In an Athenian court the defence and the prosecution both came up with a punishment and the court would then decide which one the guilty man would serve. The idea was that both sides would come up with a sensible punishment. If the guilty man came up with too light a punishment then the court would choose the prosecutors more harsh punishment. Similarly, if the prosecutor chose a punishment that was too harsh the court would go with the lighter one. The idea was to get a punishment from both sides that was reasonable and then it was the discretion of the court as to which one was chosen. For example, Socrates when he was convicted of impiety and corrupting the youth of Athens suggested a fine of 100 Drachmae (one fifth of his property) and the prosecutor suggested death by hemlock. The latter punishment was taken and Socrates died. So no is the answer, at least in the Athenian legal system.

This submission has been removed because it involves current events. To keep from discussion of politics, we have a 20-year rule here. You may want to try /r/ask_politics or another current-events focused sub.

Sorry, we don't allow throughout history questions. These tend to produce threads which are collections of trivia, not the in-depth discussions about a particular topic we're looking for. If you have a specific question about a historical event or period or person, please feel free to re-compose your question and submit it again. Alternatively, questions of this type can be directed to more appropriate subreddits, such as /r/history or /r/askhistory.

This submission has been removed because it is soapboxing, promotion of a political agenda, or moralizing. We don't allow content that does these things because they are detrimental to unbiased and academic discussion of history.