Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LeftInTX

(34,959 posts)
11. The sentence length is the key here (consecutive vs concurrent) and if there were problems at trial.
Wed Jun 24, 2026, 12:33 PM
Wednesday

I think they were facing 10 year sentences for each charge. But they had numerous charges and the judge just added them up and gave them 50. There are federal sentencing guidelines. These guidelines were used to sentence that Duggar guy on child porn.

I don't know the guidelines on consective vs concurrent, but a "normal" judge would have sentenced them concurrently. Often they are tried on numerous charges in order to get a guilty verdict on at least one and then they are sentenced currently. Found guilty on five charges and sentenced to 10 years or found guilty on one charge and sentenced to 10.

I guess you could call this malicious prosecution. This happened in the Kilmar Abrago Garcia case.

They also used two judges in this case, which is not standard practice.

I think they can get some of this reduced on appeal. However, they certainly weren't "innocent". They try to make like they were peacefully protesting, but they were doing more than that. (Think of Jan 6th)

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

The indifference by most Americans tells me a lot about what kind of country we have become. ☮ walkingman Wednesday #1
The way the system is rigged, nothing can change until at least November or even January. PSPS Wednesday #6
I often say: popsdenver Wednesday #14
Maybe it's not indifference. Trueblue Texan Wednesday #29
I hope MAGA realizes these same laws can be used against them if a Dem ever sees the Whitehouse again. n/t SpankMe Wednesday #2
Little comfort relogic Wednesday #10
Well said, Lc popsdenver Wednesday #15
That ship has sailed SpankMe Wednesday #21
Can be? It damn well better be WILL BE, starting at 12:05p on January 20, 2029. Seeking Serenity Wednesday #17
I'll do everything I can to help it happen SpankMe Wednesday #28
At the rate the (conservative) courts Quanto Magnus Wednesday #22
I would imagine that the appeals are already being written and submitted, MarineCombatEngineer Wednesday #3
The sentence length is the key here (consecutive vs concurrent) and if there were problems at trial. LeftInTX Wednesday #11
It's the Fifth Circuit, Jake dpibel Wednesday #12
Kicking with DISGUST! Faux pas Wednesday #4
It's hard to believe this made it all the way to sentencing SpankMe Wednesday #5
suspect that the rather big problem here (and probably including in eyes of the jury) stopdiggin Wednesday #7
We know there was at least one assault weapon MichMan Wednesday #8
If any other weapons had been found... Shipwack Wednesday #13
Also remember that sentenced the husband of one of the protestors who was not walkingman Wednesday #20
Which of course raises many issues about who gets prosecuted for what when guns are involved... TygrBright Wednesday #16
Hypocrisy is a bit obvious UpInArms Wednesday #18
No. It really isn't. And we do not answer this charge by aping the the behavior of mentally deficient stopdiggin Wednesday #23
I believe you misunderstood my post UpInArms Wednesday #24
while mine was directed toward the brain dead idiocy involved stopdiggin Wednesday #25
I do agree UpInArms Wednesday #26
Well, after hearing the evidence, a jury convicted them, and a jury acquitted Rittenhouse. MichMan Wednesday #27
I know this is an oldie - but it's true. harumph Thursday #31
The right wing so desperately wants this case Torchlight Wednesday #9
Almost lost it over this topic yesterday. People don't recognize what is happening before our eyes lostnfound Wednesday #19
Material support is a pretty broad charge and probably unconstitutional questionseverything Wednesday #30
Unless "material support" is well defined, it's just a garbage can term harumph Thursday #32
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»'This is injustice': how ...»Reply #11