[Jezebelle]

Nevertheless, not facing the possibility of thirty years in prison is better than facing a trial that can put you there. No lawyer would ever let his client face a criminal trial when a dismissal can be had.

Lawsuits would be the route to take to prove innocence then.

There may be other procedural steps that can be taken. There are attorneys who specialize in that area of criminal law.

[Howlin]

I never said they'd fight a dismissal; I said that the position they have been put in requires a trial to prove them innocent beyond any doubt.

There may be other procedural steps that can be taken.

How can you sue if you've never been tried?

[bjc]

I agree. There is no way I would put my kids at risk of a jury trial if there was a chance at outright dismissal. The probabilities of a jury simply siding with the AV or DA for reasons totally unrelated to the facts is too great. One would hope for a directed verdict from the judge, but jeepers the downside is just too great. 30 years is a lot to prove a point.

These risks are what Nifong is trying to use to extract some lesser admission. Clearing their names does nothing to "get" Nifong.

The alternate strategy has to be civil action to clear their names. That is where the plaintiffs get to chose a jury or bench trial - at least in Massachusetts.