Miscellaneous
Unverschämt
by Clay Staggs
That’s the best word I know to describe the sentencing of Lynne Stewart to only 28 months in prison. I use the German word “unverschämt” because it lacks an English translation that conveys the exact combination of disgust, unconscionability, obscenity, and brazenness that it indicates. (For a full list of words that it may be translated as, go here.)
Stewart had defended Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was ultimately convicted of conspiracy to blow up the World Trade Center in 1993, and other sundry terrorist activities, including the assassination of the president of Egypt. Apparently after his conviction, she passed messages from him to his followers in Egypt (and who knows where else) giving instructions to his followers, ultimately earning her own conviction for lending material support to a terrorist organization.
The federal courts have sentencing guidelines that provide a fairly standard sentence for convicts. The federal sentencing guidelines on Stewart would have indicated a 30 year sentence. The Clinton-appointed judge on the case, though, was persuaded to depart radically from these guidelines because of the defendant’s years of service to the poor and disadvantaged (many of which have been more political radicals than economically downtrodden). Making matters even worse, the judge released her without bond while she appeals.
I think this is utterly outrageous. This woman’s conduct indicates that she is a danger to innocents in this country and others. This judge ought to be ashamed of himself. I am a strong believer in grace and second chances, but I don’t think that means signing onto a suicide pact. She needs to be behind bars so that she can’t do any more damage than she’s already done.
Why is it that the most educated people in our society fail to grasp even the most basic concepts? This woman’s punisment should not be a function of how many pro bono cases she’s handled. It’s a matter of life and death. I wish we had judges that could, you know, get that.
Posted by Clay Staggs at October 17, 2006 09:36 PM
Clay, I was puzzled by this ruling, too, when it crawled across my screen. I wonder how much precedent there is for “good, moral behavior” before a crime occurs. If Ken Lay had given millions to charities during the Enron debacle, would we just slap his hand? This weakens the bench considerably. However, “Unverschämt” is now in my vocab toolbox. So that’s a good thing.
Tim, technically, Ken Lay is innocent. Since he died before he could appeal, his conviction was thrown out. Now his estate doesn’t have to pay the fines associated with a criminal conviction.