This is some information that has not been addressed in any of your articles regarding the passages on June 4th of S380 in what they are calling the "Jessica Lunsford Act." In passing this bill and combining S642 (to which we still do not know the verbiage that will be used, as it was not available for the Senate Law and Public Safety Committee to view, yet the Bill was passed) intellectually and emotionally challenged people where never considered. There are many adults with Autism and Aspergers or even sever Epilepsy who would go to prison for 25 years with the Judicial system being able to do anything. There are many Vet and Abuse Victims that are emotionally challenged that will also be incarcerated for 25 years without anybody able to do a thing. And don't say the prosecutors will charge them differently, because it has been my experience that they do not.
Is this what we really want?
I think you should check into this.
Mandatory minimum sentencing has not worked for over 60 years and it takes the balance out of the justice system. Since prosecutors determine the charges, they then would be determining the sentence, rather than our Judges. When Judges determine the sentence they take into consideration the situation, circumstances, and chance of reoffense. Mandatory minimum sentencing is a "one-size-fits-all" legislation based on a Bill that was initially written out of revenge.
Why isn't Joshua Lunsford serving 25 years? Why wasn't Mark charged for threatening police or for the porn found on his computer? Many families don't get as many passes as this family, does yours or will yours if something like this happens to it?