Quote:
Originally Posted by rhadin
After reading an article in yesterday's New York Times about another ruling by Judge Denise Cote ("Prison for Ex-Manhattan Assemblywoman in Sham Marriage Case"), I believe even more strongly that Cote predecided the "conspiracy" case and made sure that the evidence that was admitted fit her predetermination.
Don't get me wrong about yesterday's case. The woman pled guilty and did commit a crime. I just find disturbing Cote's reason for sending the woman to jail rather than following the probation department's recommendation. Increasingly Cote sounds like she has a screw loose and is very vindictive.
It will be interesting to see what the ultimate disposition of the Apple case will be. |
I see nothing in the article that mentions any possibility of pre-judging the case.
Ms. Rosa was an elected official, in the state house of New York. The only reason that she was able to be elected was the sham marriage, which led to her becoming a citizen, which led to her becoming eligible to run for the office.
As to the one year prison sentence, this was at the bottom end of the agreed prison time in the plea agreement (
as stated in the referenced article in your linked article).
So, to recap, sentencing someone who admitted to committing immigration fraud (and becoming an elected official as a result of that fraud), bankruptcy fraud, and illegally receiving money from a foreign official in connection with her election, to the bottom end of the agreed upon prison term does not show any pre-determination, but shows a great deal of leniency.