Atomic City Talk

askwhy Wrote:

Jacket Wrote:

askwhy Wrote:

I believe that Eric Anthony Bell should be the poster boy for jacket's failed idea of a justice system. Looking a few years back at Mr. Bell's stellar record not counting the most recent car jacking:

10-19-07 Arrest warrant for violation of probation

8-2-07 Arrest warrant for violation of probation

6-9-07 Arrest warrant for violation of probation

2-13-07 Arrest warrant for violation of probation

12-25-06 Failure to Appear

11-6-06 Theft by Possession

8-20-06 Driving suspended (5th) offense

9-16-05 Aggrevated burglary

6-22-05 Possession of drug paraphrenalia

2-10-05 Driving on suspended; motor vehicle theft; drug paraphrenalia

2-9-05 He was stabbed - wouldn't press charges

1-16-05 Driving while suspended

1-27-05 Warrant for violation of probation

Note that this is not a complete list since obviously there are several driving while suspended and who knows what in other locales.

Now jacket would think I am too mean for contending that our justice system should have locked this guy up years ago and thrown away the key. He would prefer that his family/community help him go straight. Well they also have criminal records - surprise! Jacket - please feel free to explain to all of us how great our justice system is in this area. It is obvious that law enforcement was at least trying with this many arrests.

All but two are misdemeanors. Max 11 months 29 days, serve 9 months. No disposition is noted on the felonies but it appears he may have gone to prison on at least the Aggravated Burglary. And your point is? He was convicted, given time, violated and sent to prison at least once on the only crime that could do that particular thing. Wow, over blown again.

So what is the explanation for him getting arrested at least 4 times within 8 months for violation of probation? That seems to indicate that he didn't get violated or he wouldn't have been out to get arrested.

Could have bonded out on the first and each subsequent arrest, and violated during that period. That is speculation. Still it is a misdemeanor probation. This is not uncommon due to jail overcrowding, to which you wish to contribute w/o wanting to pay the taxes to "cure" the problem I'm sure.

askwhy Wrote:

Atomic Wrote:

Nobody's defending this particular guy, at least as far as I can tell.

The quality of your example is a problem. That's all. Find a different example, one that has a little more solid ground beneath it.

Anthony Terrell Swicegood - charged with stealing meds and agg assault for hitting victim in face with brass knuckles; 3 weeks later 2nd agg assault where man was beaten and arm broken. He was allowed to plead to simple assault and only given 11-29, suspended for time served so now he is back out on street to attack other innocents.

While out of jail:

6-12-08 Anthony Terrell Swicegood, 22, 103 Eaton Lane; felony evading arrest, reckless driving, violation of the light law, possession of Schedule II drugs.

Only 21, he has a long history of drugs, violent crimes, especially aggrevated robbery, agg assault, etc. Yet he is given lenient plea deals and is still on the street. These are not the only examples - there are lots more. My point is that the police do their part, but the court system doesn't do theirs. Career criminals should NEVER be given reduced sentences or sweet plea deals! It is one thing to cut a first-time offender a deal - but after 10, 15, 25 arrests, they deserve the max when convicted, especially violent ones.

Your definition of Career Criminal appears to vary from the Definition of Career Criminal in the State of Tennessee. And yes it is defined, and is specific as to who is a qualifier.

askwhy Wrote:

Jacket Wrote:

askwhy Wrote:

Atomic Wrote:

Nobody's defending this particular guy, at least as far as I can tell.

The quality of your example is a problem. That's all. Find a different example, one that has a little more solid ground beneath it.

Anthony Terrell Swicegood - charged with stealing meds and agg assault for hitting victim in face with brass knuckles; 3 weeks later 2nd agg assault where man was beaten and arm broken. He was allowed to plead to simple assault and only given 11-29, suspended for time served so now he is back out on street to attack other innocents.

While out of jail:

6-12-08 Anthony Terrell Swicegood, 22, 103 Eaton Lane; felony evading arrest, reckless driving, violation of the light law, possession of Schedule II drugs.

Only 21, he has a long history of drugs, violent crimes, especially aggrevated robbery, agg assault, etc. Yet he is given lenient plea deals and is still on the street. These are not the only examples - there are lots more. My point is that the police do their part, but the court system doesn't do theirs. Career criminals should NEVER be given reduced sentences or sweet plea deals! It is one thing to cut a first-time offender a deal - but after 10, 15, 25 arrests, they deserve the max when convicted, especially violent ones.

Your definition of Career Criminal appears to vary from the Definition of Career Criminal in the State of Tennessee. And yes it is defined, and is specific as to who is a qualifier. And I can assure you that the above has never had a felony CONVICTION as an adult.

So you don't think we ought to treat someone who has been arrested say 30 times differently than a first-timer? Are you saying that someone with an extensive record of violent offenses should still get a sweet plea deal? I am trying to figure out where you are coming from. I am not even talking about enhanced sentencing for those meeting the state criteria for career criminals, I am just talking about using some of the leeway allowed to give the people who are obviously not getting it longer sentences as allowed by law. Surely you can see that letting someone who commited two agg assaults with injuries to the victims shouldn't be allowed to plea to simple assault?

Do you think the reason he hasn't had a felony conviction might be they keep reducing them to misdemeanors? That is a circular argument. He certainly committed felonies as an adult, not even counting juvvies. Do you have some vested interest in getting these people back on the street or are you just that much against justice?

He was just recently convicted of a felony. I stand corrected. My point is this. The laws are being enforced. He does not qualify as a Career Criminal as you asserted. First offender is no longer a consideration for probation. Further, the laws of the State of TN. on sentencing require all convictions below 10 years to be considered for probation. The system follows the law that it is required operate within, if not, the system is no better than a criminal who broke the law. The problem is not with the system, it is with the laws on the books. Don't like, get a lobby and change them. Until then the system will work within the frame work of the TCA on sentencing.

askwhy Wrote:

Jacket Wrote:

askwhy Wrote:

Jacket Wrote:

askwhy Wrote:

Atomic Wrote:

Nobody's defending this particular guy, at least as far as I can tell.

