Aa
non violent drug offenders to be pardoned
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/21/1293503/-President-Obama-to-Pardon-Commute-Hundreds-Perhaps-Thousands-of-Nonviolent-Drug-Offenders
You are wrong. Here in California the three strikes law means that somebody with a dime bag could indeed have been sentenced ten years or more. People who stole a loaf of bread were being sentenced to long prison terms due to this law.
http://www.courts.ca.gov/20142.htm
California's Three Strikes sentencing law was originally enacted in 1994. The essence of the Three Strikes law was to require a defendant convicted of any new felony, having suffered one prior conviction of a serious felony to be sentenced to state prison for twice the term otherwise provided for the crime. If the defendant was convicted of any felony with two or more prior strikes, the law mandated a state prison term of at least 25 years to life.
On November 6, 2012 the voters approved Proposition 36 which substantially amended the law with two primary provisions:
the requirements for sentencing a defendant as a third strike offender were changed to 25 years to life by requiring the new felony to be a serious or violent felony with two or more prior strikes to qualify for the 25 year-to-life sentence as a third strike offender; and
the addition of a means by which designated defendants currently serving a third strike sentence may petition the court for reduction of their term to a second strike sentence, if they would have been eligible for second strike sentencing under the new law.
http://www.courts.ca.gov/20142.htm
California's Three Strikes sentencing law was originally enacted in 1994. The essence of the Three Strikes law was to require a defendant convicted of any new felony, having suffered one prior conviction of a serious felony to be sentenced to state prison for twice the term otherwise provided for the crime. If the defendant was convicted of any felony with two or more prior strikes, the law mandated a state prison term of at least 25 years to life.
On November 6, 2012 the voters approved Proposition 36 which substantially amended the law with two primary provisions:
the requirements for sentencing a defendant as a third strike offender were changed to 25 years to life by requiring the new felony to be a serious or violent felony with two or more prior strikes to qualify for the 25 year-to-life sentence as a third strike offender; and
the addition of a means by which designated defendants currently serving a third strike sentence may petition the court for reduction of their term to a second strike sentence, if they would have been eligible for second strike sentencing under the new law.
http://famm.org/stephanie-george/
If I’m not mistaken FAMM was instrumental in her release and yes, I've been doing a lot of reading about it today (I'm off work).About the only thing I can find is The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 which only applies to Crack vs Powder.
I agree that her sentence was overkill. I do believe 3 time Felons should do some serious time rather it is violent or not. They, have proved they will continue that lifestyle if not held accountable. But, I don’t think it should be the same as violent felons. There are to many people that deserve to be locked up or are set free on early release because of over crowding.
If I’m not mistaken FAMM was instrumental in her release and yes, I've been doing a lot of reading about it today (I'm off work).About the only thing I can find is The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 which only applies to Crack vs Powder.
I agree that her sentence was overkill. I do believe 3 time Felons should do some serious time rather it is violent or not. They, have proved they will continue that lifestyle if not held accountable. But, I don’t think it should be the same as violent felons. There are to many people that deserve to be locked up or are set free on early release because of over crowding.
I noticed you didnt post a link. Do you have one? Thanks
But beside this particular case you are discussing, you are missing the point. The point is this. A lot of people are sitting in jail, taking up space and money due to ridiculous sentences for non violent drug crime. No one is saying these people are innocent or they didnt commit the crime. No one is saying that at all, but the punishment not fitting the crime is the problem and its very expensive and just plain unjust. No one is letting bunches of violent scary people out of jail, just to feel sorry for em and let them go....The situation is waaay bigger than that. Did you research it?
But beside this particular case you are discussing, you are missing the point. The point is this. A lot of people are sitting in jail, taking up space and money due to ridiculous sentences for non violent drug crime. No one is saying these people are innocent or they didnt commit the crime. No one is saying that at all, but the punishment not fitting the crime is the problem and its very expensive and just plain unjust. No one is letting bunches of violent scary people out of jail, just to feel sorry for em and let them go....The situation is waaay bigger than that. Did you research it?
