Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   Florida's Supreme court has decided that if you exercise your 5th amendment right at any point during a criminal trial, you will be punished even harsher due to lack of remorse. Subby isn't exaggerating, they actually said that   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Florida, shot  
•       •       •

3034 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Dec 2021 at 10:47 PM (7 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



65 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-12-02 5:16:57 PM  
Original Tweet:

 
2021-12-02 5:23:16 PM  
Let's apply that same standard to the people the Jan. 6th Committee has subpoenaed.
 
2021-12-02 5:24:16 PM  
Jeffrey Clark, come on down...
 
2021-12-02 5:42:23 PM  
Florida Supreme Court is phrasing it in the worst way possible, but they're not completely wrong in how things currently work. If you plead guilty, you tend to get a lighter sentence (Especially if you "show remorse") than if you plead innocent and are found guilty. Of course, it's possible to plead innocent, testify in your own defense (Therefore not invoke your fifth amendment rights) and still be found guilty and be sentenced harshly.
 
2021-12-02 6:00:37 PM  
Activist judges indeed
 
2021-12-02 6:08:57 PM  
Yet another reason to stay the FARK out of America's Wang.
 
2021-12-02 6:17:15 PM  
This won't stand... it's just a little pantomime to illustrate that the Florida Supreme Court doesn't work for the Florida Republican Party (i.e. the people who sign their checks).
 
2021-12-02 7:51:14 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-02 10:34:15 PM  
Under a normal SCOTUS, this would be overturned unanimously. My guess is they'll still overturn it, but one of the conservative hacks is going to pipe up just to be a little shiat.

*looks at Alito*.
 
2021-12-02 10:34:24 PM  

Monty_Zoncolan: This won't stand... it's just a little pantomime to illustrate that the Florida Supreme Court doesn't work for the Florida Republican Party (i.e. the people who sign their checks).


Unfortunately, it will be the law in Florida unless it is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Supreme Court accepts review, and the U.S. Supreme Court has five "justices" who think this is a Fifth Amendment violation (which it clearly is, but don't count on them thinking so).
 
2021-12-02 10:50:28 PM  
so would a right to remain silent and doing so also constitute a lack of remorse ?
 
2021-12-02 10:52:22 PM  
Slowly but surely the GQP will murder the Constitution.
 
2021-12-02 10:53:46 PM  
Can we make this retroactive? Because I know of a certain Senator Rick Scott that plead the 5th 50+ times during his trail. He even plead the 5th when asked if his name was Rick Scott.
 
2021-12-02 10:54:07 PM  

koder: Under a normal SCOTUS, this would be overturned unanimously. My guess is they'll still overturn it, but one of the conservative hacks is going to pipe up just to be a little shiat.

*looks at Alito*.


Nah. It's Thomas. Thomas has never met a travesty of justice he didn't like.

The guy is just aching to live as long as possible so he can vote to abolish the 13th Amendment. Mark my words.
 
2021-12-02 10:55:20 PM  
Well this is what I assumed, a plea deal or a guilty plea without a deal is generally done to mitigate sentenceing
 
2021-12-02 10:55:29 PM  
It's actually even dumber than it may first appear.

The entire concept of remorse being a factor in sentencing is one made up by the judiciary.It is not a factor according to Florida's sentencing legislation.
 
2021-12-02 10:55:51 PM  
I always thought that was a given. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
2021-12-02 10:56:27 PM  
This thing never gets old.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-02 11:04:53 PM  

Phil McKraken: This thing never gets old.

[Fark user image image 320x234]


It was updated about 5 years ago.
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-12-02 11:05:45 PM  
I don't see the problem.
Point 1- you can still take the 5th, this ruling doesn't change that
Point 2-after conviction, you can apologize/express remorse for what you were convicted of in hopes of gaining a lesser sentence. If you don't admit to doing anything, you do not get that chance at a lesser sentence and therefore get a harsher sentence in comparison

To me this ruling is just reaffirming that no expressed remorse means no leniency on the sentence. What am I missing?
 
2021-12-02 11:06:24 PM  
external-content.duckduckgo.comView Full Size
 
2021-12-02 11:09:02 PM  
There was a time that I would have said that this clear violation of the Bill of Rights would be struck down by the US Supreme Court.

I no longer think that.
 
