He's not going to plea bargain, he's going for a leg sweep on the whole business.
WTOP/AP - "In papers filed in Utah's 5th District Court, attorney Jim Bradshaw said the charge should not have been filed because the statute of limitations on the alleged crime had already expired.I keep having supposed lawyers, whose credentials I cannot verify, tell me this is bogus and won't make any difference. I don't see though, how if charges were never filed appropriately in the right venue, in the allotted time frame given by the law, how Warren can even remain convicted. Wouldn't it be a hoot if he is freed this way? The evidence challenge then becomes all important in Arizona as it is the only real substantive basis for Warren being held there. He might even get out on bail.
According to court papers, Wall and Steed were married April 23, 2001. Wall waited until January 2006 to report the alleged crime to police and prosecutors, and then only after negotiating an agreement that dictated how the information would be used.
In 2001, the statute of limitations for prosecuting a felony was four years from the date the alleged crime occurred. The law was amended in 2005 to give prosecutors eight years to file charges, but only if the alleged crime had been reported to police within four years from when it occurred."
"In 2005, both Wall's sister and her then-boyfriend, Lamont Barlow, told representatives of separate law enforcement agencies that Wall may have been a victim of sexual abuse during her marriage. Neither meets the Utah Supreme Court's standards for an 'acceptable report' which would extend the statute of limitations, court papers say.It seems pretty clear cut. Either Jim Bradshaw is engaging in pure balderdash, or he's not. A simple finding of fact.
Washington County Attorney Brock Belnap said Thursday that he is still reviewing the filing."
Sphere: Related Content
No comments:
Post a Comment