Yes, five years for Arson of land against a man with no prior criminal record is a huge sentence...
But thats what happens when you have minimum mandatory sentences.
These Con-Queda members have a beef with the Conservatives not the liberals like they think.
The law that dictates this minimum mandatory was introduced by Bob Dole R- Kansas.
The fires were set to coverup a mass shooting of at least seven mule deer near their ranch on federal land (poaching) conducted by the Hammonds.
The circumstances of both fires are worth examining. The first occurred in 2001. According to prosecutors, several members of the Hammond family set this fire “less than three hours after Steven Hammond illegally shot several deer on BLM land,” a claim they corroborate by citing testimony from D.H.*, Dwight’s grandson and Steven’s nephew. The fire, moreover, “consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations.”
D.H. also testified that his uncle Steven gave him matches and told him to help start the fires. Some time thereafter, D.H. says that he was separated from the rest of his family and found himself surrounded by burning flames. To escape harm he sheltered in a creek.
Additionally, the government claims that three men were camped nearby when the Hammonds’ started these fires, and that Steven and Dwight knew about these campers when they decided to start the fires anyway.
Steven lit the second fire in 2006 — he says that he did so as a preemptive burn in order to prevent an unrelated wild fire from spreading to the Hammond Ranch. At the time, however, the federal Bureau of Land Management had imposed a “burn ban” to protect firefighters who were busying trying to stop the wild fire. A second fire, such as the one set by Steven, could have potentially spread and endangered the firefighters.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...at-the-center-of-the-oregon-militia-standoff/
IMHO the five year sentence they got was richly deserved..
Yes, five years for Arson of land against a man with no prior criminal record is a huge sentence...
But thats what happens when you have minimum mandatory sentences.
These Con-Queda members have a beef with the Conservatives not the liberals like they think.
Why is that a lot?
For a non-violent crime committed by a first time offender who otherwise contributes to society I think five years of your life is a lot.
Democrats and Political Parties and Religions, that resemble them, throughout history, have always been bottom feeders. That is they build their support on Criminals, Dead-beats, Perverts, God Haters, Baby Killers, Haters, Slavers, Traitors and Totalitarians of all sorts. So, naturally they always go to bat on behalf of wrongdoers of every sort. FounderChurch![]()
If you review their case the repeated arson was only part of their crime.
Witnesses say they slaughtered a whole herd of mule deer on BLM land hours before the blaze was set to cover evidence of that crime up.
Their disregard for human life when they were told specifically not to light a back fire because there were campers and firefighters in that area.
Had they been a little less lucky they would now be convicted of manslaughter on federal land and would be facing the mandatory death penalty...
Five years was light, IMfHO.
I believe people should be sentenced for what they're convicted of, not the allegations surrounding the conviction.
Maybe if you use those facts to determine the sentence, but those facts were not proven in the trial.
The ranchers were not convicted of poaching, or child abuse, or reckless endangerment.
Don't use FACTS when addressing that BOY.
That dumb "negro" isn't interested in actual fact and truth.
The racist swine Princess peach has nothing to offer the conversation but racist trash talk.
A little history....
Dwight Hammond and his son, Steve, were taken to federal court for the 2001 fire. Steve was also charged for the 2006 back fire. The father and son were tried and convicted under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, created by Congress in response to the Oklahoma City bombing. Under the Act’s minimum sentencing requirements, both Hammonds faced a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison. U.S. Attorney Amanda Marshall stated: “The verdict sends an important message to those who think that they are above the law.”
But in the October, 2012 sentencing, U.S. District Judge Michael R. Hogan reduced Dwight’s sentence to three months and Steve Hammonds sentence to one year, based on his belief that such a harsh sentence was not what Congress intended in creating the statute. “It just would not be – would not meet any idea I have of justice, proportionality,” Judge Hogan stated.
The men completed their sentences and repaid about $400,000 in damages to the government.
Arson on federal land carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence, according to the U.S. District Attorney's Office, but the Hammonds successfully argued during their sentencing that the mandatory minimum was unconstitutional.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals later reversed the decision, and a federal judge in October sentenced them both to five years in prison with credit for time they already served.
Dwight Hammond Jr., 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, quietly surrendered at a Southern California federal prison.
They probably should not have been convicted under this Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 in the first place....so that the 5 year mandatory would not
be applicable....looks likes a railroad job to me....shit, the kid in the news that killed 4 people in a DUI accident didn't even get this harsh a treatment....
A little history....
Dwight Hammond and his son, Steve, were taken to federal court for the 2001 fire. Steve was also charged for the 2006 back fire. The father and son were tried and convicted under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, created by Congress in response to the Oklahoma City bombing. Under the Act’s minimum sentencing requirements, both Hammonds faced a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison. U.S. Attorney Amanda Marshall stated: “The verdict sends an important message to those who think that they are above the law.”
But in the October, 2012 sentencing, U.S. District Judge Michael R. Hogan reduced Dwight’s sentence to three months and Steve Hammonds sentence to one year, based on his belief that such a harsh sentence was not what Congress intended in creating the statute. “It just would not be – would not meet any idea I have of justice, proportionality,” Judge Hogan stated.
The men completed their sentences and repaid about $400,000 in damages to the government.
Arson on federal land carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence, according to the U.S. District Attorney's Office, but the Hammonds successfully argued during their sentencing that the mandatory minimum was unconstitutional.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals later reversed the decision, and a federal judge in October sentenced them both to five years in prison with credit for time they already served.
Dwight Hammond Jr., 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, quietly surrendered at a Southern California federal prison.
They probably should not have been convicted under this Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 in the first place....so that the 5 year mandatory would not
be applicable....looks likes a railroad job to me....shit, the kid in the news that killed 4 people in a DUI accident didn't even get this harsh a treatment....
Yeah, arson has potential to be massively dangerous and very costly to deal with. It should be viewed harshly.
Yes, and I believe they said they torched almost 1 1/2 acres
No.
More than 100 times that much in one fire alone.
Here is a hint for you dmbfuck; research first post second.
Remember google is your (Only) friend.