Attorney Gen. Urges Sentencing Guidelines

WASHINGTON -- Attorney General Alberto Gonzales called Tuesday for requiring federal judges to adhere to guidelines that set mandatory minimum prison sentences, saying there is evidence of growing disparity in jail terms since a landmark Supreme Court ruling.

Gonzales, speaking to a conference of the National Center for Victims of Crime, also said judges should retain their discretion in imposing harsher prison terms than set out in sentencing guidelines.

Sentencing guidelines for federal prisoners have been in place for nearly two decades. But the Supreme Court in January said making the guidelines mandatory violated a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial because they call for judges to make factual decisions that could add to prison time, such as the amount of drugs involved in a crime.
...
Former Attorney General Edwin Meese, a Republican, and former Deputy Attorney General Philip Heymann, a Democrat, are among those urging Congress not to rush to make changes, saying the system is not in crisis.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/21/AR2005062100611.html

mr. porn? :wow: I am in never never land now.

Are they so desperately afraid of someone not going to jail?
:banghead::banghead:

Attorney general pushing for harsher sentences
He asks Congress to force judges to follow guidelines instead of using own discretion
By ALEXIS GRANT
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, saying that some federal judges are imposing light sentences, called on Congress on Tuesday to require the jurists to follow uniform guidelines for punishments.


He urged Congress to pass a law to fix what he called the "increasing disparity in sentences and a drift toward lesser sentences" since the Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that mandatory sentencing guidelines were unconstitutional.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/3235597

If mandatory sentencing guidelines are deemed unconstitutional than it should follow that any attempt to force judges to impose sentences mandated from on high are unconstitutional. Judges have discretion. Period.

I'm terribly sorry if Mr. Gonzales doesn't like that.

There's just something wrong with one group of people having a monetary investment in locking more and more people up for longer and longer times, and one group profiting from it. What happens to justice in such a system?

It's about punishment and retaliation. These guys feel the god-given mission to smite offenders in their ugly little hearts, and sentencing is ONLY about meting out pain and privation.

To them, correction and preparation for living a good life on the outside is entirely the responsibility of the guilty as he/she buckles under the pressures of a deliberately brutal incarceration. The only mitigation to this is if Jesus is brought in; that's okay, because it contributes another bot to the cause.

Gotta fill em, specially with them pot-smokers

Most of the US prisons are run by a private corporation called Wackenhut (yes, it's really called that). I'm sure that if you dig deep enough you'll find that someone in the US government is profitting from human incarcartion.

Of course, once there's a profit incentive it automatically follows that these same people will push for more and more laws and "tougher" and longer sentences for frivolous "crimes".

FEMA has been laudering money for the black ops projects and building 'emergency housing' since Reagan. The PNAC has been in the plan for 25 yrs, so far.

Just think of it as waterboarding with some pizazz.