Virginia Prosecutors Fight to Uphold Life Sentence for Man Found Not Guilty
When police arrested Richardson in 1998, he was facing the death penalty. Afraid of potentially putting his life in the hands of a white jury in the South, Richardson, who is Black, took a guilty plea for involuntary manslaughter and was sentenced to 10 years in state prison. Claiborne, who is also Black, took a plea deal on a misdemeanor charge, as an accessory to Richardson’s crime.
But after outcry over what Gibson’s family viewed as a lenient sentence, federal prosecutors brought additional charges against the pair, accusing them of selling crack cocaine and murdering a police officer during a drug deal gone wrong.
In 2001, Richardson and Claiborne went to trial in the federal case. A jury found them not guilty of Gibson’s murder, but guilty of selling crack. In an unusual move, federal judge Robert Payne sentenced Richardson and Claiborne to life in prison using “acquitted conduct sentencing,” a legal mechanism approved in a 1996 Supreme Court ruling, which allows judges to sentence defendants based on charges for which they were acquitted.
Archived at https://ghostarchive.org/archive/zjFXZ
https://theappeal.org/terence-richardson-post-conviction-hearing/Open linkView original on lemmy.world
How the fuck is this even possible?
What a shit ruling and yet another example how how incredibly broken the US "justice" system is.
when you realize its not a 'justice' system, but a 'revenge' system, it all makes sense.
It's about punishment and revenge but most of all it's about keeping minorities "in their place".
There was a Law and Order episode where a porn actress was assaulted. Trial ensues, jury comes back with a "guilty" verdict. Judge overrides them and finds the assaulters not guilty. This story reminded me of that episode.
Was that the one where the DA wanted to go after the judge for very obvious sexist rulings?
I’ve also seen a television episode like this. In that one the judge states that the State did not make their burden, and so the juries guilty verdict is set aside. Which actually seems pretty good. This other thing though, I cannot fathom.
what in the fuck
Are you crazy should people be let out of prison just because they are "innocent"? How will we keep the prisons full and the lower classes demoralized?
It's interesting how they are using this case.
US vs Watts decided this wasn't a violation of so, but it's still a crime of which they were not found guilty of beyond a reasonable doubt.
The 2 situations used in the case was a man being charged with possession and also with growing marijuana in his home as 2 separate charges,.and a womannhlwho had been acquitted of selling cocaine once, who was then later convicted for selling cocaine on another occasion,but was sentenced for both.
Memo from US vs Watts
In the case this post is about, the guy was coerced into a confession where evidence proving his innocence was withheld from the defense, and the judge still thought he was getting off easy and convicted him of selling crack and the murder of a cop during a drug deal.
It sounds like now even though he's acquitted of the murder, they're still trying to keep him in jail on the other added on charges, if I'm reading things correctly.
How the fuck is "acquitted conduct sentencing" allowed and not a flagrant violation of justice? What the hell happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?
Also how is charging someone for a crime they were acquitted of not cruel and unusual?
Or a mechanism ripe for abuse of power.
Answering both of our rhetorical questions at once: "because they were black"
"This one is for when you kicked my dog!" *smack!*
"And this one is for when you stole $10 from me!"
"Uh, they were acquitted on that one. You found the $10 stuck to the bottom of your shoe with some gum."
"Oh... This is for making me think you stole $10 from me!" *smack*
Justice has very little to do with the US legal system.
Prosecutors and judges should get life sentences in prison for shit like this.
What the fuck kind of logic is this shit?
Fortunately it looks like the federal courts don’t allow this any more: https://www.ussc.gov/about/news/press-releases/april-17-2024
But of course the state courts have their own separate rules.
Yeah, the federal government changed their rules just in time to make sure Trump can't be sentenced for something our supreme court decided he should be immune for, but meanwhile in this case
I don’t understand how this is possible. I wouldn’t believe it if you told me this happened. How?
It's technically possible, but should never ever happen.
Normally a judge can overrule a guilty judgment as a matter of law, but some few jurisdictions allow a bench verdict, just shouldn't be possible in combination with a jury verdict unless that was somehow invalidated.
Edit:
What. The. Fuck.
This is 90s drug war law, an appeal should destroy it, it's basically patently unconstitutional under the 6th:
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt6-4-1/ALDE_00013124/
Jury Nullification is a thing
Apparently, jury nullification nullification is also a thing.
Fucking amateurs should have pulled up with the Jury Nullification Nullification Nullification.
Only way to do that is not know the words jury nullification but coming to that conclusion magically.
Just knowing what jury null is apparently can disqualify you as a potential juror.
They need to make it common knowledge, then we do what we do at the orgy and get EVERYONE off
And hopefully will become well known to all Americans when this shit happens.
Acquitted conduct sentencing
Got acquitted? Serve time anyway.
Of course he's Black.
The only crime for which he's truly being incarcerated.
If it's a federal life sentence, then surely it should be "federal prosecutors in Virginia," not "Virginia prosecutors." Confusing as hell. I thought this life sentence was in state court with a parallel case in federal court.
You would think, but the article makes multiple mentions of "state prosecutors", so I think this is Virginia prosecutors bringing charges under federal law in Virginia courts
e; or rather, this is an appeal of a case brought that way