Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'In The Stands' started by Joe Fan, Mar 12, 2019.
Just another incentive to take the deal and plead out.
Apparently Lori Loughlin has decided to roll the dice and see if she can get a
Not Guilty" verdict. Lori Loughlin, 'not seeing how serious this is,' rejected a plea deal: How much time is she facing?
I've got to believe that the prosecution wouldn't have gone this far unless they have the facts nailed down and are 100% sure of a conviction. Why didn't her attorney advise her to take the earlier plea deal? If one believes the article, she could face up to 40 years if convicted (although it would likely be much shorter, perhaps 4-5 years, but certainly not the 4-6 months Huffman will get by accepting the deal).
She is betting a jury will not convict her because of who she is. Mark Cuban took on the Feds and won on a technicality, so the "don't you know who I am" can work.
No jury in this country is going to send Lori Loughlin to jail. Her role in "Secret Admirer" alone would get her off if I was on the jury.
Phil, I respectfully disagree. If the evidence is as overwhelming as the press is portraying it, I don't see any other verdict than "Guilty." And especially since Huffman pled guilty for a deal which will involve prison time, I can't see Lori avoiding prison - indeed, I think she'll get more prison time by going to trial than if she had entered a "Guilty" plea.
Just my opinion.
She'll fake cry and blame something that's white male dominated and it'll get tossed out. Just watch. I have no faith that when it comes to someone with money and/or fame that any system will treat them the same as me or you (assuming you don't have lots of money and/or fame )
Agee VolH. That's precisely why my daughter is in the public defenders office instead of on the outside pursuing the $$$.
^I would agree if this were a local case - but it's the feds. And it's had a lot of press coverage. I can't believe the feds won't be 100% prepared for anything Lori and her attorneys can throw at them.
And there's always the chance that a negotiated plea deal will be reached before it goes to trial.
You forgot to add that the deal will piss off all those that plead guilty.
It's impossible to be prepared for really rehearsed and strong female crocodile tears. It's a force no courtroom can overcome.
Nailed it! Despite the commonly accepted view that the IRS (and state departments of revenue) are out to bankrupt taxpayers for malfeasance, they can and will forgive penalties, generall not but interest, and even allow participation in a payment plan, unless the tax evasion rises to a level of conspiracy, collusion, and wilful intent to defraud the government. Agreeing to testify against others involved in the plot, in a criminal tax matter can also result in some forgiveness. Alway bad for the last fellow, since crap flows downhill and picks up speed. Don't be "that guy".
Having seen DOJ attorneys and IRS agents at work in the courtroom, I wouldn't bet the farm on it. Add to that the costs to defend against them can be a drain on a person's fiscal resources and it is a long process. It also depends on the amount of evidence and the number of "rats" the prosecution can muster and are willing to point the finger at the defendant and spin their tale of woe. It is fun to watch though.
It would be interesting to see courtroom lawyers have to rotate into the public defender role the way the rest of us peasants have to rotate into the jury role.
Sure, but I was a minor then and financially dependent on my parents. If they had been really forceful into trying to cheat for me, I might have hard time saying no if they were insistent. I would have argued really hard for them not to, though - but that's largely because I was raised by parents who wouldn't have cheated in the first place even if they had the chance to do so and knew they'd get away with it.
The court is very likely to award defendants attorneys fees and court costs WHEN the government loses.
Never underestimate the lunacy of a Cali jury.
Interesting, more expensive strategy. She will still have additional opportunity to cut a deal later. However, she is also taking a risk. I think Hoffman is probably looking at 3-6 months, maybe 9. Laughlin's potential sentence if convicted could be much worse.
It's what I would do if I were her. But, then again, if I were her, I would never be in this situation to begin with.
Good statement! It's similar to my personal view which is "do I want to eat well or sleep well." I've always chosen to sleep well. In this particular situation, the old smell test could have been of value. If it smells bad or rotten, then it probably is, so walk away. The basic facts at issue which have been made public, are rather pungent. She should have considered walking away. The fact that a short stay in prison was included in the deal, leads me to believe that the prosecution has a pretty good hand. So, unless she's holding a royal flush or four aces, she should reconsider her position. When this first broke, she could have considered moving her portable wealth and herself to a non-extradition country, but most likely too late for that now.
Federal juries generally have functioning brain cells, which is why the better attorneys are generally able to persuade their client to avoid placing fates in the hand of a federal jury.
IMO jury makeup in this case would be an interesting question. I would not mind being present for the voir dire in this case if it were to happen. Picking a jury in a trial like this will be a great battle of wits, experience and game theory.
FWIW, in my experience, juries (including Calif juries) usually get it right. The same type of people who show up to do their "civic duty" are the type of people who take their oaths seriously, listen to the instructions and follow them as best they can. In those times when the result seems bad or unfair, it is usually not the juries fault.
The first domino falls as Felicity pleads "Guilty" - Felicity Huffman Pleads Guilty to a Felony for Her Involvement in Operation Varsity Blues. We'll see what happens at sentencing, bit it sounds like it will be minimum prison time.
Now we get to watch to see how Lori handles it.
I thought she got 4 months at Club Fed, then probation.
This can't be good news for Lori - Coach pleads guilty to faking athletic profiles for Lori Loughlin's daughter Olivia Jade, others | Daily Mail Online. Apparently Janke can testify regarding the falsification of athletic credentials, including the faked photos to show the girls as rowing athletes - and Lori, her husband, and the daughters had to know what they were doing.
Wonder when her lawyers will convince her to accept a deal in trade for a "guilty" plea.
If they do, she should fire them,sue them & clean out the professional liability, then hire someone with a clue. I'd pay to watch them destroy the coach, his wife, his girlfriend, his parents, and his kids on the witness stand. Beyond his name and a few documents, his testimony is about as reliable as a Nuevo Laredo crack *****.
College Admissions Scandal: Lori Loughlin Is 'Exasperated' Her Case Is Taking So Long, Says Source. She's frustrated that things are moving slowly - surprise, surprise!
And I find it hard to believe that she is so delusional that she thinks she did nothing wrong. She knew she was faking her daughter's crew photo in order to get her recruited as a crew athlete when, in fact, she had nver participated in the sport. How can Lori believe that's not wrong? And more important, how is her team going to convince a jury?
The government has made their splash; now they cannot afford to lose. From what I've read, this stinks of entrapment, which is a specialty of the federal government. Can't prove something, create a crime.
I really don't expect them to ever go to trial. If they do, I don't expect the government to win if it's a jury trial.
The wheels of justice turn slowly...very slowly. The prosecution has to analyze every angle, every potential defense, to destroy her attorney’s ability to create any doubt concerning her guilt. The defense has to come up with a way to create a doubt or that the law isn’t clear. (Good luck with that)
The jury will most likely NOT be folks of the same social strata or of the same class from a wealth perspective. Those folks are probably not going to identify with her plight, and might enjoy sticking it to her. Just an observation.
How demeaning. Are you saying that a jury panel that includes the maid at Motel 6 or the city worker that fills pot holes or the Waste Management truck driver has no appreciation for the superior levels of higher education?
Bwaaahahaha! Yeah, that about sums it up.