. Now, if I had to decide the sentencing then perhaps I wouldn't put someone away for life. But despite that I can't say I feel an ounce of sympathy for this guy getting life.

This wasn't some sorry kid with no friends that just happened to fall in with a bad crowd because he wanted to fit in and got swept away that night and had NO idea his buddies were going to knock off a convenience store that he drove them to. He chose. Seven times. Hard for me to feel bad about him being locked up.

 

[Neuromancer]

Yeah, because that's exactly what everyone against his sentencing is suggesting. Not, say, 7-10 years, or even just one life sentence, or something reasonable.

LESS THAN 162 YEARS? BLEEDIN' HEARTS GETTIN' SOFT ON CRIMINALS! HURR DURR.

Haha

 

[Glorious Ownage]

You misread what I said.

I agree with you that the sentence is unjust, and if I were the judge I would've given him a sentence to fit what actually happened. But, personally, I'm not going to waste emotion on a stick-up man who tried to kill a dog.

Agreed

 

[AndyD]

Sentences should be concurrent. If the guy committed armed robbery seven times give him the maximum sentence for the offence. That's why it is there. Consecutive sentences are unjust.
G]

I disagree. All charges from one incident maybe, but separate incidents, individual time.

 

[Farmboy12]

Im sure all the people who had loaded weapons jammed in their faces because of this piece of trash would rather take things than earn them felt he got off easy.

 

[Yaboosh]

I definitely think 162 years is way too much for this.

I think 80 years is fine.

 

[Brera]

He's not really a first time offender though is he?

If he's running around firing off guns willy nilly, he and his mates have a low threshold for decency.

IMO 20 years would have been satisfactory for all of them.

 

[Joni]

Sentences should be concurrent. If the guy committed armed robbery seven times give him the maximum sentence for the offence. That's why it is there. Consecutive sentences are unjust.

So if you commit two separate murders, you would only serve the same time as someone who committed one?

 

[Trike]

Lawyer GAF already told you not to waste your time looking up FLORIDA STATE LAW because he was charged, tried, and convicted in the FEDERAL system.

Jeez, sorry I missed your post! No need for that kind of capital punishment. Hahaha, get it? You should, with Fozzie as your avatar. But if not I can underline it for you. Either way, that doesn't answer my question about him having consecutive trials or not.

 

[Sir Garbageman]

If he didn't fire his weapon I think 5 - 10 years worth of jail time would be appropriate for a string of armed robberies. 162 years seems just a tad excessive.

 

[Choke on the Magic]

He won't be robbing anyone for 162 years now. Justice has been served.

 

[BPRD]

First conviction but not his first serious crime, and for the ones he is convicted of there are typically many that go unnoticed. He should of got to mandatory sentence 25 to life with possible parole though. Sorry no sympathy for chubby kids robbing with a gun and firing at a dog that was in pursuit of his fat ass

 

[Walshicus]

I guess this is what happens when you make gaol an industry.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri_per_cap-crime-prisoners-per-capita
Crazy.

In some countries this guy - who by even the most damning if unreliable accounts demonstrated no violence against anybody in his alleged crimes - would be rehabilitated, retrained and when beneficial, released.

The sentences are harsh to deter this kind of armed crime. The risk the felons put themselves, the public and the employees they target at, is catastrophic. And so then should the consequences be.

Has the "deterrence" effect ever worked? I am very sceptical.

 

[mre]

Jeez, sorry I missed your post! No need for that kind of capital punishment. Hahaha, get it? You should, with Fozzie as your avatar. But if not I can underline it for you. Either way, that doesn't answer my question about him having consecutive trials or not.

The word "trial" does not appear anywhere in your post, so I'm not sure which question you're seeking an answer for.

 

[Keru_Shiri]

Haha

You laugh, but am I wrong? Does the response have to be so freakin' binary? No one is suggesting this guy shouldn't do time.

 

[themadcowtipper]

Dude 7 armed robberies..... Would Gaf be happier if he got ten years for each? Would 70 years in prison be any better? He would still spend the rest of his life in prison. I have no sympathy for any thief.

 

[Oppo]

Well, after reading this thread, I now understand exactly how this guy got all this time. Simply put, almost no one cares. Guilty = lock away forever.

