Quote:
Originally Posted by batsballsbases
Jeff,
Im curious how much weight do you think the judge gave on the letters that were written against Mastro? Seems to me not so much. And for this crime what was the maximum sentence the judge could have given him? Like most I fell that this was very light, 17 months and yes millions in the bank most people work their whole lives and never see that kind of money seems like an easy stretch and walk away still rich. And people wonder why the justice system is the way it is. Last question why was there no restitution as it seems ever ordered? Was this his reward for throwing the others under the bus?
|
I can't say with certainty what weight the judge gave to the letters he received, I can only say from my own experience in federal sentencings -- including those in the courthouse Mastro was sentenced -- that letters regarding the defendant's character are hugely important and can make the difference between a probationary sentence and prison time.
Mastro's statutory max was 5 years, his sentencing guidelines were 57-71 months (in reality 57-60 because of the 5 year statutory cap). But the government promised a 20 month recommendation if he fully cooperated and eventually he did.
There was no restitution ordered because the law provides that if it is too difficult to ascertain the victims and/or the loss amount then restitution need not be ordered. That being said the government surely could have asked for restitution but didn't. They also didn't need to cooperate Mastro and could have gotten convictions from all the defendants regardless. Finally, the government could have asked for more than 20 months instead of making that ridiculous promise to Mastro of 20 months. The judge said that without that 20 month request he would have given Mastro possibly 5 years.
The prosecution in my eyes was lazy (except for the FBI agent who made the case -- his work was extraordinary). They could have had more but never really cared much for the case. Not enough was done for Mastro's victims. But part of that falls on the victims of Mastro who were largely quiet. Pontificating endlessly on Net 54 but doing nothing where it matters doesn't move the ball forward. Sometimes you have to open your mouth in the right venue. The prosecutors never really felt that Mastro's victims deserved any kind of special effort from them, in my opinion. As a criminal lawyer rarely do I see a defendant's victims publicly state that the defendant was a great guy, a friend, or that they don't believe they were victimized -- even though legally they were.