What is Wrong With Stone's Recommended 7-9 years

I have seen a large number of posts on this one event and both sides circle their political wagons and blame each other as to the problem when the real problem is actually outside of the whole Left Right agenda battles. It can be perceive that all this has an underlining political motivation since the original Mueller investigation literally died on the vine outside the six people being charged/convicted for process crimes and a few events like taxes done decades ago. Another example that I was not a fan of was the Clinton impeachment as it started out as an investigation into real estate investments of the Clintons named Whitewater, and ended up as sperm on a blue dress for his impeachment. WTH!! The Mueller investigation has started to look real ugly too with all the inappropriate events coming out now that were used as main drivers to start the investigation in the first place... Another WTH!! situation.

So here we are with six people that were near Trump, but more importantly they were RNC injections into Trump's circle that have been a part of the RNC for decades and with many other political figures, so was a chunk of all this political, I would bet my 401K that it was, but was the actions of the federal prosecutors politically based too? I don't think so, even if jurors like woked Seth Cousins that showed a rather high level of bias were part of the process.

So Stone was found guilty and that is where I wanted to take this post. Much of the problem and why we have a massive prison population really comes down to the sentencing guidelines creates in 1984. As bad as "three strikes you are out" this has caused an explosion of our prison population and Stone is a prefect example of it. No one is going to argue that Stone got exactly what the sentencing guidelines added up to, but we are talking 7 to 9 years for a first-time non-violent offender that is based on...

Those “guidelines” are a complicated point system that calculate potential sentences by adding and subtracting points based on factors like the amount of loss, whether the person is a leader, and so on. The problem with this point system is that it is not based on any empirical data or study.

This is not just about Stone it is about everyone that are first-time non-violent offender that find themselves in prison for a very long time when the actual crime can have zero impact in anything and with no actual victims. The Supreme Court recognized these problems and said that judges should simply consult the guidelines and should not be bound by them, but that is not how federal prosecutors work, and if you are in court for stealing baby formula and you did it a number of times the federal prosecutors can look at the guidelines and will say 10 years!

Another aspect to this is the "tax trial" that has seemed to take over trials as the main point while the original reasons kind of disappear and Stone's case is a prefect example of the tax trial in action. As per the guidelines if he pleaded guilty right up front he would have been looking at a sentence of closer to 24 months under the guidelines, and had he met with prosecutors and cooperated, he likely would have been sentenced to probation. Because he had the audacity to go to trial, his sentence goes from probation to 7-9 years. It’s no wonder that innocent people plead guilty. It’s no wonder that trials are vanishing. Before the sentencing guidelines and the trial tax, 20 percent of cases went to trial. Now it’s less than 3 percent. That is pretty stark evidence that the trial tax has become too severe.

We can also see this in Flynn's case that people have been suggesting that if he wasn't guilty then he would not have pled guilty in the first place, and now more is coming out that there is a good chance he will be a free man in the near future as to how inappropriate his case is starting to look, but it is easy now to understand why he and many others would plead guilty when they are basically not just to minimize the sentencing.

Criminal Justice Reform is being implemented. Rapists only get 5 years now.

All Stone was convicted of was telling a lie to investigators. (gasp!)

originally posted by: Xtrozero
I have seen a large number of posts on this one event and both sides circle their political wagons and blame each other as to the problem when the real problem is actually outside of the whole Left Right agenda battles. It can be perceive that all this has a underlining political motivation since the original Mueller investigation literally died on the vine outside the six people being charged/convicted for process crimes and a few events like taxes done decades ago. Another example that I was not a fan of was the Clinton impeachment as it started out as an investigation into real estate investments of the Clintons named Whitewater, and ended up as sperm on a blue dress for his impeachment. WTH!! The Mueller investigation has started to look real ugly too with all the inappropriate events coming out now that were used as main drivers to start the investigation in the first place... Another WTH!! situation.

So here we are with six people that were near Trump, but more importantly they were RNC injections into Trump's circle that have been a part of the RNC for decades and with many other political figures, so was a chunk of all this political, I would bet my 401K that it was, but was the actions of the federal prosecutors politically based too? I don't think so, even if jurors like woked Seth Cousins that showed a rather high level of bias were part of the process.

So Stone was found guilty and that is where I wanted to take this post. Much of the problem and why we have a massive prison population really comes down to the sentencing guidelines creates in 1984. As bad as "three strikes you are out" this has caused an explosion of our prison population and Stone is a prefect example of it. No one is going to argue that Stone got exactly what the sentencing guidelines came too, but we are talking 7 to 9 years for a first-time non-violent offender that is based on...

A couple of things,
Stone hasn't been sentenced yet as I understand it, so it's still remains to be seen what will actually be handed out, I would reckon that something like four to five years might just be what Stone receives.
Thing is, Stone's lawyer has said that Stone himself acknowledges the seriousness of the charges, and probably the witness tampering would carry the bulk of the sentence, around five years then.

Regardless of the sentencing guideline for this offense, the judge has the ability to take all factors into consideration including non-violent and/or first-time offenses. But in this case the judge and the lead juror are vehemently anti-Trump and anyone else that supports him. Even Stevie Wonder can see this is a ridiculous sentence recommendation.

originally posted by: carewemust
Criminal Justice Reform is being implemented. Rapists only get 5 years now.

