Page 1 of 1
On Edward Henry Schaus and the Alford Plea
Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:44 pm
by tbieter
Today my deceased sister's husband is scheduled to be sentenced by the court upon his prior Alford plea of guilty.
Schaus pled guilty to Theft by Swindle, a felony. A charge of Financial Exploitation of a Vulnerable Adult was dismissed.
"In North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160 (1970), the United States Supreme Court held that it was constitutional for a court to accept a defendant’s guilty plea, even though the defendant maintained his innocence, where the state demonstrated “a strong factual basis for the plea” and the defendant clearly expressed his desire to enter the plea based on his belief that the state’s evidence would be sufficient to convict him. The Minnesota Supreme Court first adopted the procedure in 1977, cautioning that “the court should not ‘cavalierly accept’ an Alford plea … .” State v. Goulette, 258 N.W.2d 758 (Minn. 1977).
http://mnbenchbar.com/2014/11/alford-pleas/
In thinking about today's event, I remembered a moral principle and wondered if an Alford plea violated the principle. The principle is
"It is wrong to visit punishment on people without making reasoned discriminations between the innocent and the guilty." p. 101
First Things, Hadley Arkes.
Comments anyone?
https://www.amazon.com/First-Things-Inq ... rst+things
Re: On Edward Henry Schaus and the Alford Plea
Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 11:18 pm
by Impenitent
if they plead guilty, they are.
self labelled
-Imp
Re: On Edward Henry Schaus and the Alford Plea
Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2016 2:24 am
by Arising_uk
Impenitent wrote:if they plead guilty, they are.
self labelled
-Imp
But I thought you have a plea-bargaining system over there, so that some criminals confess to crimes they did not commit to help reduce their sentence and assist the 'clean-up' rates?
Re: On Edward Henry Schaus and the Alford Plea
Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2016 3:06 am
by tbieter
Arising_uk wrote:Impenitent wrote:if they plead guilty, they are.
self labelled
-Imp
But I thought you have a plea-bargaining system over there, so that some criminals confess to crimes they did not commit to help reduce their sentence and assist the 'clean-up' rates?
A criminal case can be defined as the defendant being involved in a fact situation from which the fact-finder (judge or jury) can find either guilt or not guilty.
The parties can enter into a plea bargain agreement for many reasons. For example, in one case the defendant was charged with making terroristic threats, a felony, in a court in a small city. When I arrived at court I was told to immediately go to the judge's chambers. There I found the judge, sheriff, and county attorney. They were really friendly. The county attorney offered a plea bargain, a misdemeanor with straight unsupervised probation! I was shocked. I knew something was wrong. I stalled and thought about the evidence in the case. Had I missed something? My client took my advice and accepted the plea bargain.
The reason for the plea bargain: I discovered that the judge, sheriff, and county attorney were extreme hockey fans and that the high school team was scheduled to play in the state hockey tournament in the Twin Cities that afternoon. The team was picked to win the tournament. The three wanted to get rid of the case and take off to watch the game.
Re: On Edward Henry Schaus and the Alford Plea
Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2016 11:52 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
Plea bargaining is immoral and puts innocent people with the death penalty hanging over them in an unbearable position. No one should ever have to plead guilty to something they haven't done. It makes a mockery of the whole justice system and concept of 'beyond reasonable doubt'. It's essentially admitting that the jury system is biased, incompetent, and unjust (which it often is). It makes you wonder why the prosecution would even bother to build up a case. They could bluff their way into eliciting a guilty plea. It wouldn't be that difficult with those of a fragile nature.
Re: On Edward Henry Schaus and the Alford Plea
Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2016 1:11 pm
by mickthinks
Interesting case; interesting question, Tom. Thank you!
I can't immediately see how accepting an Alford Plea of guilty can be thought to violate the principle that it is wrong to visit punishment on people without making reasoned discriminations between the innocent and the guilty, provided it is possible for the court to satisfy itself of a strong factual basis for the plea. But that seems to me to be the rub.
May I ask you, do you think Schaus believes it is in his best interest that an Alford Plea be accepted by the court on his behalf? And do you agree with him?
Re: On Edward Henry Schaus and the Alford Plea
Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2016 10:47 pm
by Impenitent
tbieter wrote:Arising_uk wrote:Impenitent wrote:if they plead guilty, they are.
self labelled
-Imp
But I thought you have a plea-bargaining system over there, so that some criminals confess to crimes they did not commit to help reduce their sentence and assist the 'clean-up' rates?
A criminal case can be defined as the defendant being involved in a fact situation from which the fact-finder (judge or jury) can find either guilt or not guilty.
The parties can enter into a plea bargain agreement for many reasons. For example, in one case the defendant was charged with making terroristic threats, a felony, in a court in a small city. When I arrived at court I was told to immediately go to the judge's chambers. There I found the judge, sheriff, and county attorney. They were really friendly. The county attorney offered a plea bargain, a misdemeanor with straight unsupervised probation! I was shocked. I knew something was wrong. I stalled and thought about the evidence in the case. Had I missed something? My client took my advice and accepted the plea bargain.
The reason for the plea bargain: I discovered that the judge, sheriff, and county attorney were extreme hockey fans and that the high school team was scheduled to play in the state hockey tournament in the Twin Cities that afternoon. The team was picked to win the tournament. The three wanted to get rid of the case and take off to watch the game.
justice colored by a bunch of dirty puckers...
-Imp
Re: On Edward Henry Schaus and the Alford Plea
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2016 1:42 pm
by tbieter
Impenitent wrote:tbieter wrote:Arising_uk wrote:
But I thought you have a plea-bargaining system over there, so that some criminals confess to crimes they did not commit to help reduce their sentence and assist the 'clean-up' rates?
The parties can enter into a plea bargain agreement for many reasons. For example, in one case the defendant was charged with making terroristic threats, a felony, in a court in a small city. When I arrived at court I was told to immediately go to the judge's chambers. There I found the judge, sheriff, and county attorney. They were really friendly. The county attorney offered a plea bargain, a misdemeanor with straight unsupervised probation! I was shocked. I knew something was wrong. I stalled and thought about the evidence in the case. Had I missed something? My client took my advice and accepted the plea bargain.
The reason for the plea bargain: I discovered that the judge, sheriff, and county attorney were extreme hockey fans and that the high school team was scheduled to play in the state hockey tournament in the Twin Cities that afternoon. The team was picked to win the tournament. The three wanted to get rid of the case and take off to watch the game.[/color]
justice colored by a bunch of dirty puckers...
-Imp
What is a "pucker"?
Re: On Edward Henry Schaus and the Alford Plea
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:22 pm
by Arising_uk
Hockey pun I'd say.
Re: On Edward Henry Schaus and the Alford Plea
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:42 pm
by attofishpi
No, its someone that wants a snog..as in 'pucker up'.