Lisa Miller case

[Ken]

It's not what you think or what I think that will govern this case. If this case goes to sentencing (as opposed to a plea bargain or settlement of some sort) then it will be up to the judge. They do have discretion. But they also have guidelines for sentencing. If you don't believe me, feel free to look them up yourself. This trial will be in a Federal district court. Here are the sentencing guidelines (and mitigating factors) that are in effect:

https://guidelines.ussc.gov/gl/%C2%A73E1.1

And in Soviet Russia, sharing the gospel would get you sent to the gulag; in Nazi Germany, helping hide Jews would get you sent to a concentration camp. What's your point?

And do you have some remark about "sentencing guidelines" that result in a guy getting out in 3 years from a 9 year conviction that was originally 20 years who then literally kills and eats his neighbour?

My point was made multiple times in this thread. Temporal1 stated that she was hoping and praying for leniency on the part of the court. I commented that under Federal sentencing guidelines, factors such as remorse and contrition are usually weighed when determining sentencing leniency. Which could put Lisa Miller in a bind if she is not willing to do that. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to argue the point. It is pretty cut and tried. Look it up for yourself. There is a tremendous amount of written material on the role of remorse in Federal sentencing.

As for your tangent from Oklahoma. Read the actual article that you linked to. The man in question was originally sentenced for a drug-related parole violation. That he went out and killed people is horrific. But that is not why he was originally in prison. The judge didn't release a murderer. He released a drug offender. That happens routinely hundreds of times a day across the country.

[temporal1]

Lisa Miller has not been convicted of anything. Except in media.

[mike]

Lisa Miller has not been convicted of anything. Except in media.

Her conviction is a foregone conclusion. The only question is what the plea and the sentence will be, and how she will hold up as the process plays out.

[mike]

It's not what you think or what I think that will govern this case. If this case goes to sentencing (as opposed to a plea bargain or settlement of some sort) then it will be up to the judge. They do have discretion. But they also have guidelines for sentencing. If you don't believe me, feel free to look them up yourself. This trial will be in a Federal district court. Here are the sentencing guidelines (and mitigating factors) that are in effect:

https://guidelines.ussc.gov/gl/%C2%A73E1.1

And in Soviet Russia, sharing the gospel would get you sent to the gulag; in Nazi Germany, helping hide Jews would get you sent to a concentration camp. What's your point?

And do you have some remark about "sentencing guidelines" that result in a guy getting out in 3 years from a 9 year conviction that was originally 20 years who then literally kills and eats his neighbour?

It would be nice if you wouldn't derail this thread by bringing up all kinds of other situations. We all know the Miller case reflects on the broad problems of our society and its legal system, but I'd like to keep this discussion focused on the topic, please.

[Ken]

Lisa Miller has not been convicted of anything. Except in media.

Her conviction is a foregone conclusion. The only question is what the plea and the sentence will be, and how she will hold up as the process plays out.

So are you expecting a plea deal rather than taking the case to trial?

[mike]

Lisa Miller has not been convicted of anything. Except in media.

Her conviction is a foregone conclusion. The only question is what the plea and the sentence will be, and how she will hold up as the process plays out.

So are you expecting a plea deal rather than taking the case to trial?

Yes. I can't imagine this will go to trial. For one, to mount a good defense, if there is one to be made, would require expensive attorneys and drag the whole thing out for who knows how long. The custody case was litigated years ago; this whole "kidnapping" thing happened because it didn't go in Lisa's favor. I can't imagine all of that being brought up again. My expectation is that Lisa will likely plead guilty at some point and simply serve the sentence. I have no idea what will happen, but if it were me, I would just want to get it behind me.

[temporal1]

Yes. I can't imagine this will go to trial. For one, to mount a good defense, if there is one to be made, would require expensive attorneys and drag the whole thing out for who knows how long. The custody case was litigated years ago; this whole "kidnapping" thing happened because it didn't go in Lisa's favor. I can't imagine all of that being brought up again. My expectation is that Lisa will likely plead guilty at some point and simply serve the sentence.

