On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nothing, other than trying to make a more obvious and forceful obligation.
Without some sort of suggestion of what a "strict sentence" should entail, and maybe something more forceful than just encouraging the judge, I'm not sure this rule would have much effect. It could be read to rule out FINE and APOLOGY, but we can already encourage judges to deal harshly with such cases, and if we disagree about whether an infraction is "of little consequence", we can appeal sentences of FINE or APOLOGY as inappropriate if they're assigned in such cases. If I'm not mistaken the only place the rules even try to influence a judge's discretion in sentencing is for violations of Rule 2144, where a judgement of EXILE is fairly self-evidently the only judgement that would give the rule any purpose at all. Breach of an equation is, IMO, a fairly serious offense, but if other serious offenses don't get special instructions to the judge I'm not sure we need them here.
