Serial rapist Darren Sharper sentenced to 9 years for 9 rapes

[RavenSky]

and then there's this:

To put his fame to good use, Sharper even contributed to a book that came out that year titled NFL Dads Dedicated to Daughters. Sharper, who has a teenage daughter, wrote in the book that women are "undervalued and exploited."

"Money cannot buy the women we love everyday security, which men take for granted," Sharper wrote. "So, it's going to take strong, accountable men to educate young boys and influence other men to deal with women respectfully, honorably and fairly at all times."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...geles-phoenix-las-vegas-new-orleans/70326360/

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, that nice. It's rare to see a serial rapist who has a proper level of respect for women. Hopefully, he can use his time in prison to convey this attitude to the other prisoners while the murderers teach him about the value of life and the thieves educate him about property rights.

 

[laughing dog]

Good thing he got a radical feminist judge to sentence him. No telling how light his sentence would have been with a "normal" judge.

 

[Bronzeage]

Good thing he got a radical feminist judge to sentence him. No telling how light his sentence would have been with a "normal" judge.

Sharper made a deal. The judge just stamped it and it was done.

The problem with the Sharper case was lack of physical evidence. A real trial would have been long and expensive, and required all his victims to testify they couldn't remember what happened. No prosecutor likes those odds. The real threat to Sharper was the trial, not the verdict. He faced prosecution in several cities. He could be found not guilty in one and face a new trial in a week. The prosecutors and he and made the smart move. He has to cop to everything and go to prison.

It's a win. The rest is just bitching because they didn't cover the spread.

 

[laughing dog]

Good thing he got a radical feminist judge to sentence him. No telling how light his sentence would have been with a "normal" judge.

Sharper made a deal. The judge just stamped it and it was done.

Judges do not have to stamp deals.

The problem with the Sharper case was lack of physical evidence. A real trial would have been long and expensive, and required all his victims to testify they couldn't remember what happened. No prosecutor likes those odds. The real threat to Sharper was the trial, not the verdict. He faced prosecution in several cities. He could be found not guilty in one and face a new trial in a week. The prosecutors and he and made the smart move. He has to cop to everything and go to prison.

It's a win. The rest is just bitching because they didn't cover the spread.

It is fascinating when the components of the argument can be used to rebut its conclusions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Good thing he got a radical feminist judge to sentence him. No telling how light his sentence would have been with a "normal" judge.

Sharper made a deal. The judge just stamped it and it was done.

The problem with the Sharper case was lack of physical evidence. A real trial would have been long and expensive, and required all his victims to testify they couldn't remember what happened. No prosecutor likes those odds. The real threat to Sharper was the trial, not the verdict. He faced prosecution in several cities. He could be found not guilty in one and face a new trial in a week. The prosecutors and he and made the smart move. He has to cop to everything and go to prison.

It's a win. The rest is just bitching because they didn't cover the spread.

Exactly. When you see a light sentence look carefully at the facts. You'll very often find a plea bargain involving a weak case.

 

[Bronzeage]

Sharper made a deal. The judge just stamped it and it was done.

Judges do not have to stamp deals.

The problem with the Sharper case was lack of physical evidence. A real trial would have been long and expensive, and required all his victims to testify they couldn't remember what happened. No prosecutor likes those odds. The real threat to Sharper was the trial, not the verdict. He faced prosecution in several cities. He could be found not guilty in one and face a new trial in a week. The prosecutors and he and made the smart move. He has to cop to everything and go to prison.

It's a win. The rest is just bitching because they didn't cover the spread.

It is fascinating when the components of the argument can be used to rebut its conclusions.

I don't know about Minnesota, but in Louisiana, a judge pronounces the sentence. Whether the verdict is the result a jury conviction, or a guilty plea with a deal, the judge is ultimately responsible for the sentence. If the judge objects to the deal, the deal is dead.

 

[RavenSky]

Sharper made a deal. The judge just stamped it and it was done.

The problem with the Sharper case was lack of physical evidence. A real trial would have been long and expensive, and required all his victims to testify they couldn't remember what happened. No prosecutor likes those odds. The real threat to Sharper was the trial, not the verdict. He faced prosecution in several cities. He could be found not guilty in one and face a new trial in a week. The prosecutors and he and made the smart move. He has to cop to everything and go to prison.

It's a win. The rest is just bitching because they didn't cover the spread.

Exactly. When you see a light sentence look carefully at the facts. You'll very often find a plea bargain involving a weak case.

It had nothing to do with "weak cases". Had you read the articles you would see that the prosecutors were concerned about Darren Sharper's celebrity sports star status affecting the jurors; and the expense of a trial that likely would not gain any longer sentence than he got in the plea deal.

The man fully acknowledges 9 rapes. There is no way he would do that if the cases were "weak"

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Exactly. When you see a light sentence look carefully at the facts. You'll very often find a plea bargain involving a weak case.

It had nothing to do with "weak cases". Had you read the articles you would see that the prosecutors were concerned about Darren Sharper's celebrity sports star status affecting the jurors; and the expense of a trial that likely would not gain any longer sentence than he got in the plea deal.

The man fully acknowledges 9 rapes. There is no way he would do that if the cases were "weak"

He acknowledges them as part of a plea deal. That says nothing about the strength of the case.

 

[laughing dog]

Judges do not have to stamp deals.

The problem with the Sharper case was lack of physical evidence. A real trial would have been long and expensive, and required all his victims to testify they couldn't remember what happened. No prosecutor likes those odds. The real threat to Sharper was the trial, not the verdict. He faced prosecution in several cities. He could be found not guilty in one and face a new trial in a week. The prosecutors and he and made the smart move. He has to cop to everything and go to prison.

