Absurd senteces and/or ammount of time served.

Fëanor

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Messages
3,626
Location
Nirvana
What is/are the most absurd sentences or amount of time served for committing a crime that you've heard of?

Here are two example, the first is an absurd long sentence the second is an absurd short amount of time served.

Oliver Jufer: sentenced to 10 years in prison after pleading guilty to lese majeste -- offending the dignity of 79-year-old King Bhumibol Adulyadej, Security cameras videotaped Jufer spraying black paint on the monarch's portraits during a drunken spree. (he was pardoned after 2 weeks)

Issei Sagawa: Murders and Eats Renée Hartevelt, French psychologists found him legally insane and unfit to stand trial. Instead, he was deported back to Japan, where he was put in a mental institution. However, the deportation order did not specify how long Sagawa must remain in the institution. 15 months later, Sagawa checked himself out, and has been a free man ever since.
 
In some parts of the US are the three strike laws. Commit 3 relatively minor offenses and you're in prison for life. For example, selling drugs is one of those relatively minor crimes.

Well I don't consider selling drugs to be minor. Using it yourself I could see be argued as a minor crime, but I have no sympathies at all for the dealers.

Three strikes is for three felonies.

As for those bizarre cases of someone being sentenced to life in prison because they stole two cookies,
The problem is not with the three strikes law,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_strikes

the problem is with the felony petty theft.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_petty_theft

Felony petty theft is the colloquial term for a statute in the California Penal Code (Section 666) that makes it possible for a person who commits the crime of petty theft to be charged with a felony rather than a misdemeanor if the accused had previously been convicted of a theft-related crime at any time in the past. The technical name for the charge is petty theft with a prior.
 
This was pretty harsh.

2 missing hot dogs, 1 felony charge
BY RON SYLVESTER
The Wichita Eagle
Video: The Hot Dog Caper

BY THE NUMBERS
Hear about the guy who spent 71 days in jail for stealing two hot dogs from a Wichita QuikTrip?

Wait. He didn't steal the hot dogs, he just forgot to pay for them. Twelve people took two days off to serve jury duty last week, heard the evidence, and found the guy not guilty.

"It was stupid," said presiding juror Krysti Mason, 21.

This is no joke. The case of Thomas M. Wimberly, a 74-year-old veteran living on Social Security, highlights both inconsistencies in the law and the experiences of poor people in the criminal justice system.

Wimberly sat in jail unable to make bond, $100,000 at one point, charged with a crime that -- even if he'd been convicted -- brings no time behind bars, only probation.

The hot dogs cost $2.11, "with tax," assistant store manager Jeff Dalke testified.

A bill tied up in the state Legislature would clear up a law that leads to cases like Wimberly's and frustrates prosecutors.

Kansas law requires felony prosecution for crimes such as petty theft if the suspect has had two prior convictions.

When Wimberly walked out of the QuikTrip at Broadway and Murdock without paying for the hot dogs last July, he had two previous misdemeanor thefts on his record -- one more than a decade old.

With thousands of felony cases filed each year in Sedgwick County District Court, it's easy for someone such as Thomas Wimberly to get lost in a crowd of dockets that strain the schedules of judges, prosecutors and public defenders.

But cases such as this one are closer to what fill the daily routines in Kansas' busiest criminal court district than the sensational murders and sex crimes that draw public attention.

"Property crimes, drug crimes, forgery, theft, burglary, making a false writing... those are the majority of the cases we see," said Sedgwick County District Judge David Kaufman, who presided over Wimberly's trial.

And the smaller cases are growing.

Following a recent Supreme Court decision, city municipal courts, which usually deal with misdemeanors, now hand those cases over to district attorneys to prosecute in state courts once they reach felony level.

"It's highly frustrating," said Kim Parker, deputy district attorney for Sedgwick County. "Nevertheless, we're trying to make sure no one walks through without some sort of consequence."

Parker said that the district attorney's office, because it takes prior criminal records into account, has handled cases such as alcoholics stealing mouthwash.

