Anonymous wrote:I'm confused... isn't the law to reduce the time served closer to what they would serve if they were convicted today?

They are not given a reduced sentence unless they judge agrees, they have proven to be rehabilitated, had good behavior, have a recommendation from a mental health professional and the victims' families agree.

Though some of these current cases that would be up for review go back to 80s, this isnt "fixing" 3 strikes and you're out or crack laws. These are murderers or rapists up to age 25, including recent ones under current sentencing, who could apply for release after serving 15 years.
Can you please support that this requires family approval? They have veto if all other conditions are met? Curious about that - not the way justice usually works in our country.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused... isn't the law to reduce the time served closer to what they would serve if they were convicted today?

They are not given a reduced sentence unless they judge agrees, they have proven to be rehabilitated, had good behavior, have a recommendation from a mental health professional and the victims' families agree.

15 years is not what someone would serve today for the crimes covered by this act, mostly murder - often youth on youth. It's a reflection of Allen's - and our city's approach to youth offenders, now defined by the proposed revised IRAA Act as up to age 25. The fact that he scolded a judge who did not agree in one case of resentencing, shows the pressure he is willing to bring to bear for the 500+ violent offenders who would be up for resentencing.

What you are saying... the resentencing does not reflect guidelines set today? It is less harsh than what is set today? The law states that "resentencing" would follow today's guidelines.

Didn't he "scold" a judge for not following current guidelines?

I think the problem with the new law is that it does not allow the judge to look at the old case. Maybe I am wrong, maybe they are given the old case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused... isn't the law to reduce the time served closer to what they would serve if they were convicted today?

They are not given a reduced sentence unless they judge agrees, they have proven to be rehabilitated, had good behavior, have a recommendation from a mental health professional and the victims' families agree.

Does that include future victims and their families too?

In the states that his has happened their have not been future victims.

but we could just lock up all men to stop all victimization of people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The democrat felon fetish needs to end

Free country.
Move to a more conservative area nobody forcing you to live in Montgomery County.

Yeah, gosh, it's almost like people are thinking that people can move freely from one part of this country to another. What idiots they are!

What an ignorant response. This is akin to telling every foreigner that has any objection or suggestion to the way things are done in this country to just "go back to where they came from."

No, there is more than one person living here so there is going to be more than one way to conduct business and pass laws.

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused... isn't the law to reduce the time served closer to what they would serve if they were convicted today?

They are not given a reduced sentence unless they judge agrees, they have proven to be rehabilitated, had good behavior, have a recommendation from a mental health professional and the victims' families agree.

15 years is not what someone would serve today for the crimes covered by this act, mostly murder - often youth on youth. It's a reflection of Allen's - and our city's approach to youth offenders, now defined by the proposed revised IRAA Act as up to age 25. The fact that he scolded a judge who did not agree in one case of resentencing, shows the pressure he is willing to bring to bear for the 500+ violent offenders who would be up for resentencing.

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused... isn't the law to reduce the time served closer to what they would serve if they were convicted today?

They are not given a reduced sentence unless they judge agrees, they have proven to be rehabilitated, had good behavior, have a recommendation from a mental health professional and the victims' families agree.

Does that include future victims and their families too?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The democrat felon fetish needs to end

Free country.
Move to a more conservative area nobody forcing you to live in Montgomery County.

Yeah, gosh, it's almost like people are thinking that people can move freely from one part of this country to another. What idiots they are!

So the IRAA law allows for resentencing after 15 years no matter the nature of the crime. This is what Allen would like extended through age 25. Since 2016, about 12 under age 18 murderers and 2 rapists have been released through the first IRAA act he legislated. The judge that Allen excoriated declined to revisit the sentence of a 17 year old convicted of a series of violent home invasions with a group of friends, in which he committed multiple rapes at knifepoint- of a married couple, of roommates (they attacked a house and a group of young women sleeping on multiple stories) and of course a woman and her 9 year old daughter who they happened upon at home, attacking both. Allen's complaint was that the judge considered the nature of the crime over the defendants jailhouse behavior in declining to reduce his sentencing. Hence, the Posts point today that the Dayton and El Paso mass shooters would also qualify under this proposed IRAA 2 Act.

I'm confused... isn't the law to reduce the time served closer to what they would serve if they were convicted today?

They are not given a reduced sentence unless they judge agrees, they have proven to be rehabilitated, had good behavior, have a recommendation from a mental health professional and the victims' families agree.

