Thank you for the responses, spicy and all.
The line for me starts with firing up people you don't know using the internet to flood the court with calls and potentially having some nut job decide to take the law in his own hands.
This is a fair point. The link I saw that was actually from SG (not someone's copy of a copy of a copy which may be valid) went to the Department of Justice, which wasn't the court. I'm not sure what the purpose of that was so it does leave me a bit confused. I also acknowledge I may have missed something else that was posted and maybe removed. I also think there are plenty of nut jobs out there who could decide to take the law in to their own hands without anyone saying anything. Some people are really attached to this case.
My issue with SG is Judge Hippler didn't make the plea deal. The prosecutor made the deal.
In my experience, the Defense Prosecution and Judge all had to agree before the Plea deal was presented to the Prosecution formally. No Defense or Prosecution is going to present a Plea deal that a Judge won't accept. So they all made the deal. I can see SG's point on this one, though you don't have to agree. It doesn't mean he might not have handled it in a different manner, but he's not wrong.
And for the life of me, I can not understand why an actual guilty plea, in court, isn't justice.
For those who believe an eye for an eye, this is not justice (being what is merited). That is an opinion that some of my friends hold. As a reference to why.
If just SG called and complained to the court, ok that can be handled. I bet many people who've been sentenced by this judge are unhappy too, and call him up to complain, too.
People do not seem to understand that unless you yourself are a victim or an alleged perpetrator, you are merely a spectator...
I used to compare most truecrime consumers to sports fans, but it's becoming even worse.
Do sports fans try to join the opposite team's side and force them to commit fouls? Do they riot on the court in order to force an umpire to change the call?
I think the analogy is more like "Do people call the referee before the game and tell them that they aren't going to be happy if they don't make bad calls on the other team?" And that answer would be no.... so fair point. However, just because you aren't the one who was killed doesn't mean you are not a victim of a person who purported a crime against your loved one. So I can't agree with that. IMO. (Victim:
someone or something that has been hurt, damaged, or killed or has suffered, either because of the actions of someone or something else, or because of illness or chance)
It's about timing IMO.
Judge SH is the sitting judge on this case. Addressing him in any manner outside the courtroom has the capacity to throw a trial. Even an appearance of impropriety derails trust in the system. Threats, pressure, force, harassment, coercion, blackmailing, begging, buying -- all bad.
IMO the judge was compelled to raise it on the record, no different than if a defendant mailed him money to side with him. Judge SH was clear, he was not influenced by that misguided campaign, that he turned it over without listening to it, and that he does as his job requires, applies the laws as he understands them. It's his responsibility to run his courtroom in such a way the law is upheld, protecting BK's rights (because he was the accused) and as such the rights of every man or woman accused.
Public sentiment in that regard, rather than trying to persuade/bribe/threaten a sitting judge, has actual recourse -- the long, hard way, changing the laws, should they need changing.
Once BK is sentenced to four fixed life sentences +10 years, concurrently or consecutively or repackaged as LWOP +300 years, I hope everyone impacted by the loss of these four young people who were embarking on their futures will find a way to decompress. To find enough joy to temper the sorrow, hope to overcome despair and laughter to balance the tears.
That is how we win.
JMO
100% agree Hippler had to call this out to insure the integrity. No question there. The optics of his appearing to be more angry about that than the person who killed 4 people were rough. If there was a better way for SG to deal with this, there was also a better way for Judge Hippler to address it. He's a professional. SG is a distraught father. Again, JMO.
I can go with misguided. In my area the Police Dept sucks. The Sheriff's Dept does not. The difference? The Sheriff's department treats you like you are a person, not a gold sticker for their record or a case to be closed, or some inconvenience because you want justice. People can get misguided when they have no real guidance or compassion from LE. JMO, still.
And I might be wrong to some, but I definitely disagree that stating ones opinion to something they disagree with is trying to persuade/bribe/threaten anyone. Here is what I think, take anything you can use, throw away the rest, you don't have to do anything with it. But I grew up where everyone had an opinion and no one was offended by anyone's opinion. You didn't have to pay any attention to it. That's why it is an opinion. That all seems to have changed in the last 20 years or so. Odd for me.
I don't necessarily condone or even agree with some of SG's actions, I do understand them. I sure can't be angry at a person who feels like the system let his family down. I've been let down by the system enough times to know that the long, hard way, changing the laws (no disrespect intended with the copy/paste) rarely works unless you have lots of money or lots of money behind you. The rest of us get that sandwich and suck it up, buttercup. It doesn't feel good when that happens at all.
