Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitch
I would think that the book was thrown (with which I disagree, more below) not for "following the American Dream" inasmuch as abusing that concept as part of a court submission, by someone who used that sham marriage to a) become an elected official of her state of residence, and b) defraud a bankruptcy court.
I think that Cote's indignation would have been lit by the idea that following the American Dream is some sort of justification for these types of acts. Not the fraudulent, perjurious marriage, mind you; the other acts. If that is true, we can fondly look upon Al Capone as the same as she; someone who simply wanted to follow the American Dream and leave an empire to his children.
Cote hardly "threw the book" at her; she was eligible for up to 10 YEARS in Prison, and Cote abided by the plea agreement, which stated "12-18 months." In fact, she could easily have made it the 18 months (or, mind you, abrogated the plea agreement altogether--she has that authority). She, Cote, sentenced her simply for the year--not even the 18 months. That falls, in my opinion, FAR outside the idea of "throwing the book" at her.
Frankly, for the crime of this sentence alone: "...I didn’t do none of the things that usually you are very used to seeing in the other guys that get in this situation,” I would have sentenced her to 3 years.
Hitch
|
All I can go by is what the article says. The first sentence that I quoted says "The federal Probation Department recommended no prison sentence...". Of course Federal judges are free to follow their whims whenever they wish, but the article does make it clear that Judge Cotes' issue was that she didn't like the idea that someone would say that the defendant was trying to follow the American Dream. It will be interesting to see if there is an appeal on the sentence.
As far as the rhetoric about Al Capone, I'm pretty sure that following the American Dream was not mentioned with regards to Al Capone's sentencing.