63
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
63 points (100.0% liked)
News
51 readers
1 users here now
Breaking news and current events worldwide.
founded 2 years ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sadly, the answer to this is going to feel pretty circular. It can't be used in other cases because this was a no contest plea and the difference between a guilty and no contest plea is that a no contest plea can't be used in future legal matters as evidence for guilt.
No contest pleas are not always available to a defendant. Consider it similar to any other plea bargain.
The philosophical justification is that the person has not admitted to anything and the court did not find him guilty. The no contest plea is your way of saying "I admit no wrongdoing but will simply accept the punishment to avoid this whole process". Since there was no trial you can't say the person was found guilty in any trial.
If they find him guilty why couldn't that be used in future cases? I don't see the functional difference between pleading "innocent" and being found guilty versus "no contest" with the same outcome.
They aren't finding him guilty. If you offer no contest, there is no trial.
The ~~prosecution~~ plantiffs COULD reject the no contest bid and pursue the trial anyway. Which is why I said earlier you should think of this as a plea bargain of sorts.
Forgive my ignorance but even without a jury trial there must be some verdict handed down from the judge, no?
Nope. That's what it means for a no contest bid to be accepted. It means a sentence/award without a verdict.