If he wasn't guilty, why would he not seek legal counsel? Are we to believe that he's really that ignorant as to the way our legal system works, after 2 decades in the legislature, and the legal ramifications of a guilty plea? Furthermore, would it not constitute contempt of court for an "innocent" man to plead guilty- i.e. lie to the court- and is the typical common man entitled to a "do-over" on a guilty plea, at taxpayer expense, as he's prepared to seek? What are the legal ramifications of setting such a precedent- both for others that have entered into plea agreements, and for those currently going through the system- will every misdemeanor now require a court trial to assure that a conviction is final?
2007-09-05 05:55:36 · 5 answers · asked by kena2mi 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Officially he is not guilty of a sex crime. He pled guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct. However, he is indeed seemingly guilty of poor judgement, possibly of soliciting for the purpose of sexual acts, and by his own admission he is guilty of the disorderly conduct. His entire demeanor in this has been poor. He had to be well aware of what he was doing when he pled this out.
As far as reversing his plea, if the court refuses to allow a reversal his attornies will have to attempt to appeal. I don't know how Minnesota law reads but in most states pleas are only appealable for very narrowly defined reasons.
2007-09-05 06:18:33 · answer #1 · answered by toff 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He plead to disorderly conduct, so that part is over. WHATEVER he did certainly involved bad judgment.
2007-09-05 13:03:00 · answer #2 · answered by Flatpaw 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Good question.
Ted drowned a mistress while cheating on his wife.
He's now a hero to the Dems.
Go figure.
2007-09-05 12:59:44 · answer #3 · answered by Duminos 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
He should resign..sicko Craig
2007-09-05 13:01:05 · answer #4 · answered by o_o 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Both.
2007-09-05 13:05:35 · answer #5 · answered by mstrywmn 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