I have no idea what will happen, but if it were me, I would just want to get it behind me.

sometimes court rulings are later found to be wrong. and overturned.
in this case, a “next friend” was given custody? when a parent was willing and able.

i understand about getting it over with. time+effort has been invested for Isabella.
there will be future Isabellas.

it’s important to get things right, esp in new and untested laws.

if i understand, if this scenario played out a year earlier, there may not have been anything to debate (?)
(i’m asking. wondering. i do not know.)

[Ken]

Her conviction is a foregone conclusion. The only question is what the plea and the sentence will be, and how she will hold up as the process plays out.

So are you expecting a plea deal rather than taking the case to trial?

Yes. I can't imagine this will go to trial. For one, to mount a good defense, if there is one to be made, would require expensive attorneys and drag the whole thing out for who knows how long. The custody case was litigated years ago; this whole "kidnapping" thing happened because it didn't go in Lisa's favor. I can't imagine all of that being brought up again. My expectation is that Lisa will likely plead guilty at some point and simply serve the sentence. I have no idea what will happen, but if it were me, I would just want to get it behind me.

I expect that's probably the advice she is going to get from her attorneys. Taking it to trial would probably mean years of additional delay as the Federal courts are pretty backlogged due to Covid. And for the risk of a longer sentence than would likely be negotiated in a plea deal. On the other hand, she could be getting conflicting advice from religious rights legal activists who want to make her case a test case or something and actually take it to trial.

[temporal1]

.. religious rights legal activists who want to make her case a test case or something ..

but the political bloc/cult initiating the litigation is A-ok. (not in my view.)

From a Christian and moral perspective, if i knew JJ, i would have encouraged her to accept LM as Isabella’s mother, in the U.S., or Nicaragua, encouraged her to offer financial and emotional support, for benefit of the child. To reject any legal recourse. i would empathize with the difficulty.

LM is the only known bio parent. No adoptive parent exists. Her competence has not been questioned.

Loving a child, means putting self aside, doing what’s best for the child. Even if it hurts. Even if it hurts for life.

[mike]

So are you expecting a plea deal rather than taking the case to trial?

Yes. I can't imagine this will go to trial. For one, to mount a good defense, if there is one to be made, would require expensive attorneys and drag the whole thing out for who knows how long. The custody case was litigated years ago; this whole "kidnapping" thing happened because it didn't go in Lisa's favor. I can't imagine all of that being brought up again. My expectation is that Lisa will likely plead guilty at some point and simply serve the sentence. I have no idea what will happen, but if it were me, I would just want to get it behind me.

I expect that's probably the advice she is going to get from her attorneys. Taking it to trial would probably mean years of additional delay as the Federal courts are pretty backlogged due to Covid. And for the risk of a longer sentence than would likely be negotiated in a plea deal. On the other hand, she could be getting conflicting advice from religious rights legal activists who want to make her case a test case or something and actually take it to trial.

I think it is a test case in a way, but the parental custody and gay marriage laws are already on the books. This case isn't going to change any laws. There may be something there in the original custody case where Miller's side was arguing abuse. As I heard it, a certain filing that was a day late is at least part of what derailed the case. I don't know the details. I know there are allegations of things happening during the court-ordered visits that made Lisa's daughter, who barely knew her other "mother," very uncomfortable, such as bathing with her. So maybe there are some things there to make a case for something or other. But that's already been litigated. I can't imagine that there is the will or the money to fund a defense based on things that have already been through the courts. As to the bigger issues of religious rights related to gay marriage, I just don't see why some org with the money would choose this case in particular as a basis for fighting for the right of Christians not to have to accept the legal ramifications of gay marriage. It seems to me that fight would have to be fought at a higher level. However, I don't know how all these things work.