[free-sklyarov] Re: Continuing the fight

[Seth Finkelstein]

>>> Peter D. Junger wrote:
>>> There is no admission of guilt there.

>> Ruben Safir wrote:
>> Nonsense.  People found innocent by courts are not put on probation,

> Branden Robinson wrote:
> No offense, but I'm more inclined to take the opinions of a law
> professor (Prof. Junger) more seriously than yours.

	In retrospect, my original phrasing was poor. The problem
is that as a non-lawyer, I'm trying to figure out what this DOJ
"agreement" means strategically, in terms of the case. Is it a
token admission, or a plea-bargain where he *just short* of
pleads guilty and gets probation in return? Even though it's *not*
formally an admission of guilt, is it *in practice* very close, very
nearly approaching that? That was the original question I was raising.

	That is, if a defendant "admitted his conduct" in such a way
as to affirm every element of the charges against him, has he given
away his defense in all but name? Yes, this is not legally a guilty
plea, as he could maintain innocence if the deal breaks down and he
then goes to trial. But *pragmatically*, would he have much hope then?

-- 
Seth Finkelstein  Consulting Programmer  sethf at sethf.com  http://sethf.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/19/technology/circuits/19HACK.html  
BESS's Secret LOOPHOLE: http://sethf.com/anticensorware/bess/loophole.php
BESS vs Google: http://sethf.com/anticensorware/bess/google.php