- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- news
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- news
In his sentencing memo Thursday, U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney made it clear why he was letting Tyler Laube off lightly.
It wasn’t just because of what Laube did or didn’t do – the defendant had already confessed to beating a journalist at a 2017 Southern California rally and pleaded guilty to violating riot laws as part of a white supremacist gang.
Laube deserved a light sentence, Carney said, because prosecutors should have focused on leftist groups.
In a 22-page memo, Carney repeatedly said prosecutors have “ignored” violence committed by Antifa and instead focused on targeting people like Laube – Trump supporters and members of the far right.
…
The federal judge’s strong words – and clear political bent – are as unusual as they are uninformed, legal experts told USA TODAY.
“He’s really gone off the deep end,” said John Donohue, a professor at Stanford Law School.
This particular judge is a joke. The American legal system is flawed in many ways, but you also have to recognise that no system as large as that can be internally consistent all the time. There are tens of thousands of judges in the US, so it’s expected that every so often you will see a particularly unfair or strange ruling.
Except it’s proven particular groups are more likely to receive harsher sentences than others (brown men). It a corrupt hypocritical system that was intentionally made to give justice to some and not others. It was designed to be unfair
I quite literally said—
This outcome is not a product of the systematic problems you describe. The average January 6 defendant received sentences of several months to several years imprisonment. This case (and I’m only talking about this case) is a statistical outlier.
I swear, whenever I try to make a nuanced point the people on this site can be dense as fuck and it goes right over their heads and they think that I’m claiming everything’s perfect
I know what you said. My argument is the system isn’t flawed. It’s working as it is intended.
The entire system uses prejudice to sentence those it considers outliers harsher than others. Whether it be race, gender, political ideology, etc. As well as DA’s being more concerned with getting a conviction no matter the cost instead of actual justice.
Yet even you bring up the fact that the VAST majority of Jan 6 defendant receive less time (especially compared to BLM protestors) yet somehow this case is seperate from the issues that plague our justice system? Couldn’t have anything to do with their races and political affiliation right?
no response… how telling.
I mean, increased scrutiny and harsher penalties applied to left-wing radical groups and amnesty for right-wing radical groups has been a pretty consistent problem for decades at minimum. This is a prominent example of a more widespread problem.
Less than 1000 at that level (US district judge) I’m pretty sure. It is a pretty big deal. They are confirmed by the Senate and serve for life. Real zanies are not supposed to get through.
There are many times more state court judges, some of whom hold their offices by virtue of election
I get what you’re saying, but there needs to strong and effective remedies for situations like this.
This judge needs to be removed and barred from any public office or service, and every ruling they ever made carefully re-evaluated.
I agree. These rulings seem politically motivated and, as the experts in the article said, reflect shocking ignorance of the situation. Unfortunately, unlike most state judiciaries, there is no body set up to scrutinise federal judges. The only recourse is political, through impeachment.
Bullshit. A jury of peers was always supposed to be white men. From the very first moment this shit hole was settled, its been nothing but racism, fascism, and greed.