"Obviously, businesses get hard hit all the time with repeat shoplifters," Parker said. "And the cost of shoplifting is passed on to all of us, anyway. Then they take their disappointment to the Legislature" and push for get-tough bills.

But for the poor, it can lead to a revolving jail cell door.

A past that haunts him

In some ways, Wimberly is still paying for his most serious crime, which occurred more than 20 years ago.

Wimberly, then 52, drove a car off the road, hitting and killing 10-year-old Michele Jessogne in the summer of 1984.

The Army veteran now remembers the car brakes failing. Police said his blood alcohol level was 0.122 -- over the legal limit of 0.1 at the time.

Wimberly didn't fight the charge; he pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter and drunken driving.

"I took responsibility," Wimberly said in a December telephone interview from the Sedgwick County Jail. "It was the only thing to do. I wanted to set an example for my kids."

Wimberly served the rest of the 1980s in prison. He ended up divorced from his wife of 38 years and estranged from his two grown children.

While bouncing between homes and odd jobs, Wimberly was convicted of petty theft in 1994 and again in 2000.

These days, Wimberly is hard of hearing, walks with a stooped gait and shapes his words around missing teeth. His eccentricity extends to telling funny stories to a dog and testifying that the dog laughed. He tells people his age is 174 --"A hundred of that is mileage."

At the time of his latest arrest, Wimberly lived on a $448 monthly Social Security check.

The QuikTrip case

July 8, 2006.

Wimberly put his dog, Smokey Bear, into a shopping cart and went downtown to a car show.

On the way home, Wimberly said, he stopped at the QuikTrip on the corner of Broadway and Murdock.

Officer John Ryan of the Wichita Police Department was moonlighting as part-time security that day. Ryan would testify that he saw Wimberly pick up two hot dogs, put them into a bag and walk out of the store without paying for them.

Wimberly said he meant to pay for the hot dogs. He did buy a candy bar. He had $11 left, more than enough to pay for the franks he was getting to feed Smokey Bear.

As he was standing at the counter, Wimberly said, he saw Smokey Bear starting to jump out of the shopping cart, so he went out to stop him.

By the time Ryan caught up with Wimberly, Smokey Bear was gobbling down the evidence.

Behind bars

Wimberly was booked on theft, then went about his business. At City Hall he learned that his case had been dismissed. That didn't surprise Wimberly, who said he didn't understand all the fuss over a couple of hot dogs.

Wimberly said he thought it was over. It wasn't.

The city sent Wimberly's case to the district attorney's office. But a summons to attend a hearing at the Sedgwick County District Court was returned as undelivered.

When Wimberly failed to show up for a hearing that he said he didn't know about, he got what everyone else who misses court gets -- a bench warrant.

That's a warrant judges routinely issue for the arrest of no-shows for court. Wimberly's landed him in the Sedgwick County Jail on Nov. 20 with a $5,000 bond.

"I heard that, and I thought the price of hot dogs had really gone up," Wimberly said with a straight face.

Such a bond is standard, said Judge Greg Waller, who presides over the District Court's criminal division. Waller writes out several such warrants each week, with bonds appropriate to the crime. A murder case might draw a $1 million bond, a theft less than $10,000.

A bail-bond service will usually post bond for 10 percent cash down to get people out of jail.

But in Wimberly's case, the $500 cash was more than his monthly income.

The public defender

Poor people often are the ones who stay in jail, awaiting their case to proceed through a crowded court system.

"For someone like Thomas, even $100 is more than half what he pays for his monthly rent," said Lacy Gilmour, the lawyer with the Sedgwick County public defender's office assigned to the case.

Public defenders are appointed to people who can't afford a lawyer.

Each public defender in Wichita juggles dozens of cases at once. Their time to visit with their clients is limited by heavy caseloads, and sometimes they don't get to talk with their clients until just before a hearing.

"It depends on the client," Gilmour said. "Some are very involved. They show up for their appointments, and they're very concerned. Some don't even care enough to show up for their court dates."