Anonymous wrote:The 2016 IRAA law applied to a 17 year old, who the judge declined to resentence. This earned the judge a frosty letter from Charles Allen, who "knows better". Now he'd like to extend this to 500+ violent offenders. Why dont you read what the 17 year old was originally convicted of? And then get back to us.

Why don't you run against Charles in 2022 and take his Ward 6 Council seat?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The democrat felon fetish needs to end

Free country.
Move to a more conservative area nobody forcing you to live in Montgomery County.

DC COUNCIL.

My bad my bad same difference.
Don't get why folks get so bent out of shape about the laws and leanings of an area they ain't nobody forcing them to stay in.
Pack your shit and move to Buttcrack, Wyoming if you don't like how things are going here nobody's stopping you.

Yeah the government is about to let out violent offenders with youth, strength, minimal education, and no job prospects and the reasonable thing to do here is suggest moving to Wyoming.

They ain't letting em out in Wyoming are they?
DC got a shuttlebus service that's taking these violent offenders into Yellowstone National Park or something?

LOL they should. The law abiding people in Wyoming actually have guns and can shoot back. We'll see how they like that.

Truth

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The democrat felon fetish needs to end

Free country.
Move to a more conservative area nobody forcing you to live in Montgomery County.

DC COUNCIL.

My bad my bad same difference.
Don't get why folks get so bent out of shape about the laws and leanings of an area they ain't nobody forcing them to stay in.
Pack your shit and move to Buttcrack, Wyoming if you don't like how things are going here nobody's stopping you.

Yeah the government is about to let out violent offenders with youth, strength, minimal education, and no job prospects and the reasonable thing to do here is suggest moving to Wyoming.

They ain't letting em out in Wyoming are they?
DC got a shuttlebus service that's taking these violent offenders into Yellowstone National Park or something?

LOL they should. The law abiding people in Wyoming actually have guns and can shoot back. We'll see how they like that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The democrat felon fetish needs to end

Free country.
Move to a more conservative area nobody forcing you to live in Montgomery County.

DC COUNCIL.

My bad my bad same difference.
Don't get why folks get so bent out of shape about the laws and leanings of an area they ain't nobody forcing them to stay in.
Pack your shit and move to Buttcrack, Wyoming if you don't like how things are going here nobody's stopping you.

And here we go...
Curious why you assume this has anything to do with liberalism /conservativism. And just for your stereotyping, Wyoming is more libertarian (much like New Hampshire) than anything else so pick another state for your puerile buttcrack humor. Or maybe YOU need to travel more and get to know the variations in our great land?

Did you see me mention anything about political parties? Whether Democrat or Republican I think you have enough sense to know that the WAY OF LIFE in Wyoming is more conservative than DC so it doesn't have a rack of under-25 murderers running rampant that keeps you awake at night does it? Maybe YOU need to travel and go find someplace else to live so you can get some rest and stop stressing.

The 2016 IRAA law applied to a 17 year old, who the judge declined to resentence. This earned the judge a frosty letter from Charles Allen, who "knows better". Now he'd like to extend this to 500+ violent offenders. Why dont you read what the 17 year old was originally convicted of? And then get back to us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The democrat felon fetish needs to end

Free country.
Move to a more conservative area nobody forcing you to live in Montgomery County.

DC COUNCIL.

My bad my bad same difference.
Don't get why folks get so bent out of shape about the laws and leanings of an area they ain't nobody forcing them to stay in.
Pack your shit and move to Buttcrack, Wyoming if you don't like how things are going here nobody's stopping you.

And here we go...
Curious why you assume this has anything to do with liberalism /conservativism. And just for your stereotyping, Wyoming is more libertarian (much like New Hampshire) than anything else so pick another state for your puerile buttcrack humor. Or maybe YOU need to travel more and get to know the variations in our great land?

Did you see me mention anything about political parties? Whether Democrat or Republican I think you have enough sense to know that the WAY OF LIFE in Wyoming is more conservative than DC so it doesn't have a rack of under-25 murderers running rampant that keeps you awake at night does it? Maybe YOU need to travel and go find someplace else to live so you can get some rest and stop stressing.

I'm a Democrat through and through and liberal in every way, but DC Council has got to be some of the stupidest group of assholes I've ever met. I am all for non-violent offenders getting this, but violent offenders deserve to have a book thrown at them. I am sick of DC excusing this.