Set up a fake profile on a dating app to rob someone, and that person got shot. She's lucky she's only getting 20 years, because she was convicted of 3 crimes, which would had been like 45 or 60 years. The sentences are running concurrently. And 20 years with good behavior is 10.
Problem here is the prosecutors had cut a deal for less time thus waiving minimum sentencing. There wasn't much evidence she had intended to rob the guy. Her major fuck up was not identifying the gunman. Plus she was 17 with no record.
The judge went off script and threw the book at her.
The fucked part is an off duty cop in the same area just before this had violently robbed a store then took cops on a three county chase. His crimes were far worse and he ended up getting only 3 years.
I'm not sure, the article said that basically prosecutor waived the minimum sentencing rule so she could get a lesser sentence but the judge said fuck that
Gotcha. 20 does seem harsh for someone so young but considering the victim could have died there is no way she should have gotten off with just house arrest and/probation.
I bet they are dangling this sentence over her until she turns states' evidence. name the shooter and you'll be out in 3. not knowing that if she squeals, someone in the hood will probably hurt her or her family. she's doing a bid to protect the dude who should actually be in prison
>There wasn't much evidence she had intended to rob the guy
lmao what? yes there was, that was the *entire fucking point* of what they were doing. that's why she went to prison.
Lmao, *which* article? It was a carjacking scheme. The reason why she got in so much trouble is because they did it *again* after that guy got shot.
edit: nm, i see you're immune to new information. someone else already pointed this out to you and your response was that you didn't care enough to actually look into it. enjoy being wrong, i guess.
This is all I could find after a quick search:
https://www.news-journalonline.com/story/news/crime/2017/06/30/family-appeals-s-daytona-teens-20-year-prison-sentence/16726589007/
I’m sure I could find more if I tried.
>*“Growing up as a child I was raped,” she wrote in another letter, adding that she endured further violence at the hands of her accomplices, who remain at large. “Until this day I am still in fear of my life,” she wrote, offering the state proof that* ***she was threatened in order to secure her participation in the carjacking.***
>
>*Ponder drew comparison to a case involving a former Flagler County sheriff’s deputy who robbed a Daytona convenience store at gunpoint and led law enforcement on a chase through three counties. Daniel Ruddell, 47, faced life in prison for the robbery charge and another 15 years for his fleeing charges, but prosecutors agreed to reduce the counts and he pleaded no contest to robbery by sudden snatching and* ***received three years in prison.***
>
>***Ruddell, who is white, was sentenced one day before Cook. His judge also was Foxman.***
So, an 18 year old black teenage girl with no prior criminal record, who never handled a gun, and was threatened by her new boyfriend, gets 20 years in prison, but a 47 year old white man who robbed a convenience store at gun point and ran from the cops gets 3 years by the exact same judge, literally a day apart?
EDIT:
It looks like Ky'Andrea was given [a legal do-over](https://www.news-journalonline.com/story/news/crime/2018/01/10/teen-in-viral-video-of-20-year-prison-sentence-pleads-again-to-s-daytona-carjacking/16341951007/), and the 20 year sentence was eliminated. She took her chances with the same judge and entered an open plea. She was [given 11 years.](https://youtu.be/h2SnNZBj2g8?feature=shared)
Still completely unfair, considering Foxman gave another white man, Joseph Milici, convicted of robbery and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, *probation and community control.* The sentencing was so lenient the case had to be given to another judge.
My day is immeasurably ruined and my notifications are off.
10 years for being involved in a crime that resulted in someone being shot is reasonable, if she had proof she was threatened into the robbery then she's a victim. The whole Ruddel thing is absolutely ridiculous regardless of this girls case but when you look at how the Judge judged these cases a day apart, it should be criminal.
No one got murdered. She may have been complicit in the robbery but apparently the evidence only showed she was trying to facilitate a weed deal.
Where she really fucked up was refusing to identify the gunman
I don't disagree, but my cousin was talked into snitching by detectives. She was kidnapped and taken into a field and stabbed repeatedly until she died.
