Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Billthedrill
But the bottom line is that what he was doing was knowingly breaching a trust with known penalties -

Do the crime, do the time isn't a difficult concept to understand. However when my Justice Dept enters into a plea agreement (and I don't much like them), I do expect them to keep their word. And when they don't, based on secret information, it concerns me. IMO, that's the issue here, not Pollard the individual. And it's an issue which could be easily resolved by declassification of the 4 page communication to the judge.

68 posted on 05/23/2003 1:55:28 PM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: SJackson
And when they don't, based on secret information, it concerns me.

And I think you are quite justified in this. Only that's one of the things I was trying to express, albeit poorly, above - the nature of the case and the individual and the information involved preclude the presentation of this sort of information in open court (and hence public record). This means that sentencing guidelines (and they are only guidelines, not written in stone) are subject to abuse with not a great deal of control. It may be that some sort of review might be added here, but anyone doing that reviewing must be cleared for that information, which in itself is subject to state control and hence potential abuse. I don't actually see much of a way around this, but I'm certainly open to suggestion.

71 posted on 05/23/2003 2:39:50 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson