Raw Story reports:
The attorney representing Cesar Sayoc, the Trump-obsessed man who sent explosives to the president’s political enemies last fall, told a court on Monday that President Donald Trump helped make his client “deranged.”
According to Courthouse News reporter Adam Klasfeld, attorney Ian Marcus argued during a sentencing hearing that Sayoc deserved leniency in part because he’s a disturbed man whose mind has been twisted by conspiracies and misinformation promoted regularly by the president.
“He slowly became deranged by it,” Marcus said of the conspiracy theories. “We believe that the President’s rhetoric contributed to Mr. Sayoc’s actions in this offense.”
We’re back.
Rakoff says he’ll release a written decision as well.
He begins: “In a nation like the United States, that rightly places such a strong value on individual autonomy.”
— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) August 5, 2019
Rakoff notes that the federal guidelines call for a sentence that’s “sufficient but no greater than necessary.”
“If any of us had the misfortune to face sentence, who would we want to be sentenced by?” Rakoff asks, a judge looking at generalities or the specific facts.
— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) August 5, 2019
Rakoff: The bombs were designed to strike “fear and terror” in the hearts of the victims.
— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) August 5, 2019
Rakoff: In at least three of the victims — Biden, Clinton and Soros — the bombs were sent to personal residences, sending the message that no one was safe.
“Just, so who is the human being who perpetrated these horrific acts of domestic terrorism?”
— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) August 5, 2019
Rakoff notes Sayoc was abandoned by his father, sexually abused by his teachers.
He later became a petty thief and made a verbal threat to his energy company, an act the judge notes in hindsight may be viewed as “a portent for worse to come.”
— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) August 5, 2019
Rakoff: Sayoc became “infatuated” in Trump.
Though not legally insane, Sayoc became “obsessive” and “paranoic,” he notes.
“Does any of this matter?” Rakoff asks, referring to “unfortunate circumstances” leading up to his crimes.
“Yes,” he says, “within modest limits.”
— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) August 5, 2019
Rakoff: A defendant’s intent is as important as his actions.
“That does not mean that we can ignore for one moment a defendant’s actions and its consequences.”
— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) August 5, 2019
Rakoff: “The issue that’s most in dispute in this case” is Sayoc’s intent, that is, did he intend to kill and/or maim his targets, even if the chance was remote.
Was Sayoc a “careless or unskilled pipe bomber,” or try to intimidate them?
— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) August 5, 2019
Rakoff finds that Sayoc “was fully capable of concocting pipe bombs capable of exploding,” and since he didn’t, Rakoff believes that was “in the court’s view, a conscious choice.”
BREAKING: 20 years imprisonment.
— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) August 5, 2019