Jump to content

Washington DC Carjacking Teenage Girls


cabowabo

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

You are right - I did not fully complete my sentence.  You can read the context of the entire post and understood my point that their age should not significantly absolve of their responsibility.  That should be obvious, but I wont put it on you for my syntactic failure. 

Heinous is grave and extreme.  Aggravated car jacking -- threatening someone with a weapon, and escalating that threat, is ipso facto heinous.  You dont need to recalibrate the word by comparing it to a homicide, and doing so is a distraction (but Anders Breivik didn't kill as many people as Tim McVeigh!!!).  You can give people all the benefit of the doubt you want, until you end up discarding the fact that they attempted the car jacking, escalated the car jacking, and ultimately killed a man.

My reaction to this is that they committed something very serious and deserve a far tougher punishment than what the plea bargain suggested. 

Try to park the personal emotion angle.  Unlike others, Im not the one trying to signal any zen or righteousness.  Im not interested in the shape and color of your feelings, so you shouldnt try to guess at mine.  Let the topic be the topic.

I seriously question the conclusion that a 6-8 year sentence for a 13/15 year old means that they were "significantly absolved of their responsibility." They weren't absolved at all. They accepted responsibility. That is what a plea is. What you actually mean is that their punishment is insufficient to satiate your desire for retribution. 

What's hilarious about this is that I in fact stated earlier in this thread that I thought their sentence seemed light. You think I disagree with your conclusions, and I'm not sure I do. But I do question what reasoning if any you are employing. Ultimately your opinions that these particular individuals deserve a harsher sentence, deserve no reduction in sentence due to their age, and that they are unremorseful are untethered from principle or fact. Your guide stone is anger. And that is a terrible way to run a justice system. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Your guide stone is anger.

It's not just him.  It has been the guiding principle of the criminal justice system for pretty much our entire existence.  And note that anger is frequently a manifestation of fear: the fear that something like this could happen to you or someone close.

If, God forbid, something like this were to happen to you or a family member, I would hope that you could move beyond fear and a desire for retribution.

And, if you are going to fear something, it's probably more likely that you have a kid or family member that commits some incomprehensibly stupid act that exposes them to the criminal justice system.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

If, God forbid, something like this were to happen to you or a family member, I would hope that you could move beyond fear and a desire for retribution.

It's common for the family members of victims to want MORE lenience than tough guys who have no connection at all to any of it. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the dead man's family was consulted in some fashion regarding this plea decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

I guess this is as close as I'll get to an honest and straight answer from you to a very simple question.

There's no organized thinking to any of this shit, just drifting from one case to the next seeking some kind of vague emotional satisfaction. That should not be how our criminal justice system works.

Yea, they plug their emotional (self-inflamed by self-righteousness) pyrotechnics into a meter that shows a number. The number, usually excessively high, is then applied to a complex formula for determining prison sentences. I'll do my best to represent this formula, I'm not a mathematician. Let's seeeeee,

Emotion Rating = E  Prison Sentence = P 

E = P

Prison sentences become mere numbers without regard for what the actual punishment entails for the convicted and society when the convicted is released let alone what American prison conditions say about the American people.

The emotional responders also assume that any argument brought against them is also emotional. They're hard and tough, their opponents are soft and snowflakey. The self-righteousness ramps up adding a new factor, a multiplier, to the complex equation.

Soaring Self-righteousness = Ss

E(Ss)(Aa) = P

Aa represents the black person multiplier, but that's for another lesson since it clearly doesn't come into play here.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 52-80 said:

Heinous is grave and extreme.  Aggravated car jacking -- threatening someone with a weapon, and escalating that threat, is ipso facto heinous.  You dont need to recalibrate the word by comparing it to a homicide, and doing so is a distraction (but Anders Breivik didn't kill as many people as Tim McVeigh!!!).  You can give people all the benefit of the doubt you want, until you end up discarding the fact that they attempted the car jacking, escalated the car jacking, and ultimately killed a man.

I know I already responded, but I'm confused about this particular passage. Are you saying that in determining punishment we don't or shouldn't differentiate between levels of heinous? That can't be it, can it? We can agree their crime was heinous. But I would think we would also agree that it was less heinous than Tim McVeigh's. And I think we would agree that they don't deserve the same sentence as McVeigh merely because both crimes were "heinous." Saying it another way, I would think we would agree that Tim McVeigh deserves more time in prison in part because his crime was "particularly" more heinous.  So, given that, what point did you think you were making here? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I seriously question the conclusion that a 6-8 year sentence for a 13/15 year old means that they were "significantly absolved of their responsibility." They weren't absolved at all. They accepted responsibility. That is what a plea is. What you actually mean is that their punishment is insufficient to satiate your desire for retribution. 

What's hilarious about this is that I in fact stated earlier in this thread that I thought their sentence seemed light. You think I disagree with your conclusions, and I'm not sure I do. But I do question what reasoning if any you are employing. Ultimately your opinions that these particular individuals deserve a harsher sentence, deserve no reduction in sentence due to their age, and that they are unremorseful are untethered from principle or fact. Your guide stone is anger. And that is a terrible way to run a justice system. 

