I think someone has an unhealthy obsession with this piece of garbage...

A lot of people are interested in his trial, not just me. I mostly read about it, I didn't watch it like a lot of people did.

Fred Guttenberg, father of 14-year-old Parkland school shooting victim Jaime, called on Broward County Public Defender Gordon Weekes to resign on Wednesday.

"I want to see Gordon Weekes resign before the end of the day today," he said at shooter Nikolas Cruz's sentencing hearing.

This comes after Weekes asked the judge to direct the state to encourage its witnesses to not make any statements to or about the defense team and the jury and to stick to their feelings about how Cruz's sentence affected them.

Weekes had criticized some of Tuesday's testimony for verbally attacking defense lawyers, and claimed that the defendant's lawyers were just doing their jobs as the law provides criminal defendants a right to legal representation.

"It is very important … that we do not create an atmosphere where dog whistles are being emanated from this courtroom encouraging folks to act on those same type behaviors," Weekes told the court.

Guttenberg slammed these appeals and Weekes' suggestion that the grieving families were inciting violence while making their statements.

Some of these impact statements have been great, some of them are just railing against the entire judicial system which I think is some thing that should not be part of a victim impact statement.

These people are standing up in open court getting a lot of media coverage in bashing public defenders and some yesterday were very critical of the jury. Many have complained about being told to refrain from showing too much emotion in the courtroom, saying their first amendment rights were violated. None of this is relevant to a victim impact statement.

His description of what he wants to happen to Cruz in prison was ... rather detailed.

Whose description?

Guttenberg is a political activist now. He's made a lot of appearances in DC.

Linda Beigel Schulman, mother of Scott Beigel, a Parkland teacher shot and killed in the massacre, said her son saved 31 people inside the school before he died.

To gunman Nikolas Cruz, she said, "I have never uttered your name, and I never will," addressing him as the "confessed, convicted Parkland mass murderer" in court. She said Cruz's "notoriety is over today."

Beigel Schulman thanked the judge and the prosecution team. She told the prosecutors that she thought their case was "flawless" and that they "proved every aggravating factor" at trial.

She concluded her statement by holding up a picture of those killed in the shooting and reading their names and ages. For her son Scott, she called him "my irreplaceable son" who she will "honor, cherish and love for every day for the rest of my life."

Isn't Andrew Pollack a political activist too?

lethalninja said:

---

Whose description?

---

Fred Guttenberg

They were VERY restrained in their victim impact statements during the trial. Nothing they say now will affect the outcome. The judge is letting them speak and I'm sure she's aware of what's appropriate.

If you've watched the trial, you know this defense team deserves the criticism they are getting. Yesterday was just the straw that broke the camel's back for some of them.

What was his description?

lethalninja said:

---

What was his description?

---

To summarize, he wanted Cruz to be the ***** of every prisoner there so he could get passed around every day like a toy.

Now this sister of a victim accused the defense of condoning the crimes. She's way out of line. This entire impact statement has nothing to do with victim impact, she just said she wasn't planning to say anything today until the defense made an objection yesterday. This entire statement is just railing against the defense team, it's inappropriate and it needs to be stopped.

She just finished. She never mentioned her brother. She never talked about the victim in what is supposed to be a victim impact statement. This has turned into a kangaroo court of people using the platform to rail against a public defender's office. This should not be allowed.

Private PoopyPants said:

---

Now this sister of a victim accused the defense of condoning the crimes. She's way out of line. This entire impact statement has nothing to do with victim impact, she just said she wasn't planning to say anything today until the defense made an objection yesterday. This entire statement is just railing against the defense team, it's inappropriate and it needs to be stopped.

---

While true that it is inappropriate, defense counsel was being pretty whiney yesterday and pissed off the judge.

Not the same as saying defense counsel asked for it but had they just let it go yesterday, doubt it would have increased the level of blowback.

And now another one forgetting the victim and just complaining about the defense team. This has gone completely off the rails.

The judge never had control of the courtroom to begin with. If she had established decorum in the first place she would have a lot more standing to reinforce it now.

Are they allowed to curse at Nikolas Cruz during their statements? Like if one of them wanted to call him a f***ing piece of s***, could they say that?

lethalninja said:

---

Are they allowed to curse at Nikolas Cruz during their statements? Like if one of them wanted to call him a f***ing piece of s***, could they say that?

---

They have already, so yes.

Would they be allowed to go into a long rant about the types of torture they think he deserves? Like if they were explicit and not just saying that he should be in pain for every second of his life.

Private PoopyPants said:

---

The judge never had control of the courtroom to begin with. If she had established decorum in the first place she would have a lot more standing to reinforce it now.

---

What I watched yesterday, defense counsel was being very defiant to her orders to stop talking about it, she had made her ruling but they kept trying to argue with her and wouldn't sit down and shut up.

When a judge tells a lawyer to sit down, they are expected to sit down and not further disrupt her courtroom during a proceeding. So the judge went off of the rails and defense counsel went off of the rails, both.

But this is all post conviction stuff, so there really is no prejudice involved to the defendant. Unpleasant bickering that is unnecessary but not harmful.

In a written statement read aloud by a friend in court, April Schentrup, whose daughter Carmen died on the floor of her classroom, said convicted mass shooters should earn an automatic death penalty. She called on legislators to make it easier for judges to pass the sentence.

Alyssa Alhadeff's father said he should be put in a shock collar when he goes to prison.

lethalninja said:

---

He forgot to ask the judge to forbid commissary, recreation and books, but the judge doesn't have discretion over prison conditions anyways.

---

The judge ordered his commissary account to be garnished until all fees and restitution is paid, which means the account will be at zero for the duration of his sentence. That something at least.

How much money does he owe?

The 34 life sentences he received are consecutive, right?

If each life sentence was eighty years and if it was actually possible for him to live that long, his sentence would be more satisfying, since that's 2,720 years and he would be getting punished for each victim.

lethalninja said:

---

The 34 life sentences he received are consecutive, right?

---

That verdict only took the death penalty off of the judge's options for sentencing, is my understanding. He still has not been formally sentenced yet.

I thought the judge sentenced him to life without parole on each count, since today is his official sentencing.

lethalninja said:

---

How much money does he owe?

---

To be determined. The judge included sheriff's office fees, public defender fees, court costs, and restitution to all the victims/families. That's going to eat up the 25 cents an hour he makes cleaning toilets.

Quote:

---

The 34 life sentences he received are consecutive, right?

---

Yes.

lethalninja said:

---

If each life sentence was eighty years and if it was actually possible for him to live that long, his sentence would be more satisfying, since that's 2,720 years and he would be getting punished for each victim.

---

The DA's office said each life sentence was a minimum of 1029 months. That would be 2,915.5 years for 34 life sentences.

lethalninja said:

---

I thought the judge sentenced him to life without parole on each count, since today is his official sentencing.

---

Confusing why Florida allows victim impact statements after sentencing but yes I stand corrected.

I was referring to the effect of what the jury actually voted on and how that affected the judge's options in sentencing and confused myself. LOL. It happens.

My eighty years example was because that's the average human lifespan in America, so it would make sense if life without parole was considered eighty years. I didn't know that there was a minimum number of months he would have to serve on each life sentence in Florida, I just thought it was life without parole and that's it. Either way, he'll still die in prison.

So if he lives that long, which will never happen, he could theoretically be released?