This thread discusses the Content article: The Plea
The great pity though is that as I understand it this will mean that that he will be unable to sue the state for wrongful imprisonment etc. (which is I suspect a major factor in the State's reasoning for offering the plea in the first place). Still I'm sure he was aware of that and put any chance of getting justified damages against spending more months locked up with his health in further jeopardy.
The other unfortunate thing about it is that as with other case which end with no contest pleas (off the top of my head the Sonia Jacobs case springs to mind) whatever the truth of the matter, certain people will continue to insist that he was in fact guilty.
All that being said I am delighted for Kenny - it's such a great shame that it took as long as it did, especially from the first 6th Circuit decision, shame on the State of Ohio. |
It doesn't sound like it, but Kenny's "no-contest" plea...is that going to be considered an Alford Plea?
"Under an Alford plea, a defendant does not admit guilt, but agrees the state has enough evidence to gain a conviction."
From what I understand, An Alford Plea makes it possible for a person to sue for a claim of innocence/compensation.
Anyone know if this relates to Kenny or not?
http://www.freebobandrandy.com |
No its not the same plea and Kenny will NOT get any compensation.
Nolo contendere, in criminal trials, in some common law jurisdictions, is a plea where the defendant neither admits nor disputes a charge, serving as an alternative to a pleading of guilty or not guilty. Its literal translation from Latin means, "I do not wish to contest," and is also referred to as a plea of no contest, to stand mute, or, more informally, a nolo plea.
Oh, Great Spirit, grant that I may not criticize my neighbor until I have walked a mile in his moccasins." - Old Indian Prayer My dad told me!! |
|
Home 
