![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ndrosenI have sent a message to Senator Kaine, and plan to send one to Senator Warner shortly, asking them to co-sponsor S. 601, the Prohibiting Punishment of Acquitted Conduct Act. I ask other fellow Americans reading this to do likewise with their senators, or thank them if they are already sponsors.
We are supposed to have the right to trial by jury, and we are not supposed to be punished unless found guilty, but current practice permits defendants to be punished for alleged crimes of which they were acquitted, or with which they were not charged. Daniel Defendant may be accused of A, B, and C. A jury may then acquit him of A and B, convicting him only of the lesser charge C. Perhaps the jurors honestly believed that he had been proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of C, although not of A and B; perhaps they or some of them figured he must be guilty of something, or he wouldn’t be on trial, so they compromised on convicting him on one charge.
Current practice is that the judge can then impose a higher sentence than would normally apply to someone convicted only of C, based on treating the defendant as also guilty of A and B. I believe this to be contrary to justice and the Constitution, and I hope that the Senate and House of Representatives will agree.
We are supposed to have the right to trial by jury, and we are not supposed to be punished unless found guilty, but current practice permits defendants to be punished for alleged crimes of which they were acquitted, or with which they were not charged. Daniel Defendant may be accused of A, B, and C. A jury may then acquit him of A and B, convicting him only of the lesser charge C. Perhaps the jurors honestly believed that he had been proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of C, although not of A and B; perhaps they or some of them figured he must be guilty of something, or he wouldn’t be on trial, so they compromised on convicting him on one charge.
Current practice is that the judge can then impose a higher sentence than would normally apply to someone convicted only of C, based on treating the defendant as also guilty of A and B. I believe this to be contrary to justice and the Constitution, and I hope that the Senate and House of Representatives will agree.
