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.

  • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    2 months ago

    The comments here are pretty gross. This guy needs help, instead you’re happy to send him to the corrupt American prison system for the rest of his life. Please stop bootlicking and start caring for people.

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      I also despise the prison industrial complex and prefer rehabilitation over punishment, but there’s a point where losses need to be cut.

      He doesn’t seem remorseful, and he’s not going to seek help when he believes he is justified in beating an elderly man with a hammer. At that point, what options are left? it’s immoral to involuntarily institutionalize and forcibly medicate individuals, and even if it wasn’t, that’s a slippery slope you don’t want to go down.

      • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Why do you think it’s immoral to involuntarily institutionalize but moral to lock them in a jail cell?

        • pivot_root@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I never said that was moral either. I hold the stance that, despite the utter lack of most freedoms, at least you get to maintain some semblance of bodily autonomy while in prison.

          On the other hand, forced institutionalization with involuntarily sedation and/or medication is directly violating bodily autonomy. We don’t need to return to the days of deciding to “fix” people without their permission like we used to with transorbital lobotomies.

          • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I don’t know why you think there’s more autonomy in a mental institution than prison, or why you keep bringing up forcing drugs and surgery on people like that’s the only way to help people with mental health issues. Your stance is still not making sense from a moral standpoint.

            Edit: just want to note that the first sentence of the comment above wasn’t there when reply was written

            • pivot_root@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Mental illness treatment and rehabilitation is the path forward, but it’s not a one-size-fits all solution. I was more direct about this in my other comments: What do you do with people who don’t want help and actively refuse to be rehabilitated?

              Practically speaking:

              You can’t reintegrate them into society as they are.
              You can’t ship them off to an island in the southern hemisphere and wash your hands of them.

              Morally speaking:

              You can’t execute them.
              You can’t lock them up.
              You can’t treat them against their will.

              What now?

              ————————

              The American prison industrial complex is a privatized slavery-for-profit feedback loop, yes. It’s an atrocity that needs to be dismantled and replaced with a justice system with rehabilitation and reparation as its core tenets. But, the inevitable truth is that either prisons must exist in some form as the lesser of many evils, or you voluntarily choose to repeat the atrocities of our past.

              I’m not arguing against treating and rehabiliting people who have made mistakes. I’m arguing that championing it as the solution to prisons is either an overly-optimistic pipedream, or a hypocritical display of indifference to the idea of involiable bodily autonomy.

              • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                2 months ago

                You seem unable to separate rehabilitation / treatment for mental health from medical interventions and drugs.

                What I’m arguing is that punishment is not justice. No person should have the right to dole out punishments to another. To think otherwise betrays a very authoritarian mindset.

                I don’t have a 500 page document detailing a new version of our justice system, partly because, as you correctly stated, there isn’t a one size fits all solution. But I know whatever system that is should be focused on empathy and compassion, not making people pay for their misdeeds.

                But even if I completely agreed with what you’re saying, I would still think it’s gross to cheer for anyone being sent to “an atrocity that needs to be dismantled and replaced”, especially if it’s for the rest of their lives.

                • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  You have to stop people from victimizing society and the kknds of folks who normally do so regularly ignore dialogue.

                  If someone rapes women you may not be able to fix them but you can be sure most of society won’t be in danger while he is in prison.

                  • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    You commented twice and apparently I attached my response to the one you deleted so I wanted repost that response with the context that the other comment included the phrase “an evil man”

                    Of course protecting the public is the first priority, otherwise there just wouldn’t be a justice system. But your willingness to label a person as evil keeps you open to calling whole groups of people evil (like say immigrants). That actually invites evil to yourself and society because ‘prison is for evil people, I’m not in prison so I must not be evil’ when in reality everyone is capable of evil and should always be guarding against those thoughts, not dismissing them as impossibilities.>

                • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  What I’m arguing is that punishment is not justice

                  I don’t know if I agree with this tbh. Bad people deserve a chance to reform, but at a certain point they start deserving bad things.

                  • pivot_root@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 months ago

                    Bad people don’t deserve bad things. That eye-for-an-eye mentality makes the whole world blind.

                    That being said, living in a society means existing within an implicit social contract. If someone choose to not uphold their end, it’s reasonable that they should lose the benefits that come with it until they agree to and make meaningful effort demonstrating that they wish to follow through if given another chance (rehabilitation).

                    That’s not to say that convicted individuals should be given the privileges to walk freely among society, though. For most people, there should be options for rehabilitation away from the general public, like how Norway does it. Throw in reparations for the wronged parties, and we have a humane approach as an option to carry out justice.

                    As it stands today, I agree with the other guy, though. The current system is not justice; it’s punishment. Is it a practical way to isolate irredeemable people like rapists and murderers? Sure. But it’s also used as a sledgehammer for dealing with everyone, nonviolent offenders included. It’s also needlessly cruel and exploitative, putting profits above humane treatment.

                  • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    In line with the rest of my paragraph, labeling them as bad people who deserve bad things is very authoritarian and dehumanizing. That’s the type of rhetoric someone like Trump uses. The more comfortable society is with that rhetoric the more susceptible we are to a fascist takeover.

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        2 months ago

        I also despise the prison industrial complex and prefer rehabilitation over punishment

        Uh huh. Sure. Let’s find out how much.

        but there’s a point where losses need to be cut.

        Ah, the answer was “not at all”.

        He doesn’t seem remorseful, and he’s not going to seek help when he believes he is justified in beating an elderly man with a hammer.

        Okay.

        At that point, what options are left?

        Rehabilitation? Mental health care? All of the things that European countries do better than us?

        it’s immoral to involuntarily institutionalize and forcibly medicate individuals

        But somehow in your book it’s perfectly moral to lock them in a cage until they die? I’d take medication and institutionalization over being tortured to death any day.

        and even if it wasn’t, that’s a slippery slope you don’t want to go down.

        Ah yes, the slippery slope of not throwing people away like pieces of trash. Would hate to fall down that one… /s

        • pivot_root@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Rehabilitation and mental health care are only effective when the individual is receptive to it. This guy is brainwashed, but let’s imagine that’s just the tip of the iceberg: what if it’s just a symptom of a greater issue like psychopathy, and he just doesn’t want to be rehabilitated.

          What, then? Let him have the chance to convince others going through their own rehabilitation to join the q-ult? Keep dragging him to appointments where he does nothing but reinforce his own delusions of grandeur? Forcefully sedate him? Put him in a straightjacket and padded cell, causing maddening isolation? Give him a fucking lobotomy against his will?

          The world isn’t sunshine and rainbows. Prison is a shit option, but it’s a hell of a lot better than being rehabilitated by firing squad or 1940s quack medical procedures.

    • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      His mental picture of the world is pretty disrorted but at the same time he knew enough to know it was unlawful for him to take matters into his own hands and when the police showed up he had every reason to run or resist but what he chose to do is spitefully try to murder Paul whom he had no reason to hate or want to harm.

      Basically you can be mentally unwell and evil and he pretty clearly is.

      I don’t care if an evil man gets help. Why should I. I care that he is incarcerated.

      • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Of course protecting the public is the first priority, otherwise there just wouldn’t be a justice system. But your willingness to label a person as evil keeps you open to calling whole groups of people evil (like say immigrants). That actually invites evil to yourself and society because ‘prison is for evil people, I’m not in prison so I must not be evil’ when in reality everyone is capable of evil and should always be guarding against those thoughts, not dismissing them as impossibilities.

    • blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      There is a finite amount of help to go around. You think we should waste it on someone who is likely to kill again?