The Stephanie George Story
I agree that the sentence was harsh but she wasn’t this innocent mother of 3 that was convicted for just hiding her Boyfriend’s “Because of her 1993 drug offenses, Stephanie was categorized as a career criminal, an enhancement which mandates a life sentence.”
Stephanie dated several men who were involved in selling drugs. At times, they would help Stephanie support her family. In exchange, she occasionally delivered and sold drugs and took messages for them. On October 26, 1993, police arrested Stephanie after she was found sitting on the front porch of a house next to a bag that contained cocaine residue. She confessed she had crack in her possession and surrendered it to the officers. She received probation. On November 10, several weeks after her arrest, police sent a confidential informant (CI) to make a controlled drug buy from Stephanie. On November 15, the CI purchased two crack rocks for $120. On December 8, the CI bought $40 worth of crack from Stephanie and several codefendants. After this final controlled buy, officers searched Stephanie’s residence and found four pieces of crack cocaine and drug paraphernalia. Stephanie was fined and sentenced to nine months in jail with work release.
Nearly three years later on August 16, 1996, police raided Stephanie’s residence after a CI reported that he had seen crack in the house. Officers found 500 grams of powder cocaine and $13,710 in an attic safe belonging to Stephanie’s former boyfriend, Michael. In the master bedroom, police found utensils that tested positive for drug residue. Michael had the key to the safe, along with $797 in cash in his pants pocket. He confessed to police that the money, the cocaine and the paraphernalia belonged to him and that the $797 was from 500 grams of crack he had already sold.
Later, Michael would testify that he paid Stephanie to let him reside and store crack at her house. At the time of her arrest, Stephanie had no cash, no bank account and owned no other property besides her car, valued at $2,500. She depended on food stamps and welfare to provide for her children.
Stephanie went to trial. She was held accountable for 500 grams of powder cocaine found in the attic safe as well as 500 grams of crack that Michael said he sold. Several of Stephanie’s codefendants who dealt drugs with Michael testified against her. Because of their uncorroborated testimony, Stephanie was held accountable for an additional 290 grams of crack, for a total of 1,290 grams (about 2.84 pounds).
Because of her 1993 drug offenses, Stephanie was categorized as a career criminal, an enhancement which mandates a life sentence.
Despite his objections,
Judge Roger Vinson was forced to sentence 26-year-old Stephanie to life in prison without parole. He said:
I agree that the sentence was harsh but she wasn’t this innocent mother of 3 that was convicted for just hiding her Boyfriend’s “Because of her 1993 drug offenses, Stephanie was categorized as a career criminal, an enhancement which mandates a life sentence.”
Stephanie dated several men who were involved in selling drugs. At times, they would help Stephanie support her family. In exchange, she occasionally delivered and sold drugs and took messages for them. On October 26, 1993, police arrested Stephanie after she was found sitting on the front porch of a house next to a bag that contained cocaine residue. She confessed she had crack in her possession and surrendered it to the officers. She received probation. On November 10, several weeks after her arrest, police sent a confidential informant (CI) to make a controlled drug buy from Stephanie. On November 15, the CI purchased two crack rocks for $120. On December 8, the CI bought $40 worth of crack from Stephanie and several codefendants. After this final controlled buy, officers searched Stephanie’s residence and found four pieces of crack cocaine and drug paraphernalia. Stephanie was fined and sentenced to nine months in jail with work release.
Nearly three years later on August 16, 1996, police raided Stephanie’s residence after a CI reported that he had seen crack in the house. Officers found 500 grams of powder cocaine and $13,710 in an attic safe belonging to Stephanie’s former boyfriend, Michael. In the master bedroom, police found utensils that tested positive for drug residue. Michael had the key to the safe, along with $797 in cash in his pants pocket. He confessed to police that the money, the cocaine and the paraphernalia belonged to him and that the $797 was from 500 grams of crack he had already sold.
Later, Michael would testify that he paid Stephanie to let him reside and store crack at her house. At the time of her arrest, Stephanie had no cash, no bank account and owned no other property besides her car, valued at $2,500. She depended on food stamps and welfare to provide for her children.
