Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorB
Ok get some facts straight
"The director pleaded guilty in 1977 to a single count of having unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, acknowledging he had sex with a 13-year-old girl."
That totally different that saying
"pleaded guilty to having unlawful sex with a minor when he gave booze and drugs to a 13 year old and then had sex with her"
The DA said he drugged and raped her. And if they had a case why give him a plea deal that had no jail time except for the 42 days he already served?
|
Why would he make a plea deal? Because the guy is/was a celebrity and had/has a lot of money plus it sounds like the girl in the case wasn't going to be very co-operative so getting a full on conviction might have been difficult.
After making my original post I then made a second post stating that there were questionable things going on in the case. Still, the guy had a sesx with a 13 year old, it isn't like he an innocent person who is getting railroaded.
He should be brought back here, they should look into the case and see what happened and then decide the best legal course of action from there. If that ends up being that he get let go, so be it. If that ends up meaning he goes back on trial so be it.