Jared Fogle sentence: Too light or just right?
Some legal experts say judge's decision to impose a sentence harsher than what prosecutors wanted is a rarity in federal cases.
The vast majority of the public — at least the ones on social media — shared a common sentiment about Jared Fogle's sentence of 15 years and 8 months: He deserved more than that.
But legal experts who have been following the case — one of the highest-profile child-porn prosecutions in the country — have a more mixed reaction. Some say federal district Judge Tanya Walton Pratt's decision to impose a sentence harsher than what prosecutors wanted isn't at all surprising. Others say it is.
One law professor called the sentence fair and went as far as labeling it "brave."
Jared Fogle's 'mild pedophilia' diagnosis draws backlash
Pratt sentenced the 38-year-old former Subway pitchman during a highly publicized hearing that lasted five hours Thursday in federal court in Downtown Indianapolis. Fogle's punishment is significantly higher than the five-year prison sentence his defense attorneys sought. It's also slightly higher than the 12½ years that federal prosecutors asked for.
Federal law allows Pratt to go beyond the sentencing range recommended by the parties in the plea deal. Legally, she could've sentenced Fogle to 50 years.
During the hearing, Pratt called Fogle a man who had it all and who used his fame and wealth to entice juvenile victims.
"Mr. Fogle was living a double life." Pratt said. "(He) engaged in a web of deception and depravity."
Some legal experts say Pratt's decision to go beyond the recommended sentence is uncommon in federal cases.
"Usually, a judge would operate within the parameters the parties spell out in the (plea) agreement," Indianapolis defense attorney John Tompkins said.
Jack Crawford, an Indianapolis defense attorney and former county prosecutor, agreed, calling Fogle's sentence a "significant decision by the court."
"The judge in this case wanted to send a clear message," Crawford said. "One, these kind of crimes are going to be punished severely. Number two, no matter how much money you have or how much celebrity you've earned, you will pay a heavy price for harming children."
Lahny Silva, who teaches sentencing at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis, agreed, saying that going beyond the sentencing range sends a strong message that offenses that harm children should be punished just as strongly, if not more, than other crimes, particularly drug offenses.
"I think it was fair. I think that it was brave. I think that it was important for the general public," Silva said of Pratt's decision. "For her and for many people in the general public, 12 years wasn't going to be enough."
Attorneys who have been in Pratt's courtroom numerous times say they aren't at all surprised.
Tompkins, who has seen Pratt on the bench since he became a lawyer 18 years ago, said the judge has a reputation of being at the high end of sentencing ranges.
"She is not inconsistent," Tompkins said. "She believes in what she's doing and is consistent in applying it."
Indianapolis defense attorney Bob Hammerle shares the same reaction, but doesn't agree with the characterization of Pratt as one of the toughest judges. He said the decision rather reflect's Pratt's intelligence and ability to not simply take something at face value.
"She's always had the inherent ability to look behind the curtain," Hammerle said. "She's not going to take some representations of your client without definitive proof that support that."
During the hearing, Fogle's defense attorneys reiterated they weren't excusing their client's behavior, but they argued that Fogle isn't the worst of child-porn defendants. They criticized a sentencing guideline that they say is flawed and draws an arbitrary line between receiving child porn and creating child porn. And while he did seek sex with children younger than 16, there was no evidence that he actually slept with them.
But Pratt called Fogle's behavior "very alarming," particularly the lack of realization about the seriousness of his actions.
"While Mr. Fogle didn't introduce these children to prostitution," Pratt said, "he continued to victimize them."
Fogle said he will first consult with his attorneys about whether or not he will appeal his sentence in the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Tompkins said he believes Fogle probably has a "better than average" chance of prevailing in the appeals court, if he were to argue that the sentence he received was too great based on comparisons with similar child-porn offenses that received significantly more lenient sentences.
Silva, the law professor, however, believes Fogle's grounds for appeal would be unsuccessful. Although Pratt went beyond the recommended sentence, Silva said, she didn't stray too far from it.
Pratt will recommend to the Bureau of Prisons to place Fogle in a Littleton, Colo., facility known for its sex-offender program. Pratt also ordered Fogle to pay a fine of $175,000 on top of the $1.4 million he already has paid in restitution to his victims.
Call Star reporter Kristine Guerra at (317) 444-6209. Follow her on Twitter: @kristine_guerra.
Jared Fogle sentenced to nearly 16 years goes from pitchman to 'pariah'
Jared Fogle reaction: More time for the crime
Tully: Jared Fogle�s delusional plea for leniency