349

When police arrested Richardson in 1998, he was facing the death penalty. Afraid of potentially putting his life in the hands of a white jury in the South, Richardson, who is Black, took a guilty plea for involuntary manslaughter and was sentenced to 10 years in state prison. Claiborne, who is also Black, took a plea deal on a misdemeanor charge, as an accessory to Richardson’s crime.

But after outcry over what Gibson’s family viewed as a lenient sentence, federal prosecutors brought additional charges against the pair, accusing them of selling crack cocaine and murdering a police officer during a drug deal gone wrong.

In 2001, Richardson and Claiborne went to trial in the federal case. A jury found them not guilty of Gibson’s murder, but guilty of selling crack. In an unusual move, federal judge Robert Payne sentenced Richardson and Claiborne to life in prison using “acquitted conduct sentencing,” a legal mechanism approved in a 1996 Supreme Court ruling, which allows judges to sentence defendants based on charges for which they were acquitted.

Archived at https://ghostarchive.org/archive/zjFXZ

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 155 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

How the fuck is this even possible?

a legal mechanism approved in a 1996 Supreme Court ruling, which allows judges to sentence defendants based on charges for which they were acquitted.

What a shit ruling and yet another example how how incredibly broken the US "justice" system is.

[-] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 77 points 2 months ago

when you realize its not a 'justice' system, but a 'revenge' system, it all makes sense.

[-] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 34 points 2 months ago

It's about punishment and revenge but most of all it's about keeping minorities "in their place".

[-] Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works 28 points 2 months ago

There was a Law and Order episode where a porn actress was assaulted. Trial ensues, jury comes back with a "guilty" verdict. Judge overrides them and finds the assaulters not guilty. This story reminded me of that episode.

[-] Zahille7@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

Was that the one where the DA wanted to go after the judge for very obvious sexist rulings?

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

I’ve also seen a television episode like this. In that one the judge states that the State did not make their burden, and so the juries guilty verdict is set aside. Which actually seems pretty good. This other thing though, I cannot fathom.

[-] lanolinoil@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

what in the fuck

[-] theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Are you crazy should people be let out of prison just because they are "innocent"? How will we keep the prisons full and the lower classes demoralized?

[-] anon6789@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

It's interesting how they are using this case.

US vs Watts decided this wasn't a violation of so, but it's still a crime of which they were not found guilty of beyond a reasonable doubt.

The 2 situations used in the case was a man being charged with possession and also with growing marijuana in his home as 2 separate charges,.and a womannhlwho had been acquitted of selling cocaine once, who was then later convicted for selling cocaine on another occasion,but was sentenced for both.

Memo from US vs Watts

In the case this post is about, the guy was coerced into a confession where evidence proving his innocence was withheld from the defense, and the judge still thought he was getting off easy and convicted him of selling crack and the murder of a cop during a drug deal.

It sounds like now even though he's acquitted of the murder, they're still trying to keep him in jail on the other added on charges, if I'm reading things correctly.

this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2024
349 points (100.0% liked)

News

23622 readers
2452 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS