The problem is that max sentences are often abused as tool of intimidation to get plea bargains. So even if there is no way in he will get 100 years the possibility scares some people into plea bargains.

Ridiculous max sentences which almost never happen do not work well together with plea bargains.

Still it is intimidating. If I show you a sledge hammer you won't risk to hit you on the head with it to find out whether it is made of steel or Styrofoam.

Yes. It's good to read "XXX faces YYY years in prison" as "There is no possible way XXX could go to prison for more than YYY years." Though that's more comforting when YYY is something like 5, rather than 100.

The linked article makes the point that these sentences are used as a tool of intimidation but don't generally reflect actual sentences. I'm not convinced that's a reason to ignore them: it seems to me that the correct response of a less credulous observer would be to attack the system. Piling bullshit charges on to get extra years and extract a plea bargain is reprehensible. Are they trying to serve justice or collect scalps?

> Obligatory

Really?

http://www.righto.com/2013/09/9-hacker-news-comments-im-tire...