I don't usually approve of courts making examples of people, but the court needs to make an example of this guy.
this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
51 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10177 readers
47 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Out of curiosity, why do you not usually approve of it and what in this case makes it justified to you?
My reason for not approving of the court making examples of people would be along the lines of it not really working - people still commit crimes no matter how many examples seem to be made, and giving someone an excessive punishment to dissuade others is inherently unjust - so for me it’s hard to see a reason it would be okay in any case, even this one.
Your reasoning against it may be different though.
I don't usually approve because two people convicted of similar offenses ought to be dealt similar punishments.
But violence or intimidation towards elected representatives is a crime that is worse than the sum of its parts.
Especially if its for political reasons. That makes it terrorism and not just violence.
The guy is so deranged and isolated from reality that prison is the best place for him.
I dunno, I kinda think a mental health unit might be a better place for the insane?
I keep reading his name as David D Pepe in my head. Far too fitting.
🤖 I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
The harrowing October 2022 attack sent shockwaves through Washington at a time of rising threats against public officials, raising fresh concern over violence driven by increasingly hostile political rhetoric and partisan animosity.
Congressional lawmakers reflected at the time on their safety as fears of political violence remained heightened in the wake of the January 6, 2021, US Capitol attack and other incidents targeting members of Congress in recent years.
DePape’s attorney, Jodi Linker, conceded on the first day of the trial that her client was the one to attack the 83-year-old Paul Pelosi, but argued that his motivation for the assault did not match the charges against him.
Testifying in his own defense on Tuesday, DePape, gave jurors a closer look at his motives before the attack, becoming emotional at times as he shared examples of conspiracy theories he felt were true.
“I’m telling him, I have other targets, but if you stop me, I’ll go through you,” DePape said, recounting a conversation with Paul Pelosi, adding that he then reacted and hit him “in the head,” because his plan was “basically ruined.”
Pelosi, who underwent surgery to repair a skull fracture and injuries to his hand and arm, told jurors that his recovery has been difficult, with spells of lightheadedness and headaches.
Saved 66% of original text.