Cliff notes version of today's legal proceeding

pjcord

I've seen many posts wondering, "how in the world could they plead guilty and walk free?" Here are the basic reasons why as plainly as I can tell it, but a law school class could have been taught on the legal procedure that went into it.

Basically, the state stipulated that the defense produced enough evidence to warrant a new trial. This is how they even got to the point where pleas could be entered. Then, the state reduced the capital murder charges to first-degree murder charges. The three defendants then entered a rarely used "Alford" plea, which essentially means they pled guilty, but were allowed to maintain and actually profess in open court their actual innocence, and didn't have to allocute, or confess to the crime of which they were accused. State prosecutors usually NEVER accept Alford pleas, as it undercuts their case entirely.

Usually in a guilty plea if you maintain your innocence, the judge will not accept it. And for a judge to accept a guilty plea, there usually must be an allocution. Here, the defendants bascially said, "We are innocent and didn't commit this crime, but will plead guilty to accept the state's deal." And the deal they accepted is credit for time served. The state, after the guilty plea, suggested a sentence to the court of 18 years, or how long they have already been in prison, plus 10 years suspended imposition of sentence (probation). And THAT, is how and why they were able to plead guilty, and walk free 15 minutes later.

And, finally, for those curious, it was the defense who proposed the Alford plea to the state.

rick1zoo2

I have been reading a few articles about this today and it made me think about the saying: "you can't be a little bit pregnant, either you are or you aren't"

Doggystylen

rick1zoo2 wrote:

I have been reading a few articles about this today and it made me think about the saying: "you can't be a little bit pregnant, either you are or you aren't"

you're a bit pregnant if your this dude

http://msinformedblog.com/current-event ... gnant-man/

marcos

I don't recall learning about the Alford plea but my Criminal Procedure professor was recently fired for using the dean of our shit law school in a murder hypothetical, I like it though, it makes perfect legal sense

spearhead

"The plea means that you maintain your innocence but you believe there is a substantial likelihood that a jury will find you guilty so you are pleading guilty per State v. Alford," Anne Bremner, a Seatt...le attorney and legal analyst, told The Huffington Post. "The effect of the corresponding finding of guilt by the court is the same as with a straight guilty plea."

...the only other alternative was to have a new trial, with dna evidence that would certainly have cleared all of them, and it would have only cost them another 8 or 9 years in prison

PearlJamPatriot

pjcord wrote:

I've seen many posts wondering, "how in the world could they plead guilty and walk free?" Here are the basic reasons why as plainly as I can tell it, but a law school class could have been taught on the legal procedure that went into it.

Basically, the state stipulated that the defense produced enough evidence to warrant a new trial. This is how they even got to the point where pleas could be entered. Then, the state reduced the capital murder charges to first-degree murder charges. The three defendants then entered a rarely used "Alford" plea, which essentially means they pled guilty, but were allowed to maintain and actually profess in open court their actual innocence, and didn't have to allocute, or confess to the crime of which they were accused. State prosecutors usually NEVER accept Alford pleas, as it undercuts their case entirely.

Usually in a guilty plea if you maintain your innocence, the judge will not accept it. And for a judge to accept a guilty plea, there usually must be an allocution. Here, the defendants bascially said, "We are innocent and didn't commit this crime, but will plead guilty to accept the state's deal." And the deal they accepted is credit for time served. The state, after the guilty plea, suggested a sentence to the court of 18 years, or how long they have already been in prison, plus 10 years suspended imposition of sentence (probation). And THAT, is how and why they were able to plead guilty, and walk free 15 minutes later.

And, finally, for those curious, it was the defense who proposed the Alford plea to the state.

You did an excellent job explaining this. Thanks.