Bee Zee commented on another post:
"Anyone who is saying that Rubashkin should be acquitted is delusional, but to say that the sentence suggested to the court by the prosecution is a bit extreme is legitimate. Others who have done much worse than he has done get less time than he is facing. This is not to say that he shouldn't pay for his crimes, nor that what he did wasn't so bad, but to give him a sentence that is fitting, when comparing his crime to the crimes of others with smaller fines and/or sentences. We have laws in the USA regarding sentencing someone beyond the requirements of the crime that they committed. Whenever the courts act in a certain way, giving people certain sentences, it sets the standards for sentencing. To move beyond these standards, then, would bemoving beyond the standards set for the punishment for his crime."
Yes, Bee Zee, we do have such a thing. It's called the "doctrine of stare decisis." Stare decisis is from the latin: "to stand on decided cases." This is chapter one of someone's first law class. I just want to point out.. prosecuters suggest harsh punishments. That's what they do, that is their job. It is then the job of the DEFENSE LAWYER NOT members of the public to counter-argue to the judge that the reccommendation is too harsh.
No seriously, if Jews want to help other Jews, can't they find someone who isn't a criminal to help? Ok, I"M not a real Jew and thus undeserving of human kindness from Jews... it's a good thing the goyim are really nice to me. Anyhow, maybe there's a real Jew who is NOT a criminal and you should be helping people like that.....