Moving sale! Everything must go by December 1st!

[lildog]

He chose between 10 years vs. 25 to life.  In the article he even said he took the plea because he was scared of the longer sentence.   Being forced to chose between two horrible alternatives....I'd hardly call it perjury. 

Who would accept a punishment for something they didn't do without putting up a fight to defend themselves?  Who would willingly give up even 5 years of their life for something they know in their heart they were innocent of?

I'm sorry but I don't buy it.  And as Tammy pointed out, by pleading guilty, which he did, he even gives up the chance to appeal.  If he fought the charges and was found guilty and given 25 years he could appeal on every angle he could find to argue it.  Heck how many true criminals are set free due to stupid legal technicalities (OJ comes to mind).

Any sympathy or question of his innocents went right out the window when he plead guilty to the crime in my opinion.

[tony]

Lilidog, your childishly naïve posts really push buttons. What kidnapped by NKWD Russians, charged in courts and sentenced to gulags were guilty of?
You seam not to realize we do not have benefit of courts of justice. We do not even have the benefit of the courts of the law. All we have is court of public policy.
If it is politically expedient for somebody from the rulers class you have no chance.
Russians agreed to plead guilty whatever commissioners wanted in purpose to avoid much bigger sentences or death.
I am not interested in your statements behind safe computer keyboard what you would do or not do –empty declarations.
I know that I would go for minimum loss/maximum benefit. Yes, I would plea for 10 years vs. 25 to life. System is broken and we are to experience soviet model of it soon.

[Pat K]

 

[lildog]

I am not interested in your statements behind safe computer keyboard what you would do or not do –empty declarations.
I know that I would go for minimum loss/maximum benefit. Yes, I would plea for 10 years vs. 25 to life. System is broken and we are to experience soviet model of it soon.

"Tony", my name is Rick Barnes.  I do not hide who I am and would say the same things I say here to your face or anyone else so do no accuse me of hiding behind a keyboard if you do not know me because clearly you have no idea what your talking about.

Secondly this isn't about accepting 10 years vs 25 years.  This is accepting guilt of a SEX CRIME.  That has punishment far beyond just the 10 years he'll be facing behind bars.

1) By accepting guilt he eliminates any chance of appealing.  Even if found guilty he can attempt to fight and have that over turned.
2) By accepting the charge of sex criminal he is now placed on a life long list that bars him from living in many places and will prevent him from ever seeing his children until they are adults.

This isn't Russia, no one had a gun to this man's head and said accept guilt or die.  No, instead he has a system here that allows for appeal after appeal after appeal and many guilty people have gotten set free simply by kissing up to the right politicians or finding a loop hole in the system or just getting the lucky draw of getting a Bronx jury.

To attempt to claim we are no different then Russia where there were guns physically put to people's heads forcing them to accept guilt is childish.

[Lloyd Danforth]

Yes.

[KBCraig]

Who would accept a punishment for something they didn't do without putting up a fight to defend themselves?

Someone who found the price of the defense higher than the price of the guilty plea, that's who.

Assuming Tim's version is accurate, defending himself would mean destroying his daughter in court. As a father, I have to tell you that I would have a hard time making that choice.

[Tom Sawyer]

This isn't Russia, no one had a gun to this man's head and said accept guilt or die.

I have no idea what Tim might have done...
However, to say that the prosecutor doesn't have very effective threats to make people plead guilty when they are not... you haven't been paying attention very well.

All sorts of stories where people take plea agreements, accepting a couple of years rather than face decades. The system, thanks mostly to the drug war, is now designed to grease you up and get "justice" quickly and cheaply for the court.

[lildog]

Who would accept a punishment for something they didn't do without putting up a fight to defend themselves?

Someone who found the price of the defense higher than the price of the guilty plea, that's who.

There are THREE choices in a court of law though... innocent, guilty or no contest.

I knew a man in NY who was a leader in a youth group I was in.  He would take us out to movies and did a lot of nice things for the boys in the group.  Eventually a boy in the group came forward and claimed he had been molested by this man.  He never came on to me or made any moves on me personally so I don't claim to know his guilt or innocents but when he went to court rather then stand trial he plead no contest and accepted the sentence.  This left the door open for him to later appeal and fight the charge if he wished.  In his case he served less then 5 years and was let back out.

[Heatman]

He chose between 10 years vs. 25 to life.  In the article he even said he took the plea because he was scared of the longer sentence.   Being forced to chose between two horrible alternatives....I'd hardly call it perjury. 

what Tim pled guilty to included the language:
"Sexual contact" includes the intentional touching of the victim's, the defendant's, or any other person's intimate parts, or the intentional touching of the clothing covering the immediate area of the victim's, the defendant's, or any other person's intimate parts, if that intentional touching can be reasonably construed as being for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification;

what he did NOT plead guilty to, but the impression that was given by the newspaper, included the language:
"Sexual penetration" means sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any other intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person's body or of any object into the genital or anal openings of the victim's, the defendant's, or any other person's body, but emission of semen is not required;

Tim did not take this decision lightly.  He did not have the money required to hire a lawyer that would win.  He was confident that the public defender would most likely lose and he would get a manditory 25 to life.

A good lawyer can keep a criminal free, and a bad lawyer can cause an innocent man to go to jail.

Newspapers #1 priority is:
a: report the news as accurately as possible and to fact check every story
b: sell newspapers
c: to make sure that the articles are un-biased
d: none of the above

(answer: b)

[Kat Kanning]

D:  none of the above.  Their purpose is to disseminate government propaganda.

[Heatman]

D:  none of the above.  Their purpose is to disseminate government propaganda.

I wanted to put something like that, but my brain wasn't working too well at that hour.  Maybe I should have put e: what you said..."just incase they don't sell enough papers, they might be able to get a bailout.
I know they are a bunch of liberal hacks.  I haven't subscribed to a paper for over 10 years because of the lies.