Submitted by roundposter t3_10pzgiu in Music
NativeNYer10019 t1_j6n264w wrote
It makes sense. It’d be a huge waste of taxpayer money to follow through with this indictment when he’s already locked up on the same type of charges by the Feds anyway. He won’t soon see the light of day, so what’s the point besides a VERY costly symbolic gesture? I hope the accusers in this case can see this as a reasonable objective decision. It really does make sound financial sense for the taxpayers of Chicago.
garry4321 t1_j6nynh6 wrote
It kind of is bad, because if the other convictions get overturned ALA Bill Cosby, they just gave up a perfectly legit case that would have kept him in there. Imagine if there were 3 other cases that convicted Bill of the same behavior. He would still be in jail. Famous horrible criminals have a very odd knack for getting out of prison.
Wizard_Tendies t1_j6o4o4z wrote
>Famous horrible criminals People with money have a very odd knack for getting out of prison.
FTFY. It’s not just famous people. The judicial and criminal justice system is otherwise the admission costs to behavior. Epstein and Maxwell were guilty of sex trafficking, who’s guilty of buying that service? DWI’s are for poor people. SEC fines are the costs of doing business for some, while the initial charge will be jail time for others.
usernamen_77 t1_j6n65oq wrote
Let's hope
bigfatmatt01 t1_j6nslmj wrote
It makes sense to everyone but the victims. That is who the trial would be for. It would be so they could have their day in court and he would be, not just punished in general, but punished specifically for hurting them.
pf30146788e t1_j6o2lai wrote
It’s also very hard for victims to testify. They might be relieved by the decision. Hard for us to know how they feel.
bigfatmatt01 t1_j6o3lwm wrote
According to the article at least 1 is not satisfied with the decision and is coming out saying so.
pf30146788e t1_j6o3o62 wrote
Ah good catch
NativeNYer10019 t1_j6nsqk0 wrote
And that is precisely what I mean by letting emotion rule over being objective and reasonable.
bigfatmatt01 t1_j6o9ndm wrote
I don't know, there's an amount of emotional catharsis that they are owed by society in general. No matter how much it saves, this feels a bit unjust.
Mitch1musPrime t1_j6n8fg5 wrote
Wrong. This victim will never get Justice. They’ll never get to see this man answer for his crime. He could spend the rest of his life denying it and their will have been no court of law to hold him accountable to that guilt.
This is how my brother ended up in prison on a lighter sentence than he deserved. Prosecutors already had his confession of one assault so why go through the hoops to maybe prove he’s manufactured and distributed images too? I told them it’d all be on his Xbox. They didn’t care. His confession to sexual assault meant he’d do some time and that was enough for them.
NativeNYer10019 t1_j6nbo4y wrote
But R Kelly didn’t get a lighter sentence, this case is nothing like your brothers. R Kelly already got sentenced to 30 years of Fed time, and fed time is stricter than state time is. Even with good behavior he’d still have to serve 25.5 years of the sentance he received from the Feds. He will most likely die in prison already with the sentence he’s already received, or be released at 81 years old, if he even lives that long. If that’s not Justice I don’t know what is. Just because those specific accusers names aren’t attached to that trial sentencing paperwork doesn’t mean they’ve not gotten justice. The man that abused them will not be able to hurt anyone else because he won’t see the light of day. That has to be enough. Anything else is a purely emotional desire for vengeance, not rooted in healthy objective reasoning. Spending millions of dollars on a trial to appease emotions but that won’t make a difference in keeping this man in prison longer than he’s already sentenced to would only be a symbolic gesture. It’d be nothing but a waste of a shitton of Chicago taxpayer dollars. And that wouldn’t be a sound financial decision.
Mitch1musPrime t1_j6nfgnc wrote
But it’s for the victim. They were violated. That deserves the punishment for the crime. And my brother didn’t get a lighter sentence. He didn’t receive any sentence for his other crime. That’s my point. He’s doing time for one crime that truthfully isn’t even the worst crime he committed. Not even close. But they stopped short of doing the full investigation necessary to unpack and prosecute his worst crimes because they’d already gotten his confession for the first one.
That’s not lighter sentencing. That’s not sentencing for a separate crime at all.
Plus, what if some weird shit happens like what happened with Cosby and he finds his way out of prison later? You prosecute all of it. As separate crimes done to separate victims.
NativeNYer10019 t1_j6npldb wrote
You said exactly “This is how my brother ended up in prison on a lighter sentence than he deserved.” I didn’t make that up, YOU said that.
