Do not google this. You will hate white people in reply.

 

I don't get it. This is the same judge who gave the police recruit the maximum for rape and sodomy back in 2013 or whenever it was. He told him to accept responsibility for his actions. Is there more to this particular case than we know?

 

To go to my point, the armed robber PLEAD GUILTY. He had to be offered probation as part of a plea bargain with the Prosecutor's office, correct? I'm guessing that this wasn't quite a slam dunk case for the prosecution?

To go to my point, the armed robber PLEAD GUILTY. He had to be offered probation as part of a plea bargain with the Prosecutor's office, correct? I'm guessing that this wasn't quite a slam dunk case for the prosecution?

 

The judge can always reject a plea deal he or she finds unfair. Judging by the prosecutor's reaction at sentencing, this was not the plea he thought he was getting when he walked in.

The judge can always reject a plea deal he or she finds unfair. Judging by the prosecutor's reaction at sentencing, this was not the plea he thought he was getting when he walked in.

 

I understand that the judge has discretion. What I don't understand is that the judge accepted the guilty plea, but vetoed the negotiated deal to grant probation? If so...this judge needs to be off of the bench, unless I am missing something about the negotiation. However, after preaching from his pulpit, he says that he gave the accused probation in order to change his life around???? So, he accepted that the man was guilty, but didn't feel like he should be sentenced? He needs to explain that one.