posted on Oct, 29 2009 @ 03:49 PM
The sentence amounts to life without hope of parole. That's a bit steep for bribery and corruption. That's an appropriate sentence for murder,
perhaps, or some other heinous crime where people die.
Sure you want to put away corrupt politicians, and you want it to hurt. Ten or twenty years would hurt. This sentence is utterly ridiculous.
As for the mayor's other alleged crimes, that is irrelevant. I don't care what else he did or might have done. He wasn't tried for those alleged
crimes. He was convicted of corruption charges. The punishment must be imposed only for the crimes for which he was convicted.
It would not surprise me if the sentence were reduced, either by the trial judge, or on appeal. It is wildly excessive.
[Edit:] Oops, I missed it. My bad. Serves me right for not reading carefully...
The mayor hasn't even been sentenced. The 800+ years is the *potential* maximum sentence. News media constantly use the largest possible,
theoretical number, in order to make it sound more dramatic. If they say the mayor faced a likely 10 to 20 years, well big deal. But when you claim
he's looking at 8 centuries, that sounds really exciting.
I would be very surprised if the judge would impose the full penalty. The mayor is already 60 or so. Even if he gets only 10 years, that could be a
life sentence. 20 years would be even more likely to be life. At best, this man will live long enough to get out of prison, and spend the last few
years of his life as a "free" man. That should be penalty enough.
[edit on 10/29/2009 by chiron613]