From: Cotty > On 02/09/07, John Sessoms, discombobulated, unleashed: > > >> >And it's not uncommon for a jury to propose, and a judge to impose, >> >punishment for things the defendant wasn't actually convicted of. That's >> >the whole purpose of those charges that get dropped " late in the trial". >> > >> > > The jury decides sentence?? Hole moly. We do things different here. The > judge decides. Besides, juries are notoriously fickle - if I was guilty, > I'd opt to be tried by a jury. If I was innocent, I would opt to be > tried by a just a judge. >
Depends on what the law is in the jurisdiction where the "crime was committed" and where the trial takes place. In many places in the US a trial has two phases - first you're tried for the crime and *IF* you're found guilty, there's a separate phase to determine the penalty. In a lot of places, it's a whole new trial. It appears that in Virginia, the jury can consider sentencing recommendations immediately after returning a guilty verdict. The girl's mama got to testify after the guilty verdict. I don't know who else was called, but the jury then deliberated again to come up with the recommended sentence. Often the judge can impose a sentence less severe than the jury proposes, but seldom can he impose a harsher one. Shell was charged with felony homicide; charged with committing one or more felony crimes, with the death of the model as a direct result of one of those crimes. The felonies in this case are drug possession and distribution, i.e. Shell gave her the drugs she overdosed on. But the jury had the option to convict him of the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter in the death, and apparently did so. Keep in mind he was convicted not only for the manslaughter charge, but for seven additional drug and sexual misconduct charges. That's gonna' weigh heavily in the jury's recommendation. The sentencing range on everything Shell was convicted of is 6 years to 131 years. The judge will make up his mind and impose the actual sentence some time in October. As far as judge or jury ... IF you have good reason to believe they can't PROVE you're guilty, you're better off with just the judge - otherwise you're better off with a jury. The prosecution's gotta' convince all 12 of 'em you're guilty. You only gotta' convince one of 'em you're not. > >> > >> >Bottom line - whether the sentence he gets is fair or not, a >> >50-something year old man who gets involved with a 19 year old drug user >> >and takes pictures of them doing kinky shit is an idiot. >> > >> >He's ultimately the victim of his own stupidity. >> > > Personally I think that's a bit harsh. Without knowing all the facts of > the situation - and there's only one person who does - it's too easy to > be judgemental, especially when we place our own life values into a > situation that pertains to someone else's life. > > Yeah, it is a bit harsh. It's a lot harsh. Life's like that sometimes. Facts of the situation are fairly simple. Big news story in Roanoke, VA, and it's easy to find the stories from the local papers on-line. Shell got involved with jail-bait and drugs, HARD drugs - morphine and Valium - a Schedule 2 narcotic and a Schedule 4 tranquilizer. From the evidence presented at the trial, Shell was the supplying the victim with drugs for several months before she overdosed. All the while he was making pornographic videos with her. Two witnesses testified Shell put something in the victim's WINE before the photo-shoot the day the victim died. Serving alcohol to anyone under 21 is a crime in all 50 states all by itself. The witnesses, other bondage models who were present for the photo-shoot, and the DA, said it was morphine. Shell testified it was echinacea. The jury didn't believe him. Alcohol mixed with morphine or benzodiazepines is a stone killer. Just ask Jimi Hendrix or Janis Joplin. And he was taking kinky pictures of her WHILE she died of a drug overdose. Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, ... > I think Bob fell into a set of circumstances - either of his own making > or not - that became very difficult, and eventually tragic. Life is all > about choices - and those choices lead to other choices. If you misjudge > your decisions, then the consequences can be startling to outsiders. > That may not ultimately be stupidity. > They were definitely of his own making. And there are just too many "mis-judgements" to absolve him; not just a single mis-judgement, but a whole chain of 'em. > Personally I hope Bob understands the consequences at the juncture he > has arrived at, and now he will be forced into a scenario where he will > be able to consider the results of his actions, rightly or wrongly, for > some considerable time. > > And that's just plain sad. I don't think he will, although I think he's gonna have at least 6 years to think about it, maybe longer. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
