Let the Punishment Fit the Crime

Let the Punishment Fit the Crime

Johannes Mehserle’s sentence for killing Oscar Grant has been decried as less than Michael Vick was given for killing dogs.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Let the punishment fit the crime, they say.

Well, we now know the punishment for the BART officer who shot Oscar Grant: two years and time served. He could actually be out of prison in seven months—for killing a man. His involuntary manslaughter charge normally carries a four-year sentence, and could have included California’s "gun enhancement," which would’ve raised his sentence to 14 years. Instead, his short sentence has been decried as less than Michael Vick was given for killing dogs.

Meanwhile, some of the protesters arrested when the original verdict came down are facing felony charges which could carry more time in prison than Mehserle will serve.

And how about the case of a hit-and-run driver in Vail, Colorado, who was offered a plea bargain that would wipe his felony conviction after a few years of "good behavior"? The man he left lying in the street isn’t dead, but suffered spinal cord injuries and a life sentence of pain. The driver’s profession? A "wealth manager" at Morgan Stanley.

You have to wonder about our "justice" system. Does the punishment have anything at all to do with the crime—or only with who’s committing it? And what happens when a society loses the fundamental premise of the rule of law—that we have one law for all?

One law for me, another for you. What next—one economy for us and another for them? One environment, one marriage, one school… Wait, I guess the real question is: What do we do now we’re here?

The F Word is a regular commentary by Laura Flanders, the host of GRITtv which broadcasts weekdays on satellite TV (Dish Network Ch. 9415 Free Speech TV) on cable, and online at GRITtv.org and TheNation.com. Support us by signing up for our podcast, and follow GRITtv or GRITlaura on Twitter.com.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x