Higgins

Except nobody will employed if they are both in prison. That's a given.

But Michelle didn't grow up in a family like that.

Did they actually claim they didn't know who Dolly is? There is no way that is true. I don't believe that for a minute.

Yes, but Tamra invited Vicki's opinion of Simon and in fact, created it.

Moderates can also interpret the Bible into whatever they want it to mean too.

Delays are so common. It is not unusual at all, it happens more often than not. If the court didn't determine there was merit to the request, they could deny the postponement.

Nope.

Whether you like it or not, the children are a consideration.

I'm not saying she can deny responsibility but, her attorneys can be much more nuanced than that as they argue her case at the sentencing. Things are not as black and white as some may wish they were. There is a distinction between taking responsibility for one's part in it and being the person who thought up the scheme. The section of the plea you are referencing as if it it is significant , is standard wording. The prosecutor is never bound by promises as they are not the the authority on sentencing. The judge has the only sentencing discretion. The judge considering that she didn't plan the scheme would be mitigation or that she was involved in charitable actions or she has no prior convictions. Aggregation is the treatment of all counts and sentences as one, or the way they group counts to determine sentencing guidelines. It is a very complicated computation. There was no trial so, how do you know who planned the scheme especially the mortgage fraud? How do you know if Joe came up with it and Teresa participated but didn't plan it? You don't think that matters? That doesn't mean she didn't knowingly participate. There are nuanced differences and if we were to only consider what the prosecutor presented without judicial discretion , why would we need a judge in sentencing? If everything we need to determine the sentence is written in the plea agreement like you seem to think, we wouldn't need the judge to determine sentencing.

If you are an asshole maybe.

We'll have to wait and see.

Joe has priors, Teresa doesn't. Joe pled guilty to more counts. I would suspect that they will try to sell it that he was the mastermind and she merely went along with it.

Yeah, two which is what she is up for. It's not going to happen. Joe probably will get two years.

I think Joe will serve several years and will get whatever the feds allow for good time served. Teresa will either get probation or a relatively short sentence compared to the penalty of which she could be sentenced to. No way she serves years. I still believe she gets probation although a female judge could be tougher IMO.

Not at all, I would b happy if she were to get the maximum but, just because I want something to happen doesn't mean it will. I worked for a defense attorney for 5 years when I was in my early 20s and my experience tells me that Joe will get the brunt of the sentence. Your quote from the court documents could go either way couldn't it? Teresa will not serve years in prison that is what I believe. We will soon know. If you don't think that pleading guilty works to minimize your sentence even for what you are agree you are guilty of, you are dead wrong.

We will see. So much of this stuff goes on behind closed doors. Have you ever had any involvement in a criminal trial?

Even if they don't work? What do they do with their time? I was a stay at home mom with 3 kids under 4 years old and I certainly didn't need help.

You do understand though Lotus that Plea bargains would never happen if the defendants had nothing to gain from them. They agree to plea because they have been promised something advantageous to them. So the judge, in the interest of the court and the people, rarely go rouge. I suspect that the only way they would have taken the agreement was if the prosecutors agreed to recommend suspending Teresa's jail time or at the very least, a very short sentence served for her staggered with Joe's relatively longer sentence.

Yes, but they tend to put a lot weight on the recommendations and that is where the deal comes into play with sentencing

Because the prosecutors make recommendations to the judge on sentencing. Sometimes the prosecution will agree to a specific sentence and make it part of the plea deal by promising the defendant to "recommend" the sentence to the judge when it comes time for sentencing. For example, the prosecutor may recommend sentence of fewer years in prison than a defendant might face if he goes to trial or gets convicted. The prosecutor may also promise to recommend probation instead of jail time. http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/plea-bargains-or-agreements-and-sentencing.html

That's defiantly better

Sorry Scoobs....I still don't like them on men. I think they strike me as feminine. Now there are white tanks that are okay with me on men but they aren't skin tight with thin straps. Sleeveless loose shirts are okay and I think the "wife beaters" look good on women just not men.

Different strokes and all!

Like these guys?

It happens all the time. Judges do use discretion in sentencing and couples cut deals with prosecutors. Prosecutors make deals with defendants to save the court time and money. Attorney's negotiate all the time. This is not unusual.