Jalen Rose to serve 20 days...

Submitted by allintime23 on July 27th, 2011 at 12:35 PM
Wow, a harsh sentence clearly to prove a point.

Comments

MGoUberBlue

July 27th, 2011 at 1:41 PM ^

A young kid (18 or 19) got his second DUI and state law mandated 90 days in jail for second offense.  However, the judge has leeway regarding the specifics of the sentencing.  I was a young guy at the time and did not want this kid to spend time in jail, so I got him a job with the Durango Parks Department during the day and he would only have to spend the nights in jail.  He lasted one night and took a hard left to who knows where, but I learned my lesson.

This judge probably could have waived all of the jail time, but took the harsh road on Jalen.  I wonder what it will do to his career at ESPN?

name redacted

July 27th, 2011 at 1:43 PM ^

as someone who has been hit by a drunk driver... i have zero problem with the sentence. 

all of you saying shes a bitch, and how rediculous the sentence is, grow up.  drinking and driving is one of the easiest things in the world to avoid.  there are a million ways to plan ahead, and a million ways to avoid driving after the fact.  I love Jalen.  Jalen was an idiot in this instance. 

20 days is a good amount of time to sit and think about how stupid you were.

MGoSoftball

July 27th, 2011 at 1:51 PM ^

are missing the point.  The issue is not about how much time a first offender should get, it is about one judge ALWAYS giving jail time and other judges using descretion and common sense in sentencing.

If Jalen went in front of a different judge then he would have probably received probation and counseling.  Automatic jail time is over-kill.

MGoSoftball

July 27th, 2011 at 3:07 PM ^

friend is another issue.  It is a political issue to be settled by majority vote or through our elected representatives in Lansing.   I dont have an issue with it if EVERYONE were subjective to it.

However when one drunk driver gets a slap on the wrist and the other gets 90 days in jails seems a little un-balanced.  A judge using the bench to further her political career is aweful.

FgoWolve

July 28th, 2011 at 12:28 PM ^

We want judges to have discretion. It is an integral part of the justice system. There are some cases that require a judge's keen eye to recognize a person's background, the circumstances of the case, and whether there is a special need to sentence harshly or lightly. These people went to law school and practiced for years. We assume (although not always correctly) that they are in the best position to pass down sentences from their bench, a position that involves them handling dozens of cases per day.

Every case is different. A chart dreamed up by politicians cannot predict a just and uniform outcome for every single defendant that might possibly result. So the legislature tells our judges that they can sentence anywhere between probation and 93 days in jail. The judge did that here, and she didn't do anything wrong. Judges are people too, and they're all different. Therefore they are going to have different insights and biases. Jalen would have ended up with a different sentence in front of a different judge, but such is the risk you take when you expose yourself to the criminal justice system. Equal and uniform justice is impossible, so the best we hope for is that, as a whole, the system will eventually spit out enough cases that average out to a just and orderly society.

name redacted

July 27th, 2011 at 3:17 PM ^

I think you are missing the point...  you assume she isn't using descretion?  Maybe its her descretion that when someon breaks the law in such a way that kills and injures people thousands of times a year, they deserve automatic jail time.  As an idiot who has previously driven drunk, and been hit by one, if I were the judge that would be my discretionary choice.

name redacted

July 27th, 2011 at 3:34 PM ^

"I don't believe people have the right to roll the dice with other people's lives," she (the judge) said. "Not when you get behind the wheel of a 2-ton vehicle."

I don't know about her sentencing with other violations, such as MIPs and such, but she seems right on with drunk drivers

 

Blue in Yarmouth

July 28th, 2011 at 10:00 AM ^

I read some of your other posts about getting hit by a drunk driver and thankfully I have no experience with such things, but still agree with your point. I find it astounding how much sympathy a number of posters on this stie have for people who receive DUI's, and I am not just using this thread as a reference. Every time it comes up there are numerous posters squaking about how it isn't that serious and everyone does it. 

My conclusion from reading many threads like this in the past is there is a very large number of university aged kids on this site (and even yonger perhaps) because I find it hard to believe that educated adults could take such a sypathetic look at DUI's. 

I also agree with another poster who was debating with softball guy about the sentencing. The softball guy said his problem was that her sentencing didn't fall in line with the standard for such offenses and his response was that perhaps the standard was wrong and needed to be "restandardized". Just because something is done a certain way for a long time doesn't mean it is right and standards often change with the times, that's just a fact.

Anyway, that was just a long-winded way of saying I agree with you.

CRex

July 28th, 2011 at 10:48 AM ^

It's hard to get outraged over the fact Jalen blew 3 beers on the meter.

Everyday people are driving while sick and on medication and PubMed is full of studies of the "significant impairment to reaction time" that first and second gen antihistamines have on driving (ex: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15049392).  To the point where doctors are told not to prescribe stuff because it's been found to completely impair driving ability.  

Basically at the same time Jalen was out driving, odds are some guy was driving home from CVS doped up to the gills on prescription drugs.  i'm much more worried about that guy sharing the road with me.  I see no reason to blow my tax dollars to pay for locking the guy up for 20 days.  I'd much rather go pave a road or something.

(To be fair, I pay Washentaw County taxes, not Oakland, so I don't think I'm paying to keep Jalen guy in the can.)

UMich87

July 28th, 2011 at 11:28 AM ^

by the lack of uniformity, not that DUI drivers shouldn't get jail time.

My issue is one of punishment vs. rehabilitation.  Given what the studies referenced in prior posts have found, jail time is not an effective deterrent.  It would seem that those who want DUI drivers to serve significant time, as Judge Smalls does, talk about deterrence but ignore the empirical evidence or really are more inclined to believe that punishment is what the criminal justice system is for. 

That is a huge debate.  For really bad people -- those who commit violent crimes such as murder, sexual assault or armed robbery -- perhaps the system serves primarily the purpose of punishment rather than rehabilitation.  For the less-than-career criminal capable of rehabilitation, perhaps the system should serve the rehabilitation role.  That is not to say that the system should not dole out punishment, but when one adds to the equation the responsibility to use the public's finances effectively as well as efficiently, then perhaps extended jail time is not the right answer for first time DUI offenders.

OMG Shirtless

July 27th, 2011 at 9:35 PM ^

Or does that not apply in Michigan and/or criminal cases.  My only experience is in civil shit in Illinois.  We can take 1 substitution of judge as a right, as long as it's within some statutory time period.

Look Up_See Blue

July 27th, 2011 at 9:58 PM ^

it seems as though many folks on here think this is a harsh punishment. The bottom line is Jalen Rose made a bad decision and he is paying the consequences. I'm a big supporter of Jalen Rose and grew up watching him play. However, that doesn't excuse the fact that he broke the law. He's lucky he didn't kill anyone. Hopefully, he won't be fired over this and he can continue his career. I have no sympathy for people that willingly make stupid decisions, especially grown men. He could've endured a lot worse than spending 20 days in jail. Unfortunately, the people that think this punishment is unfair/harsh are probably the ones boozing it up and driving themselves. Maybe we all can learn something from this, not just Mr. Rose.