305
submitted 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

State charges included kidnapping, first-degree burglary and false imprisonment of husband of Nancy Pelosi

The man who was sentenced to 30 years in federal prison for attacking the husband of Nancy Pelosi with a hammer in their California home was sentenced on Tuesday to life in prison without the possibility of parole following a separate state trial.

A San Francisco jury in June found David DePape guilty of charges including aggravated kidnapping, first-degree burglary and false imprisonment of an elder.

Before issuing the sentence, Judge Harry Dorfman dismissed arguments from DePape’s attorneys that he be granted a new trial for the 2022 attack against Paul Pelosi, who was 82 years old at the time.

“It’s my intention that Mr DePape will never get out of prison, he can never be paroled,” Dorfman said while handing out the punishment.

top 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 8 points 3 hours ago

The justice department have become such pussies that I'm wondering what incorrect thing caused this correct level of sentencing to happen. Did he protest the genocide of Palestinians during his trial?

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago

He's a conservative hero. The next Republicunt president will pardon him and he will be treated like a star on the conservative talkshow guest circuit.

[-] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 60 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

“This is a man who has always been a peaceful, law-abiding person up until his activation,” Lipson said.

When given the chance to address the court before his sentencing, DePape, dressed in prison orange and with his brown hair in a ponytail, spoke at length about September 11 being an inside job, his ex-wife being replaced by a body double, and his government-provided attorneys conspiring against him.

“I’m a psychic,” DePape told the court, reading from sheets of paper. “The more I meditate, the more psychic I get.”

And the attorney wants them to reconsider the sentence? Sounds like he needs some serious therapy, and institutionalized, not let out.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 40 points 8 hours ago

“This is a man who has always been a peaceful, law-abiding person up until his activation,” Lipson said.

Oh fuck all the way off, asshole. His brain was rotted from right-wing media- there was no secret hidden sub-programming which could be turned on with a code word.

Also, fuck you again. Everyone is a peaceful, law-abiding person until they decide to break the law.

[-] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

People with certain mental illnesses are far more susceptible to conspiracy theories and other such nonsense. It doesn’t excuse what he did but it’s important to recognize this. Our society is a much more dangerous place for these kinds of vulnerable individuals than it was before mass media, simply because of the huge amount of exposure they have to harmful materials.

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 7 points 7 hours ago

Until they're caught breaking the law, anyway.

[-] athairmor@lemmy.world 13 points 8 hours ago

Did they not try an insanity defense? He must have been declared competent, I guess.

[-] TallonMetroid@lemmy.world 18 points 8 hours ago

My understanding is that insanity defense has a very high bar, beyond what the public would commonly consider "crazy", so it's not actually something that happens often. And even then, actually getting out of whatever institution you're remanded to isn't guaranteed.

[-] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago

I dont want to armchair assess too much, but reading a statement that involves your psychic powers, assuming that's real, the guy is not mentally fit.

[-] stoly@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

You have to be completely divorced from reality and really have no idea what you’re doing. This guy is a kook but knew that hitting old people with hammers is bad.

[-] TallonMetroid@lemmy.world 14 points 7 hours ago

I agree that the man is clearly off his rocker, but from a legal perspective, what matters is whether or not you understand that you have, in fact, killed a dude, and that this is in fact a bad thing. Having voices in your head telling you to do it is a completely separate issue. Again, this is my understanding as a layman, so any actual lawyers please feel free to tell me I'm full of shit.

[-] GladiusB@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

Probably if he ever sought help. He was married at one point. Did it come up in the divorce? All these things can be a factor from my understanding.

[-] zephorah@lemm.ee 25 points 8 hours ago

Just think, voting for Trump means you’re voting in a pardon for this guy.

[-] athairmor@lemmy.world 23 points 8 hours ago

Life sentence is from the state charges. President can’t pardon that. But, yeah, he’ll pardon the federal charges if he gets the chance.

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 9 points 7 hours ago

Will he? He said he'd pardon a lot of people when he was still able and never did. He only cares about people with power or fame, not nobodies like this guy.

[-] athairmor@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago

I guess it depends on whether he needs to rile his base. The GOP already has them frothing at the name “Pelosi”. He might do it as an intimidation tactic. Hopefully, we never find out because he never gets the chance.

[-] zephorah@lemm.ee -3 points 8 hours ago

That does not sound real. If a presidential power to pardon is unlimited except in the case of impeachment, why would that matter? Even Congress can’t stop it.

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago

Because it's unlimited for federal crimes only.

[-] procrastitron@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago

@athairmor@lemmy.world is right; presidents cannot pardon state level crimes: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3-1/ALDE_00013316/

Specifically, the offense must be “against the United States”, and state level offenses are only against the respective state, not the United States.

[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 32 points 9 hours ago
[-] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 9 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Prison-as-a-mental-healthcare-system should not exist. Of course, that would require leadership that is neither conservative nor neoliberal.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

This guy is wack, but he also tried to kill someone. He deserves jail, and needs mental help.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 19 points 8 hours ago

How long before Trump calls him a patriot and a political prisoner?

[-] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 8 hours ago

My mind hadn't even gone here yet, so I wasn't ready, and I was appalled rather than just being quietly furious with certainty that this will happen, probably tomorrow.

[-] just_another_person@lemmy.world 19 points 9 hours ago

Good riddance.

[-] midnight_puker@sh.itjust.works 13 points 8 hours ago

Taste the hammer of justice, scum.

[-] snausagesinablanket@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

Hammer time!

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -2 points 9 hours ago

The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for The Guardian:

Wiki: reliable - There is consensus that The Guardian is generally reliable. The Guardian's op-eds should be handled with WP:RSOPINION. Some editors believe The Guardian is biased or opinionated for politics. See also: The Guardian blogs.
Wiki: mixed - Most editors say that The Guardian blogs should be treated as newspaper blogs or opinion pieces due to reduced editorial oversight. Check the bottom of the article for a "blogposts" tag to determine whether the page is a blog post or a non-blog article. See also: The Guardian.


MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom


Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/29/david-depape-sentenced-paul-pelosi-hammer-attack
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2024
305 points (99.0% liked)

politics

19127 readers
4535 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS