#33 | Posted by Danforth
Interesting question. I don't think there are simple answers. In that context there are many paths to explore.
Guilty pleas don't say a lot to me. A 90% +/- rate is not atypical.
I look at the dismissals, acquittals and sentences. Dismissals say "as a matter of law no crime was committed." That's a powerful statement. It says that under no factual scenario alleged could a criminal violation of law been committed. To memory, of the hundreds of disposed cases only a few have been dismissed on very narrow grounds. By one judge, joined by no others given the opportunity.
Acquittals say a jury doesn't think the evidence presented, i.e. the factual scenario, proves beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime was committed. Again, my memory, there have only been a few trials. Most have resulted in convictions. There have been a few acquittals, again on narrow grounds, with some split verdicts. Guilty on this acquitted on that.
Sentencing to me is most informative of the question "anarchists or provocateurs." So far, my sense is the courts are not seeing those types. I think the courts are mostly seeing people caught up in mob mentality, momentary idiots. Thus, some consider light punishment. Then I see significant, year plus, incarcerations plus significant post supervision for more egregious conduct.
What has not been seen is the consequences of the conduct of those alleged to be "anarchists and provocateurs" See i.e. seditious conspiracy and conspiracy to obstruct justice.
I'm more interested in those dispositions.