Judge won't toss out 55-year sentence

Return To Article

Commenting has temporarily been suspended in preparation for our new website launch, which is planned for the week of August 12th. When the new site goes live, we will also launch our new commenting platform. Thank you for your patience while we make these changes.

  • Anonymous
    April 7, 2010 7:41 p.m.

    We got to realize that we are grown and we don't have to keep dealers in business. We go to them to buy drugs not them coming to us. Yes he need to be punish, but 55year is unheard of. Now I don't agree with the guns and violence and they need time for that,but 55 come on now.

  • Friend of Weldon
    April 6, 2010 4:18 p.m.

    REGARDLESS that I know Weldon personally, look at the FACTS OF THIS CRIME. He had NO prior felony or drug convictions! Prosecuters only SPECULATE what he was involved in. AND there is NO solid evidence that he had a gun strapped to his ankle. This whole case is based on what some pothead criminal said just to get out of his own 3-4 year sentence. Amazing what people will do to screw others over to make sure they don't suffer for their own mistakes. Three counts of selling marijuana, I believe that's like a three year sentence generally. And all of you saying its FAIR, how can you not see this is very CRUEL AND UNUSUAL punishment, haven't you read the 8th amendment? What if it were your son or father or loved one? Every one makes mistakes and they should be given at least ONE chance before they get sentenced to LIFE IN PRISON---ESPECIALLY if they didn't commit rape, murder, or any kind of violence. All of you need to get off your high horses and see the reality of what goes on around you EVERY DAY.

  • pro-life, or pro-war,choose one.
    Aug. 9, 2009 3:49 p.m.

    this is an absurd sentence.

  • Windsword
    May 8, 2009 10:20 a.m.

    Personally I think Britain had the right idea with a penal colony. Put them all on an island, together. Gun specifications to federal sentencing guidelines are not needed, most criminals carry a weapon, it's irrelevent. This all came about because of the war on drugs, pure political motivation. Personally I don't want them anywhere near my house and I think they should be locked away for a minumum of 20 years for dealing. On the other hand if the person has made a lifestyle of this and can be proven that they have been directly involved in violence and murder because of their dealing it should be life. Further life sentences should be moved to a death sentence. We as a society should not have support a person for the rest of thier natural lives because of a wrong they committed. Execute all the lifers and be done with it. That would also include anyone to serve a minumum of 55 years and they are 50 when they go in there is no point to allow them to survive and drain our resources. And by the way i'm a former convict and still believe this way.

  • nurse
    May 5, 2009 6:04 p.m.

    I think that the law is crazy, does not make sense. Murderous , paedophilles and rapist walks away with minimum setence. Billions are spends by the legal process and followed by providing for them in this so called prisons. I strogly agree thatone should pay for the crime, the crmical should be made to pay back to the community by working not lazing in prison. Just imagine if all the prisoners are made to work and payback to society, it will be a richer place

  • Drug Dealer
    May 1, 2009 2:00 a.m.

    We're not talking a few joints here, look at the crimes this individual committed. At least this is one drug dealer who will not be dealing on our streets for a very long time! Pity they didn't lock up all murderers, rapists, child molesters and drug dealers for longer periods, now that's what I call a wise use of our tax dollars.

  • Pragmatist
    April 30, 2009 11:11 p.m.

    I think we are nuts to want to feed, clothe, and house this guy for 55 years. Probably 5 million or so. I guess his customers are totally innocent.

  • Dan M.
    April 30, 2009 12:29 p.m.

    Re: Ronnie Bray:

    "None except drug dealers will be upset by this reasonable sentence."

    As a non-drug dealer, I am living proof that you are dead wrong. So is the judge who originally sentenced him. So is any other rational and reasonable person.

  • Ronnie Bray
    April 30, 2009 12:07 p.m.

    Who can say what length of sentence is appropriate for a drug dealer? Who can tell how many lives have been broken, how many children abandoned, how many lives wasted, and how many caskets filled as a result of this man's 'business'?

    If your child were among his victims, how long and imprisonment would be appropriate in your personal case?

    None except drug dealers will be upset by this reasonable sentence.

