|
Jumpingmanjim posted:Do they do sentence discounts for guilty pleas in America? The judge can consider it yeah. The real "magic" happens before trial if/when the prosecutor offers a plea deal (which these people almost assuredly won't get) for a reduced sentence to avoid going to trial in the first place.
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Cliven will not be offered anything other than a cell to live in until he dies. His sons getting plea deals would be absurd because the evidence against them for decades worth of prison time is pretty insurmountable. Maybe they'll get out on parole in a very long time but the Feds have zero reason to show any mercy to armed secessionists or an old rear end in a top hat who has been the source of numerous danger and violent stands against the law. I guarantee you he will be offered something, it just won't be much. Do you have any idea how much money the government saves if he pleas out?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:Do they do sentence discounts for guilty pleas in America? Yes they do, yes they get abused to coerce innocent people into pleading guilty, yes it's hosed up, yes it's mainly a poor/minority vs white wealthy system thing. The practice is slowly improving but it has major flaws.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 06:43
|
|
|
Honestly, I see both of the brother's turning on their father (with their father's blessing) just because they know that his days are numbered and any time over a certain point is a death warrant and pointless. It would allow them to see the light of day earlier than they expect. Of course I'm sure the Feds are well aware of this and probably won't make any deals other than guilty pleas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:The judge can consider it yeah. The real "magic" happens before trial if/when the prosecutor offers a plea deal (which these people almost assuredly won't get) for a reduced sentence to avoid going to trial in the first place. To be honest I expect most of the guys will be offered plea deals. It looks like they're all facing enough time that it's effectively life. This is one of those cases where the trial will be pretty open and shut; the guys are proper hosed but it might lead to a lengthy trial anyway. Even so trials cost time and money, which the courts have finite amounts of. It actually makes sense for the court to say something like "hey guys, we can either drag this out and give you life or you can just plead 'guilty' right now and we'll give you ten years instead." The quicker this gets wrapped up the quicker they can go after other criminals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:I guarantee you he will be offered something, it just won't be much. Do you have any idea how much money the government saves if he pleas out? Is there even a scenario here where a 69 year old man with this many serious offenses and this much evidence amassed against him doesn't die of old age in prison? Even if both parties were interested in cutting a deal, it looks like any sort of agreement that acknowledges the realities of the case is still going to involve a sentence extending far past Cliven Bundy's lifespan. The Feds have no incentive to be lenient to the degree that would let Bundy see another day outside of bars and there doesn't seem much point to Cliven in negotiating just how long he'll have been dead for when his nominal sentence ends. ToxicSlurpee posted:To be honest I expect most of the guys will be offered plea deals. It looks like they're all facing enough time that it's effectively life. This is one of those cases where the trial will be pretty open and shut; the guys are proper hosed but it might lead to a lengthy trial anyway. Even so trials cost time and money, which the courts have finite amounts of. It actually makes sense for the court to say something like "hey guys, we can either drag this out and give you life or you can just plead 'guilty' right now and we'll give you ten years instead." The quicker this gets wrapped up the quicker they can go after other criminals. Given the nature and notoriety of the Bundy clan's crimes, and the fact that the evidence against them will be essentially insurmountable, it's reasonable to expect that the prosecutors may be interested in making an example of the Bundys as a warning to anyone else who shares their sensibilities. This is doubly so given that their not killing everyone in 2014 has been perceived as weakness by some of said circle. Voyager I fucked around with this message at 06:55 on Feb 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:Is there even a scenario here where a 69 year old man with this many serious offenses and this much evidence amassed against him doesn't die of old age in prison? Even if both parties were interested in cutting a deal, it looks like any sort of agreement that acknowledges the realities of the case is still going to involve a sentence extending far past Cliven Bundy's lifespan. The Feds have no incentive to be lenient to the degree that would let Bundy see another day outside of bars and there doesn't seem much point to Cliven in negotiating just how long he'll have been dead for when his nominal sentence ends. They could offer him minimum security, and I'm not totally sure they will be so dead set on putting him in prison for the rest of his life.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:They could offer him minimum security, and I'm not totally sure they will be so dead set on putting him in prison for the rest of his life. Fair enough, the quality of those last years in prison could definitely be a factor in negotiation. I'm still struggling to imagine a plausible plea bargain for what he's done that doesn't extend past the ten or so years he probably has left, though. EDIT: Even if I were to feel sentimental about it, the dude already had a full life. It sucks that he won't get to spend his last years with his family, but I'd still feel worse for his sons who are about to have their prime years taken away from them and will probably be closer to their dad's age when they get out. Voyager I fucked around with this message at 07:05 on Feb 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:02
