[Magdalen] Heather Cook

[Jim Guthrie]

From: Grace Cangialosi

>Well, I think I understand, Jim, but it just doesn't seem fair for the family 
>to have to keep waiting for one delay after another when there's no uncertainty 
> >about guilt.

One of the things that is forgotten in this self-indulgent era is that this is a 
nation  of laws. And that means emotions of families should have nothing 
whatsoever to do with justice. I realize we live in an era where emoting at 
Victims Impact hearings (a sure sign of the decline of laws into something of a 
localized mobocracy. And this is aided and abetted by TV reporters looking for 
profitable emotional outbursts, "How do you feel seeing your child burned to 
death in that house fire?"

>I can't say I understand the whole plea system, except that it's designed to 
>get the least possible penalty for the guilty party, which, course, is what 
>she's

Nope -- a plea bargain is designed to get the best outcome for all concerned --  
the guilty, the victims, the law and the state.

>paying the lawyers for. But why can't they go into the courtroom, provide 
>whatever evidence they have, have a judge or jury declare her guilty, since 
>that's >not an issue, and then hammer out whatever deals they want without 
>keeping the family on the string?
>It would be different if they didn't know what happened or who the driver was, 
>of course.

Taxpayers wouldn’t stand for the costs if this was done everywhere. And as I 
said, the family has nothing to do with it under the rule of law, however 
modified and stretched by the current cultural milieu.

>Good thing I'm not a lawyer. I could never defend someone I knew to be 
>guilty...

Agreed.

But as the Miranda warning -- the law of the land -- says . . . .  As a nation 
we long ago decided our Constitution demands representation for both guilty and 
innocent persons.

Cheers,
Jim


> On Jun 6, 2015, at 9:00 AM, "Jim Guthrie" <jguthrie at pipeline.com> wrote:
>
> From: Grace Cangialosi
>
>> see why the trial would be especially long.  Seems to me she's just trying
>> to stay out of jail for as long as possible.
>
> Yes -- but not for the reason you think.
>
> A trial costs lots of money for all involved. A plea deal costs are relatively 
> tiny in comparison. That's why the state has an interest in avoiding trial --  
> no matter the circumstances.
>
> So plea negotiations drag on with the defendant's attorney(s) fighting to 
> minimize jail time or other punishments. The state will continue negotiations 
> to avoid a trial. And unless the defendant pleads guilty or nolo contendre at 
> the outset, even a trial where "everyone knows" what happens can drag on for 
> days or weeks. But no person in their right mind or with competent Counsel 
> would ever do that without a plea deal first.
>
> And sometimes negotiating time gets drawn out -- especially once vacation 
> seasons start at the beginning of summer.
>
> This is how the justice system in America works. I realize the Tea Party set 
> wants trials for all and no namby-pamby plea deals, though they want the 
> trials for free -- easy enough if they all end up in a few minutes using Queen 
> of Hearts justice.
>
> Plea deals and attendant negotiations are the way of the world.
>
> 'Cheers,
> Jim