    As a non-drug dealer I can only applaud the action taken, because if it does no more than signal to drug dealers that when caught they will serve a sentence whose length is in equal measure with the amount of damage their 'products' can and will cause in their victims.

    Naturally, is one does not place much value on human life, then any sentence for those that 'fill a social need' will seem excessive.

    Those whose minds are not in a drug-induced miasma will maintain their abilities to think rationally and thus escape the mindset of "Give Drug-Dealers a Fair Shake" activists.

    A 'fair shake' would be nothing less than a capital charge. Custodial sentences are too lenient for domestic terrorists whose businesses kill.

  • What's the issue here?
    April 30, 2009 11:34 a.m.

    This guy was selling drugs and had a gun. I don't care if he's a "music producer" anymore than if he were a M.D., taxidermist, or plumber. And the fact that he was doing this around his children is all the more reason to lock him up. Yes, the sentence seems a little excessive, but not because of his family situation or occupation.

  • Dan M.
    April 30, 2009 11:19 a.m.

    Well, at least this guy did something to warrant being locked up, unlike the poor woman who was thrown in jail for texting in court (I know, I know, it was the CONTENT of the texting... blah, blah, blah). Still, 55 years is definitely too long. If murderers had to go to prison for at least 55 years no matter what, it would be a bit more rational. But the irony is astounding.

    The problem with a drug dealer carrying a gun is the fear that he may use it to murder someone. So, he's off to the slammer for 55 years no matter what. But if someone actually USES a gun to murder someone, he gets out in as little as one year - just because he wasn't selling dope when he shot someone? Sorry, guys... not makin' any sense in the universe I know about.

  • Excessive for a reason
    April 30, 2009 9:20 a.m.

    Because there are law abiding gun owners who desire to protect their rights, we have passed laws that require substantial enhancements of penalties for misusing a gun.

    Criminals need to learn: Don't give gun owners a bad name!

    Until criminals stop using guns, we need to continue to escalate these enhancements. Evidently, even 55 years isn't enough to get criminals from using guns. Next up: 100 years!

  • Harsh?
    April 30, 2009 8:46 a.m.

    Too bad he didn't text in court. Then he would have gotten capitol punishment.

  • excessive
    April 29, 2009 4:31 p.m.

    The penalty should fit the crime. 55 years is excessive. This guy isn't going to learn anything in 55 years that he wouldn't learn in 15 or 16 year. The minimum mandatory sentences are unreasonable and unconstitutional.

  • One less
    April 29, 2009 2:20 p.m.

    One less drug dealer on the street, ah what a shame!!!!

  • nottyou
    April 29, 2009 2:04 p.m.

    I love how criminals that rape or embezzle hundreds of millions of dollars or even murder the innocent and get off with sentences that are far less severe than this guy. Perhaps we should decriminalize marijuana and unclog the legal system and make room in jails and prisons for those that deserve to be therejust my conservative opinion.

  • awsomeron
    April 29, 2009 1:57 p.m.

    He got what he deserved. We are talking 16 counts, and a Weapons charge. We have Mandatory Minimum for a reason. To keep bleeding hearts from using the Jail as a revolving door. Also it helps to keep the Rich and Connected from getting off lightly. Mandatory means everyone.

    For some reason he was offered a plea, (which is used to get around Mandatory Minimum, protect the Rich and Connected and their Children). Pleas in Drugs cases should not be allowed.

    He turned the plea agreement down, because he thought the 16 years was to long. In a Federal Drug Crime, there is No Good Time, you do the full sentence.

    Now he most likely will die in Prison.

    Yes Murderers very often get less time and they can get Good Time in some states 2 for 1. Sadly Americas biggest Murderers, Abortion Doctors get No Time At All, at least on this side of the Vail.

    Murder is an act usually for a reason. Except Abortion which is a Business. Drug Dealing is a Business, that is against the law. We justly give more time for Crimes committed with Guns.

    I hope he enjoys his Prison Time.

  • re: good
    April 29, 2009 1:48 p.m.

    I sure hope you don't EVER do anything wrong that would require mercy.

  • good
    April 29, 2009 1:00 p.m.

    good for the judge. Make that scummy criminal pay for his crimes and be an example to other criminals of what will happen to them when they get caught dirty handed.