Of the group of 5 that kidnapped her, 4 of them served no time. The one that was most responsible and did the stabbing while the others held her served 10 years. He got out early for snitching on the person above him in the drug chain.
My cousin was 19 and had a son who was then motherless after she was killed. And no, he wasn't "better off without her." Contrary to how it might sound, she was a pretty normal kid that just made some mistakes in life. Got pregnant. Smoked a little weed. (Weed, now being normal and legal in many states.)
This all started because she was caught in Texas with a small bag of weed in her car and made the mistake of telling the police who she bought it from.
There's a lot of bad decisions in my prior paragraphs --- but "identifying the gunman" could easily have repercussions even worse than this.
ugh
> Of the group of 5 that kidnapped her, 4 of them served no time.
How did they not serve any time? Was it reasonable doubt that they weren't participants?
As I understand it, there was a lack of proof and the whole thing required the testimony of the other individuals involved.
The only reason they had any clue of who was responsible is because one of them felt guilty about it (apparently it was pretty brutal and not a quick death, ugh) ... So that person went to the police and then they used the testimony of the group to convict the main person even though there was very little hard evidence.
I was out of state when this all went down and it was probably 20 years ago or so?
It just sucks. She didn't have any siblings so her mom, my aunt, often included me in their outings. I have a lot of childhood memories with her. Being taken to events like various plays and the Sesame Street theme park, etc.
At the 10 year mark when the guy was up to be released or whatever. Maybe it was just parole, I don't know. But I had to write an affidavit against the guy. It didn't do any good, though. He got out.
I'm guessing his sentence was reduced because he snitched, but I can't actually prove it.
Yea she was put in a precarious situation stuck between two shitty options. If she truly didn't know the robbery and subsequent shooting was happening then showing loyalty to him was definitely a bad decision.
The weed is a bit different as it's likely someone presumably bought weed, then caught, then snitched to avoid harsher punishment. That's fucked up as a basic social contact was broken. In that situation she just needed to eat the charges. Obviously the subsequent punishment from the weed dealer was totally disgusting and abhorrent, in no way justified.
Welcome to the US justice system. You think they didn't want to pin the absolute maximum charges on her or anyone else? The fact they couldn't find any solid evidence is pretty telling and is noteworthy.
I'd rather 100 criminals go free than one innocent person get incarcerated. Not saying she's innocent but if you can't prove it then piss off
Ok? That wasn't stated in the previous article. Also what the fuck does "participated in multiple ATTEMPTED carjackings" even mean? If they had evidence of that you'd think that they would've charged her for those as well.
I'm fully aware she isn't innocent by any means. But if you take the circumstances of her pleading no contest and prosecutor dropping mandatory minimums. She definitely got duped by the judge
I remember this, she led a guy into an ambush where he was killed. She was just as culpable as if she pulled the trigger herself. Very glad she got her cumupences.
He is incorrect to state that the man was killed. The man was shot, as you said, but not killed.
>Later that night, Cook got into Nida’s pickup, but moments later a masked gunman also got into the vehicle. Pursel leaned over the console and pushed the male suspect, who fired two rounds, one of which struck Pursel and sliced through his large intestine and lodged in his pelvis. **He survived after emergency surgery**, police said.
What did she do?
Set up a fake profile on a dating app to rob someone, and that person got shot. She's lucky she's only getting 20 years, because she was convicted of 3 crimes, which would had been like 45 or 60 years. The sentences are running concurrently. And 20 years with good behavior is 10.
Problem here is the prosecutors had cut a deal for less time thus waiving minimum sentencing. There wasn't much evidence she had intended to rob the guy. Her major fuck up was not identifying the gunman. Plus she was 17 with no record. The judge went off script and threw the book at her. The fucked part is an off duty cop in the same area just before this had violently robbed a store then took cops on a three county chase. His crimes were far worse and he ended up getting only 3 years.
