Daily GUIDE-ance:

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

This one came to me while I was asleep the other night:

Why can't we hold judges partially responsible when people they sentance become repeat offenders? I mean, obviously the judge should have slammed them harder or more creatively the first time. Of course, this might only make the judge deliberately find the repeater Not Guilty. Hmmmm.

5 comments:

Renae said...

laksjfh

timpani76 said...

Where does the responsibility really lie though? With the parents, with the schools, with society? We would have to start pointing more fingers if you want to start blaming judges, and I think you would eventually run out.

lizS said...

YOU ARE WRONG!

Eyepoke said...

DIE

Mary said...

Two words for you: sentencing guidelines.

They have to follow the guidelines, which means they don't get to make up fun creative sentences. They have to go by what's already outlined by legislation and legal precedent. If the law says that you have to give a first time murderer a maximum of 10 years with 5 years of probation, then that's what the judge has to give them. And then there's time off for good behavior, which the judge has no say over - that's the parole board's call, then with the overcrowding of American prisons, those that make these decisions are left having to come up with creative ways to get offenders out of the system to make room for new inmates, so they do things like house arrest, halfway houses, and anything else they can think of to get people in and out as quickly as possible. Really, it's not the judges' faults at all. Their hands are tied.