All Stone was convicted of was telling a lie to investigators. (gasp!)

Well he did call a guy a rat bastard and threaten the man's dog.. Who laughed it all off BTW... I'm sure that was at least 5 years of the recommendation.

I think Trump's reform is going to go in many other directions...

originally posted by: smurfy
A couple of things,
Stone hasn't been sentenced yet as I understand it, so it's still remains to be seen what will actually be handed out, I would reckon that something like four to five years might just be what Stone receives.
Thing is, Stone's lawyer has said that Stone himself acknowledges the seriousness of the charges, and probably the witness tampering would carry the bulk of the sentence, around five years then.

Calling what he did "witness tampering" is pretty sad and just adds to the whole failure I talk about in my post?

a reply to: Xtrozero

If you have any question how the DOJ prosecutors came up with their sentencing recommendations, you can read it for yourself here: www.usatoday.com...

The sentencing guidelines and their rationale start on page 16.

As for Gen Flynn, are you kidding me! The guy, Trump's National Security Secretary, was a secret paid operative for Turkey and lied to Mike Pence and President Trump about it. He and his son had all kinds of illegal troubles, including Pizza Gate and a plot to kidnap a Turkish cleric residing here in the US in exile, for 15 million dollars. Not to mention his conversations with Russian officials regarding sanctions, that he lied to the FBI about.

Flynn took a plea deal, and copped to a lesser charge, lying to the FBI, in exchange for a light sentence, no charges against his son, and he would assist the government in ongoing investigations.

He reneged on assisting the FEDS and now says he was coerced? LOL Great! give him a trial on the whole shebang then, not just his perjury charges.

originally posted by: HalWesten
Regardless of the sentencing guideline for this offense, the judge has the ability to take all factors into consideration including non-violent and/or first-time offenses. But in this case the judge and the lead juror are vehemently anti-Trump and anyone else that supports him. Even Stevie Wonder can see this is a ridiculous sentence recommendation.

The guidelines sure gives the judge ample ammo to do anything they want being bias or not. We have seen some rather bias people on ATS suggesting the 7-9 years is 100% correct of what Stone should get for his process crimes as a first time non-violent offender, and they say this only because of the guidelines.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
If you have any question how the DOJ prosecutors came up with their sentencing recommendations, you can read it for yourself here: www.usatoday.com...

So do you think sentencing guidelines as a whole is good for the courts?

a reply to: Xtrozero

I think as long as Bill Barr is going around insisting that prosecutors throw the book at average criminals around the country, I think looking at lenient sentences for Trump's friends is a little off putting.

a reply to: Xtrozero

The jury foreman was caught lying about her knowledge of Stone and the case.

Mistrial, and prosecute again.

But we live in Banana Republic and the leftists want to attack anyone associated with Trump so they will probably kill him because they *(the evil leftists) are evil and don't believe in the rule of law.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
If you have any question how the DOJ prosecutors came up with their sentencing recommendations, you can read it for yourself here: www.usatoday.com...

If as you say all that Flynn did was correct, why even have a plea deal... Are they really going to peas deal to a low lying charge if he did so many high crimes? You are lacking a level of logic here... I guess if I rob a bank I should plea deal about lying that I didn't rob the bank and so get sent to jail for lying instead...lol

a reply to: DBCowboy

The jury foreman was caught lying about her knowledge of Stone and the case.

No she wasn't. Her party affiliation was known. She was asked if her affiliation would adversely affect her ability to be impartial. She said it wouldn't.

If you were asked to serve on a similar jury, would you be disqualified for your political opinions, posted here on ATS? Do you think that you could be an impartial juror is a similar case?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

She lied and got busted, candy-coat it how ever you wish, but it doesn't change the facts that she lied.

a reply to: DBCowboy

BS!
2nd line.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
If you have any question how the DOJ prosecutors came up with their sentencing recommendations, you can read it for yourself here: www.usatoday.com...

If as you say all that Flynn did was correct, why even have a plea deal... Are they really going to peas deal to a low lying charge if he did so many high crimes? You are lacking a level of logic here... I guess if I rob a bank I should plea deal about lying that I didn't rob the bank and so get sent to jail for lying instead...lol

What are you saying? Do you think that Flynn didn't lie about being a paid Turkish asset to Mike Pence and Donald Trump? Are you saying that he and his son weren't running Pizza Gate lies from the during the transition and from White House? Do you not believe that Flynn and his son were not involved in a plot to kidnap a Turkish cleric and fly him back to Turkey to be dealt with? That Flynn didn't lie to the FBI about conversations with Russian officials about dropping the sanctions?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Coming from someone who hates the Constitution, rule of law. . . .

Shocked face.

a reply to: Xtrozero
If we take the points you have made as a given your conclusions are reasonable. I am in sympathy with Trump's statements on this account however not if he only interjects his position on this one case, the case of his friend Stone. Should he call for an over all reassessment of these sentencing guidlines across the board and not just in the Stone case I would support his move. However I do not think that he will.

a reply to: DBCowboy

More cheap lies and BS accusations coming from you! I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

HA!

You accusing people of lies and BS. Pot meet kettle.

You have zero credibility.