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:Given the nature and notoriety of the Bundy clan's crimes, and the fact that the evidence against them will be essentially insurmountable, it's reasonable to expect that the prosecutors may be interested in making an example of the Bundys as a warning to anyone else who shares their sensibilities. This is doubly so given that their not killing everyone in 2014 has been perceived as weakness by some of said circle. If the guys take a plea deal that also looks like capitulation and submission to the feds. No matter what happens the Bundys lose. Unless they somehow manage to win the trial, which is absurdly unlikely.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
*Defendent Bundy points at gold fringed flag in the courtroom* Judge: Curses! Foiled again! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:19
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:They could offer him minimum security, and I'm not totally sure they will be so dead set on putting him in prison for the rest of his life. Minimum security seems like a pretty bad idea? There are a lot of guys who are jerking off right now at the thought of breaking him out of prison. They are all imbeciles and I assume minimum security is still fairly secure against escape attempts (if not so secure against shankings, etc.), but still.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:23
|
|
|
McNerd posted:Minimum security seems like a pretty bad idea? There are a lot of guys who are jerking off right now at the thought of breaking him out of prison. They are all imbeciles and I assume minimum security is still fairly secure against escape attempts (if not so secure against shankings, etc.), but still. I'm pretty sure Jarmak's talking about quality of life in terms of small liberties and amenities rather than the physical security of the facilities.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
These are federal charges remember so parole isn't even on the table. It's been more than thirty years since federal parole was abolished (though you still hear about federal prisoners getting out on parole because they were either imprisoned before 1987 or meet one of the small list of exceptions where parole is still possible).
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
"Next friend" are the people SovCits pay to get advice on when to deploy the one weird trick that nullifies all laws. They aren't practicing law without a license, you see, because
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
McNerd posted:Minimum security seems like a pretty bad idea? There are a lot of guys who are jerking off right now at the thought of breaking him out of prison. They are all imbeciles and I assume minimum security is still fairly secure against escape attempts (if not so secure against shankings, etc.), but still. If memory serves they also don't just put anybody in minimum security. I'm pretty sure nobody starts there; you have to behave well and prove you aren't an escape risk. Lower levels of security are something you earn rather than something they just hand you. Kind of like how nobody really starts at maximum security unless they're a real threat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:37
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:I'm pretty sure Jarmak's talking about quality of life in terms of small liberties and amenities rather than the physical security of the facilities. Is there much of a distinction? I assumed by the time you were hardcore enough to need the tall walls, they are pretty much done offering amenities, and these facilities would not have been built with much to offer. Of course there's always room for things to get worse. Realistically speaking I imagine he's going to wind up in supermax. Not that I'm not super happy about it; it's overkill for pretty much anyone, but I would be surprised to hear they offer any lifestyle that isn't some level of living hell.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:37
|
|
|
All this talk of plea deals ignores the fact that the Bundy's are by all accounts still delusional about how the law works and very egotistical. Given what we know of the Bundy clan, them being self-aware or humble enough to realize a plea deal is a good idea to take is a very unlikely scenario. If they are half the true believers they have acted as, they'll never agree to anything that doesn't equate to them getting off scot-free and with full apologies/reparations for the "crimes" the federal government committed against them. Unless prison has already had some severe sobering effects on them, which does not appear to be the case now, they'll ride their SovCit nonsense all the way to ensuring they never see the light of day again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:38
|
|
|
