Supreme Court pick Ketanji Brown Jackson .

a reply to: frogs453

You really think judges can give all the defendents the max sentence? Really? You do realize that there is a point system that is done from information gathered by other departments that is given to her before sentencing that she has to by law use to weigh the sentence? Why do you think in big cases they don't immediately sentence people? Because there is a process to follow. You really believe that sentences would not be overturned if a judge was giving max sentences to all the defendents and not following proper judicial procedure?

So your one of those people that just see's what they want ignores the rest and makes up bits to fill in the blanks .

Did I say she has to give max sentence to everyone ? Nope never came up , I said she can do what she wants the sentence when it's all said and done is up to her .

and JinMI above just provided very clear information for you saying as much .

a reply to: frogs453

If she were to max all cases, then no. Shed be consistent.

Conversely, should she deviate from her own record, it can be argued during any appeal.

Your link states they do have to follow the guidelines and only if there is extenuating circumstances can they vary and again the appeals court determines whether it was just.

Inncorrect. Its literally posted above.

The "must consider" is not the same as "have to follow."

When a judge determines within his or her discretion to depart from the Guidelines, the judge must explain what factors warranted the increased or decreased sentence.When a Court of Appeals reviews a sentence imposed through a proper application the Guidelines, it may presume the sentence is reasonable.

Nothing about extenuating circumstances, only factors relevant the the case

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Ok, so she can do what she wants and have it overturned on appeal and just let the guy run the street, with no monitoring for life, etc. I'm not just seeing what I want to see, it may be a flaw in the system but nationwide cases have the same result.

Ok "must consider", again so a lessor sentence is really what's called for but she gives an extensive one even after considering. Seems again that would likely be overturned as how can you consider the informations leads to a lower end, yet you give a high end?

a reply to: xuenchen

She should have been dismiss from the beginning, darn I still wonder why she is still been asked questions, we already know what she stands for and what she is all about.

But like with Sotomayor she will be appointed and there goes the supreme court.

a reply to: frogs453

Ok, so she can do what she wants and have it overturned on appeal and just let the guy run the street, with no monitoring for life, etc.

Depends on the nature of the appeal.

If "the guy" is eventually let loose its because the prosecution or judge failed at their craft or the guy is legitimately innocent.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Ok, so she can do what she wants and have it overturned on appeal and just let the guy run the street, with no monitoring for life, etc. I'm not just seeing what I want to see, it may be a flaw in the system but nationwide cases have the same result.

Ok "must consider", again so a lessor sentence is really what's called for but she gives an extensive one even after considering. Seems again that would likely be overturned as how can you consider the informations leads to a lower end, yet you give a high end?

Such is the nature of American courts .

but a properly Prosecuted case will never see a Pedo released early via appeals court.

a reply to: JinMI

Not if the circumstances and all of the pre-sentence information and facts did not warrant the heavy sentence. It would likely still be overturned. Dude would probably be free with time served.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Heck a 47 year old pedo who raped a 14 year old in Tennessee for 20 months just got probation. So it's very possible they would let one out with time served.

I don't support them getting little time, she has daughters and nightmares about the victims, she probably feels the same, but she and every other judge in the U.S. apparently have their hands tied somewhat in these situations. Has to be a flaw somewhere if this is happening as reported by all judges.

What's this nonsense about asking what a women is? When do we get to the part where the Republicans accuse her of raping someone? I want to see how she reacts under that kind of pressure.

I mean did you see her facial gestures when she was asked what a woman is? My bet is she wouldn't be able to withstand the rape aligations.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

I wonder what her interpretation of the 19th amendment will be if she cant define what a woman is. It seems that would be pretty much a requirement, at least for that particular piece of legislation.

a reply to: frogs453

Again, incorrect. Sentencing implies that there os already a guilty verdict. Therefore the nature of the appeal applies. Are you appealing the verdict? Malfeascence? Jury? The sentence itself?

Did you know that it can take up to 3 times of a sentencing appeal to appear before a different judge than the one you were originally sentenced by?

a reply to: dandandat2

She was asked if she's been accused of sexually assaulting anyone, she calmly said no.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Didnt she chime in on Roe v Wade the same day?

Clearly political on top of the discrimination it took to have her there.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: dandandat2

She was asked if she's been accused of sexually assaulting anyone, she calmly said no.

Congressman asking a nominee if they have ever been accused of sexually assaulting anyone.

vs

Congressman actually accusing a nominee of sexual assaulting several people; followed by a weeks long process of trying that nominee on the allegations of sexual assault in the court of public opinion.

Are not even close to the same thing.

I can understand if Ketanji Brown Jackson could not calmly withstand the pressure of the second; not many people could. But that was the litmus test the Democrats set up for a past nominee and I wonder why the Republicans haven't sunk to the same level?

Is it because Republicans are more civil then Democrats?

originally posted by: frogs453
Well anyway, it seems as if most want to just yell "radical" and "pedo lover" and "I get a bad vibe" regardless of the facts of law. I've provided all the info and links I can. I'll leave you to the echo chamber you seem to prefer. Don't forget to throw in a few "CRT", and "Leftist Agenda" in there too.

You're not as smart as you think you are and your *OPINION* is just that. It's easy to spout that word vomit, however, you've yet to recognize the real issues we're seeing here.
Compare and Contrast to that of ACB and Kav, I REST MY CASE.

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: frogs453
Well anyway, it seems as if most want to just yell "radical" and "pedo lover" and "I get a bad vibe" regardless of the facts of law. I've provided all the info and links I can. I'll leave you to the echo chamber you seem to prefer. Don't forget to throw in a few "CRT", and "Leftist Agenda" in there too.

You're not as smart as you think you are and your *OPINION* is just that. It's easy to spout that word vomit, however, you've yet to recognize the real issues we're seeing here.
Compare and Contrast to that of ACB and Kav, I REST MY CASE.

The two cant be compared .

They are treating Ketanji like a fragile tea cup and at best the questions being ask are basic Soft ball questions that any nominee would get , and even still the Left media are completely losing there minds calling every single question racist .

Brett Kavanaugh on the other hand was treated like a serial rapist guilty before the fact.

Is it because Republicans are more civil then Democrats?

Compare and Contrast to that of ACB and Kav, I REST MY CASE.

Thats why Rs continue to lose.
Erosion of the constitution all the way down to cancellation from making a living to educating the youth.

All funded by your own tax dollars.

Simply not playing the same game.

originally posted by: JinMI

Is it because Republicans are more civil then Democrats?

Compare and Contrast to that of ACB and Kav, I REST MY CASE.

Thats why Rs continue to lose.
Erosion of the constitution all the way down to cancellation from making a living to educating the youth.

All funded by your own tax dollars.

Simply not playing the same game.

Precisely and the single largest reason Trump has such an enormous base.

What you said is true and I can see it. Being born in 1983, I have that special set of "lens".

It's so bad that I literally condone Trump Loyalist lackies because at least they're screaming "Freedom loving Constitutionalist Patriotic Americans" rather "racist from a racist country!" Which is not good, but between these two, I have to with the most reasonable and sensible one.

originally posted by: frogs453
Well anyway, it seems as if most want to just yell "radical" and "pedo lover" and "I get a bad vibe" regardless of the facts of law. I've provided all the info and links I can. I'll leave you to the echo chamber you seem to prefer. Don't forget to throw in a few "CRT", and "Leftist Agenda" in there too.

The easy way out again 😎

a reply to: JinMI

Her and harris are living breathing proof of why affirmative action doesn't work.