"The Night Dad Went to Jail," title of children's book

[greynotsoold]

My father never went to jail, but I'm not unfamiliar with the concept. For instance, you are having a party and watching a Chavez fight, a friend goes to get beer and you don't see him again until 1998. In January of 1999, one of my best friends stopped by around 11:30 pm and we made plans to meet for breakfast at 9 am...and I haven't seen him since. He's 13 years into a 57 years to life sentence.

That's a long sentance!

What did he do?

He got caught with a 1/16th ounce of methampethamine and a gun. He was a 3rd striker and took it to trial rather than take a 25-to-life sentence. Just spoke to him an hour ago, as a matter of fact.

That still seems such a long sentence considering he didn't actually do anything as such. Possession, rather than causing trouble.

1.75 grams is such a small amount of anything. I was expecting you to say he was caught with kilos of something or actually shot someone.

Do you live in the US? If so, I thought having a gun was standard practice. No licence required.

Not in California; guns are highly problematic there.
He had two previous violent felonies, so he was eligible for his "third strike", which is a mandatory minimum of 25 to life. He was arrested in January of 09, on the 9th, I believe. On 22 September of 08, the same officer that arrested him in 09 told him that he would get rid of him. He'd either shoot him and plant a gun, or plant a gun on him and strike him out.
The gun was found behind a panel in the back seat of a car, not registered to him, and the gun did not have his fingerprints on it. It took the police 45 minutes to remove the panel to get to the gun, yet they testified, in court, that it was within easy access. The same officer that threatened him arrested him and was the lead witness at his trial. He testified that having that much dope and a gun proved that he was a serious dealer, because only serious dealers carried that a gun and that much dope. Very circular reasoning that was cited by the appeals court, which then used the ezact same circular reasoning to justify the conviction.