It’s relevant in the sense that it’s an example of how individual bad cases can lead to broad changes.

I don't have evidence because it's a concern about what will happen in the future. And I don't have faith in the judges to be smart, especially when they're facing recall

I have a very strong belief that all defendants should be released on an AFFORDABLE bond unless there is absolutely overwhelming evidence that the defendant should be held non-bondable.

The point is that this won’t be limited to abusers who get overly lenient sentences. It will extend to a variety of other crimes. For example, over the past few years there have been a bunch of examples where the right goes into a frenzy because a judge gave a lenient sentence to an illegal immigrant. From both sides…

The problem is that if we recall this judge for giving a sentence that was inappropriate, it will lead to judges giving sentences that are too harsh in far more cases

I posted an article earlier with a couple of examples of cases where Persky gave similar sentences to minority defendants, but that’s beside the point.

Because instead of even attempting to craft a sentence that might rehabilitate the offender, judges will instead throw the book at defendants. Especially minority defendants, who are already considered inherently violent and less likely to be rehabilitated.

From what I've gleaned so far, this isn't unique to sex assault/dv cases; this is just what he does during sentencing. And I'm going to question the wisdom that somebody should get a higher sentence for being a football player...

Keeping the judge on the bench isn't a strike for reform, but kicking him off the bench will be a strike AGAINST reform

It won't prevent or reverse the existing problems, but I do think that any good that might come from removing Persky from the bench is outweighed by how much worse it will make the system for all defendants

I don’t think that the sentence is emblematic of a history of Persky letting of white rapists.

And I care too much about criminal justice reform to let the response to a few bad sentences lead to thousands of minorities being locked away for decades and having their lives ruined because the judge is afraid that all of the (white) people will run them out of office if they don’t bring the hammer down on the…

I haven’t done enough research on either one, but I’d assume both of them were a recognition that the primary purpose (in theory) of the penal system is rehabilitation.

I think the sentence was legal, but horribly lenient. But I also believe that the only possible result of this recall succeeding is that thousands of minority defendants will get far harsher sentences because the judge is terrified that each case will be the one to cause an Internet uproar and lead to a recall effort.

I was specifically thinking of the Ramirez case, which has nothing in common with the Brock Turner sentence because it was 1) a different crime and 2) a plea deal, which the judge doesn’t decide.

So a judge in a criminal trial should be biased against the defendant?

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a01788…

Am I surprised that in light of popular outrage over a lenient sentence, the left and right came together to pass a tough on crime law? Not in the fucking slightest

According to both prosecutors and defense counsellors, he has a long history of fairly adjudicating cases. He also has a history of deferring to the sentences recommended by the probation officers, which was too low in this case.

If it helps, you can remind yourself that he’ll also probably go to prison one day for violating the terms of his sex offender registry because of how difficult it is to follow all the rules