Maybe those predictions simply weren't as credible as you thought?
Federal wire fraud (and conspiracy to commit the same) has a maximum sentence length of 20 years. I guess she could have gotten 80 years if all 4 convictions were ordered to be served consecutively. I don't know how common consecutive senteces are vs concurrent.
In federal prison you can only parole at a maximum the last 15% of sentence, so she well serve the majority of the time (if held up on appeal etc., etc.)
> Maybe those predictions simply weren't as credible as you thought?
They were made by people with solid credentials in the legal field. My guess is that in the end they dropped a bunch of charges to levels that would skate under the multipliers, or she simply wasn't convicted on the ones that had big multipliers. But since I am not the lawyer, that is my non-credible speculation.
Right. She wasn't convicted on the non-wire fraud counts. You may think that's wrong but it's what the jury concluded and I don't think we generally want judges effectively making their own decision to unduly punish defendants because the judge thinks they "got off" on some other charge.
Federal wire fraud (and conspiracy to commit the same) has a maximum sentence length of 20 years. I guess she could have gotten 80 years if all 4 convictions were ordered to be served consecutively. I don't know how common consecutive senteces are vs concurrent.
In federal prison you can only parole at a maximum the last 15% of sentence, so she well serve the majority of the time (if held up on appeal etc., etc.)