It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: GreenGunther
And the system breeds another hardened criminal.
originally posted by: underwerks
That's around $200,000 of taxpayer money paying for him to be locked up for a $5 TV remote, if he serves his whole sentence.
Wouldn't surprise me in today's golden age of thought if there's people out there that think this is a good idea for some strange reason.
Dont want to go to jail for 22 years then dont make thr choice to be a career criminal so that when you are eventually caught doing sometbing dumb, like stealing a remote, they throw the book at you...
originally posted by: evc1shop
The judge should've given him a sentence more fitting for the crime.
Perhaps 3 years in prison with a tv behind a protective cover and no remote. 1 channel or maybe randomly selected by the guards.
That should help him reflect on why other's may want to have their remotes handy and not stolen.
originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
This is a classic example of a gross miscarriage of justice. Especially for a petty theft, and calling taking a TV remote from a common and publicly accessible lounge in an apartment complex burglary is a new low for a prosecutor. They wanted to make an example of him. But then they make an example out of everyone in today's courts.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: goou111
A lot of them were remotes and televisions.
Burglary is burglary. 22 years for an admitted 60-odd burglaries isn't harsh. Especially considering having a prior history and multiple attempts by the court to give him alternative sentencing.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: goou111
A lot of them were remotes and televisions.
Burglary is burglary. 22 years for an admitted 60-odd burglaries isn't harsh. Especially considering having a prior history and multiple attempts by the court to give him alternative sentencing.
originally posted by: goou111
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: goou111
A lot of them were remotes and televisions.
Burglary is burglary. 22 years for an admitted 60-odd burglaries isn't harsh. Especially considering having a prior history and multiple attempts by the court to give him alternative sentencing.
Oh I dont really care where he ends up at all. 22 years for anything non violent just seems so harsh.
originally posted by: goou111
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: goou111
A lot of them were remotes and televisions.
Burglary is burglary. 22 years for an admitted 60-odd burglaries isn't harsh. Especially considering having a prior history and multiple attempts by the court to give him alternative sentencing.
Oh I dont really care where he ends up at all. 22 years for anything non violent just seems so harsh.
originally posted by: opethPA
originally posted by: goou111
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: goou111
A lot of them were remotes and televisions.
Burglary is burglary. 22 years for an admitted 60-odd burglaries isn't harsh. Especially considering having a prior history and multiple attempts by the court to give him alternative sentencing.
Oh I dont really care where he ends up at all. 22 years for anything non violent just seems so harsh.
Then the criminal shouldn't have made the choice to steal from people over 60 times.