this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2024
424 points (98.0% liked)

News

23266 readers
4245 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 95 points 7 months ago (1 children)

American jurisprudence is a joke.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 35 points 7 months ago (4 children)

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.

[–] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 52 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I quite literally said—

The American legal system is flawed in many ways...

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

[–] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 21 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I know what you said. My argument is the system isn't flawed. It's working as it is intended.

This outcome is not a product of the systematic problems you describe.

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.

This case (and I'm only talking about this case) is a statistical outlier

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?

[–] aniki@lemm.ee -4 points 7 months ago

no response... how telling.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 17 points 7 months ago

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.

[–] solrize@lemmy.world 20 points 7 months ago (1 children)

tens of thousands of judges

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.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

There are many times more state court judges, some of whom hold their offices by virtue of election

[–] Veraxus@lemmy.world 18 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago

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.

[–] aniki@lemm.ee -3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

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.