2021-12-02 11:11:00 PM  

Birnone: I don't see the problem.
Point 1- you can still take the 5th, this ruling doesn't change that
Point 2-after conviction, you can apologize/express remorse for what you were convicted of in hopes of gaining a lesser sentence. If you don't admit to doing anything, you do not get that chance at a lesser sentence and therefore get a harsher sentence in comparison

To me this ruling is just reaffirming that no expressed remorse means no leniency on the sentence. What am I missing?


Among other things, "lack of remorse" is not actually part of sentencing guidelines.
 
2021-12-02 11:11:02 PM  
Anyone care to grab the part of the 45-page decision that actually references a defendant invoking their fifth amendment rights?
 
2021-12-02 11:12:47 PM  

Bootleg: Florida Supreme Court is phrasing it in the worst way possible, but they're not completely wrong in how things currently work. If you plead guilty, you tend to get a lighter sentence (Especially if you "show remorse") than if you plead innocent and are found guilty. Of course, it's possible to plead innocent, testify in your own defense (Therefore not invoke your fifth amendment rights) and still be found guilty and be sentenced harshly.


The entire point of the 5th amendment is to prevent the state from holding your refusal to self-incriminate against you.  That Americans allow it to happen anyway doesn't mean it's okay.
 
2021-12-02 11:18:18 PM  
I used to say that conservatives love the Constitution but they hate democracy. Now they hate both.
 
2021-12-02 11:19:44 PM  

Diogenes: Let's apply that same standard to the people the Jan. 6th Committee has subpoenaed.


Aaaaannnd we're done here.
 
2021-12-02 11:22:51 PM  
This reminds me of the Cardassian legal system: "Of course you're guilty. They wouldn't have arrested you if you weren't guilty."
 
2021-12-02 11:23:58 PM  

Flappyhead: Slowly but surely the GQP will murder the Constitution.


Slowly?
 
2021-12-02 11:27:43 PM  

bingethinker: This reminds me of the Cardassian legal system: "Of course you're guilty. They wouldn't have arrested you if you weren't guilty."


That was an allusion to the American Justice system. If you are guilty and take a plea deal you get a lesser sentence but if you are innocent and fight it , you will get punished with the full force of the system because if you are on trial you must have been guilty.
 
2021-12-02 11:29:52 PM  

bingethinker: This reminds me of the Cardassian legal system: "Of course you're guilty. They wouldn't have arrested you if you weren't guilty."


When elected prosecutors run on a 90% conviction rate, you already have the Cardassian legal system.

Nobody cares because the people arrested are "the usual suspects" and "are guilty of something".  If a prosecutor fails "the criminal skated on a technicality".  That harkens to the American anti-intellectual bent.
 
2021-12-02 11:31:05 PM  

sinner4ever: bingethinker: This reminds me of the Cardassian legal system: "Of course you're guilty. They wouldn't have arrested you if you weren't guilty."

That was an allusion to the American Justice system. If you are guilty and take a plea deal you get a lesser sentence but if you are innocent and fight it , you will get punished with the full force of the system because if you are on trial you must have been guilty.


America doesn't have a justice system.  America has a *legal* system.
 
2021-12-02 11:43:03 PM  
Wow. That's 5 lawyers. And let me guess... at least 2 of them are from Harvard, Yale, or Georgetown?
 
2021-12-03 12:27:21 AM  
Florida is an evil goddamn place.
 
2021-12-03 12:36:29 AM  
andrewagill:Among other things, "lack of remorse" is not actually part of sentencing guidelines.

Isn't there discretion available to judges, if mandatory sentences are not involved? For example, if the convicted apologizes to the victim and/or the victim's family and if the victim and/or the family ask for leniency on behalf of the convicted, aren't judges allowed to take that into consideration?

What this ruling seems to be saying is that if you don't admit to anything then you can't be sorry for it or ask forgiveness for it, therefore the judge won't take any of that into consideration.
 
2021-12-03 1:03:26 AM  
FFS some of the commenters on the original tweet are monumentally dumb.
 
2021-12-03 1:10:47 AM  

Bootleg: Florida Supreme Court is phrasing it in the worst way possible, but they're not completely wrong in how things currently work. If you plead guilty, you tend to get a lighter sentence (Especially if you "show remorse") than if you plead innocent and are found guilty. Of course, it's possible to plead innocent, testify in your own defense (Therefore not invoke your fifth amendment rights) and still be found guilty and be sentenced harshly.


You'll also not get parole if you don't admit guilt and express contrition.
 
2021-12-03 1:30:35 AM  

Flappyhead: Slowly but surely the GQP will murder the Constitution.


Nah, Russia's just waiting for the best time for a first strike.
I believe that January 6th was a setup by Russia to expose/derail the chain of custody of the football.
The arrested russians suddenly couldn't speak english, yet were leading the crowd before getting arrested...
 
2021-12-03 2:00:12 AM  
There are reasons to use the Fifth that have absolutely nothing to do with contrition or lack thereof.
 
2021-12-03 2:40:37 AM  
What the opinion actually says:

During sentencing, a court 'may not weigh the exercise of [Fifth Amendment] rights against the defendant.' But a court may take into account a defendant's freely offered statements indicating a lack of remorse.

And to be clear it's not why the defendant got the maximum sentence:

The presentence investigation report noted Davis's "extensive criminal history," which included "numerous violent offenses." It also concluded that Davis "appears to have a history of gang related activity" and "apparently continues to be a threat to the safety of the community." The PSI [(presentence investigation)] report recommended the maximum sentence.
 
2021-12-03 3:14:35 AM  

Chagrin: What the opinion actually says:

During sentencing, a court 'may not weigh the exercise of [Fifth Amendment] rights against the defendant.' But a court may take into account a defendant's freely offered statements indicating a lack of remorse.

And to be clear it's not why the defendant got the maximum sentence:

The presentence investigation report noted Davis's "extensive criminal history," which included "numerous violent offenses." It also concluded that Davis "appears to have a history of gang related activity" and "apparently continues to be a threat to the safety of the community." The PSI [(presentence investigation)] report recommended the maximum sentence.


Okay, that's different.
 
2021-12-03 4:29:04 AM  

Chagrin: What the opinion actually says:

During sentencing, a court 'may not weigh the exercise of [Fifth Amendment] rights against the defendant.' But a court may take into account a defendant's freely offered statements indicating a lack of remorse.

And to be clear it's not why the defendant got the maximum sentence:

The presentence investigation report noted Davis's "extensive criminal history," which included "numerous violent offenses." It also concluded that Davis "appears to have a history of gang related activity" and "apparently continues to be a threat to the safety of the community." The PSI [(presentence investigation)] report recommended the maximum sentence.


Problem with that is, "gang related activity" can mean anything from gunning down innocent bystanders to literally wearing the wrong sneakers in the wrong neighborhood.

(feel free to check official guidelines on MS13)

The latter tend to get arrested more, since they don't shoot back as much.

/which eventually leads them to become the former
 
2021-12-03 5:27:29 AM  
"...criminal defendants who exercise their right against self-incrimination by refusing to admit guilt may be punished with higher sentences due to "lack of remorse."

Jeffrey Clark
 
2021-12-03 5:58:26 AM  
I thought nullification laws were what helped lead to the civil war.
 
2021-12-03 6:11:47 AM  

Diogenes: Let's apply that same standard to the people the Jan. 6th Committee has subpoenaed.


Came in to post this but done in one. The House should adopt this and cite the Florida ruling as justification. It's what the GOP would do if tables were turned.
 
2021-12-03 6:55:38 AM  
Whether or not someone believes that a convicted person shows remorse is totally subjective anyway. One member of the jury, or a judge, may believe that the person shows remorse and another may believe that the convicted person is merely full of it and just lying in order to get a lighter sentence.
 
2021-12-03 7:53:08 AM  
Just going to leave thus here:
Don't Talk to the Police
Youtube d-7o9xYp7eE
/"Anythingyou say can and will be used against you"
 
2021-12-03 8:42:56 AM  

LittleSmitty: Senator Rick Scott that plead the 5th 50+ times during his trail


It was during a civil deposition, not a trial.
 
2021-12-03 8:44:42 AM  

Birnone: after conviction, you can apologize/express remorse for what you were convicted of in hopes of gaining a lesser sentence


Where does that put you for appeals? Does expressing remorse effectively mean you are admitting guilt and making it infinitely harder to appeal your conviction?
 
2021-12-03 9:05:34 AM  
Those who are outrage, should read the opinion first and not Mark Joseph Sterns majorly misleading take on it.

The dude was sentenced according to statute.  This is not a 5th Amendment thing.

The defendant testified at his own sentencing hearing and proceeded to lie.  The Judge determine that he wasn't going to deviate down from the statutory maximum sentence for a career offender who was caught with an illegal gun.

End of story.  Whatever it is that Mark Joseph Stern is implying about this case is horribly wrong.
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.