You Be The Judge

You're a judge in Massachusetts. A defendant stands before you, convicted of illegal gun possession

  • 90 days

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 6 months

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1 year

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    120
That sould be brought to the attention of the local news channels. They are all on the increase of gun crime in Boston band wagon. What the hell good is the Bartley Fox law if the judges and legal system doesnt enforce it?
 
Damn, I guessed correctly!

This tracks what a judge (now a chief justice) told me about enforcement of Bartley-Fox. It is NOT enforced as the perps would all demand jury trials and the judicial system would choke to death on the weight of so many trials. Thus, they file these charges and take a plea bargain (stress on the word "bargain")!

This only applies to bad-asses. Good citizens who get caught up in a technical violation will indeed get screwed!
 
I remember reading an editorial years ago that said Ma. judges are reluctant to enforce that law...don't remember the reasoning behind it. :?
 
wherewolf said:
I remember reading an editorial years ago that said Ma. judges are reluctant to enforce that law...don't remember the reasoning behind it. :?

Somewhere here I did discuss it, I'm sure. But here it is in brief form:

Background: Said justice referred to by me above was sitting in Stoughton District Court (Norfolk County). He was "contracted" by Brockton District Court (Plymouth County) to hear an overflow of 35 criminal cases/day that Brockton couldn't handle. Brockton BTW is one of the major crime and drug cities in the state.

- Judge had to plea bargain away 30 cases/day. No more than 5 jury trials/day could be handled. Tomorrow there is another 35 cases awaiting him.

- Judge explained that anyone facing a minimum-mandatory 1 year (no good time off allowed in Bartley-Fox) WILL DEMAND a jury trial!

- Therefore if they don't "file the charges", the entire court system will die of it's own weight in jury trials in short order.

- Therefore, Bartley-Fox is ONLY invoked on people who have done no other crime and have nothing to "bargain" away.
 
Nickle, a "judge in Massachusetts" implies a state judge. They can't invoke a Federal sentence.

In most cases the Feds aren't interested in "small fry" cases.
 
Set off an incendiary device in an enclosed, filled to capacity space, kill 100 persons while doing it.

What is the penalty per person for this mass murder?

A little under 37 days..

The sentence for the road manager that set off the pyrotecnics in the Rhode Island Night Club that resulted in the fire and deaths of 100 patrons was 10 years.

So, a life is worth just 37 days? I guess you get a good discount in bulk.
 
LenS said:
Nickle, a "judge in Massachusetts" implies a state judge. They can't invoke a Federal sentence.

In most cases the Feds aren't interested in "small fry" cases.

True, but I base my opinions on the Federal penalty levels. In this case, I think the Federal penalty is 10 years for illegal possession of a firearm, poosibly 20 years, if the circumstances are right.

5 years just doesn't cut it. Too short.
 
OOOOHHHH...

Well, my sentence wasn't offered, so I figured you ment what was most likely to be true.

Lets see - I am looking at 10 years for owning a glorified PEZ dispenser that holds more than 10 rounds regardless if I have the gun it goes to or the ammo that goes into it solely if it happened to be made after a certain date.

So, I think that a proper sentence for a 16 year old convicted armed robber found in posession of a firearm should be no less than...

Well, I'd give him a choice. 5 years conducting front line landmine eradication in some 3rd world hellhole or life in prison. His choice.

What can I say, I'm such a softie.
 
[shock]

I don't know why I should be shocked....but I am. 11 FLIPPING days???????

Have I mentioned of late that I hate.... [roll] you know what I mean.
 
mAss Backwards said:
I see some of picked the "11 days" option.

I guess I should have been more clear. For the purposes of this poll, YOU are a judge IN Massachusetts, not a Massachusetts judge.

Big difference.

Crap should have read the full post first!

But is there a difference? I would think sitting on the bench in Mass would turn you into a Criminal-Freeing "For the Children" type, much like how holding an AR-15, or a Glock turns you into a Drive-by-shooting Psycho Mass-murderer.

Is my logic flawed? [lol]

Arrrr

-Weer'd Beard
 
If this is as reported, it is both outrageous and illegal. (See G.L. ch. 269, sec. 10(a).)

However, before lighting fuses, someone should check to see if this dude was in custody pending trial, and for how long. He gets mandatory credit for pre-trial custody.
 
LenS said:
Nickle, a "judge in Massachusetts" implies a state judge. They can't invoke a Federal sentence.

In most cases the Feds aren't interested in "small fry" cases.

Absolutely true. The Feds will generally only intervene if the defendant is a major player. I know of one case where the Feds took jurisdiction of a shooting that took place in Boston. The suspect was a career felon suspected of more than one murder. The justification used was that the ammunition came from out of state and was possessed illegally by the suspect. I don't remember the outcome of the trial, but it was a local murder transferred to federal court.

I think a lot more of these cases could go to federal court, but the Feds as I said, unless it's a major case they aren't going to expend their resources.


Gary
 
Back
Top Bottom