This article looks good. I'll read below the fold later, but:
1) It's about federal sentencing, which is not the same as state sentencing.
2) Sentencing is complicated and often done wrong by practitioners. For example, in a situation where harm is greatly divorced from conduct (imagine the kid in this article died on the way home) mom could get 20 years for sure in some states/municipalities.
3) Most practitioners know that the maximum is way higher than the likely sentence, but judges and prosecutors (and sometimes certain wayward members of my tribe) insist on browbeating accused people with the possible maximum in order to procure a quick guilty plea. So I'll (always) accept some blame on e.g. the media for not communicating with reasonable clarity, but this situation where people focus on 20 years is actually the intended state of affairs brought about by prosecutors and judges.
1) It's about federal sentencing, which is not the same as state sentencing.
2) Sentencing is complicated and often done wrong by practitioners. For example, in a situation where harm is greatly divorced from conduct (imagine the kid in this article died on the way home) mom could get 20 years for sure in some states/municipalities.
3) Most practitioners know that the maximum is way higher than the likely sentence, but judges and prosecutors (and sometimes certain wayward members of my tribe) insist on browbeating accused people with the possible maximum in order to procure a quick guilty plea. So I'll (always) accept some blame on e.g. the media for not communicating with reasonable clarity, but this situation where people focus on 20 years is actually the intended state of affairs brought about by prosecutors and judges.