Stephanie went to trial. She was held accountable for 500 grams of powder cocaine found in the attic safe as well as 500 grams of crack that Michael said he sold. Several of Stephanie’s codefendants who dealt drugs with Michael testified against her. Because of their uncorroborated testimony, Stephanie was held accountable for an additional 290 grams of crack, for a total of 1,290 grams (about 2.84 pounds).
Because of her 1993 drug offenses, Stephanie was categorized as a career criminal, an enhancement which mandates a life sentence.
Despite his objections,
Judge Roger Vinson was forced to sentence 26-year-old Stephanie to life in prison without parole. He said:
Yeah comments like that doesn't help anyone here. Why not elaborate so we can what position you are even taking on the subject?
OH- Some guy caught with a dime bag of weed is not getting 20 years. Drugs=more crime. Look at how a lot of drugs get here what does it start with...brutal drugs cartels. Or how about local meth labs or home gown weed, all people involved are violent one way or another. That was too broad of a statement, very few people in the drug business is non-violent.
As for that mother she had a choice, hide the drugs, leave, or hide the drugs but call the police. I am pretty sure that if she called the police and said "hey my bf stashed a kilo at my house" she would not be arrested.
Are drugs ever going to be stopped...no but we as a society can do the best we can to show each other that this is not acceptable. If that means John the street corner dealer caught selling rock 5x's spends 20 years in jail then so be it, or Henry who smuggled in 100lbs of uncut coke gets life or Jack who bought a dime bag get 5 days and $1000 fine.
It ***** and I hope to do the best I can to keep my kids away from drugs.
OH- Some guy caught with a dime bag of weed is not getting 20 years. Drugs=more crime. Look at how a lot of drugs get here what does it start with...brutal drugs cartels. Or how about local meth labs or home gown weed, all people involved are violent one way or another. That was too broad of a statement, very few people in the drug business is non-violent.
As for that mother she had a choice, hide the drugs, leave, or hide the drugs but call the police. I am pretty sure that if she called the police and said "hey my bf stashed a kilo at my house" she would not be arrested.
Are drugs ever going to be stopped...no but we as a society can do the best we can to show each other that this is not acceptable. If that means John the street corner dealer caught selling rock 5x's spends 20 years in jail then so be it, or Henry who smuggled in 100lbs of uncut coke gets life or Jack who bought a dime bag get 5 days and $1000 fine.
It ***** and I hope to do the best I can to keep my kids away from drugs.
Does anyone really research anything and seriously think about it?
I am so disappointed in the superficial lip service paid to such a serious subject. I don't know where to start anymore and that's just as well because no one wants to really think about anything...................like the.......oh, never mind.
I am so disappointed in the superficial lip service paid to such a serious subject. I don't know where to start anymore and that's just as well because no one wants to really think about anything...................like the.......oh, never mind.
well, 17 years does seem enough, doesn't it? I think a pardon in that type of situation makes sense.
I agree, but she has already served 17 years. Its not that I dont think they should get punishment, I do, but appropriate punishment makes more sense than a life sentence.
I have very mixed feelings. I personally believe that a mother that has a drug addicted/drug dealing boyfriend has issues to allow that kind of situation into her home and to even help him. Do I think a life sentence is too much, yes. But I do believe in punishment as a form of deterrent. Read a story about what happened to this woman . . . perhaps someone else will make better lifestyle choices that your allow to enter into your home and the home of your kids.
But I do understand overcrowding of jails and that a life sentence doesn't sound appropriate for that crime. At all. But, that doesn't mean I think she doesn't deserve some action taken against her.
But I do understand overcrowding of jails and that a life sentence doesn't sound appropriate for that crime. At all. But, that doesn't mean I think she doesn't deserve some action taken against her.
A senior official says that during Obama’s last few years in office he may grant clemency to “hundreds, perhaps thousands” of people“:
The scope of the new clemency initiative is so large that administration officials are preparing a series of personnel and process changes to help them manage the influx of petitions they expect Obama to approve. Among the changes is reforming the recently censured office within the Justice Department responsible for processing pardon petitions. Yahoo News has learned that the pardon attorney, Ronald Rodgers, who was criticized in a 2012 Internal watchdog report for mishandling a high-profile clemency petition, is likely to step down as part of that overhaul. Additional procedures for handling large numbers of clemency petitions could be announced as soon as this week, a senior administration official said, though it could take longer.
