Add new comment

I can go along with the Hawks on this one, who argue that Lueke's "No Contest" is -- in practical terms -- an admission that he did it.  Whatever "It" is.
.....................
What I don't get, is why these same Hawks don't skip on to the next cliff ledge after that one:  what Lueke's punishment was.
The judge, privy to the circumstances where we are not, sentenced Lueke to time served.  Why is the first 50% of the judicial outcome emphasized, and the second 50% not considered?
....................
A quick Google shows that date rapes commonly get 10, 15, 20 years' prison time if the circumstances warrant (and, admittedly, light punishment in other scenarios).  With a No Contest plea, the judge has the prerogative to be harsh.  Why wasn't that the case?