> is why this guy [not the hacker] is getting 25 years.
No, he is not getting 25 years. He is being sentenced for a crime whose statutory maximum punishment is 25 years, for an offense which, under the circumstances put forward by the prosecutors, has a base guideline sentence of about 5 years (which is also what prosecutors have said they will seek in sentencing.)
The defense is likely to, in sentencing, challenge the prosecution position on damages, which may result in the guideline range being substantially lower. There is, basically, zero chance of a sentence anywhere close to 25 years here.
It boggles the mind that it's even possible to manufacture such a charge. In most European countries you would get the highest sentence for the biggest crime, which although wouldn't be "accurate" either, it's a whole lot closer to what the punishment should be than stacking the sentences up.
And please spare me the "but he would never get this sentence anyway!" argument. If you were in his position and the government would tell you you're risking 80 years in prison unless you fully cooperated with it, you'd shit your pants, too, and you'd probably give up any rights you have just to not risk getting anywhere close to that sentence, or you would even settle and plead guilty to avoid that.
> the guy will be walking free in another 9 years time.
This is not true. He was sentenced to 21 years in prison, but his prison stay can be extended, indefinitely, as long as he is deemed a danger to society.
I would be extremely surprised if Breivik walks at the end of the 21 years.
< who would have been sentenced to 124 years in prison
This is a number floated as possible years of time, but it is not what he 'would have been' sentenced. We don't know because he decided to turn snitch.
> If he had been German it would have 60 years for those same multiple crimes.
Nope. That's nonsense. Contrary to other countries, prison time isn't added on a per-conviction basis in Germany. There's maximum prison time per crime (in this case: 15 years) and that's that.
> This guy is now marked for life [...] based on the subjective option of a judge
That is not quite what this is. He hasn’t been convicted of anything; the judge is determining the conditions on which he can be released before the trial happens and making that determination requires the judge to weigh the available evidence and apply a legal standard—albeit one where ‘danger’ doesn’t align with its everyday definition-to determine if some level of monetary bail is required.
I do agree that he may well be marked for life and in the sense that Google will remember this event forever, even if he is acquitted at trial.
I look then to Section 5G1.2{d) of the guidelines, which
tells us that where there are multiple counts, and the
guideline range exceeds the statutory maximum for the most
serious count, the court must impose consecutive terms of
imprisonment to the extent necessary to achieve the total
punishment.
There is a little bit of ambiguity, however, as to
what is meant by "total punishment" where the guideline
calculation calls for ~ife imprisonment, but Second Circuit
case law makes clear that in such a situation, the district
court is to stack or add up the maximum sentences for all
the counts.
In United States v. Evans, for example, 352 F.3d 65,
where the guideline calculation called for life
imprisonment but no count carried a life sentence, the
court held that the guideline range is 240 years, the
maximum sentences for all the counts added together.
Accordingly, here the guideline range is not life
imprisonment, but 150 years, the maximum sentences for each
of the 11 counts added together.
I don't think you're right, but in any case, even if he receives the statutory max, it's unlikely he'll do it and stay in jail for 115 years.
reply