What does Tim Hugo think happens to someone charged with a mandatory life offense for child sexual assault? That they just say "oh well, you've got me! I'll go serve my life sentence now." /1 https://twitter.com/TimHugo/status/1346559132648824832

Here's what happens: they realize they have nothing to lose. They require the gov't to prove its case at trial, forcing the gov't to face the prospect of re-traumatizing a child victim--or instead, plea bargaining. But how can it bargain when the only option is mandatory life? /2

It can't; not with the crime actually committed. Instead the government's plea offer must involve a "legal fiction," which is basically a lesser offense that the defendant didn't commit, but that he'll plead guilty to. /3

Are you following? Invariably, the man. min. for child rape leads to one of two outcomes: 1) the gov't re-traumatizes child victims by making them testify at trial, or; 2) defendants aren't convicted of the offenses they actually committed. /4

Don't believe me? Despite an increase over the past 15 years (since these man mins were enacted) in criminal incidents reported as rape, the number of successful rape prosecutions in Virginia has declined by around 30% over that time period! /5

And this is saying nothing of the PRIMARY effect of MMs, which is to take fundamentally judicial decisions out of the hands of judges, and in their place substitute the Richmond-based, politically-driven, broad-brush judgment of elected officials like Hugo /6

This may come as a surprise to reform opponents like the delegate, but persons convicted of sex offenses often have some of the most compelling mitigation of any defendants in the justice system. Many were themselves abused -- physically, emotionally, sexually -- .... /7

Many grew up in extraordinary poverty, have intellectual or developmental disabilities, autism, or serious mental illness. And contrary to popular belief, rates of reoffense among "sex offenders" are actually very low, especially if the person receives treatment /8

If you were a judge or a sentencing jury, wouldn't you want some of that info before deciding to put a human being in a cage until his very final breath? Maybe you'd still impose life, and you'd have that ability. But a man min precludes even the consideration of leniency. /9

Man mins DO NOT WORK. Not for any purpose. They don't deter crime, reduce recidivism, increase victim satisfaction, & or even result in people being held accountable for the crimes they committed. They simply have no place in a contemporary, evidence-informed justice system /x