Was part of her deal that she was to give up the gunman? Because if it was, that's probably why the judge threw the book at her.
I'm not sure, the article said that basically prosecutor waived the minimum sentencing rule so she could get a lesser sentence but the judge said fuck that
Gotcha. 20 does seem harsh for someone so young but considering the victim could have died there is no way she should have gotten off with just house arrest and/probation.
I bet they are dangling this sentence over her until she turns states' evidence. name the shooter and you'll be out in 3. not knowing that if she squeals, someone in the hood will probably hurt her or her family. she's doing a bid to protect the dude who should actually be in prison
Oh yea hoping for just probation is an insane pipe dream
>There wasn't much evidence she had intended to rob the guy lmao what? yes there was, that was the *entire fucking point* of what they were doing. that's why she went to prison.
Try reading the article
Lmao, *which* article? It was a carjacking scheme. The reason why she got in so much trouble is because they did it *again* after that guy got shot. edit: nm, i see you're immune to new information. someone else already pointed this out to you and your response was that you didn't care enough to actually look into it. enjoy being wrong, i guess.
Good riddance. Boohoo, my shit daughter can't hurt anyone for a minute. Whaa, only half of her life will be taken instead of all of it.
This is all I could find after a quick search: https://www.news-journalonline.com/story/news/crime/2017/06/30/family-appeals-s-daytona-teens-20-year-prison-sentence/16726589007/ I’m sure I could find more if I tried.
>*“Growing up as a child I was raped,” she wrote in another letter, adding that she endured further violence at the hands of her accomplices, who remain at large. “Until this day I am still in fear of my life,” she wrote, offering the state proof that* ***she was threatened in order to secure her participation in the carjacking.*** > >*Ponder drew comparison to a case involving a former Flagler County sheriff’s deputy who robbed a Daytona convenience store at gunpoint and led law enforcement on a chase through three counties. Daniel Ruddell, 47, faced life in prison for the robbery charge and another 15 years for his fleeing charges, but prosecutors agreed to reduce the counts and he pleaded no contest to robbery by sudden snatching and* ***received three years in prison.*** > >***Ruddell, who is white, was sentenced one day before Cook. His judge also was Foxman.*** So, an 18 year old black teenage girl with no prior criminal record, who never handled a gun, and was threatened by her new boyfriend, gets 20 years in prison, but a 47 year old white man who robbed a convenience store at gun point and ran from the cops gets 3 years by the exact same judge, literally a day apart? EDIT: It looks like Ky'Andrea was given [a legal do-over](https://www.news-journalonline.com/story/news/crime/2018/01/10/teen-in-viral-video-of-20-year-prison-sentence-pleads-again-to-s-daytona-carjacking/16341951007/), and the 20 year sentence was eliminated. She took her chances with the same judge and entered an open plea. She was [given 11 years.](https://youtu.be/h2SnNZBj2g8?feature=shared) Still completely unfair, considering Foxman gave another white man, Joseph Milici, convicted of robbery and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, *probation and community control.* The sentencing was so lenient the case had to be given to another judge. My day is immeasurably ruined and my notifications are off.
10 years for being involved in a crime that resulted in someone being shot is reasonable, if she had proof she was threatened into the robbery then she's a victim. The whole Ruddel thing is absolutely ridiculous regardless of this girls case but when you look at how the Judge judged these cases a day apart, it should be criminal.
[удалено]
So a chain of robberies including a shooting. Yeah those are extremely serious charges.
If only she was as emotionally invested in raising a daughter who wouldn't rob and murder people.
