Max KennerlyJan 12, 2023

One nice thing about American law is how you can often state what the law is in a neutral, unbiased, objective manner and it still sounds deranged and Kafkaesque.

"A U.S. government panel tasked with crafting federal sentencing policy on Thursday proposed curtailing the ability of judges to impose longer sentences on criminal defendants based on conduct for which they were acquitted at trial, a practice that the U.S. Supreme Court is considering addressing."

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-panel-proposes-limiting-sentencing-defendants-acquitted-conduct-2023-01-12/

U.S. panel proposes limiting sentencing of defendants for acquitted conduct

A U.S. government panel tasked with crafting federal sentencing policy on Thursday proposed curtailing the ability of judges to impose longer sentences on criminal defendants based on conduct for which they were acquitted at trial, a practice that the U.S. Supreme Court is considering addressing.

Reuters
Show threadTazorJan 12, 2023

@maxkennerly

I'm sorry, what? Judges in the US can sentence someone who was acquitted?? English is not my first language, so does "acquitted" not mean what I think it means?

Show threadJim DoppkeJan 12, 2023
@Tazor @maxkennerly Say a defendant is charged with multiple crimes in the same case, and is found not guilty of some of them, but guilty of others. When sentencing the defendant, the judge can still consider *all* of the charges, even the ones on which he was found not guilty.
Show threadTazor

@jimdoppke @maxkennerly

And nobody has thought to change this? Because that sounds like the opposite of justice..

Jan 12, 2023 at 10:22pmWeb
Show threadJim DoppkeJan 12, 2023
@Tazor @maxkennerly it's not great! The article says change may be happening now. I hope so.