re: #788 LudwigVanQuixote

I could not disagree more strongly. For every case that you feel erred on the side of mercy, there are dozens where the mitigating circumstances were swept away and produced a miscarriage of justice.

Mandatory sentencing and “no tolerance” policies are exactly the reason you see school children expelled for using aspirin and other such foolishness. This kind of thinking rules out the ability to use common sense by appealing to the fears and basest desires of vengeance of the masses. In criminal court, the stakes are vastly higher.

You have automatically assumed that the Judge was biased in a bad way and that no such mitigating circumstances were there as you boldly assert that she must have made a bad call based on her racial loyalties. That in of itself smacks of racism. Perhaps you are correct in this case. However, to boldly assert that must be the case is unfair and wrong. Perhaps there really were mitigating circumstances and perhaps, just perhaps, the mandatory sentence was too severe for the case at hand.

In the general case though, do you think that making certain the bad guy “gets it” to the full measure of your sense of vengeance is more important than perhaps being merciful to those who deserve to have their stories heard? The point of a trial is to have your story heard. The point is to be treated as an individual. Mandatory sentences take that away. It is wrong.

By that logic, minimum and maximum sentences are also unjust.