Thread: Insight: Florida man sees "cruel" face of U.S. justice [W:53]

http://news.yahoo.com/insight-florid...050157061.html

"My first offense, and they gave me all this time," said Davis, a pudgy African American with dreadlocks who spoke with Reuters at the Federal Detention Center in Miami. "Might just as well say I'm dead."Davis was convicted of participating in a string of armed robberies in the Miami area in 2010. His accomplices testified against him, saying he carried a gun during their crimes and discharged it at a dog that chased them after one of their burglaries. But Davis was not convicted of hurting anyone physically, including the dog.
Davis would occupy no place at all in the annals of crime if not for his sentence. Now 20 years old, he was sentenced to 1,941 months - almost 162 years - in prison without the possibility of parole.
On the day of Davis's interview with Reuters, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that life sentences without parole for defendants under the age of 18 constituted "cruel and unusual punishment" even in cases of murder. Unfortunately for Davis, he was 18 at the time of his crimes.

Davis, who still maintains his innocence, was the only one of the six men charged who went to trial. The others cut plea deals that left them with sentences of nine to 22 years in prison.As the odd man out, Davis was convicted largely on the basis of his accomplices' testimony, court documents show.
Davis, who was not identified as the group's ringleader, claims he was never offered a plea bargain.
Davis's ex-attorney, Zelman, declined to comment on this point, citing attorney-client privilege.

This must be that racially unbiased justice system I keep hearing around.

Cue all the people who will swear up and down that 162 years is a reasonable sentence for this crime. Why, I'm sure that they'd be saying exactly the same thing if it were the wealthy white son of some well-known political figure.

Originally Posted by Hatuey

Insight: Florida man sees "cruel" face of U.S. justice - Yahoo! News





This must be that racially unbiased justice system I keep hearing around.

When you have private, Corporate jails, you have to have clients. Lock up all them no-good, worthless reefer smokers, poker players, reckless drivers, boozers, and illegal immigrants. They ain't got no money or support group, so they a guaranteed long term income. You gotta have much finer fixins fo' the likes o' them white collar crminals, like bankers, embezzlers, politicians, preachers, poachers, and assorted pisspots. Besides, them Corporations is people, don't ya' know?

Originally Posted by DaveFagan

When you have private, Corporate jails, you have to have clients. Lock up all them no-good, worthless reefer smokers, poker players, reckless drivers, boozers, and illegal immigrants. They ain't got no money or support group, so they a guaranteed long term income. You gotta have much finer fixins fo' the likes o' them white collar crminals, like bankers, embezzlers, politicians, preachers, poachers, and assorted pisspots. Besides, them Corporations is people, don't ya' know?

Hmm, this may not be such a bad idea. I see a new home for the OWS crowd.

Seriously? 162 years for a first conviction of robbery and carrying a weapon? People who rape and murder children get smaller sentences than that. This is insane.

The story explains this moron's REAL problem, 7 federal armed robbery convictions, and he went to trial, instead of taking a plea deal. He has his "friends" mainly to thank for this, as they cut plea deals and let this moron be pegged as the "leader". I am sure his fine public defender (PD) THOUGHT that a judge/jury would see this as a scam, and cut him some slack, so it went to trial.

BAD move, as it turned out, but for 7 armed robberies, and no chance that this moron would ever be a productive member of society, it would not be wise to let him simply walk. His PD should have cut a deal, but was obviously not as quick as the other accomplice's council were to reach this conclusion. The last guy to make a deal always gets either NO deal, or a very bad one.

The guy is obviously not innocent, yet suffered a raw deal, largely because all his "friends" likely knew how much of a moron he was, and his PD thought that would work well for leniency at his sentencing. Perhaps cutting his time back to 7, 10 year consecutive sentences would be better, parole eligable after 66 years, would be "fair".

Originally Posted by ttwtt78640

The story explains this moron's REAL problem, 7 federal armed robbery convictions, and he went to trial, instead of taking a plea deal. He has his "friends" mainly to thank for this, as they cut plea deals and let this moron be pegged as the "leader". I am sure his fine public defender (PD) THOUGHT that a judge/jury would see this as a scam, and cut him some slack, so it went to trial.

BAD move, as it turned out, but for 7 armed robberies, and no chance that this moron would ever be a productive member of society, it would not be wise to let him simply walk. His PD should have cut a deal, but was obviously not as quick as the other accomplice's council were to reach this conclusion. The last guy to make a deal always gets either NO deal, or a very bad one.

The guy is obviously not innocent, yet suffered a raw deal, largely because all his "friends" likely knew how much of a moron he was, and his PD thought that would work well for leniency at his sentencing. Perhaps cutting his time back to 7, 10 year consecutive sentences would be better, parole eligable after 66 years, would be "fair".

LOL what on earth is fair with 66 years for this crime? He got a raw deal because he is black and poor.. pure and simple. Had this been a white guy with a bit of money, he would have gotten under 10 years and would be out in 5.

From OP's link...

According to expert testimony at his trial, Davis suffers from a learning disability and bipolar disorder.

At the time of his arrest, he told Reuters, he was living on $674 a month in Social Security disability payments and hoping to get back into school to learn a trade.

I also find it interesting that so many here are playing the race card without even knowing the race of his accomplices.

I do know one thing though...from what info we have it definiteately appears that this guy, though definitely in the wrong, surely does not deserve 160 years in prison.

Originally Posted by Kal'Stang

From OP's link...



I also find it interesting that so many here are playing the race card without even knowing the race of his accomplices.

Irrelevant. Based on empirical evidence and studies, poor black men get higher and tougher sentences than anyone else...a recent study states that poor black men get 60% longer sentences than poor white men in the federal system, and you can not tell me that it is better on state level.. especially in the south.

Originally Posted by Paschendale

Seriously? 162 years for a first conviction of robbery and carrying a weapon? People who rape and murder children get smaller sentences than that. This is insane.

Yeah, even I think that's excessive. Armed robbery, and discharge of a firearm? 25-30 is probably the max he should get. For a first offense, maybe 10-15.