A man committed five counts of robbery and was convicted. No one was physically harmed. According to this article, a guilty plea would have netted him as little as 13 years.
[Judge Norman] Thomas had no sympathy. He had thought about the case frequently. The judge cited Clardy’s use of Craigslist to lure victims, calling his actions a prostitution of their trust. He noted the location of the crimes, near a college campus and in the sailors’ home.
“You rob them at gunpoint and call them filthy names and hold them down in their living rooms at gunpoint to their head and put them in fear of death in their own home,” Thomas said. “That must be addressed.”
Judge Thomas threw the book at him, sentencing him to five life sentences, plus 53 years for gun and conspiracy charges. Projected release date: 2808.
Senator Jim Webb has sponsored legislation, The National Criminal Justice Commisssion Act of 2009, geared toward reforming our prison system. From a recent press release:
The goal of this legislation is nothing less than a complete restructuring of the criminal justice system in the United States. In my view, this overhaul has been made necessary by the rapid growth of our prison population, which now totals 2.38 million — the highest in the world. The growth in our prison population has not seen a corresponding increase in public safety.
So my question, dear readers, is simple: was the sentence excessive?
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Viv,
Five life sentences? Probably excessive, and irrelevant. I don’t have any problem keeping this guy in prison until he’s 70 or so, when he probably won’t pose a threat to anyone.
Doesn’t this violate the 8th amendment in some way?
The Court has had trouble standing on a proportionality argument for punishments. The 8th amendment disallows “excessive” bail or fines, but doesn’t use the term “excessive” in dealing with punishments. It uses “cruel and unusual,” and life sentences for violent crimes are not unusual in a Constitutional sense.
too excessive. we have given up on rehabilitating our prisoners.
and the for profit prisons need to fill those beds.
Laura,
I’m all for rehabilitating people who are in for property crimes, theft, burglary, embezzlement, bad check writers. Drug criminals as well.
Put people who commit crimes against other people. And this guy terrorized people and put a loaded firearm to their heads, need to be PUNISHED first.
I represented a white man (on a collateral issue) who is in jail until he is like 75 (was about 25-30 when it occurred) for putting his hands down the pants of a woman and whipping his thang out and trying to get her, a co-worker- to consent. Entire thing lasted a minute or two. Not justifying it in the least, but that was pretty “disproportionate” too.
If the sentences are concurrent (running at the same time), then no the sentences are not excessive, they are just about right given what the judge identified.
If they are consecutive, then the sentences are excessive.
Part of what the Court considers is that this guy did not plea even though he was clearly guilty, and even made up a crazy story to try to justify his actions. If we were judges, most of us would be pretty annoyed with this guy too.
Wouldn’t they have to be consecutive to have a release date 800 years from now?
It is not appropriate to trust the statements of a reporter at face value when analyzing a legal decision. There is no logical combination of numbers I can determine to come up with the supposed release date of 2808 except to suggest that if alive on that date, he may be eligible for geriatric parole under current standards.
The Virginia Courts website has a place where the clerks office can indicate if the sentences are concurrent or consecutive. The box is left blank for all of his crimes. One would need to see the physical sentencing orders to determine if these are consecutive or concurrent.
Under Virginia law, life generally means one’s natural life. The 53 additional years and the four additional life sentences are essentially superfluous. The sentences were assigned to dissuade any person considering clemency from ever finding in favor of release.
Life imprisonment, without a chance of early release makes sense. If he lives to 300 then he should get a second chance.
So my question, dear readers, is simple: was the sentence excessive?
Maybe, but given the nature of the crimes, a long sentence is warranted. I’d be satisfied with just the 53 years w/o the 5 life sentences.
Why don’t you ask the victims he taunted, held a gun to their heads and then, tried to get them to stay away from court. This guy was not strung out on drugs or under any influence but his own. He sounded to smart to resort to what he did. I feel better knowing he is off the street. So no, not excessive!
The man threatened to murder his victims; while not pulling the trigger, I cannot fault the judge for making an example of this young man. I’d figure if you favor gun control, you’d see this as the reason why you want guns of the street. If you are an advocate for second amendment rights, this kind of thing gives you a huge headache as it is irresponsible and may only lead credence to the opposing view. In any event, if five life terms is excessive, it is not by much. He might get some forgiveness for the first time, if he hadn’t gone and repeated his actions. The fact that he may have had a history of criminal activity, as is suggested by one commenter in the article (who apparently had just a bit of trouble posting the proper link), may have had something to do with the punishment.
Research consistently shows that the idea that you can ‘make an example’ of people is unfounded: incarceration rates have little if any impact on crime rates.
Yet again we fail to acknowledge the deep inequalities in our societies, be it poverty and deprivation, education and literacy or access to healthcare and mental health services, which lead some of us to commit acts that to many of us seem unfathomable, but which in a compromised environment (which as a society we have permitted to exist and develop) are not terribly surprising.
When do we get sentenced for condemning entire communities and their children out of indifference to a harsh and under-resourced existence?
Heh, what was I thinking? We have deep differences standards of living. Clearly, he should’ve been let off with a slap on the hand and a stern “don’t do it again”.
I don’t know where your little tangent came from. All I was saying is that when a person breaks the law, they have to expect punishment of some kind. Seems to me that death threats, whether from the poor beggar on the corner or from Bill Gates, should be taken seriously. Five life sentences may seem like it is harsh, but let’s face it; this man will be in jail for the rest of his life even if he only received one, though I fear I may be starting a “is one life term sentence excessive?” debate.
If you’re a law-abiding gun owner, you recognize this man is not a law-abiding gun owner, and you treat him as you do every other low-life scum. That is, you are thankful the system took care of him, and it wasn’t your family or home that was invaded.
One again, a comment thread illustrates that most are interested in indulging retribution, instead of rehabilitation or deterrence or anything else.
It’s ugly.
Thanks for being so much better than the rest of us, putz.
Someone has to be.
The abolishment of parole at the federal level, and in many states is acknowledged as the end of rehabilitation as a basis for incarceration.
In Virginia rehabilitation is still a significant basis for incarceration.
Nonetheless this sentence is based on retribution and incapacitation. As indicated by widespread support of the abolition of parole, most of us agree with the purpose of retribution, as harsh and unpleasant as that may sound.
I make no apologies for wanting “retribution”! The “rehabilitation” argument has been proven moot time and again. The guy terrorized human beings, and threatened to kill them. Lock em’ up, throw away the key and forget him.
If you want to whine about ‘rehabilitate” then start on the judges!
You forgot to shake your pitchfork, Nathan.
Its not a “pitchfork” its JUSTICE! Look it up, might surprise you to try to comprehend the meaning! Obviously not a word you understand!
Our own frustrated and silly 2L strikes again.
Confusing me with the girl who told you no at the bar, again? C’mon, Brian.
It depends on what standard we want to apply. It is excessive in the sense that it is outside the norm of what people get in this area for armed robbery. I work in the court system and have rarely seen someone get a sentence approaching life for robbery.
That having been said, I believe robbery should be treated more harshly than it is currently. This is an individual who targeted people, put a gun to their heads, placing them in fear for their lives. I have no problem with him never again seeing the light of day.
Of course they’re not excessive. The crimes were premeditated and violent (anyone who thinks a gun to the head is OK as long as it isn’t fired is smoking the drapes).
He was looking for an easy way to avoid taking responsibility. Now he can take responsibility.