It's a win. The rest is just bitching because they didn't cover the spread.

It is fascinating when the components of the argument can be used to rebut its conclusions.

I don't know about Minnesota, but in Louisiana, a judge pronounces the sentence. Whether the verdict is the result a jury conviction, or a guilty plea with a deal, the judge is ultimately responsible for the sentence. If the judge objects to the deal, the deal is dead.

I am under the impression that it is not necessarily the case that a judge has to accept the sentence in a plea deal. Perhaps an experience attorney can comment on the validity of the impression.

- - - Updated - - -

It had nothing to do with "weak cases". Had you read the articles you would see that the prosecutors were concerned about Darren Sharper's celebrity sports star status affecting the jurors; and the expense of a trial that likely would not gain any longer sentence than he got in the plea deal.

The man fully acknowledges 9 rapes. There is no way he would do that if the cases were "weak"

He acknowledges them as part of a plea deal. That says nothing about the strength of the case.

It says the cases were strong enough to get Sharper to agree to a plea deal. Do you think he'da agree to go to prison for 9 years if he though there was no chance he'd get convicted? Obviously Sharper thought this was better than taking his chances at trial(s).

 

[ZiprHead]

Maybe Sharper just used the tip of his penis and not the whole thing.

 

[RavenSky]

It had nothing to do with "weak cases". Had you read the articles you would see that the prosecutors were concerned about Darren Sharper's celebrity sports star status affecting the jurors; and the expense of a trial that likely would not gain any longer sentence than he got in the plea deal.

The man fully acknowledges 9 rapes. There is no way he would do that if the cases were "weak"

He acknowledges them as part of a plea deal. That says nothing about the strength of the case.

It says everything about the strength of the cases - plural. If he thought he could do better than 9 years plus probation for life, he would have taken his chances with the juries - plural.

But since you obviously won't read the actual article, I will spoon feed it to you:

Pastor also explained to Sharper that the court considers a no-contest plea to be "exactly the same" as a guilty plea. "Do you understand this?" Pastor asked.

""Yes sir," Sharper replied.

By agreeing to the plea deal, Sharper avoids the risk of receiving an even worse punishment in the future and expensive litigation that could drag on indefinitely in four states. If convicted, he faced life in prison in Louisiana and more than 30 years in Los Angeles.

For prosecutors, the plea deal avoids the risk of going to trial, where juries might be influenced by Sharper's fame and celebrity defense attorneys

Note the parts I bolded for you.

 

[Bronzeage]

[
I am under the impression that it is not necessarily the case that a judge has to accept the sentence in a plea deal. Perhaps an experience attorney can comment on the validity of the impression.

.

If not a judge, then who?

You are proposing that a prosecutor could name a sentence and if the defendant agrees, there is no need to take it to court.

 

[laughing dog]

[
I am under the impression that it is not necessarily the case that a judge has to accept the sentence in a plea deal. Perhaps an experience attorney can comment on the validity of the impression.

.

If not a judge, then who?

You are proposing that a prosecutor could name a sentence and if the defendant agrees, there is no need to take it to court.

Not only did I do no such thing, I fail to see how anyone could even to jump to such a conclusion.

 

[Underseer]

and then there's this:

To put his fame to good use, Sharper even contributed to a book that came out that year titled NFL Dads Dedicated to Daughters. Sharper, who has a teenage daughter, wrote in the book that women are "undervalued and exploited."

"Money cannot buy the women we love everyday security, which men take for granted," Sharper wrote. "So, it's going to take strong, accountable men to educate young boys and influence other men to deal with women respectfully, honorably and fairly at all times."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...geles-phoenix-las-vegas-new-orleans/70326360/

Are you suggesting that he should have been sentenced to more than 9 years for 9 rapes? Oh my god, stop persecuting men, you Feminazi!!!!!!!!!! Also, those women were probably asking for rape by showing too much ankle.

It used to be I would have tagged this as a parody of arguments by Christians or conservatives, but frankly there are an awful lot of atheists making arguments like this these days.

 

[Bronzeage]

If not a judge, then who?

You are proposing that a prosecutor could name a sentence and if the defendant agrees, there is no need to take it to court.

Not only did I do no such thing, I fail to see how anyone could even to jump to such a conclusion.

It's the only conclusion.

Okay, explain how a person ends up serving a prison sentence, without being sentenced? How many ways can this happen?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I guess you save in prison sentences if you commit crimes in bulk.

 

[dismal]

Maybe the plan is to put him in a cell with Lawrence Phillips.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Maybe the plan is to put him in a cell with Lawrence Phillips.

Not too certain what the outcome would be with that.

 

[ronburgundy]

He acknowledges them as part of a plea deal. That says nothing about the strength of the case.

It says everything about the strength of the cases - plural. If he thought he could do better than 9 years plus probation for life, he would have taken his chances with the juries - plural.

It says that he and his lawyers knew that having 9 plaintiffs against him would be viewed by any jury as evidence in itself (no matter what they were instructed to consider), likely resulting in at least 1 conviction even if each case in itself was not very strong (noting strength of rape case does not mean lack of actual guilt).
It also likely that prosecutors and plantiffs suspected that most and perhaps all of the cases were not very strong in and of themselves and thus a guilt verdict on each of the separate counts was unlikely, so getting him to plea to the average sentence for a single rap (8-9 years) was a good idea given the only modest change of a longer sentence at trial and the negative that come with it.
In sum there seems to be no basis to think anything unjust or untoward or shady was at work here, and quite plausibly the justice system worked rather ideally (except for the prison system itself and his likely lack of actual rehabilitation).