For many people unfamiliar with the justice system, the idea of a 985-year sentence seems almost surreal. Why would a court impose a punishment that exceeds the natural lifespan of a human being? The answer lies in the structure of sentencing laws in the United States.
In criminal cases, each charge carries its own potential sentence. When multiple charges are brought, a judge can decide whether the sentences run concurrently (at the same time) or consecutively (one after another). In this case, the judge chose consecutive sentencing, stacking dozens of years for each conviction until the total added up to 985.
From a legal standpoint, such a sentence serves several symbolic and practical purposes:
- Symbolism of Severity: The extraordinary number communicates the seriousness of the crimes. It signals to the public and to victims that the court acknowledges the gravity of the harm.
- Prevention of Release: Even if future legal changes allow for parole or early release, a sentence of this magnitude ensures the defendant cannot realistically leave prison.
- Legal Redundancy: In some jurisdictions, courts hand down extremely long sentences to guard against the possibility of appeals overturning individual counts. If one charge is dismissed later, others remain to keep the individual incarcerated.
While these practices are legally grounded, they spark debates about proportionality and fairness. Critics argue that such numbers can appear performative, raising questions about whether the justice system prioritizes punishment over rehabilitation. Supporters, however, contend that the punishment fits the crime when lives have been lost or permanently altered.
