Phil Holloway

describe them as part of a pattern involving control, drugs, and pressure on these women.

And you can't use the First Amendment as a shield to get away with underlying conduct that is in and of itself a crime.

The defense would like the court to make some kind of finding that the judge considered specific conduct in his sentencing for which

Did he was acquitted.

He was not convicted of course, of all of the charges.

He was convicted of these man act violations, but the judge.

just like the jurors sat through every day of the trial.

And the judge is not required, nor is he expected to ignore the totality of the evidence in the case when it comes to how he exercises his sentencing discretion.

And on the question of whether Combs could win early release, don't bet on it.

The argument that the sentence is excessive is not going to fly either because the trial judge is vested with broad discretion here.

And

As long as the sentence that was handed down by the judge fits within the statutory sentencing scheme authorized by Congress, the judge is on very solid ground.

In the absence of some strong compelling evidence of abuse of that discretion, the sentence will not be overturned.

And you think it will actually help extend a dog's life?

How long?

Well, it seems like it might be a little premature, just generally speaking, in any criminal case to issue a blanket clearance like that until you know who your suspect or suspects, in the plural, might be.

I think that this statement is...

more of a reflection of pressure that the sheriff is undoubtedly receiving because the public has speculated and many have claimed that certain family members might be considered suspects so i imagine the sheriff is under some political pressure to try to tamp that down but i think he may have miscalculated because this statement

is simply, I think, doing the opposite.

It's drawing more attention to the issue that people were trying to make go away.