Someone I care about is facing a sentencing on September 8, to plea bargain in an attempt to avoid a cage.
I don't know if she did what she is charged with doing. It seems completely out of character, based on what I know of her due to a friendship that has lasted 17+ years so far. And, it is completely irrelevant to my current objections, anyway. If she did what they claim, she owes someone restitution, and that "someone" isn't the State. The State's injustice system doesn't even have justice on the radar, but seeks only to punish.
So, on to my points:
Her lawyer told her that she has only two options-- plead guilty in a bid to avoid jail time, or go to jail. His reasoning? There is no evidence, and she confessed.
Seems to me "no evidence" should be in her favor-- innocent until PROVEN guilty is the lie we are fed.
Of course, when she "confessed" she was mentally ill-- in fact, this was so obvious to everyone involved she was immediately sent to a psych hospital and put on psych medication after she was booked. She has always had mental issues, and physical brain problems (epilepsy, for one). How is a confession under those circumstances even admissible?
Also, her lawyer admitted to her that he has become friends with the DA during the course of his "defense". Conflict of interest? Seems clear to me.
I don't know if her lawyer is a public defender or an actual defense lawyer. Either way it seems he wants to save his buddies in the DA's office some trouble, and is railroading his client into unnecessary trouble. Not ethical behavior at all.
If I had the money I would pay to get her a real defense lawyer; one committed to truth and justice, and not just pragmatic convenience and keeping his political friends happy.