The ill-considered prosecution leading to the suicide of computer prodigy Aaron Swartz is the most recent in a long line of abusive prosecutions coming out of the U.S. attorney’s office in Boston, representing a disastrous culture shift. It sadly reflects what’s happened to the federal criminal courts, not only in Massachusetts but across the country.

It seems never to have occurred to Ortiz, nor to the career prosecutors in her office in charge of the prosecution, Stephen Heymann and Scott Garland, that there is something wrong with overcharging, and then raising the ante, merely to wring a guilty plea to a dubious statute.

There’s no evidence of any anti-religious bias on the part of the government.

Hamesucken consists in committing serious violence upon another in his dwelling-house, the house having been entered with the intention to commit an assault.

Once you leave state and local jurisdiction and enter into the Federal one sentences can go up quite a bit. A few punks shooting at each other on the grounds of a national park, for example, will likely find themselves facing a much harsher Federal system. Most crime is local so most states are burdened by keeping large numbers of people in jail. The Fed. gov’t has much more resources in that regard. In this case I’m going to guess the religious oppression aspect made this a civil rights case giving the Feds jurisdiction. Also keep in mind the proseuction only asked for life. It’s only a request to the judge.

On top of that…turning down a plea offer is a good way to get the prosecution to really throw the book at you.

On top of that, kidnapping is a Federal crime and has very harsh penalties. J. Edgar Hoover and the Limbaugh baby kidnappers can be thanked for that.

I think everyone is in agreement (including me) that a life sentence seems extreme. On the other hand here’s part of the text of the federal statute:

(a) In General.—
(1) Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin.— Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person—
(A) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and
(B) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if—
(i) death results from the offense; or
(ii) the offense includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.

They were convicted of kidnapping. So the statute permits life imprisonment.

But life sentences, when nobody actually was killed or permanently injured, seem excessive in a climate where other armed home invaders (including those who planned ahead of time with others to do it) *don’t* typically get that sentence. I get that the prosecutors are only asking for it, but I think it’s an excessive request and not appropriate justice *even to ask for it,* in a world where murderers don’t consistently get life.

That’s just my opinion, but it is my opinion.

pentamom,

As I have already said, a life sentence does seem extreme. But these are not “ordinary” crimes. They are bias crimes.

I am wondering if part of the reaction to this is that Amish are not taken particularly seriously by many people. What if a group of neo-Nazis carried off five home invasions and shaved the heads and beards of Hassidic Jews? And the neo-Nazi ringleader was unrepentant? I think that would have engendered significantly more outrage.

Also, let’s note the following:

But what has made the trial outcome especially painful is knowing that they turned down a collective plea deal that would have guarenteed them relatively light punishments. Under the terms prosecutors offered, Mullet would have served less than five years. The other Bergholz men would have served two years, including time served. The women would have gotten probation.

It is not as if the justice department was intent on inflicting the most severe punishment possible. Mullet and his men knew when they turned down the plea deal what kind of sentences they were likely to receive if they went to trial.

Still, I am betting the judge will not give Mullet a life sentence.

Absolutely. But how often is it a LIFE sentence?

Around here the punks who shoot each other generally don’t get life sentences.