I agree with Wthermans but I think we would be in the minority, at least were we both in the US.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

Well, after reading this thread, I now understand exactly how this guy got all this time. Simply put, almost no one cares. Guilty = lock away forever.

I agree with Wthermans but I think we would be in the minority, at least were we both in the US.

Did you not read the OP? No one cares because it was a STRING of armed robberies. Armed Robbery is a serious offense to begin with and then he did it multiple times and discharged his gun twice? The sentence might be longer than necessary but I don't see how someone who has done multiple armed robberies but wasn't arrested in between as just doing one armed robbery. I also love the selective quoting in the OP talking about how he was living on $600 disability payments and wanted to learn a trade like that has anything to do with his armed robbery charged. And he was tried as an adult because of his age so I'm not sure why the juvenile thing is brought up.

Dude 7 armed robberies..... Would Gaf be happier if he got ten years for each? Would 70 years in prison be any better? He would still spend the rest of his life in prison. I have no sympathy for any thief.

Seriously it's like people didn't read the OP. The years are absurd but he would have gotten absurd time like you said anyhow because of the number of armed robberies he did.

If he didn't fire his weapon I think 5 - 10 years worth of jail time would be appropriate for a string of armed robberies. 162 years seems just a tad excessive.

5-10 years total for 7 armed robberies? WAT.

 

[Oppo]

Did you not read the OP?...
Seriously it's like people didn't read the OP. The years are absurd but he would have gotten absurd time like you said anyhow because of the number of armed robberies he did.

5-10 years total for 7 armed robberies? WAT.

Yes, i read the OP. Like a few others, I also feel 160 years is totally fucking crazy. Even on a string of armed robberies, which is a very serious offence of course. It seems crazy that there are murderers and rapists who get less time. This was theft. It's fucked.

Anyways.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

Yes, i read the OP. Like a few others, I also feel 160 years is totally fucking crazy. Even on a string of armed robberies, which is a very serious offence of course. It seems crazy that there are murderers and rapists who get less time. This was theft. It's fucked.

Anyways.

Did they murder or rape 7 people? This isn't 1-1 like everyone is trying to make it out to be. This is for multiple offenses. What is a fair amount then? What should he have received for 7 armed robberies?

 

[themadcowtipper]

Yes, i read the OP. Like a few others, I also feel 160 years is totally fucking crazy. Even on a string of armed robberies, which is a very serious offence of course. It seems crazy that there are murderers and rapists who get less time. This was theft. It's fucked.

Anyways.

Even if he got 10 years for each robber.That is 70 years, most likely the rest of his life in prison. It seems some here feel the guy should only be charged with one robbery even though he commited 7.

 

[Walshicus]

Did they murder or rape 7 people? This isn't 1-1 like everyone is trying to make it out to be. This is for multiple offenses. What is a fair amount then? What should he have received for 7 armed robberies?

Does it really matter how many robberies took place? Does one robbery of £100,000 morally count 1/10th as much as 10 robberies of £10,000?

Even if he got 10 years for each robber.That is 70 years, most likely the rest of his life in prison. It seems some here feel the guy should only be charged with one robbery even though he commited 7.

I think he should be charged with being a robber, not with x counts of robbery.

 

[themadcowtipper]

Does it really matter how many robberies took place? Does one robbery of £100,000 morally count 1/10th as much as 10 robberies of £10,000?



I think he should be charged with being a robber, not with x counts of robbery.

So you think a person who commits 7 crimes in the span of months, should recieve the same punishment as a person who commits one crime??

 

[mre]

I think he should be charged with being a robber, not with x counts of robbery.

He took an armed weapon into a store seven times, and put the lives of the employees and customers at risk each of those seven times.

If you want to argue that the length he received for each count was excessive, I'm inclined to agree, but I completely and vehemently disagree with everything you said in this sentence.

 

[Keru_Shiri]

I think a 25 year sentence would be enough, honestly. People seem to forget that some of his accomplices are only getting 9 years (the max being 22 years) just because they entered plea bargains. I guess being willing to testify against the stupid fat guy makes you less of a dangerous criminal.