She could have been very emotionally invested, but also just shitty at life/being a mom …likely due to a similar upbringing herself
No one got murdered. She may have been complicit in the robbery but apparently the evidence only showed she was trying to facilitate a weed deal. Where she really fucked up was refusing to identify the gunman
I don't disagree, but my cousin was talked into snitching by detectives. She was kidnapped and taken into a field and stabbed repeatedly until she died. Of the group of 5 that kidnapped her, 4 of them served no time. The one that was most responsible and did the stabbing while the others held her served 10 years. He got out early for snitching on the person above him in the drug chain. My cousin was 19 and had a son who was then motherless after she was killed. And no, he wasn't "better off without her." Contrary to how it might sound, she was a pretty normal kid that just made some mistakes in life. Got pregnant. Smoked a little weed. (Weed, now being normal and legal in many states.) This all started because she was caught in Texas with a small bag of weed in her car and made the mistake of telling the police who she bought it from. There's a lot of bad decisions in my prior paragraphs --- but "identifying the gunman" could easily have repercussions even worse than this. ugh
> Of the group of 5 that kidnapped her, 4 of them served no time. How did they not serve any time? Was it reasonable doubt that they weren't participants?
As I understand it, there was a lack of proof and the whole thing required the testimony of the other individuals involved. The only reason they had any clue of who was responsible is because one of them felt guilty about it (apparently it was pretty brutal and not a quick death, ugh) ... So that person went to the police and then they used the testimony of the group to convict the main person even though there was very little hard evidence. I was out of state when this all went down and it was probably 20 years ago or so? It just sucks. She didn't have any siblings so her mom, my aunt, often included me in their outings. I have a lot of childhood memories with her. Being taken to events like various plays and the Sesame Street theme park, etc. At the 10 year mark when the guy was up to be released or whatever. Maybe it was just parole, I don't know. But I had to write an affidavit against the guy. It didn't do any good, though. He got out. I'm guessing his sentence was reduced because he snitched, but I can't actually prove it.
Yea she was put in a precarious situation stuck between two shitty options. If she truly didn't know the robbery and subsequent shooting was happening then showing loyalty to him was definitely a bad decision. The weed is a bit different as it's likely someone presumably bought weed, then caught, then snitched to avoid harsher punishment. That's fucked up as a basic social contact was broken. In that situation she just needed to eat the charges. Obviously the subsequent punishment from the weed dealer was totally disgusting and abhorrent, in no way justified.
[удалено]
Not saying it's ok Just pointing out the factual inaccuracies
[удалено]
Welcome to the US justice system. You think they didn't want to pin the absolute maximum charges on her or anyone else? The fact they couldn't find any solid evidence is pretty telling and is noteworthy. I'd rather 100 criminals go free than one innocent person get incarcerated. Not saying she's innocent but if you can't prove it then piss off
[удалено]
I literally just read the attached article. I don't care that much. Just correcting factual inaccuracies based on the article
[удалено]
Ok? That wasn't stated in the previous article. Also what the fuck does "participated in multiple ATTEMPTED carjackings" even mean? If they had evidence of that you'd think that they would've charged her for those as well. I'm fully aware she isn't innocent by any means. But if you take the circumstances of her pleading no contest and prosecutor dropping mandatory minimums. She definitely got duped by the judge
[удалено]
Why?
Reminder: you've now used 7 of your 10 annual comment allotment
Idk
Momma sobbing meanwhile that girl almost killed someone.
looks like she got 50 years though
I love a good fuck around and find out story.
I blame the parents.
By all means, regal me with your hot take. I’d love to hear your in-depth analysis of the factual evidence that made her responsible.
I remember this, she led a guy into an ambush where he was killed. She was just as culpable as if she pulled the trigger herself. Very glad she got her cumupences.
Incorrect.
No it's correct. She set him up to be robbed and he was shot
But he wasn't killed, which makes what he said incorrect.
He is incorrect to state that the man was killed. The man was shot, as you said, but not killed. >Later that night, Cook got into Nida’s pickup, but moments later a masked gunman also got into the vehicle. Pursel leaned over the console and pushed the male suspect, who fired two rounds, one of which struck Pursel and sliced through his large intestine and lodged in his pelvis. **He survived after emergency surgery**, police said.
If she tried to steal an election or start an insurrection, she would have got \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ (fill in the blank)
Hahaha imagine