Reminder: they aren't in prison. They're in the county jail which ducks so much more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:All this talk of plea deals ignores the fact that the Bundy's are by all accounts still delusional about how the law works and very egotistical. If the indictment docs taught me anything it's that Bundy thinks federal courts are rigged at the best of times, and he has a 0-4 record in them, so I think he's the rare sovcit who knows his Jedi mind tricks won't work on the judge. I doubt the plea deal would be much better, so he'll probably stake everything on a jury of True Americans coming to his rescue. Not sure whether he's delusional enough to be confident in that, though, or what the other defendants might think about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:49
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:If memory serves they also don't just put anybody in minimum security. I'm pretty sure nobody starts there; you have to behave well and prove you aren't an escape risk. Lower levels of security are something you earn rather than something they just hand you. Kind of like how nobody really starts at maximum security unless they're a real threat. People can start in minimum security, depending on the severity of their offense. People who start in a higher level of custody can move to a camp / minimum facility through behavior. There is a matrix that guides the process, and factors in things like previous record during incarceration, indivisible of escape probability (i.e. If you up for a life bid you are unlikely to start in a camp as your incentive to flee is higher), severity / violence of offense, etc. One comparator is Schaeffer Cox, who was sentenced to 26 years for a plot to kidnap and kill law enforcement and judges. He is currently housed in the communication management unit at Marion, Illinois, a very bad place to live. It is not unreasonable to imagine the leaders of the occupation / Bunkerville to wind up there as they are facing similar time and did similar things. In particular, this bunch seems unlikely to stop trying to rile people up to commit crimes, which is a behavior the government will probably try to squash. Hard to say for certain at this point though. It's entirely possible some of the more peripheral participants will be sentenced moderately and wind up in a lower custody level.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:50
|
|
|
kartikeya posted:Exc...ept they did exactly that hours after nabbing the leaders. They blocked off all the roads leading out of the refuge. Hell, they even cut the power. And they held that for two weeks or so. Now, I get that by that time they had a whole bunch of resources to do so (you can't just suddenly block off the refuge the day it starts because Burns doesn't have a bunch of armored vehicles just sititng around) and the number of people contained were significantly lower, but people were claiming it was impossible, and you're implying it didn't happen. After letting everyone that wanted to flee go. So it was four crazy holdouts no one gave a poo poo about. But do tell us how that proves your point
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 07:57
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:After letting everyone that wanted to flee go. So it was four crazy holdouts no one gave a poo poo about. But do tell us how that proves your point It didn't dwindle to four until two nights later, there were ten to fifteen-ish left the morning after the arrests, and they set up the blocks that night. Once the blocks went up no one, to my knowledge at least, left without passing through, going through their identity/gun check, etc. My point, if you can call it that (I'm not sure what point you think I'm trying to prove), is that yes, it was possible to block off the roads leading into the refuge, and that the terrain, despite looking very flat, is rough enough to make leaving cross country difficult to impossible (which is why when one of the crazy four tried it, they used an ATV...and still got caught). The morning after the arrests was also when those remaining were at their most violent, except possibly the last night, screaming into the camera about killing law enforcement officers and taking pot shots at a drone. All I'm saying is that it happened, because it seemed to be implied that it didn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
Federally Ruined in the rear end by a Grand Jury by Chuck Tingle
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:All this talk of plea deals ignores the fact that the Bundy's are by all accounts still delusional about how the law works and very egotistical. Am I a bad person if I desperately hope one of them tries to fight to the end, preferably on constitutional grounds? The nonsense when people were trying to get the final 4 out and were saying things about fighting on a new battleground in the courts gave me hope someone was planning to challenge the charges based on their understanding that the federal government couldn't own that land therefore there was no illegal occupation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
I'm hoping their court appointed attorney will be able to talk some sense into them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 13:21
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:I'm hoping their court appointed attorney will be able to talk some sense into them. My assumption is that they're going to refuse any legal help and try to represent themselves. I'm also hoping this happens because the results will be hilarious. "You see, your honor, you cannot legally charge my physical person with anything because my legal person is a boat."
