RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Federal Court Rules Rand Paul Attackerís 30-Day Sentence Too Lenient - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Federal Court Rules Rand Paul Attackerís 30-Day Sentence Too Lenient Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   grimreefer 

  • U.S. Merchant Marine
  • View gallery
  • Group: Diamond Community Supporter
  • Posts: 5,742
  • Joined: 18-December 03

Posted 09 September 2019 - 10:32 PM

Quote

Federal Court Rules Rand Paul Attackerís 30-Day Sentence Too Lenient

The Washington Free Beacon
Alex Griswold
September 9, 2019 3:30 PM

excerpt:

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the 30-day prison sentence of the man who attacked Senator Rand Paul (R., Ky.), ruling that federal guidelines did not permit so lenient a sentence.

In 2017, Paul was tackled from behind by his next-door neighbor Rene Boucher over a mundane disagreement about lawn clippings. Paul was left with six broken ribs and a substantial hospital stay that forced him to take a leave of absence from the Senate. Paul testified that he suffered constant "intense pain" as a result of his injuries, and later required further surgery in August 2019.

Boucher was originally charged with misdemeanor assault under Kentucky law, but the state charges were dropped in lieu of a federal felony prosecution. Boucher could have received up to 10 years in prison for an assault of a member of Congress that inflicted personal injury, but prosecutors sought 21 to 27 months in light of his acceptance of responsibility.


<SNIP>


The judges concluded there was "no compelling justification for Boucher's well-below-Guidelines sentence" and vacated the lower court's ruling. The court remanded the case back to district court, where Boucher will be resentenced based on the ruling.


LINK

:spank:
0

#2 User is offline   Liz 

  • ***-----------***
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 51,434
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 09 September 2019 - 10:54 PM

Quote

The judges concluded there was "no compelling justification for Boucher's well-below-Guidelines sentence" and vacated the lower court's ruling. The court remanded the case back to district court, where Boucher will be resentenced based on the ruling.

While it won't restore Senator Paul's health and well-being, the sentence was an insult and I'm glad the penalty will be reconsidered.
0

#3 User is online   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 28,566
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 09 September 2019 - 11:49 PM

Iíd say instead of 30-days in minimum security, give him 10 years for attempted murder in maximum security. (Iím so fair itís scary.)
0

#4 User is online   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 31,199
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 10 September 2019 - 01:10 AM

View PostLiz, on 09 September 2019 - 10:54 PM, said:

While it won't restore Senator Paul's health and well-being, the sentence was an insult and I'm glad the penalty will be reconsidered.

It was all handled by very crooked democraps here (our courts are packed full of them), so this was to be expected.

I'm surprised that anyone actually ever did anything about this after the fact?
0

#5 User is offline   Howsithangin 

  • The more ppl I meet, the more I like my cats
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 28,073
  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 10 September 2019 - 01:10 AM

good news from a court, for a change
0

#6 User is online   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 31,199
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 10 September 2019 - 01:11 AM

View Postzurg, on 09 September 2019 - 11:49 PM, said:

Iíd say instead of 30-days in minimum security, give him 10 years for attempted murder in maximum security. (Iím so fair itís scary.)

The guy deserves no less than 20 years for attempted murder upon a senator.
0

#7 User is online   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 31,199
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 10 September 2019 - 02:51 AM

Let me make this clear (since some do not get it), the perp should have been properly sentenced THE FIRST TIME.

Revisiting it again is tantamount to double jeopardy.
0

#8 User is online   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 31,199
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 10 September 2019 - 03:14 AM

And one more point; Boucher agreed to plead guilty to the reduced sentence.

How can they now change his sentence after the fact?
He's already served the time and paid the fine (which were not harsh enough in my opinion and were far short of what the law had provisions for).

This was not what Boucher had agreed upon to accept for his guilty plea. He plead guilty for the lesser sentence in a plea bargain.

Isn't this cheating and moving the goal posts or reneging on a promise/contract by the court?

I'm not on Boucher's side at all (far from it), but this sure isn't fair nor honest practice either.
0

#9 User is offline   RedSoloCup 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 5,720
  • Joined: 05-June 15

Posted 10 September 2019 - 04:49 AM

Hang the bastard in the town square.
0

#10 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 58,149
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 10 September 2019 - 09:21 AM

View PostRock N, on 10 September 2019 - 03:14 AM, said:

And one more point; Boucher agreed to plead guilty to the reduced sentence.

How can they now change his sentence after the fact?
He's already served the time and paid the fine (which were not harsh enough in my opinion and were far short of what the law had provisions for).

This was not what Boucher had agreed upon to accept for his guilty plea. He plead guilty for the lesser sentence in a plea bargain.

Isn't this cheating and moving the goal posts or reneging on a promise/contract by the court?

I'm not on Boucher's side at all (far from it), but this sure isn't fair nor honest practice either.


I have to agree on all counts. The original sentence was WAY too lenient, but nonetheless it was the official sentence. Even though Boucher is a slimeball who deserved a much harsher sentence, he has served the time and paid the fine he was given.

B)
0

#11 User is offline   searcher 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 2,921
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 10 September 2019 - 09:33 AM

 Rock N, on 10 September 2019 - 02:51 AM, said:

Let me make this clear (since some do not get it), the perp should have been properly sentenced THE FIRST TIME.

Revisiting it again is tantamount to double jeopardy.



I have to agree. First se tante was a joke but it was what it was. I can see this decision being misused in so many ways by other defendants in the future.

Mark
0

#12 User is offline   First Sarge 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 886
  • Joined: 04-May 12

Posted 10 September 2019 - 12:18 PM

Itís just like the criminal court finds you innocent, then you have to go through the civil court also, why is that not double jeopardy.
0

#13 User is offline   moocow 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 1,122
  • Joined: 18-December 04

Posted 11 September 2019 - 02:07 AM

View PostFirst Sarge, on 10 September 2019 - 12:18 PM, said:

Itís just like the criminal court finds you innocent, then you have to go through the civil court also, why is that not double jeopardy.

Or tried for a crime in a federal court, and then tried for the exact same crime in a state court.
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users