 

Their suggested sentencing is MAXIMUM 6-8 years.  For killing a guy who had 10 years of life left.  Probably not the juvie "child prison" (as suggested), could just be a juvie home, or probation. 

A pair of 18 year olds wouldnt get off that lightly.  Which means their age heavily discounted their sentencing, to a degree far greater than what I think is appropriate.  Apparently you thought the same, so what is hilarious is you trying deconstruct my argument on grounds of pendantry.  My opinion is that sentence is far too light for reasons given. 

I dont couch what I think and why I think so on this topic.  Yet instead of discussing the topic, you keep trying to discuss my motivation.  Common theme around these parts . (no wonder its in the CR).  If posters are the subject of your focus, you should start a separate thread to house all the gossip.  You have my blessing.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


 
If you could stop making this about yourself constantly it would be a more productive conversation.


lol I have so much love for this [mention]bad_teammate [/mention] .

I appreciate a good passive aggression.

PS - Are you running a psyops on us like you did TexasAgs? Are you the Donkey smoking a Swisher Sweets?
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

A pair of 18 year olds wouldnt get off that lightly.  Which means their age heavily discounted their sentencing, to a degree far greater than what I think is appropriate.

Why would the takeaway from understanding the discrepancy not be that 18+ offenders are sentenced too harshly? Is it based on some kind of evidence regarding the efficacy of longer prison sentences?

Also, why do you feel such deep and immediate certainty regarding a situation you don't fully understand? (psssst, it's emotional)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

PS - Are you running a psyops on us like you did TexasAgs? Are you the Donkey smoking a Swisher Sweets?

Wait, what?

I've been to busy to be reading over there for a couple of weeks, did something happen? After they nuked their 'Q' thread, some of those people infected all the other threads and it became unreadable.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Their suggested sentencing is MAXIMUM 6-8 years.  For killing a guy who had 10 years of life left.  Probably not the juvie "child prison" (as suggested), could just be a juvie home, or probation. 

 

So... pure speculation on your part? 

Quote

A pair of 18 year olds wouldnt get off that lightly.  Which means their age heavily discounted their sentencing, to a degree far greater than what I think is appropriate. 

This also seems like speculation. What is the average felony murder sentence in the district for accidental death during a felony? That's essentially what we're comparing I think. 

Quote

Apparently you thought the same, so what is hilarious is you trying deconstruct my argument on grounds of pendantry. 

My opinion is that sentence is far too light for reasons given. I dont couch what I think and why I think so on this topic. 

Maybe you need to reread your posts. Because you absolutely expressed an opinion on why they deserve a harsher sentence. I'm just asking you to explain it in more detail. In a discussion of how criminal justice system should fairly handle sentencing, asking you to provide your rationale why these particular individuals should receive a harsher sentence is not pedantry. My conclusion is still that you don't actually have any principled reason. 

Quote

Yet instead of discussing the topic, you keep trying to discuss my motivation.  Common theme around these parts . (no wonder its in the CR).  If posters are the subject of your focus, you should start a separate thread to house all the gossip.  You have my blessing.

I'd rather discuss your reasoning, but you're providing none. And it isn't you in particular I'm interested in, but rather the broader discussion of how the criminal justice should operate. And frankly, I'm not sure what you think the topic is or the purpose of this message board. Why post your thoughts at all if you didn't want to discuss them?  What is it exactly that you think I should be posting that would be on topic? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

So... pure speculation on your part? 

we're all operating off the same reported plea deal.  juvie detention centers i understand to be short-term holdings.  feel free to refute that if you know better

13 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

This also seems like speculation. What is the average felony murder sentence in the district for accidental death during a felony? That's essentially what we're comparing I think. 

https://law.justia.com/codes/us/2011/title-18/part-i/chapter-103/section-2119/

up to 15 years for carjacking, up to 25 years if it results in injury, up to life or execution if it results in death.

that defines the minimum, but the maximum hints at the severity.  dc law adds up to 1.5x multiplier for taxi drivers.  up to 1.5x multiplier against ppl 65 years old.  theres another enhancer if convicted of bias (people like to take race into account, right?).  cali penal code (just as a reference) adds multiple years for severe injuries during a felony.

so your turn to do homework - what do you suppose is the average sentence in like scenario?

13 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Maybe you need to reread your posts. Because you absolutely expressed an opinion on why they deserve a harsher sentence. I'm just asking you to explain it in more detail. In a discussion of how criminal justice system should fairly handle sentencing, asking you to provide your rationale why these particular individuals should receive a harsher sentence is not pedantry. My conclusion is still that you don't actually have any principled reason. 

I'd rather discuss your reasoning, but you're providing none. And it isn't you in particular I'm interested in, but rather the broader discussion of how the criminal justice should operate. And frankly, I'm not sure what you think the topic is or the purpose of this message board. Why post your thoughts at all if you didn't want to discuss them?  What is it exactly that you think I should be posting that would be on topic? 

the thread title defines the topic.  if the topic is whether deshaun watson is done in houston, we opine on why we individually think deshaun watson is done.  we dont steer it to what personal reasons dahobbs might have for thinking a certain way about deshaun watson.  