After waiving his right to a preliminary hearing and being bound over for trial, Wimberly stayed locked up until Gilmour persuaded Waller to release him on a no-cash bond two days after Christmas.

Waller said Wimberly could get out of jail on the condition he check in with the Day Reporting Center at 21st and Amidon. Gilmour had asked that Wimberly be allowed to report to Pre-Trial Services at the county's Community Corrections Office, which is only two blocks from his apartment.

Waller later said the two programs offer different services; the Day Reporting Center is able to help connect clients with social services and other agencies.

"I remember Mr. Wimberly as being older and he was poor and stole food," said the judge, "so I took those needs into account."

With no transportation and no home phone, Wimberly shuffled across town, or rode the bus, to make his reports.

Wimberly met his court obligation and stayed free for two months. Then he fell ill.

When Wimberly missed reporting, he was sent back to jail.

Waller issued a new bond: $100,000.

"We've got people who have drug problems, or are repeated thieves, and when they violate the conditions of their bond, I want to make sure that they have a high enough bond that they don't get out, until I can determine what the problem is," Waller said.

Waller lowered Wimberly's bond to $5,000 the Friday before last week's trial. That would have required $500 cash to get out.

There was no plea offer from the district attorney's office, Gilmour said, and she's not sure she would have advised Wimberly to accept one if it were available.

"This was just a silly case," Gilmour said. "Even if he pleaded, he would have gotten 12 months probation, and if anything happened, he would have his probation revoked and gone to prison for about 11 months. There's no way this guy needs to be on probation or facing prison."

Wimberly's trial lasted all day Monday and Tuesday morning, then the jury decided his oversight in paying for the hot dogs didn't rise to the level of felony theft.

"Everyone makes mistakes," said Mason, the presiding juror.

Still, Thomas M. Wimberly remained in jail two more days.

Epilogue

Wimberly faced other city charges:

There was a trespassing case filed when Wimberly tried to go back to QuikTrip to pay for the hot dogs.

And that shopping cart he used to push his dog around in? It belonged to the Walgreens at 13th and Waco. Wimberly's story was that the manager let him borrow the shopping cart, because he used to go and round up the stray carts in the parking lot. When Wimberly tried to talk to the store's newly hired manager, he racked up another trespassing charge.

Thursday, the city agreed to drop the charges if Wimberly entered a county program for adult offenders. He agreed.

"I talked to him in the holding cell at the city building," Gilmour said. "I said 'Thomas, when you get out, do not go back to that QuikTrip and do not go to the Walgreens.' He said he wouldn't."

Wimberly got out of jail late Thursday afternoon. He turns 75 today.
 
The problem is that, for many things, what is an absurd sentence is a matter of opinion. The purpose of putting people in prison for their crimes is (should) be so that there is a negative incentive to commit crimes and to keep people who can't function in society out of it.

This is why I don't think the three-strikes law is unjust. After someone commits three felonies, it is obvious that this person can't legally function in society. If they can't function in society they should be removed from it.

I thought that 10 years was for vandalizing the King of Thailand's? portrait. I like in a more liberal representative government where the figure head of government is not so high and mighty that it is a crime to "upset his dignity." I think the man should have been punished for vandalism not for upsetting the King.
 
in Thailand people dress in yellow clothes every Monday to honor the fact that the king is born on a Monday :lol:

I agree with the spirit of the 3 strikes law even though in practice is causes some extreme situations.
 
A kid at my old highschool was angry at his teacher, so he spiked her water bottle with hydrocholoric acid. Thankfully, she only took a small sip and noticed there was something wrong with her water before gulping down anymore. She was rushed to the hospital and I'm pretty sure is fine, but obviously it could have been much worse.

The kid was convicted of some misdemeanor and will spend up to 60 days in jail. The school board convinced the teacher to not press charges, it could ruin the poor kids life! I'll have to find the article, but don't have time now.
 
A kid at my old highschool was angry at his teacher, so he spiked her water bottle with hydrocholoric acid. Thankfully, she only took a small sip and noticed there was something wrong with her water before gulping down anymore. She was rushed to the hospital and I'm pretty sure is fine, but obviously it could have been much worse.

