Our Legal System (and what money can buy)

[Benton]

(03-20-2019, 10:45 AM)CKwi88 Wrote: I think it's different from an Alford Plea, assuming that it works the same way in Florida as it does here in CT.

An Alford Plea still results in a conviction. When I hear "deferred prosecution" I don't think of a guilty finding. This sounds like what MA calls an "admission to sufficient facts". He recognizes that he would probably be found guilty (same as an Alford Plea) but instead of getting a conviction he's placed on a sort of pre-trial probation with certain conditions. Once those conditions are met and x amount of time goes by, the case is dismissed.

The OP is just misplaced outrage at its best. Any person, rich or poor, white or orange, would have been offered the same, provided they have no record.

The worst for Kraft will be coming from Goodell's, who can be as arbitrary as he pleases.

An Alford Plea is a guilty plea where the person charged is maintaining that they're innocent, but admit there is enough evidence to convict them of the accused crime. It's important for the defendant if he believes he is innocent and might win on an appeal later with new evidence or a new judge. Most often, though, it seems like it's being used for defendants to save face.

As far as the conviction, yes, as it's a guilty plea, but the sentence is up to whatever the prosecution and defense work out, provided the judge approves (and I've seen judges toss plea deals out for being too light).

With deferred prosecution, the prosecution agrees to defer the charges as long as something is done (rehab, restitution, etc). I guess to be fair, they could make Kraft give out hand jobs to defer.