The quality of your example is a problem. That's all. Find a different example, one that has a little more solid ground beneath it.

Anthony Terrell Swicegood - charged with stealing meds and agg assault for hitting victim in face with brass knuckles; 3 weeks later 2nd agg assault where man was beaten and arm broken. He was allowed to plead to simple assault and only given 11-29, suspended for time served so now he is back out on street to attack other innocents.

While out of jail:

6-12-08 Anthony Terrell Swicegood, 22, 103 Eaton Lane; felony evading arrest, reckless driving, violation of the light law, possession of Schedule II drugs.

Only 21, he has a long history of drugs, violent crimes, especially aggrevated robbery, agg assault, etc. Yet he is given lenient plea deals and is still on the street. These are not the only examples - there are lots more. My point is that the police do their part, but the court system doesn't do theirs. Career criminals should NEVER be given reduced sentences or sweet plea deals! It is one thing to cut a first-time offender a deal - but after 10, 15, 25 arrests, they deserve the max when convicted, especially violent ones.

Your definition of Career Criminal appears to vary from the Definition of Career Criminal in the State of Tennessee. And yes it is defined, and is specific as to who is a qualifier. And I can assure you that the above has never had a felony CONVICTION as an adult.

So you don't think we ought to treat someone who has been arrested say 30 times differently than a first-timer? Are you saying that someone with an extensive record of violent offenses should still get a sweet plea deal? I am trying to figure out where you are coming from. I am not even talking about enhanced sentencing for those meeting the state criteria for career criminals, I am just talking about using some of the leeway allowed to give the people who are obviously not getting it longer sentences as allowed by law. Surely you can see that letting someone who commited two agg assaults with injuries to the victims shouldn't be allowed to plea to simple assault?

Do you think the reason he hasn't had a felony conviction might be they keep reducing them to misdemeanors? That is a circular argument. He certainly committed felonies as an adult, not even counting juvvies. Do you have some vested interest in getting these people back on the street or are you just that much against justice?

He was just recently convicted of a felony. I stand corrected. My point is this. The laws are being enforced. He does not qualify as a Career Criminal as you asserted. First offender is no longer a consideration for probation. Further, the laws of the State of TN. on sentencing require all convictions below 10 years to be considered for probation. The system follows the law that it is required operate within, if not, the system is no better than a criminal who broke the law. The problem is not with the system, it is with the laws on the books. Don't like, get a lobby and change them. Until then the system will work within the frame work of the TCA on sentencing.

That is my point. If the sentencing guidelines say 2-8 years, I think the person like swicegood should get the max, not the minimum, based on his criminal history. Of course, if there are other factors that get him bumped to a higher classification, those should apply. I just think we are continually allowing serious crimes to be pled down which allows these thugs to remain on the streets to commit more crimes. This allows people who have committed several felonies which have been pled to only have misdemeanors on their record.

Then perhaps in addition to your lobbying efforts, you should go to law school and work toward becoming a criminal court judge.

Turn your avocation into your vocation.

All:
These multi-layer nested quotes make the thread difficult to follow! Please only quote that which is necessary to make your point. Once you hit the "reply" button, you can delete everything within the [ quote ] tags except the part(s) you need.

There is a great difference between doing nothing and doing what is appropriate. What is not appropriate is what you have advocated including locking up people and throwing away the key based on your 20/20 hind sight rather than the law. Oak Ridge is not extraordinary with regard to crime. What we don't need are people advocating extraordinary retributions so thoughtlessly.

If you look at the 2005 data for example, other similar nearby towns have worse crime rates including Crossville, Morristown, Kingsport, ... It is clearly not just an Oak Ridge story.

askwhy Wrote:

CrackerNation Wrote:

There is a great difference between doing nothing and doing what is appropriate. What is not appropriate is what you have advocated including locking up people and throwing away the key based on your 20/20 hind sight rather than the law. Oak Ridge is not extraordinary with regard to crime. What we don't need are people advocating extraordinary retributions so thoughtlessly.

So just for grins - do you have an idea of how many crimes you think one person should be allowed to commit before they should be incarcerated?

Potentially 1 conviction.

askwhy Wrote:

Do you believe in 3-strike laws?

I believe they exist, but I think they are more a cover for failures of the prison system. I do believe that priors are fair game for sentencing.

askwhy Wrote:

Do you agree with plea bargaining violent felonies down to misdemeanors?

Sure when the prosecution's case is weak.

askwhy Wrote:

I am not advocating throwing away the key on first offenses, but you should use hind sight when it is available and a few dozen arrests/convictions should be taken into account.

Except there is a world of difference between prior arrests and prior convictions.

Unless you are convicted it only counts as an arrest. If not convicted, then I guess the system doesn't think you committed the crime. If I remember correctly the philosophy of this country is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVDEN GUILTY. Just because you are arrested does not mean you are guilty. That has to be proven.

askwhy Wrote:

The other issue is how screwed up our justice system is if someone has the opportunity to get arrested 20 times without any convictions. So much for speedy trials. It is a big problem locally that you have people getting caught a number of times before the first case ever comes to trial.

They got arrested 20 times without conviction because RAMSEY was in office.

When the last time you made an arrest and had all the facts in order for a conviction?

Apparently YOU don't know the system as well as you claim you do. Hmph. Imagine that.

Jacket

Jacket

Jacket

CrackerNation

Modette

CrackerNation

CrackerNation

CrackerNation

poisonivy

Blowin Smoke