 

but that is the inevitable nature of the CR, and now that this thread has been moved here, and ya'll are fixated on individual motivations rather than actual topics, enjoy your sandbox bro.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

but that is the inevitable nature of the CR, and now that this thread has been moved here, and ya'll are fixated on individual motivations rather than actual topics, enjoy your sandbox bro.

I have no idea what your motivations are for posting in this thread. I haven't commented on that. I'm trying to determine why you believe these girls deserve a longer sentence. So far, the sum total of your contribution is that they deserve because their crime was "particularly heinous." We've gone round and round on why that isn't a very helpful or sound basis to make that decision. Heinous in comparison to what? They deserve time, which the plea contemplates. I had a generally feeling that 6-8 years seemed light. But, I recognize it was just a gut feeling, not really based on any objective standard or rationale. @TwiceHorn's comment regarding the relative length of the sentence in comparison their total years on earth had me re-examine that feeling.

For a 13 year-old, those 8 years are going to feel like an eternity, or at least that is what my experience tells me. As far as punishment goes, feeling imprisoned for an eternity seems like a fairly severe one. Compound that with my general belief that our goal should be rehabilitation (particularly for the young), the evidence indicating the girls did not intend to kill him (they did use a taser after all), and my general understanding as a former teenager that teenagers do incredibly stupid and dangerous things without fully understanding the possible ramifications, and I have hard time seeing what purpose a longer sentence would serve. If there is some other reason why we think these girls are incapable of being redeemed beyond the mere fact that they committed this particular crime, I need to know it. For instance, you've asserted they've expressed no remorse. If that were true, I'd definitely see a longer sentence being warranted. But I have no idea if that is the case or not. I assume that the DA and the judge would not agree to a plea like this if the girls had shown no remorse since the incident. But that is just an assumption on my part.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

 

Wasn't the affluenza kid about the same age? How many teens did he kill? What did his sentence end up being? I remember him being on probation or something and fleeing to Mexico, I think?

 

What would the ghetto version of "affluenza" be, anyway?

 

That kid was raised by wolves.  And that's an insult to vulpines.  A little bit of money and complete white trash parents.  Very ghetto in and of itself.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

It's common for the family members of victims to want MORE lenience than tough guys who have no connection at all to any of it. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the dead man's family was consulted in some fashion regarding this plea decision.

That can be true.  Sometimes it's not though.  It pains me to see people all worked up about whether the justice system delivers up justice or "closure" for them.

I submit they're looking in the wrong place.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That can be true.  Sometimes it's not though.  It pains me to see people all worked up about whether the justice system delivers up justice or "closure" for them.

I submit they're looking in the wrong place.

100%.

this sounds callous, but we place too much emphasis on the victims and their families in dispensing "justice." justice should be more free from emotion. there's a reason that statue is wearing a blindfold, but that ideal has never been realized in our justice system. 

hell, people regularly on here glorify prison rape and violence, as though that is the natural order of things. that that happens for criminals in the justice system is beyond appalling. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

100%.

this sounds callous, but we place too much emphasis on the victims and their families in dispensing "justice." justice should be more free from emotion. there's a reason that statue is wearing a blindfold, but that ideal has never been realized in our justice system. 

hell, people regularly on here glorify prison rape and violence, as though that is the natural order of things. that that happens for criminals in the justice system is beyond appalling. 

A couple of observations.

Recovering from a tragic death, or really any death, is a personal/spiritual matter that by and large other humans can't help you with.

And, as a lawdog, the justice system delivers a very crude facsimile of someone's notion of justice.  The O.W. Holmes apocryphal quote kind of sums it up.

So if you are relying on externalities, and the justice system's externalities in particular, to resolve your sorrow and grief, well, I have to pity you.

That said, I'm not a fan of "victims rights."  There is something that evolved from it known as "restorative justice" that seems a much more productive endeavor.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

That kid was raised by wolves.  And that's an insult to vulpines.  A little bit of money and complete white trash parents.  Very ghetto in and of itself.

Hell yeah, love the latin name for wolves, but vulpine is fox. Blue bonnet's latin name or at least for one of them is Texas lupine.. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/7/2021 at 5:24 PM, hayden_horn said:

100%.

this sounds callous, but we place too much emphasis on the victims and their families in dispensing "justice." justice should be more free from emotion. there's a reason that statue is wearing a blindfold, but that ideal has never been realized in our justice system. 

hell, people regularly on here glorify prison rape and violence, as though that is the natural order of things. that that happens for criminals in the justice system is beyond appalling. 

IMO it’s currently the opposite. The emphasis has been put on criminal advocacy. The voice of the victims (exactly like we see here) are silenced. We play mental gymnastics to justify and explain their actions. The victims just aren’t really part of the equation. 
 

When enough victims feel like there is no justice, there is no legal alternative, that’s when we get vigilante violence. If the law won’t hold them accountable, others eventually will. 
 

If that is your wife, you are ok with these murders will be celebrating their 21st birthday free at a bar?  No guarantees they are even locked up until 21. 
 

Victims don’t pay attorney fees. Attorneys are the justice system. Judge and jury. 

Edited by ChickenSandwich
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...