krkrjx
The answer is blowin' in the wind.
- Joined
- May 4, 2010
- Messages
- 12,920
- Reaction score
- 42,009
As I understand Florida law, a person may qualify for Youthful Offender status if they are young and have no priors. Youthful Offender is offered to those who qualify and they can take it or leave it. My understanding is that if it is offered and the defendant opts not to accept, it can not be offered to that person again.
The word is out that Fields hopes to have Misty sentenced as a Youthful Offender. Whether or not he can pull this off remains to be seen.
If Misty was facing just one charge she would certainly qualify for YO. However, Misty faces EIGHT charges. This is the hurdle that Fields will have to jump. And he will have to jump high, IMO, to persuade the judge to rule in Misty's favor.
But, even if Fields is successful in persuading the judge, there remains that one pesky charge in another county. Can Fields persuade that judge as well? And will it even be an option, given a defendant is only eligible for YO status one time?
Misty's charges all rise from a single arrest. However, the offenses were committed over time; this is not a case of eight charges resulting from a single incident.
Coercion--being led astray--is what qualifies a young first-time offender for Youthful Offender consideration. Fields will have to show that Misty was coerced by others. He can point toward Ron, but will that fly? Ron was not physically present during every one of Misty's transactions. This could be used as evidence that Misty acted on her own in at least some of the drug deals.
All Misty's transactions took place in Putnam County save one. Why? Could it be that the UC chose the meeting/transaction location for that deal? If so, why did he do that? Was it deliberate in order to have Misty on video involved in criminal activity in separate jurisdictions? If that is the case...why?
IMO, LE wanted Misty. I am not buying that the drug sting was unrelated to Misty's involvement in a missing child case. Given Misty's age and prior arrests, LE set out to snag an adult Misty and they did it in a way that would make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for Misty to squirm out of the charges. I believe Misty was trafficking well before the drug sting was set up and that LE was watching and waiting...waiting for Misty to turn 18.
But even then, LE knew she could weasel out as a Youthful Offender, so they took precautions--they set the stage for eight counts in two separate jurisdictions.
If a person can be offered YO status for their first offense only, what happens to the person with eight separate charges that arise from a single arrest? Even with offenses on different dates and in different jurisdictions, could YO status still be an option if the person has no prior arrest record?
If LE suspects JO, I believe they could have arrested him on unrelated charges just as they did Misty, Tommy, and Ron. JO was in fact arrested in Tennessee recently and if he were a real suspect in Haleigh's disappearance, he would be sitting just as the Satsuma bunch--on ridiculously high bail. I do not doubt JO is a criminal and I do not doubt LE in his area would willingly work with Putnam LE to get him. Until something significant happens regarding JO, I have to assume LE does not really want JO.
Misty appeared before the judge in St. Johns county this morning. It is not clear to me exactly what Fields said in court but it is being reported that he mentioned Misty's "Joe did it" scenario. Even if he did not say it in court, he said it to reporters, apparently. If the SA is not looking at Misty as a possible suspect regarding Haleigh, Misty may be granted Youthful Offender status. IMO, her offenses resulted in one arrest, so she could qualify. However, YO status is a privilege, not a right. If Misty is not granted Youthful Offender status it may mean that she is regarded as more than just "the key" in a missing child investigation.
MOO
(sorry this is so long)
The word is out that Fields hopes to have Misty sentenced as a Youthful Offender. Whether or not he can pull this off remains to be seen.
If Misty was facing just one charge she would certainly qualify for YO. However, Misty faces EIGHT charges. This is the hurdle that Fields will have to jump. And he will have to jump high, IMO, to persuade the judge to rule in Misty's favor.
But, even if Fields is successful in persuading the judge, there remains that one pesky charge in another county. Can Fields persuade that judge as well? And will it even be an option, given a defendant is only eligible for YO status one time?
Misty's charges all rise from a single arrest. However, the offenses were committed over time; this is not a case of eight charges resulting from a single incident.
Coercion--being led astray--is what qualifies a young first-time offender for Youthful Offender consideration. Fields will have to show that Misty was coerced by others. He can point toward Ron, but will that fly? Ron was not physically present during every one of Misty's transactions. This could be used as evidence that Misty acted on her own in at least some of the drug deals.
All Misty's transactions took place in Putnam County save one. Why? Could it be that the UC chose the meeting/transaction location for that deal? If so, why did he do that? Was it deliberate in order to have Misty on video involved in criminal activity in separate jurisdictions? If that is the case...why?
IMO, LE wanted Misty. I am not buying that the drug sting was unrelated to Misty's involvement in a missing child case. Given Misty's age and prior arrests, LE set out to snag an adult Misty and they did it in a way that would make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for Misty to squirm out of the charges. I believe Misty was trafficking well before the drug sting was set up and that LE was watching and waiting...waiting for Misty to turn 18.
But even then, LE knew she could weasel out as a Youthful Offender, so they took precautions--they set the stage for eight counts in two separate jurisdictions.
If a person can be offered YO status for their first offense only, what happens to the person with eight separate charges that arise from a single arrest? Even with offenses on different dates and in different jurisdictions, could YO status still be an option if the person has no prior arrest record?
If LE suspects JO, I believe they could have arrested him on unrelated charges just as they did Misty, Tommy, and Ron. JO was in fact arrested in Tennessee recently and if he were a real suspect in Haleigh's disappearance, he would be sitting just as the Satsuma bunch--on ridiculously high bail. I do not doubt JO is a criminal and I do not doubt LE in his area would willingly work with Putnam LE to get him. Until something significant happens regarding JO, I have to assume LE does not really want JO.
Misty appeared before the judge in St. Johns county this morning. It is not clear to me exactly what Fields said in court but it is being reported that he mentioned Misty's "Joe did it" scenario. Even if he did not say it in court, he said it to reporters, apparently. If the SA is not looking at Misty as a possible suspect regarding Haleigh, Misty may be granted Youthful Offender status. IMO, her offenses resulted in one arrest, so she could qualify. However, YO status is a privilege, not a right. If Misty is not granted Youthful Offender status it may mean that she is regarded as more than just "the key" in a missing child investigation.
MOO
(sorry this is so long)