Minnesota Prosecutor Under Fire Over Tesla Vandal Case, Focuses On ‘Racial Disparities’ In Sentencing (1 Viewer)

[Bum]

A liberal Minnesota prosecutor receiving backlash for letting a Tesla vandal off easy is now pushing to reduce “racial disparities” in sentencing.
Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty’s office will consider a defendant’s “racial identity” when weighing potential plea deals starting Monday, KARE 11 reported. Moriarty drew criticism days earlier after declining to prosecute an employee in Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s administration who keyed six Tesla vehicles and caused more than $21,000 in damage.


“While racial identity and age are not appropriate grounds for departures [from the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines], proposed resolutions should consider the person charged as a whole person, including their racial identity and age,” a memo from Moriarty’s office reportedly reads. “While these factors should not be controlling, they should be part of the overall analysis.”

M'kay.

 

[Peter]

Vandalising a Tesla should get exactly the same punishment as vandalising any other vehicle.

Elon Musk is not a protected class and nor is Tesla.

 

[Moon]

Vandalising a Tesla should get exactly the same punishment as vandalising any other vehicle.

Elon Musk is not a protected class and nor is Tesla.

Excellent example of missing the point. Well done!

 

[Moon]

A liberal Minnesota prosecutor receiving backlash for letting a Tesla vandal off easy is now pushing to reduce “racial disparities” in sentencing.
Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty’s office will consider a defendant’s “racial identity” when weighing potential plea deals starting Monday, KARE 11 reported. Moriarty drew criticism days earlier after declining to prosecute an employee in Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s administration who keyed six Tesla vehicles and caused more than $21,000 in damage.


“While racial identity and age are not appropriate grounds for departures [from the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines], proposed resolutions should consider the person charged as a whole person, including their racial identity and age,” a memo from Moriarty’s office reportedly reads. “While these factors should not be controlling, they should be part of the overall analysis.”

M'kay.

You get what you vote for. I hope the Hennepin County residents are happy with their pick.

 

[Peter]

Excellent example of missing the point. Well done!

That point being?

 

[Napoleon]

Vandalising a Tesla should get exactly the same punishment as vandalising any other vehicle.

Elon Musk is not a protected class and nor is Tesla.

Doing $21,000 in vandalism damage is a fourth degree felony. Refusing to prosecute it because the guy knows a failed vice presidential candidate is outrageous. In the UK, he’d get up to 10 years in prison.

 

[Maidenrules29]

Vandalising a Tesla should get exactly the same punishment as vandalising any other vehicle.

Elon Musk is not a protected class and nor is Tesla.

Causing $20,000 dollars worth of any kind of vandalism should get the same punishment.

 

[Maidenrules29]

You get what you vote for. I hope the Hennepin County residents are happy with their pick.

This is akin to California's prop 47. We all know what happened after that was passed.

 

[Bodi]

That point being?

It has nothing to do with Tesla and everything to do with racist policies of the DA.


'

 

[Mr Person]

I love having to find a link. then finding that the first several are: National Review, Freebeacon.com, Fox News, MSN (reposting Daily Caller), Kare11.com

Do we at least have a decent source for this?


___________

That said, sentencing is not merely about punishment. I'm not sure what's so horrible about considering the whole person, which includes their circumstances. Isn't the sentence supposed to be the punishment deserved by the individual, not a group of persons like the individual only by virtue of the identity of crime? If there is a source that doesn't always shit its pants, I'll consider it based on what happened but... trustable details would be nice.

At any rate, I hope the only people angry about this are still absolutely ballistic about Trump pardoning the 1/6 insurrectionists. 'Cause, y'know....Teslas vs Capitol Building, cops, etc

Excellent example of missing the point. Well done!

He did miss the point. But the point was still shit. His missing it doesn't make the point better.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Vandalising a Tesla should get exactly the same punishment as vandalising any other vehicle.

Elon Musk is not a protected class and nor is Tesla.

No.

The vandals need to be compensated for their time and trouble!

 

[Moon]

That point being?

It has nothing to do with Tesla.

 

[aociswundumho]

That said, sentencing is not merely about punishment. I'm not sure what's so horrible about considering the whole person, which includes their circumstances.

Sounds very "progressive", meaning it's built on vague feelings instead of actual justice. Which sob story gets priority? Poverty, bad parents, dropping out of school, voting for the wrong party? With this kind of clown show, two people can commit the exact same crime, but the one who cries harder or checks the right victim boxes walks away with the proverbial slap on the wrist.

 

[Peter]

Sounds very "progressive", meaning it's built on vague feelings instead of actual justice. Which sob story gets priority? Poverty, bad parents, dropping out of school, voting for the wrong party? With this kind of clown show, two people can commit the exact same crime, but the one who cries harder or checks the right victim boxes walks away with the proverbial slap on the wrist.

So you don't think someone stealing a loaf of bread to eat because they're starving should be treated less harshly than someone with wealth stealing a loaf of bread just for the thrill of it?

 

[aociswundumho]

So you don't think someone stealing a loaf of bread to eat because they're starving should be treated less harshly than someone with wealth stealing a loaf of bread just for the thrill of it?

Using an extremely rare case (starving person stealing bread) is the appeal to pity fallacy. 99.9% of theft is not about survival.

Furthermore, intent is already considered separately in law (e.g., theft vs. robbery vs. fraud) - without needing to invent a "how poor are you?" meter at sentencing.

 

[Peter]

Using an extremely rare case (starving person stealing bread) is the appeal to pity fallacy. 99.9% of theft is not about survival.

Furthermore, intent is already considered separately in law (e.g., theft vs. robbery vs. fraud) - without needing to invent a "how poor are you?" meter at sentencing.

My point is that crime is never judged on pure logic and unyielding observation of the law.

There is always an element of circumstances involved.