The Supreme Court of the United States Thread

[RockyTop85]

No I’ve just worked on both law enforcement and healthcare side of sexual abuse and actually have an understanding of the issue and the psychology behind it as well as why the sex offender list even exists in the first place. You on the other hand are upset at the thought of someone being “unjustly” branded for life for a crime such as child rape but it’s deservedly so

Super logical to incorrectly assume what my motivations are.

Also super logical to assume that your “career”gives you a better understanding than the judge, prosecutors, and probation officers involved in these actual cases.

 

[Wireless1]

KBJ's confirmation will insure that every republican nominee going forward will carry not only the litmus test for abortion but also anti pedo and heavy on the sentencing....hence conservative judges will start those practices to in hope of being nominated. Her confirmation could be a great thing for America as long as she remains impotent on the court.

 

[happy-go_vol]

Do You Know More About Basic Human Biology Than Biden's SCOTUS Nominee? Take The Simple, One Question Quiz!

 

[whodeycin85]

Yes, sorry on the State.

The judge was not in my view advocating for lesser sentences, she was explaining what she believed were the constraints on her at the time.

Her explanation was plausible and makes sense. But using that to claim she's soft on people possessing child porno just seems ridiculous to me.

Why does 1st degree murder carry a lifetime sentence?

 

[happy-go_vol]

Given that therebis direct correlation between child porn and child sexual assault, anything less then punishment that equal the life long damage done by these people is unjust. And she should consider all 3....and come somewhere in the middle..not just one source given that these people reoffend at a 30% clip because of such sentencing

The access to porn has caused an increase in child porn demand. People become desensitized and they need more extreme stuff to satisfy themselves.

 

[whodeycin85]

The access to porn has caused an increase in child porn demand. People become desensitized and they need more extreme stuff to satisfy themselves.

I agree and its disgusting hence why punishment should be more severe

 

[happy-go_vol]

We can only hope she has a modicum of integrity. I am not very confident though.

It not the light sentences that she gave, fact is, she's a radical leftist. That enough to not vote for her.

 

[RockyTop85]

I think pedophiles should be killed on the spit if guilty, no jail time at all.

I’m sure a lot of the people crying about Jackson feel the same way. The fact that that’s not even close to what happens for any crime, even the direct abuse of a child, is a good indication about the relative conformity of her practices to societal norms as opposed to the radical beliefs of those who are criticizing her.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[allvol123]

It not the light sentences that she gave, fact is, she's a radical leftist. That enough to not vote for her.

Another Ivy League dolt, because we’re into diversity, right?

 

[RikidyBones]

Yes, sorry on the State.

The judge was not in my view advocating for lesser sentences, she was explaining what she believed were the constraints on her at the time.

Her explanation was plausible and makes sense. But using that to claim she's soft on people possessing child porno just seems ridiculous to me.

She chose not use factors that were present but did not give a good reason why those factors should not be considered. She called the cases by it's worse adjectives yet used the lower sentences based on her opinion that the guidelines were outdated. I don't find that reasonable given a single picture still equates to abuse and the existence of more of them should have the opposite effect on sentencing decisions.

 

[RockyTop85]

All her cases were closer to probations recommendations and on avg 7 months less then others.... not imagine your child was viewed in a situation by theses people.... is 7 months less then avg and 2 plus years less the recommended by federal and prosecution enough punishment???

So now you’re moving the goalposts to “Closer to probation?” That is not what you said. You said lowest of the three.

Side note: it is still absolutely wrong to say there are only 3 recommendations. The defense also makes a recommendation. The fact that you’re treating the defense recommendation as immaterial isn’t all that egregious since he’s a bit biased. However, spoiler alert: so is the prosecutor. Which is why there is an independent recommendation from the probation office and why being closer to that independent estimate is not a bad thing, but it’s the opposite bias as the prosecutor. How do you justify disregarding one and not the other?

As to the 7 months: each case is to be considered individually based on the facts of the offense and the individual defendant. Even among these 7 cherry picked cases, there are vast disparities in inputs and outcomes. And among all pornography cases there is a huge disparity in outcomes ranging between sentences expressed in a few months to life sentences. This would create difficulties in calculating an apples to apples comparison that is reflected as a single average to apply to 7 cases. So in my opinion, the average deserves less weight than you’re giving it.

That said, To the extent that the average is to be given any weight, the fact that it’s that close despite the disparity in outcomes is less than scandalous.

You’re messing up Ricky’s next “conservatives are logical” rant with all these “imagine it was your child” appeals to emotion.

 

[C-south]

If you think there are only three things to consider in federal sentencing, your opinion is whatever comes after worthless.

I would assume federal guidelines would be #1 and prosecution recommendation would be #2. If they’re convicted what else is there to consider?

 

[whodeycin85]

She chose not use factors that were present but did not give a good reason why those factors should not be considered. She called the cases by it's worse adjectives yet used the lower sentences based on her opinion that the guidelines were outdated. I don't find that reasonable given a single picture still equates to abuse and the existence of more of them should have the opposite effect on sentencing decisions.

Exactly and by using left logic on Trump inciting 1/6 these viewers of child porn are directly responsible for these children being sexually exploited....

