[Condor51]

***The Judge is the one trusted to decided the Facts of the case, and the circumstances of each decision.***

Uh, not quite.
Juries are the "triers of facts", not the judge. His-her role is to rule on the law, after a jury has decided on the facts - which in this case the law was utterly and completely ignored.

And if this isn't a text book example of 'judicial activism' I don't know what is. A Federal Judge doesn't like a Federal Law passed by Congress so he ignores it.

[hobbes1]

Ummm Context is Key.


Juries for the most part dont have a hand in sentencing. Facts, and Circumstances are what a JUDGE is supposed to consider.

Also, Just to go a little further...since we are being overly anal.

The defendant could have waived a Jury trial.