Lawyer in Wisconsin focusing on traffic law and criminal defense, with an interest in employment discrimination and mediation/alternative dispute resolution.
Meanwhile in Wisconsin I have to pay an extra $100/yr for registration because I drive a hybrid.
Why?
Because, I shit you not, driving a hybrid apparently costs the state too much money, because we have to fuel up less, and so they get less tax.
What the fuck.
Not sure how uncommon you’re looking for, but I think I already did this.
I chose Sage.
According to some quick googling (read: not sure how accurate this is), Sage wasn’t in the top 500 names for my birth year, but my given name was top 100.
Though both names I’ve used have been trending towards more common for most of my life. Looks like my original name is now a top 35 most common, but Sage is still outside the top 100 for females and outside top 300 for males.(Really wish there was more data for the popularity of nonbinary names. I think Sage is probably one of the more popular enby names, so maybe it’s not all that uncommon, depending on how you define it.)
Without the sun, we never would have existed. Can something that didn’t exist be dead? I think no. Silly sun, narcissistic asshole and bad at logic.
No, I want you to provide a source that says Go was invented in Korea. I also checked Wikipedia, and several other sites about Go, because you made me curious, since I had always heard it was invented in China.
Everything I’ve seen has said it was invented in China.
As opposed to your source which is… “Trust me bro.”
They asked for your source, not why theirs was wrong. You still haven’t provided one.
"Correctional officers from the jail responded to a medical emergency in one of the cell pods.
There, inmates explained that they believed [Jessica] Barry was experiencing a drug overdose.
Within 3 minutes of being notified of the emergency, officers gave Barry a dose of Narcan.
A total of six doses of Narcan, chest compressions, and an AED were given to Barry, but officers were not able to resuscitate her."
Tragic stuff. I know we all like to blame the cops, and usually I’m 1000% on board, but it sounds like they did everything they could here. At most they could maybe be blamed for not catching and stopping the drugs from getting in. Maybe the ongoing investigation will turn something up as to how that happened, but I can’t say I’m surprised. I’ve been that courthouse and jail. It’s not the most well-funded, and addicts tend to find a way. Sad stuff.
My house calls this predicament “mammal-locked.”
It was once a crime for black people to sit at the front of a bus in America. Guess that means Rosa Parks is responsible for the Holocaust.
Thank the gods we had you to point it out.
I get the feeling (I wouldn’t really know, haven’t been there in months) that Reddit is still significantly better. Sure, it’s worse now, but it still has active communities on pretty much any topic imaginable. Lemmy is on its way, but won’t be there for a few years I think.
But also:
Most veterinarians doubt the existence of a syndrome known as “whisker fatigue”, but it is important that pet owners understand the structure and function of cat whiskers, and that they treat their cats’ whiskers with respect. And, yes, it is possible that some cats have particularly sensitive whiskers.
It makes sense that good cat care includes observing cats’ eating habits carefully, and if they seem to be averse to eating from narrow, high-sided food bowls, perhaps owners should consider offering food in a different type of receptacle such as a “bowl for whisker relief”, and allowing them to drink from a water fountain, even if the theory behind this is highly debatable.
https://cats.com/whisker-fatigue
Seems while there may not be hard evidence, it can still be a preference for cats to have wider bowls.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you. I don’t think there’s really a number of years to put on it to make it appropriate. But I’m sure the lawyers discussed all the points you raised in negotiating this sentence. These numbers aren’t pulled out of our asses, there are guidelines (almost certainly, again, not barred in NY) which help ensure similarly situated defendants are sentenced similarly.
What I’d like to hear more about, is whether the judge also ordered some kind of anger management counseling. I think that’s what she needs more than a longer sentence.
If we truly want to balance the goals of protecting the public, adequately punishing the defendant, and also rehabilitating her, I don’t think a few more years either way is what makes the biggest difference. I think it more depends on what she does with that time. I’m not sure what the situation is like within New York prisons as far as counseling goes, but if they have good programs, it’s hard for me to imagine, if she takes it seriously, that 8.5 years of good counseling wouldn’t be helpful to her, and to society at large.
I also think she could make all those gains in counseling, again, if she truly takes it seriously, within a couple of years. But then, I could probably be convinced that 2-3 years isn’t long enough for causing someone’s death. I’ve seen people get that for having the wrong amount of weed on them.
But then we get into the larger discussion about the entire prison industrial complex. We need some kind of change with how our prisons operate. Exactly how that looks isn’t the point here. I’m just trying to point out that there’s a bigger picture in play, and hope that people will consider that in the future.
In the end, nothing we say here has any impact on her life or the issued sentence. But it might have a difference in how people perceive and talk about the system as a whole in the future, so I think it’s important to not lose sight of that.
Defense lawyer here, though not in New York so take this all with a grain of salt, I just felt I should put my 2 cents in based on the vibes in this comment thread.
It is weird for a judge to go against a joint recommendation, which seems to have happened here. It takes something extraordinary. The article indicates that the judge felt she didn’t truly feel remorse for her actions, which could do it, but doesn’t always do it. But, to me, just the fact that the judge went against a joint recommendation will always raise an eyebrow. Usually, if the sentence isn’t harsh enough, the prosecutor won’t agree to it, and if it’s too harsh, the defense won’t agree to it. So joint recommendations are almost always followed.
Yes, it’s “only” 6 more months, but that’s really not insignificant.
Now, to all the people screaming about how it’s not enough (and especially to the one person saying she should have her citizenship revoked (???)), I wonder, how many of you are also against the prison industrial complex we have here in America? I challenge you to think beyond your initial emotions. Is this death tragic? Yes, absolutely it is. It was senseless violence for no good reason. So I agree, it deserves a harsh punishment.
But everyone keeps calling it murder. Not every killing is a murder. I also want to challenge people to watch their language. Murder carries with it an intent to kill. A shove does not intend death, regardless of who is being shoved. No, it shouldn’t have happened, yes, it’s tragic, but it was not a murder.
Now, all of you calling for 20+ years, really think about what you’re saying. Do you think this person has no chance of rehabilitation? Those are the people we put away for life. I don’t think that’s the case here. She fucked up. Obviously. She deserves to be punished harshly, and make no mistake, she is. 8.5 years is a LONG time. Think back to where you were 8.5 years ago. Were you the same person? I doubt it. Now, do you think she might better herself in those 8.5 years? I think it’s very likely, though again, the prison industrial complex makes that less guaranteed.
Sentences have many goals. Some of the primary goals are punishment, protection of the public, and rehabilitation of the defendant. Does this sentence punish her? Yes, a lot. Does this sentence give her a chance for rehabilitation? I’m not sure on that one, but that’s because it may, if anything, be too long, and cause her to get too used to life in prison, and increase her likelihood of recidivism. But that’s not her fault, that’s the fault of the prison industry. Does this sentence protect the public? I say yes. She lost her temper once and it’s now going to cost her 9 years of her life (if you include the duration of the case). That’s a hell of an incentive not to repeat.
Alright, I think that’s all I really want to say. But please, everyone, in the future, try to think about how our prison system really works, and how much you support it, when you’re discussing individual crimes, not just when you’re talking about the system as a whole. I think most people on this site lean left, and therefore should support reducing the prison populations, but this comment section has me worried with everyone here frothing at the mouth to give MORE prison time, when the sentenced amount should be enough to satisfy our sentencing goals.
You just made an enemy for life!