By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A California resident, Nicholas Roske, was sentenced to eight years and one month in prison for attempting to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Although prosecutors sought a sentence of no less than 30 years, the judge cited Roske’s abandonment of the plot and atypical circumstances as reasons for leniency. Roske, who had a pistol, knife, and other tools, told investigators she was angry about the leaked draft opinion on Roe v. Wade and believed Kavanaugh would vote to loosen gun laws. The Justice Department has announced plans to appeal what it considers an insufficient sentence.
Read the original article here
Simi Valley resident gets over 8 years in prison for attempt to kill Justice Kavanaugh – it’s hard to wrap your head around the whole situation, isn’t it? It seems so strange that a person who never actually harmed anyone, who, in fact, called the police and turned herself in, could end up serving over eight years behind bars. The core issue is, the woman from Simi Valley, in her reported state of distress, planned to take action, gathered weapons and supplies, and went to Kavanaugh’s home. But the key detail is that she stopped herself.
There’s a stark contrast here. The comments point out the perceived discrepancies in sentencing, highlighting instances where those convicted of far more heinous crimes, like sexual assault and child molestation, receive lighter sentences. It definitely raises the question of fairness, and how the legal system weighs intent versus action, especially when someone is actively seeking help. The fact that a person reporting suicidal and homicidal thoughts and seeking psychiatric help is imprisoned for eight years is a very complex case. Some feel this sends a chilling message, dissuading others from seeking help for fear of prosecution. It’s a hard thing to consider when there were no actual acts of violence.
The reaction from some is quite harsh. The whole situation has been described as a “disgusting attack” and a threat to the judiciary, while others frame it differently. It’s framed as a story where an individual was struggling and chose to seek help. It sounds like the woman had the intent and took steps to carry out the plot, but ultimately chose to turn herself in before anything happened.
It’s also worth acknowledging the potential impact on Justice Kavanaugh and his family, as the judge mentioned the “real harm” the plot caused. The idea of a threat, even a thwarted one, can be incredibly stressful, and the constant threat of violence can be deeply damaging.
One question that keeps popping up is, what exactly constitutes an “attempted assassination?” And in this case, does “attempted” become more like “contemplated”? Would a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry be awarded in similar circumstances? It’s also easy to feel like you’re living in some twisted, upside-down world, where things like attempted crimes against the judiciary are given more weight than, say, the destruction of fundamental rights. It’s clear that many people feel that the system seems to be prioritizing political agendas over individual needs.
It’s easy to argue that the woman’s actions, while reprehensible in intent, are also a cry for help. She showed up at Kavanaugh’s house with “a pistol, a knife, zip ties and burglary tools in her possession”. And she also reported herself to the police. Some believe that locking her up, rather than providing mental health care, is a massive misstep and misses the point of what the justice system should be about. It seems many feel the sentence is heavy.
The reactions reveal a real distrust of the system and frustration with how it operates. This case seems to highlight several issues: the value placed on intent versus action; the prioritization of political agendas; and the lack of resources for mental health care. The situation seems to highlight how many people feel let down by those in power. It’s not a simple issue, by any means, and the responses show the wide range of feelings around it.