“Why a plea deal here.”
I couldn’t bring myself to read the article; too depraved. But, a plea deal was probably offered because the prosecutor didn’t think he could get a stronger penalty. (I’m speculating.) It might also be that the prosecutor feels he could lose some or all of the evidence on a technicality and the jury might go for a lower sentence.
A lot goes on behind the scenes and even if the newspapers knew about it, their reporting is generally so bad they’d never get it across.
I think those are rational thoughts. It does disturbs me that the media can manipulate public opinion to the degree that it does, but why do authorities allow them to do it?
How hard would it be to list what this man did to these women, and demand justice? Certainly today’s women could be made to see this is an instance where a man took every decision a woman could make away from her, times three.
Boy, if a verdict was ever a done deal, this would have to be one IMO.
I'm not saying that he doesn't deserve to fed feet-first into an incinerator, but how much money do you want to pay for that satisfaction?
The women victims said they were relieved he will not be released...I think they agreed with the plea deal so they won’t have to go through the trauma again in a trial.
God Bless them.