The kid was convicted of some misdemeanor and will spend up to 60 days in jail. The school board convinced the teacher to not press charges, it could ruin the poor kids life! I'll have to find the article, but don't have time now.

I see nothing wrong with this... spiking a drink with acid is hardly a prank.
 
A kid at my old highschool was angry at his teacher, so he spiked her water bottle with hydrocholoric acid. Thankfully, she only took a small sip and noticed there was something wrong with her water before gulping down anymore. She was rushed to the hospital and I'm pretty sure is fine, but obviously it could have been much worse.

The kid was convicted of some misdemeanor and will spend up to 60 days in jail. The school board convinced the teacher to not press charges, it could ruin the poor kids life! I'll have to find the article, but don't have time now.

It must have been extremely concentrated acid, because otherwise, it shouldn't be a big deal. Stomach acid is hydrochloric acid.
 
http://wral.com/news/state/story/1130828/

Yah, a student poisoning a teacher, not a big deal. My bad, guys.

You failed to mention this:

Zinc chloride is a white powder that is considered highly toxic if ingested. It is used in processing textiles and soldering metals.

And hydrochloric acid is only dangerous when concentrated. You vomit hydrochloric acid, if you didn't realize.
 
i love reading about how messed up some cases are. because some are just so ridiculously stupid you wonder WTH was going on through the people who decided their fate at the time.
 
Some teenage kid in NZ killed 2 people and injured one in a car accident and isnt going to jail (i dont think, maybe doing juvenile??) because it might 'ruin his future'
 
Our country is soooo lenient its really ridiculous...eg.

Teen steals car, runs from police, is chased all over town, crashes head on into another car, kills two people, shows no remorse to any of the victims...
Sentence=6 months supervision.(supervision=report to police once or twice a week)
IMO absolutley pathetic, it just doesnt make sense, then you have the other side where a drunk driver passes out while trying to fill his car with gas but it is showen on the news over and over again therefore the judge feels he needs to make a example of him so gives him 2 years jail.(which is good, but WTH, you can kill 2 people and get nothing but pass out on camera and you get locked up for two years).
Oh but since hes only got two years he will get home detention, which means state looks after him and he sits at home all day and watches tv, drinks with his buddies, does what he likes as long as he doesnt leave property.
If for some freaky reason he doesnt get home detention(and most do,even violent offenders whom bash there wives then get sentenced to home D and go home and bash them again) he will be out in i think its 8 or 9 months as NO ONE serves there full sentence its something like 1/3 of it.

Oh if in prison they get a smack on the back of there head from a prison guard while not doing what they are told, they can and will sue and the average payout seems to be around 50000-100000 grand. None of this goes to the victims that they brutally raped and murdered though oh god forbid we do anything for the victims, in a lot of peoples eyes the crims are the victims, whoim need love and care due to being neglected by society or maybe there mama smacked them to much when they where young.

Rant over...I just get frustrated by our lenient non existent system of justice...that totally favours the criminal and ignores the victim.

Edit:Bit of a cross post with top dog there, what a coincidence lol,maybe shows the level of frustration felt by many good hard working law abiding kiwis.
 
Some teenage kid in NZ killed 2 people and injured one in a car accident and isnt going to jail (i dont think, maybe doing juvenile??) because it might 'ruin his future'

See that lots, the whole 'future' thing. Personally, I think to hell with their future.
 
See that lots, the whole 'future' thing. Personally, I think to hell with their future.

Seeing the kid and his bum family I think his future is already ruined, but god forbid he has to actually be accountable for ruining two other peoples futures not to mention there family and friends that have had there futures ruined by him.

Its all about the criminal here, there is no real thing as a victim unless there the ones that did the crime in the first place.

GRRRR:mad: :mad: :mad: thats how i feel about it anyways.
Screw him, he ruined lots of peoples lives and futures by his actions, now all that matters is that his future isnt ruined. What is society coming to. :mad:
 
Back
Top Bottom