Woman's sex act disgusts judge
Feb 8, 2012 | 8 Comments
By Paul Daquilante
Of the News-Register
Only online subscribers may access this article. Subscribe online by clicking here . Already a subscriber, please log in
• Crash claims life of Newberg High School junior (4936)
• Video showing use of excessive force by local officers goes public (3664)
• Did Oregon miss chance to stop a serial killer? (3055)
• Recent rash of thefts in Mac (2671)
• City and county sued for excessive use of force (2598)
• Welcome aboard (2366)
• Dribbling 'free spirit' touches local family before untimely death (2334)
• Doing something for his alma mater (2134)
• What a racket (1617)
• A simple message for the people of 'O' (6)
• City and county sued for excessive use of force (5)
• Need warm couch Saturday night; will contribute game of juggle (3)
• New agritourism discussion deserves full public hearing (3)
• Sheriff's office investigating rock quarry theft (2)
• Oregon budget talks gain momentum with econ report (2)
• Citizenship classes planned for Mac (1)
• Thorson throws her support to Grange (1)
• Dribbling 'free spirit' touches local family before untimely death (1)


Would you like to comment on this article?
Only online subscribers may comment on articles. Click here to see how you can subscribe.
Already a subscriber, please log in
Comments
I certainly understand your thinking on the plea bargaining. However, if you don't offer any incentives, the accused will always take his or her case to trial. The taxpayer picks up the tab for the prosecution, the defense, the cops, the court, the judge and everything else, including a year or two of jail incarceration, and it can easily run past $100,000 in a major felony case. It could run a quarter of a million.
When the case goes to trial, the accused has an absolute right to confront his or her accuser, even if that means putting a traumatized 4-year-old on the stand. And it may well result in no additional time for all of that expense, delay and trauma.
The long and short of it is, plea bargains are perhaps a necessary evil.
Steve Bagwell
Managing Editor
Reply:
Now wouldn't it be interesting if everyone stopped taking plea deals, and see what would happen to our court system. It would collapse. I'm not sure it can be sustained anyways. It seems we are losing control of it. I don't like the fact that people in measure 11 offenses are three times more likely to be convicted with a public defender than a private lawyer. Makes one wonder what type of represention one gets most of the time. OR the fact that we convict a fair amount of innocent people each year, and just think how many guilty people get off.
Don't get me started. I can write a book about our justice system... it's a mess.
** someone might reply, but it's better than most. ** "yes" but that is still no reason to not fix it! and make it even better...
Troy Prouty*
Troy,
I view plea agreements on par with any out of court settlement, such as are made between corporate entities and/or people they have,.or may not have harmed. I agree with Steve Bagwell on this one, and I agree with you as well..."...our court system. It would collapse."...without plea agreements. Due process would have to be sped up to a dizzying speed, indeed, and that need for speed would surely be more beneficial to the rich, than to the poor.
It's a tough call, homie.
So when people see so many charges dropped for a plea for this and that, they need to put in perspective that many times, those additional things; they probably never would have been able to get a conviction in the first place for.
Troy Prouty*
The Sitton case for example, which mysteriously is not accepting any comments- was only given a few years for the murder of his own father. This is justice? The plea IS the death of justice, but I blame the outrageous costs of everything entailed. Until we reorganized our priorities and begin to demand reasons for the costs of things people will claim it's a money issue, when in reality, it is a greed issue, at the cost of the victims.