You’re right, that’s precisely the point.
Pollard entered into a plea agreement. He pled to one count of transmitting national security information to a foreign government , fulfilled his obligation to cooperate with prosecutors, who had promised not to ask for a life sentence.
On the day of sentencing he and his attorney (who failed to appeal the sentence) were allowed to eyeball a classified supplemental memorandum from Weinberger, (who had already submitted a presentencing declaration, ) purporting to accusing Pollard of treason and comparing the damage to the nation caused by Pollard to that of Soviet spies Ronald Pelton, Ronald Pelton, and Jerry A. Whitworth.
None of this was brought out in the proceedings, and the memorandum was classified for national security reasons.
Secret proceedings may be necessary in some highly unusual circumstances, as may be unrebutted secret testimony, but they’re in no way representative of an American legal process, nor is Pollard’s sentencing, based solely on “faith in our institutions” (Clinton would have loved your sense of “faith”).
Today the national security concerns are long past, and Pollard’s attorneys have granted the security clearances necessary to review the Weinberger memorandum. IMO, there’s no reason it shouldn’t be made public, then we’d all know if this was a miscarriage of justice. At the very least, his attorney’s should be allowed access to the information his sentence was based on, to provide him with the ability to appeal.
Some of the issues are explained in the documents back in post 50.
Said sentence was contingent on Pollard engaging in a full and complete damage analysis.
Pollard repeatedly denied checking out documents that he was on record as having checked out from the archives. He refused to acknowledge transmitting any classified material except for some trivial stuff.
No damage analysis, no plea bargain.