You’re letting your emotions speak. If those victims feel like R. Kelly’s 30 year federal sentence isn’t already enough simply because their names aren’t attached to that conviction, they need to seek intensive therapy. No prison sentence is going to fix that. It’s unreasonable to suggest that a separate conviction with their name on it would fix what’s going on with their mental and emotional state. Revenge never feels as good as you think it will. Therapy does though.
If you’re the DA and you’re meant to be objective and have the responsibility to allocate taxpayer dollars for what will benefit the majority, you don’t go being wasteful so you can exact revenge on someone whose already convicted on similar charges, that someone being a 56yr old man who is not going to get out of prison for at least another 25 years. That would be irrational, wasteful. That would be a move that would be fueled by emotion, not rationale, logic or be seen as a sound financial decision.
Mitch1musPrime t1_j6nqk48 wrote
The decision to move forward should be based on a grand jury if the victim elects to press charges, and there is sufficient evidence. That is the DA serving taxpayers, b/c the victims are taxpayers.
And again, separate crimes, separate punishments. If the judge choose to run those sentences concurrently, so be it.
And yes, I am speaking with my emotions because I have empathy for the victim. As we all should. They have right to have a crime committed against them be prosecuted just as the others did. End of story,
NativeNYer10019 t1_j6nrk34 wrote
Yeah, that’s not how it works. I too have empathy for the victims, but I also understand how real life works. And allocating multiple millions of dollars to nothing but a symbolic gesture would be wasteful spending of the other millions of Chicago taxpayers dollars. You can have empathy without allowing it to blind you, you can feel bad for what these victims have been through and still be objective and rational. And the reality is, this man is already likely going to die in prison for what he’s done, piling on isn’t going to change anything. Whether you like it or not. Intensive therapy will help these victims far more than any additional conviction will. I hope they get it.
Mitch1musPrime t1_j6ntgvm wrote
In fact, read this article and focus on this piece:
“Prosecutors sometimes choose to go ahead with more trials out of a concern that convictions elsewhere could be reversed during appeals. They see an opportunity for additional convictions as insurance.
“We didn’t do a monetary cost-benefit analysis,” Foxx said, adding, however, that resources spent on a trial now could instead be used “in advocacy for other survivors of sexual abuse.”
And then recognize this one victim’s assault case began before the federal convictions ever spooled up:
“Foxx announced the Cook County charges months before the federal cases in New York and Chicago. Foxx's office alleged he repeatedly sought out girls for sex, including one he encountered at her 16th birthday party and another who met Kelly while he was on trial in 2008.”
And then worst of all, the DA begged women to come forward to strengthen the case:
“Foxx, who in 2019 had pleaded with women and girls to come forward so she could pursue charges against Kelly, acknowledged that the decision “may be disappointing” to his accusers.”
It is a colossal failure for those specific victims that R Kelly will be guilty of everything but actual sexual abuse.
NativeNYer10019 t1_j6nuwck wrote
Right, that was all done BEFORE the Feds convicted him, and they’d started this case and begged those victims to come forward because they wanted to ensure he’d be put away. But now that he’s indeed been put away, there is no need to drag this prosecution out further. While that might cause emotional pain to the victims, it wouldn’t be a sound reasonable or financial decision to still move ahead.
Also, if on some crazy twist R Kelly got out of the federal penitentiary, there is no statute of limitations on sex crimes and Chicago could bring this up again in the future at their own behest. This Chicago case and what they’ve gathered thus far will always be available to go after him again if need be. The need it just not there at this time. It’d be unreasonable to spend the kind of money this will cost to move ahead knowing he won’t likely leave prison alive already. Like it or not emotionally, that’s the most logical conclusion at this time.
Mitch1musPrime t1_j6ns1bd wrote
Why would it cost tax payers millions of dollars? Is it the judge making that money? The prosecutors who have a specific salary they are paid? Is it the court clerks? Why assume this would cost millions? It costs the defendant a fuck ton of money because they have to pay a defense attorney, but where does this “millions” come from for one trial?
NativeNYer10019 t1_j6nsf0z wrote
It costs EVERYONE a shit ton of money to hold any length trial, but especially a lengthy, high profile one like this. The costs associated with moving ahead with this would be astronomical.
hammering-the-cramps t1_j6nnfv1 wrote
Seconded.
This practice effectively sends the message that once you commit x amount of sexual assaults, the only ones that count are the ones that the prosecutors feel good about. Ditto for the respective victims. He may be in prison, but he got away with what he did to this person, and that is not okay.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments