THE BLACK HAND FORUM

by **kingfromqueens** » Sat Jan 06, 2018 12:29 pm

That's statutory not guidelines.

by **willychichi** » Sat Jan 06, 2018 4:42 am

kingfromqueens wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2018 7:25 pm The jury found him not guilty where the proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, that doesn't mean the conduct can't be considered during sentencing in another crime where many factors can be considered. Given the Judge presided over the trial, she is best suited to determine if there was cause to apply it. Sentencing guidelines are advisory and the Judge is by no means bound by it.

Except when mandatory minimum sentences are involved in drug cases.

by **kingfromqueens** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 7:25 pm

The jury found him not guilty where the proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, that doesn't mean the conduct can't be considered during sentencing in another crime where many factors can be considered. Given the Judge presided over the trial, she is best suited to determine if there was cause to apply it. Sentencing guidelines are advisory and the Judge is by no means bound by it.

by **Teddy Persico** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 6:59 pm

Cheech wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2018 5:37 pm Have any of you legal guys seen before what this judge did? Is it unprecendented?

The same thing happened to Genovese captain Anthony Antico. He beat robbery/murder charges, but the judge believed that the evidence against him was credible enough to factor into his sentencing for racketeering/extortion.

by **Stroccos** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 5:55 pm

Cheech wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2018 5:37 pm Have any of you legal guys seen before what this judge did? Is it unprecendented?

it happend to oj Simpson

by **Cheech** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 5:37 pm

Have any of you legal guys seen before what this judge did? Is it unprecendented?

by **UTC** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 2:16 pm

I think trying to pull her punch will bolster the appeal somewhat, because it makes it easier to say the sentence was retaliation for the acquittal. She should have just sentenced him to whatever would reach mid-2021 and kept her mouth shut. Penalizing for the reason that she disagreed with the result of our jury system of justice is personal judicial misconduct in my book.
Usually judges are just minor leaguers who never had a lucrative legal practice.

by **Confederate** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 2:13 pm

Cheech wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 2:02 pm there you go. that makes sense. although ive never seen being judged for somehing i was acquitted for. this whole thing seems un american. i dont care about the guy but it just doesnt smell right

Some of these Judges have big fucking egos and they sometimes do strange things in addition to posturing and lecturing in the courtroom.

by **Cheech** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 2:02 pm

there you go. that makes sense. although ive never seen being judged for somehing i was acquitted for. this whole thing seems un american. i dont care about the guy but it just doesnt smell right

by **dack2001** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:06 pm

I believe it has to do with the Judge crediting the Lufthansa allegations when deviating from the recommended sentencing guidelines. She is sentencing him based upon charges that he was acquitted for at trial, seem backward, unfair and bizarre? Welcome to federal jurisprudence, because the Judge considered conduct for which he was acquitted when sentencing him he gets credit for the time he served awaiting that trial. I bet that came from the Judge herself. If she had not considered Lufthansa in deviating from the guidelines she would not have given him the credit. getting credit for time served ultimately rests with the Judge's discretion unless its a binding plea agreement.

by **Cheech** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:39 pm

BobbyPazzo wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:07 am
Cheech wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:56 am I just dont see how that happens
Me either

I dont see it, brother.

by **Cheech** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:37 pm

SonnyBlackstein wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:53 am
Cheech wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:01 am He could be right. But then again, there is a possible light at the end of the tunnel, even if Vinny loses the planned appeal of his sentence. With credit for the 22 months in prison before his 2015 acquittal, the nine months he served last year, mandatory 15% good time, and a halfway house when he's got a year left on his bid, he could be out in mid-to-late-2021, at the young age of 86.
Interesting he actually will get credit for the Lufthansa trial incarceration.

Thanks for the post Cheech.

I am not sure where that info is coming from Sonny. think of it like this. i get arrested, i spend 2 years in jail awaiting trial. i get acquitted. does that mean I can do a crime and not going to jail? i've never ever seen the law work this way.

i can be wrong but i dont see it.

by **Chucky** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 11:07 am

This will be an interesting trial, shame Anastasia won't be covering it.

by **willychichi** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:24 am

Rubeo's incarceration is more fuel for an aquittal. The Feds were asleep at the wheel on this one.

by **BobbyPazzo** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:07 am

Cheech wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:56 am I just dont see how that happens

Me either

THE BLACK HAND FORUM

GL 1/4

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4

Re: GL 1/4