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 13:50
|
|
|
It's adorable that people are still weaselling around with "oh, but it could have been handled better". It's technically true while simultaneously being petty and meaningless - there's no point at which law enforcement obviously should have done thing a and they actually did thing b. Maybe if people genuinely want law enforcement to improve in the US then they can toss them a thumbs up every once in a while when they actually pursue intelligent, professional courses of action and get good outcomes because of it. The actual good thing that could conceivably come of this is that it will hopefully become harder to block funding for law enforcement agencies investigating right wing militia groups. Angela Christine posted:Am I a bad person if I desperately hope one of them tries to fight to the end, preferably on constitutional grounds? The nonsense when people were trying to get the final 4 out and were saying things about fighting on a new battleground in the courts gave me hope someone was planning to challenge the charges based on their understanding that the federal government couldn't own that land therefore there was no illegal occupation. No, I think that this whole business has been very effective at revealing these people for the selfish, moronic crybabies that they are. I honestly can't see any real downside to their having even more rope and remain convinced that it's valuable that they continue to receive exposure. They sing a song that sounds a bit like individual liberty, but the longer they sing it, the easier it is to hear the bass line "I am a grifter and I'm too stupid to know it".
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
McNerd posted:Is there much of a distinction? I assumed by the time you were hardcore enough to need the tall walls, they are pretty much done offering amenities, and these facilities would not have been built with much to offer. Of course there's always room for things to get worse. You're out of your loving mind if you think they're going to send him to supermax. This isn't Al Capone we're talking about, it's a crazy old man who has done a lot of threatening and posturing but never actually committed any violent acts. I wouldn't be surprised if they offered him him 10-15 years in a plea and told him if he took his vitamins while he was in prison he might live just long enough to get out and die in his own bed. edit: kartikeya posted:It didn't dwindle to four until two nights later, there were ten to fifteen-ish left the morning after the arrests, and they set up the blocks that night. Once the blocks went up no one, to my knowledge at least, left without passing through, going through their identity/gun check, etc. My point, if you can call it that (I'm not sure what point you think I'm trying to prove), is that yes, it was possible to block off the roads leading into the refuge, and that the terrain, despite looking very flat, is rough enough to make leaving cross country difficult to impossible (which is why when one of the crazy four tried it, they used an ATV...and still got caught). The morning after the arrests was also when those remaining were at their most violent, except possibly the last night, screaming into the camera about killing law enforcement officers and taking pot shots at a drone. It happened after they nabbed the leadership, when the situation had totally changed and the correct move was to press the advantage/momentum. Jarmak fucked around with this message at 14:38 on Feb 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Looking for Patriots to bust the Bundys out of Prison. Need 10000 Navy Seals, 5000 Ranchers, all their women and children to stand up front to be the bullet shield, and the A Team.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:Looking for Patriots to bust the Bundys out of Prison. Then what?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:*Defendent Bundy points at gold fringed flag in the courtroom*
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:Looking for Patriots to bust the Bundys out of Prison. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Guys, I just realized... The Bundys are going to spend the rest of their lives living tax-free, occupying federal land, with a (commissary) account made in their name by the government. WE'VE PLAYED RIGHT INTO THEIR HANDS! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Then what? We start executin' traitors in the name of Jesus!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ponorit/status/700309525866283008
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
And reality slowly slides into becoming shadowrun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
I don't usually endorse supernatural explanations, but this one I like. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
Well quite. How else can we hope to explain the death of an armed criminal who fled arrest, tried to run a roadblock, repeatedly ignored lawful commands from law enforcement officers and kept reaching for his weapon? It's like the time I ticked off that old lady with the cat and then slammed my cock in a drawer. I can't tell you how badly my genitals hurt after earning the displeasure of what I can only imagine was some sort of witch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:Well quite. How else can we hope to explain the death of an armed criminal who fled arrest, tried to run a roadblock, repeatedly ignored lawful commands from law enforcement officers and kept reaching for his weapon? The idea is that the whole supernatural thing clouded his mind and made him crazy. It's obviously bunk (unless tent non-ghost Finnacum was the picture of sanity which in my expert internet opinion he was not) but it wasn't necessarily the dead Paiute ghost that put the cop there who pulled the trigger, just that the dead Paiute ghost that made Finnacum a raving lunatic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:Well quite. How else can we hope to explain the death of an armed criminal who fled arrest, tried to run a roadblock, repeatedly ignored lawful commands from law enforcement officers and kept reaching for his weapon? *Ghost dances at u*
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 15:50
|
|
