MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Lori Loughlin Rejected Plea Deal / faces...

Lori Loughlin Rejected Plea Deal / faces new charges. She doesn't "accept".

posted 5 years ago by ProductionNow (1072)
10 replies | jump to latest

She has decided to "roll with the dice".
I dont' like this seemingly snobbish woman, including her arrogant looks, who does not see the seriousness of the incident. She must feel the justice system is inconveniencing her
--------------------------------------
Huffman agreed to plead guilty on Monday, saying, “I am in full acceptance of my guilt, and with deep regret and shame over what I have done, I accept full responsibility for my actions and will accept the consequences that stem from those actions.”

But Loughlin and her husband, fashion designer J. Mossimo Giannulli, have not entered pleas — and a source close to them tells PEOPLE that they have resisted any agreements that would result in jail time. Under federal guidelines, both of them would have gotten between 18-24 months in jail under a plea agreement.

“They weren’t ready to accept that,” says the source, who is familiar with the legal discussions in the case. “They’re really not seeing how serious this is.”

On Tuesday, things got worse for Loughlin and Giannulli, who were each hit with money laundering charges. They now face up to 20 years in prison for each charge.

“They were offered the carrot and the stick,” the source tells PEOPLE. “The carrot was that this can all go away and you can serve your time and put it behind you. Remember, they were facing 20 years, even before the latest charges. The stick was that [the prosecution] would and could pile on more serious charges.”

“The second superseding indictment also charges the defendants with conspiring to launder the bribes and other payments in furtherance of the fraud by funneling them through Singer’s purported charity and his for-profit corporation, as well as by transferring money into the United States, from outside the United States, for the purpose of promoting the fraud scheme,” Lelling’s office said in a statement.
Loughlin and Giannulli allegedly paid bribes to have their daughters falsely presented as a crew recruits when they applied to USC.

[–] strntz (10779) 5 years ago

Well, seeing Smollett get away with faking a hate crime and smearing innocent people with all the evidence in the world, why not ride the train until it derails?

I'm glad they got caught, and hope it exposes everyone who participated. I do. But jail time?

I sat on a jury and a drug dealer caught twice was convicted but did no jail time.

[–] ProductionNow (1072) 5 years ago

why did your jury decide on no jail time for drug dealer?

In Loughlin's case, it seems like a slam-dunk for the prosecutor; there is no mystery as to whether she's guilty, yet she is gambling on being exonerated. That's delusional. What, she expects probation while she explains "I didn't know what I did was a crime, it was just a mistake". Imagine if all those who are indicted just said "they didn't' know"?

[–] strntz (10779) 5 years ago

The jury doesn't decide sentencing. We had no say.

In Loughlin's case, it seems like a slam-dunk for the prosecutor; there is no mystery as to whether she's guilty, yet she is gambling on being exonerated.

There's no mystery about Smollett's guilt either, but he walked with a 10K fine.

I just don't see the public being safer with these two people behind bars, or them repeating the crime (impossible anyway) for if they were imprisoned. Their guilt is clear, but their crime was one of privilege, so make the punishment fit the crime.

How about a million dollar fine, 1000 hours of community service for both and probation?

[–] TexasJack (12515) 5 years ago

Plea bargains should themselves be illegal. The government should always be required to prove their case in court beyond a reasonable doubt. The plea bargain process gives prosecutors far too much unchecked power.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Arguably it benefits the accused.

There's no compulsion on the accused to accept a plea bargain. They could choose to fight the case all the way to court, but they probably know they'll be found guilty, most likely because they are, so instead of wasting all that time and resources on behalf of the state, they can do everyone a favour and take a lower sentence.

That said, as a legal representative, I'd never advise my client to take a plea bargain if they insisted they were innocent. I'd rather they took their chances in court (as you say, in theory, if they're innocent they shouldn't be found guilty beyond all reasonable doubt - unfortunately you know as well as I do that miscarriages of justice do exist and innocent people do go to prison despite all the supposed safeguards to prevent such occurrences).

[–] TexasJack (12515) 5 years ago

No compulsion? “Take the plea and the 18 months or face 20 years” sounds damn compelling to me.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

If that's how it went down, sure.

But hopefully Huffman's lawyer(s) advised her of the likelihood of such a sentence.

Still, she's entitled to take her chances.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

but you dont always get the maximum , if you refuse plea and go to trial?
could get 2 or 3 years?

[–] ProductionNow (1072) 5 years ago

I agree, though do serve a purpose sometimes. A plea bargain used by an innocent defendant with the odds stacked against from being incarcerated far longer if they are wrongly found guilty. Or a case of going easier on the guilty little guy for providing the police with the names of the criminal kingpins

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Huffman is a liberal. Loughlin and her hubby are supposedly conservatives. Conservatives don't feel shame.*

*By the way, I'm not making a judgement here. I'm a liberal, and I do feel shame, but sometimes I wish I didn't. It's a drag.