(833) 2-REPEAL
floridaactioncommittee.org
It’s not a good time to…
I think we can all agree that it’s NEVER a good time to be a CP defendant, but this week it’s really not a good time to be one. Or is it not such a bad week? I can’t tell.
There have been so many times during this week’s Supreme Court nomination hearings that I’ve cringed. If they are giving Judge Brown Jackson such a hard time over her sentencing decisions in CP cases, I can imagine Judges all over the country are probably looking at their CP defendants and thinking, ‘I better give this person the statutory maximum 20 years or it could one day be me getting skewered.’
Or, am I just conditioned to believe that things can only get worse and its possible that people watching this spectacle are thinking maybe someone should take a closer look at the guidelines if so many Judges think they are too harsh? Maybe judges are seeing the prospective Supreme Court Justice’s sentencing history in CP cases as validation of their own misgivings against giving someone more time for looking at pictures on the internet than committing the underlying crime?
Please don’t take these thoughts as any suggestion that viewing CP is not horrible. We all agree that it is and that any illegal activity is wrong and should be punished. This is merely a commentary on the current sentencing guidelines and whether certain enhancements (such as use of a computer) are truly deserving of a more serious sentence, or if they have become inherent in most offenses.
For better or worse, sentencing guidelines in CP cases were forced back into the spotlight this week and either this will expose a grievous injustice in some of the sentencing enhancements that are contained in the guidelines or it will cause congress to make laws harsher and enact higher minimum mandatory sentences because there’s a perception that people are not getting enough time.
What do you think will come from this week’s exposure?
I could not watch it all. In fact, I was sickened by what I was seeing and hearing from the representatives. I believe this was not only about her sentencing guidelines, but how the Executive branch wants to take away more and more of judges powers that they do not agree with and the use of discretion when it comes to sentencing a person. Maybe they should focus on actually innocent and a meaningful change to the system.
The talk shows that focused on this were just as bad, followed by various social media platforms who focus so much on “our kids are being indoctrinated by pedos”.
I also think that this is a step in the right direction. Mainly for the harsh registry requirements and a more focus on actual prevention than additional punishments. Atleast the elephant (registry laws) in the room is being discussed more often and debated on the damages and additional punishment they cause over prevention.
I too cringed throughout much of the hearings because I am a CP defendant. Why? I allowed someone to use my computer. It was mine, no doubt. But I wasn’t behind the key board. Did the govt ever actually prove the ages of the purported children? Nope. They just said “they look like teenagers.” The judge and jury agreed and the next thing I know, I was in handcuffs on my way to federal prison. I doubt any senator (not to name names) from any state such as Texas or South Carolina will ever understand that someone can use their computer to gain ready access to nude pictures of someone who may or may not be a child because nobody knows for sure.
Were I in Congress right now, I would DEMAND a mandatory minimum sentence of FIVE YEARS for sharing or downloading such material!
I would then claim credit for its enactment, declare problem solved, and win re-election.
Members with Federal experience will recognize what I’m up to here.
(Actually, these are the mandatory minimums that exist already. Most of the public still isn’t aware of them, yet a majority of Federal judges consider them excessive, according to the Sentencing Commission. I believe judges can be trusted with the discretion to go below these ranges where necessary).
That’s not what the Republicans are saying. However there are reports of judges appointed by Republicans sho have ruled the way Jackson has.
I think this week’s exposure is an opportunity to more broadly make our talking points known and to educate the public. We have to see this as an opportunity and act on it.
First
I do not know about CP….BUt What I Do Know, Sentencing Seems To BE Very Harsh
I WOULD NOT Worry about a Crack Down on CP and The Sentencing Guidelines…..What it is, nowadays, from what I gather, is the Volume of Images that are sometimes involuntarily/inadvertenly downloaded etc….
…sometimes computer worms take over a person’s computer and all kinds of shit gets downloaded-whether the person did it intentionally or not!..
–So, This is What Jurist Jackson was referring to During Her Testimony
-SHE IS NOT LENIENT….SHe looks at the Rule of Law and The Sentencing Guidelines and She is within 75% of Other Like Appellate Judges in Other Like Cases(Per the USDOJ)……Remember, Each Person’s Case is Unique-As She Has Said Many Times; and AS We All KNOW!
…That is Why anyone caught up in this should get a good Forensic Computer Specialist!
Anyways, I would not worry about things getting worse; I would portend that Things will get Better-It will take Decades, But at least This is A Start!
…And I wonder What Jurist Thomas is Thinking and What Anita Hill are thinking?…hummmmm
Jurist Jackson has a 58% Approval Rating According to the US Congress-The Highest, Ever Since the 1980s!