Two very different individuals convicted of very different crimes in very high-profile cases are scheduled to be sentenced in two different federal courtrooms today. Both cases involve so many notable and compelling sentencing elements, these press previews only serve to scratch the surface on the challenges facing the sentencing judges:
Link to Sean “Diddy” Combs Sean “Diddy” Combs
From ABC News, “Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs faces sentencing after conviction on prostitution-related charges“
From NPR, “Sean Combs, in custody for a year, to face sentencing on split verdict“
From USA Today, “What to know before Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs’ sentencing, including charges, trial and more“
Link to Sophie (formerly Nicholas) Roske Sophie (formerly Nicholas) Roske
From The Hill, “Kavanaugh’s attempted assassin to be sentenced Friday“
From the New York Times, “As Political Violence Rises, Justice Kavanaugh’s Would-Be Assassin to Be Sentenced“
From the Washington Post, “In era of political violence, would-be Kavanaugh assassin faces sentence“
The contrasts in these two cases across so many dimensions should be obvious. One case is getting attention because the defendant is famous and rich, the other because the crime is infamous and political. One defendant went to trial and was acquitted on the most serious charges he was facing, the other pleaded guilty and whether a dastardly plot was ever likely to be completed is unclear.
But each defendant claims to be remorseful and each is arguing to their federal sentencing judges that they are changed people who no longer pose a threat to their communities. And both cases are going to require judges to make difficult and always contestable judgments about what punishments will be “sufficient but not greater than neccesary” to serve federal sentencing purposes.