Virginia Prosecutors Fight to Uphold Life Sentence for Man Found Not Guilty
Virginia Prosecutors Fight to Uphold Life Sentence for Man Found Not Guilty
Even though a federal jury found him not guilty of murder, he was sentenced to life in prison. Virginia prosecutors want to keep it that way.
When police arrested Richardson in 1998, he was facing the death penalty. Afraid of potentially putting his life in the hands of a white jury in the South, Richardson, who is Black, took a guilty plea for involuntary manslaughter and was sentenced to 10 years in state prison. Claiborne, who is also Black, took a plea deal on a misdemeanor charge, as an accessory to Richardson’s crime.
But after outcry over what Gibson’s family viewed as a lenient sentence, federal prosecutors brought additional charges against the pair, accusing them of selling crack cocaine and murdering a police officer during a drug deal gone wrong.
In 2001, Richardson and Claiborne went to trial in the federal case. A jury found them not guilty of Gibson’s murder, but guilty of selling crack. In an unusual move, federal judge Robert Payne sentenced Richardson and Claiborne to life in prison using “acquitted conduct sentencing,” a legal mechanism approved in a 1996 Supreme Court ruling, which allows judges to sentence defendants based on charges for which they were acquitted.
Archived at https://ghostarchive.org/archive/zjFXZ
How the fuck is this even possible?
a legal mechanism approved in a 1996 Supreme Court ruling, which allows judges to sentence defendants based on charges for which they were acquitted.
What a shit ruling and yet another example how how incredibly broken the US "justice" system is.
when you realize its not a 'justice' system, but a 'revenge' system, it all makes sense.
It's about punishment and revenge but most of all it's about keeping minorities "in their place".
There was a Law and Order episode where a porn actress was assaulted. Trial ensues, jury comes back with a "guilty" verdict. Judge overrides them and finds the assaulters not guilty. This story reminded me of that episode.
Was that the one where the DA wanted to go after the judge for very obvious sexist rulings?
I’ve also seen a television episode like this. In that one the judge states that the State did not make their burden, and so the juries guilty verdict is set aside. Which actually seems pretty good. This other thing though, I cannot fathom.
what in the fuck
Are you crazy should people be let out of prison just because they are "innocent"? How will we keep the prisons full and the lower classes demoralized?
It's interesting how they are using this case.
US vs Watts decided this wasn't a violation of so, but it's still a crime of which they were not found guilty of beyond a reasonable doubt.
The 2 situations used in the case was a man being charged with possession and also with growing marijuana in his home as 2 separate charges,.and a womannhlwho had been acquitted of selling cocaine once, who was then later convicted for selling cocaine on another occasion,but was sentenced for both.
In the case this post is about, the guy was coerced into a confession where evidence proving his innocence was withheld from the defense, and the judge still thought he was getting off easy and convicted him of selling crack and the murder of a cop during a drug deal.
It sounds like now even though he's acquitted of the murder, they're still trying to keep him in jail on the other added on charges, if I'm reading things correctly.
How the fuck is "acquitted conduct sentencing" allowed and not a flagrant violation of justice? What the hell happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?
Also how is charging someone for a crime they were acquitted of not cruel and unusual?
Or a mechanism ripe for abuse of power.
Answering both of our rhetorical questions at once: "because they were black"
"This one is for when you kicked my dog!" *smack!*
"And this one is for when you stole $10 from me!""Uh, they were acquitted on that one. You found the $10 stuck to the bottom of your shoe with some gum."
"Oh... This is for making me think you stole $10 from me!" *smack*
Justice has very little to do with the US legal system.
In 2001, a jury found them not guilty of murder. A judge sentenced them to life in prison anyway.
I don’t understand how this is possible. I wouldn’t believe it if you told me this happened. How?
It's technically possible, but should never ever happen.
Normally a judge can overrule a guilty judgment as a matter of law, but some few jurisdictions allow a bench verdict, just shouldn't be possible in combination with a jury verdict unless that was somehow invalidated.
Edit:
In an unusual move, federal judge Robert Payne sentenced Richardson and Claiborne to life in prison using “acquitted conduct sentencing,” a legal mechanism approved in a 1996 Supreme Court ruling, which allows judges to sentence defendants based on charges for which they were acquitted.
What. The. Fuck.
This is 90s drug war law, an appeal should destroy it, it's basically patently unconstitutional under the 6th:
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt6-4-1/ALDE_00013124/
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Acquitted conduct sentencing
Got acquitted? Serve time anyway.
What the fuck kind of logic is this shit?
Prosecutors and judges should get life sentences in prison for shit like this.
Fortunately it looks like the federal courts don’t allow this any more: https://www.ussc.gov/about/news/press-releases/april-17-2024
But of course the state courts have their own separate rules.
Yeah, the federal government changed their rules just in time to make sure Trump can't be sentenced for something our supreme court decided he should be immune for, but meanwhile in this case
The innocence claim centers around three pieces of evidence... [one of which is] a photo lineup [that was] administered to a 9-year-old witness.
...
The photo lineup, meanwhile, did not appear in the case files of the county prosecutor, state police, or county police, according to the investigation by Herring’s office. The lineup was referenced during the federal case against Richardson and Claiborne, indicating that federal agents had a copy of it. Richardson’s counsel said they obtained the lineup through a public records request to federal investigators.
During the May hearing, the confusion surrounding the lineup led to conflicting interpretations by Richardson’s legal team and state prosecutors.
...
There is one individual who might be able to clear up the confusion around the lineup: ATF agent Michael Talbert, an architect of the 2001 federal case against Richardson and Claiborne. But Talbert did not testify at the May hearing because the federal government declined to make him available, citing his busy schedule.
Ultimately, Sussex County Circuit Judge William Tomko decided not to allow the photo lineup to be admitted as evidence.
“You’re not going to apparently ever be able to get the federal government to assist you with regards to establishing these documents, but that’s the unfortunate position that you’re in,” said Judge Tomko. “I can’t help that.”
Though Talbert did not testify at the May hearing, he spent an entire day in the courtroom watching proceedings.
“I am not permitted to ask questions of Agent Talbert because the federal government has refused to make him available, though he’s clearly available to testify,” said Hensley.
Of course he's Black.
The only crime for which he's truly being incarcerated.
If it's a federal life sentence, then surely it should be "federal prosecutors in Virginia," not "Virginia prosecutors." Confusing as hell. I thought this life sentence was in state court with a parallel case in federal court.
You would think, but the article makes multiple mentions of "state prosecutors", so I think this is Virginia prosecutors bringing charges under federal law in Virginia courts
e; or rather, this is an appeal of a case brought that way
meanwhile these prosecutors are voting for the rapist who was found guilty on many charges