While it is important to reserve praise until there is tangible action to actually judge, this would be a very positive move. Not only would it improve the lives of many Americans who were treated unjustly, but also it would save the country enormous amounts of money. Keeping someone in prison costs tens of thousands of dollars a year.
Democrats and Republicans in the Senate have been working together on a sentencing reform bill, the Smarter Sentencing Act, which could improve things moving forward but the President is the only one who has the power to do something immediately.
The scope of the new clemency initiative is so large that administration officials are preparing a series of personnel and process changes to help them manage the influx of petitions they expect Obama to approve. Among the changes is reforming the recently censured office within the Justice Department responsible for processing pardon petitions. Yahoo News has learned that the pardon attorney, Ronald Rodgers, who was criticized in a 2012 Internal watchdog report for mishandling a high-profile clemency petition, is likely to step down as part of that overhaul. Additional procedures for handling large numbers of clemency petitions could be announced as soon as this week, a senior administration official said, though it could take longer.
While it is important to reserve praise until there is tangible action to actually judge, this would be a very positive move. Not only would it improve the lives of many Americans who were treated unjustly, but also it would save the country enormous amounts of money. Keeping someone in prison costs tens of thousands of dollars a year.
Democrats and Republicans in the Senate have been working together on a sentencing reform bill, the Smarter Sentencing Act, which could improve things moving forward but the President is the only one who has the power to do something immediately.
How about the woman, mother of three, who hid her boyfriends drugs for him in her house? Life sentence is what she got. Fair? I think not.
This all came about under Raegan when he declared a drug free society. Zero tolerence. It sounded great at the time, but now we have people with unfair sentences, crowding the prison system... You can kill someone and get a lesser sentence than alot of these. Im all for the pardon.
This all came about under Raegan when he declared a drug free society. Zero tolerence. It sounded great at the time, but now we have people with unfair sentences, crowding the prison system... You can kill someone and get a lesser sentence than alot of these. Im all for the pardon.
You are mistaken to assume that just because someone got a long sentence, it is because of violence. I wish that was true but sadly it simply is not.
Anyone who is in jail for 10+ years on drug offenses is violent because at some point they had a lot of product and how do you keep that product safe? Guns, they might not have found any when they arrested the person but you would be hard pressed to find a drug dealer who is not carrying a weapon or has carried a weapon. Drugs is a violent business.
I wonder what the black-white ratio is, on the folks that he's letting go? SURELY I'm not the only one that thought it. Come on... be honest. YOU thought it as well;-)
He's letting a bunch of jailed black people/criminals back onto the street, who'll more than likely end up re-offending, and back in jail within 12-months anyway.
Good job dude!!!
Oops... there's the racist in me coming out, front & center. Sorry!
(I hope some agency keeps track of how many of these thugs end up back in jail, so we can have another priceless anecdote for the B.O. history-books. Wait, what am I saying... the Liberal revisionist history-book writers will portray B.O. as SuperMan or Rambobama or something awesome like that, and nary a negative word nor failed policy nor 'above the law/constitution' action will see the light of day. Case & point: Vietnam. Try finding a history-book that tells the Jane Fonda story how it REALLY/ACTUALLY/TRULY happened. She's a traitor, and is portrayed as a hero in today's books. As with Fonda, so it will be with the racist, Obama).
He's letting a bunch of jailed black people/criminals back onto the street, who'll more than likely end up re-offending, and back in jail within 12-months anyway.
Good job dude!!!
Oops... there's the racist in me coming out, front & center. Sorry!
(I hope some agency keeps track of how many of these thugs end up back in jail, so we can have another priceless anecdote for the B.O. history-books. Wait, what am I saying... the Liberal revisionist history-book writers will portray B.O. as SuperMan or Rambobama or something awesome like that, and nary a negative word nor failed policy nor 'above the law/constitution' action will see the light of day. Case & point: Vietnam. Try finding a history-book that tells the Jane Fonda story how it REALLY/ACTUALLY/TRULY happened. She's a traitor, and is portrayed as a hero in today's books. As with Fonda, so it will be with the racist, Obama).
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the Current Events . . . Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
