Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Friday May 22 2015, @07:07AM   Printer-friendly
from the too-small-to-prevail dept.

Glenn "Cannon Balls" Hughes, a mail carrier that took it upon himself to fly a gyrocopter into restricted space in Washington, D.C. to deliver messages to Congress, is now facing more charges and possible prison time, according to the Tampa Bay Times.

Shortly after being arrested, he was charged with crimes that could have put him behind bars for up to five years. Now additional charges have been added to raise that to a possible nine-and-a-half years, almost double the time he faced at first.

Amid the debate, lawmakers have suggested that the laws under which Hughes faced charges should be updated with tougher penalties.

When Hughes was first charged in April, he faced fewer counts and a possible sentence of fewer than five years in prison.

The list of charges seems a bit over the top, but that level of vindictiveness from our government seems the norm these days, OMO.

"I am more convinced than ever that I did the right thing," Hughes said in a Wednesday evening interview.

The charges include two felonies: one count each of operating as an airman without an airman's certificate and violating registration requirements involving aircraft. In addition, he was indicted on four misdemeanor counts: three counts of violation of national defense airspace, and one of operating a vehicle falsely labeled as a postal carrier.

If Hughes is convicted of either of the two felonies, he will be required to forfeit his gyrocopter to the federal government.

Hughes called his potential sentence "excessive" because of the nature of his action: an act of civil disobedience where no one was hurt, and no property was damaged.

"How is that worth 9½ years?" he said. "I think the prosecutor has an uphill battle."

Hughes said he is not certain what will happen at Thursday's arraignment. But he said he is open to the idea of a plea bargain, if it means no jail time. But he also is prepared for the possibility that his case could go in front of a jury.

I'm not certain I would have his optimism about the prosecution having an uphill battle, but I do hope he is right about that.

Disclaimer: I take full blame for the 'Cannon Balls' moniker in the title summary. It was meant to be a statement and show of my admiration for G. Hughes, who I see as worthy of respect, whether you agree with his cause, or not.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by pTamok on Friday May 22 2015, @08:28AM

    by pTamok (3042) on Friday May 22 2015, @08:28AM (#186371)

    I think it is useful that the prosecution itemise all the charges so ordinary folk can see just how many over-reaching laws there are.

    He is technically guilty on many counts, and this is a problem with 'strict liability' laws - it captures the inadvertantly guilty as well as those where a 'mens rea' is in place. It indicates laziness on the part of the law-makers, because in any reasonable jurisdiction, there is room to accommodate acts which are strictly illegal but made with good intentions. I do not consider the USA a set of reasonable jurisdictions.

    I would also say that there is another questions: where is the harm? While he is surely technically guilty of many offences, the main question that really should be decided by a jury of his peers is whether he did any harm, and the punishment should be commensurate with the harm caused. As you say, the only weapon left here is jury nullification, and that is a pretty sorry state of affairs.

    There used to be very many hanging offences in the UK, and it was eventually realised that over-strict punishments did not act as deterrents. If anything, they encouraged law-breakers to maximise their 'take' and so increase the harm to society - "might as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb".

    In my view, the question that should be put before a jury is not 'did he break the law', but 'did he do any harm'; and the punishment be commensurate wih the degree of harm as determined by the jury, and downgraded (if necessary) by the judge, but never upgraded. However, that is not how the legal system operates: it is interested in whether you broke the law, or not, and the judge determines sentencing. Wishing for a different legal system isn't going to get me very far.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=3, Total=4
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 22 2015, @07:19PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 22 2015, @07:19PM (#186608)

    >Wishing for a different legal system isn't going to get me very far.
    Killing for one might though. It is, infact, the one and only way. There is no substitute, and nothing else works. Nothing else at all.