 

[RikidyBones]

I would assume federal guidelines would be #1 and prosecution recommendation would be #2. If they’re convicted what else is there to consider?

They weren't even convicted by a jury. If I remember right they pled guilty.

 

[whodeycin85]

So now you’re moving the goalposts to “Closer to probation?” That is not what you said. You said lowest of the three.

Side note: it is still absolutely wrong to say there are only 3 recommendations. The defense also makes a recommendation. The fact that you’re treating the defense recommendation as immaterial isn’t all that egregious since he’s a bit biased. However, spoiler alert: so is the prosecutor. Which is why there is an independent recommendation from the probation office and why being closer to that independent estimate is not a bad thing, but it’s the opposite bias as the prosecutor. How do you justify disregarding one and not the other?

As to the 7 months: each case is to be considered individually based on the facts of the offense and the individual defendant. Even among these 7 cherry picked cases, there are vast disparities in inputs and outcomes. And among all pornography cases there is a huge disparity in outcomes ranging between sentences expressed in a few months to life sentences. This would create difficulties in calculating an apples to apples comparison that is reflected as a single average to apply to 7 cases. So in my opinion, the average deserves less weight than you’re giving it.

That said, To the extent that the average is to be given any weight, the fact that it’s that close despite the disparity in outcomes is less than scandalous.

You’re messing up Ricky’s next “conservatives are logical” rant with all these “imagine it was your child” appeals to emotion.

Emotions play a part in sentencing, as does intent and premeditation....these people are ruining a child for life (in most cases). Ive already stated the guidelines need to be harsher....she only had 7 cases on child porn in which she had discretion...if a 7 month avg is indistinguishable then by the same logic the 1 month on avg above probations recommendation means even less. She is an activist judge...and thats fine but at least own it

 

[C-south]

They weren't even convicted by a jury. If I remember right they pled guilty.

And probably to a lesser charge which should have been the maximum.

 

[Wireless1]

She chose not use factors that were present but did not give a good reason why those factors should not be considered. She called the cases by it's worse adjectives yet used the lower sentences based on her opinion that the guidelines were outdated. I don't find that reasonable given a single picture still equates to abuse and the existence of more of them should have the opposite effect on sentencing decisions.

Does she understand as a judge she is to rule on the case as related to the law, not opine that the law is outdated. She's in the wrong business, she needs to run for office and change the law if she doesn't like it. and BTW how long ago were these sentencing guidelines changed? I guarantee it's been since she was in law school.

 

[RockyTop85]

Emotions play a part in sentencing, as does intent and premeditation....these people are ruining a child for life (in most cases). Ive already stated the guidelines need to be harsher....she only had 7 cases on child porn in which she had discretion...if a 7 month avg is indistinguishable then by the same logic the 1 month on avg above probations recommendation means even less. She is an activist judge...and thats fine but at least own it

I’m shocked that a guy who agrees these people should be killed on the spot isn’t satisfied by her sentencing.

By your method, nobody who has ever been a trial judge is qualified to be on the Supreme Court. That’s a ludicrous result, but beyond that it doesn’t meaningfully distinguish her from other judges.

 

[RikidyBones]

I’m shocked that a guy who agrees these people should be killed on the spot isn’t satisfied by her sentencing.

By your method, nobody who has ever been a trial judge is qualified to be on the Supreme Court. That’s a ludicrous result, but beyond that it doesn’t meaningfully distinguish her from other judges.

I don't think he ever said they should be killed.

 

[RockyTop85]

Does she understand as a judge she is to rule on the case as related to the law, not opine that the law is outdated. She's in the wrong business, she needs to run for office and change the law if she doesn't like it. and BTW how long ago were these sentencing guidelines changed? I guarantee it's been since she was in law school.

The guidelines are not law. They’re not binding.

 

[RockyTop85]

I don't think he ever said they should be killed.

He liked the post that said they should, which is why I said he “agreed” rather than “said.”

 

[joevol33]

I’m sure a lot of the people crying about Jackson feel the same way. The fact that that’s not even close to what happens for any crime, even the direct abuse of a child, is a good indication about the relative conformity of her practices to societal norms as opposed to the radical beliefs of those who are criticizing her.

Thanks for sharing.

I've only criticized her for being uneducated. I know 2 year old who knows what a woman is, but if you want an uneducated person making decisions for our country, then you need help also. You also sure do seem defensive about people wanting pedophiles to receive what they deserve.

 

[hog88]

Yes, sorry on the State.

The judge was not in my view advocating for lesser sentences, she was explaining what she believed were the constraints on her at the time.

Her explanation was plausible and makes sense. But using that to claim she's soft on people possessing child porno just seems ridiculous to me.

I agree, almost as ridiculous as accusing someone of rape from decades ago when the victim can't remember when, where or who.

 

[hog88]

I think pedophiles should be killed on the spit if guilty, no jail time at all.

The only problem with that is how many have been found guilty that weren't?

 

[85SugarVol]

Yes, sorry on the State.

The judge was not in my view advocating for lesser sentences, she was explaining what she believed were the constraints on her at the time.

Her explanation was plausible and makes sense. But using that to claim she's soft on people possessing child porno just seems ridiculous to me.

It is.

At least we’ve moved off high school yearbooks and moved onto judicial sentencing.

Progress. Amirite.