Horton
- Thread starter gary2
- Start date
Negotiations with the police officer not yet fruitful?
This probably ends where the Hugley situation ended. Why does it have to take so damn long?
I know! But I would guess that in the big picture the lawyer is looking out for Horton's future and not consumed with trying to hurry through to get back to playing which is our focus. Maybe finding the right person to interview will provide a different more acceptable understanding of what went on, you never know.
Ithiel Horton’s Case to be Continued on January 19
PITTSBURGH — On Thursday, at Pitt guard Ithiel Horton’s preliminary hearing, the judge announced that the case will be continued on January 19. ”We are extremely disappointed and frustrated,” Horton’s attorney Phil DiLucente told Pittsburgh Sports Now. “My client was simply exercising his...
pittsburghsportsnow.com
His lawyer said he wanted it to happen next week and was disappointed that it has been pushed out so far.
I just read the headlines of course, but how does the Court get away with that, you kinda think he should be reinstated until the 19th of January just because.....
I just posted this on the paid board.. what is the downside of letting him play right now? If the worst case scenario isn't jail time, why isn't he playing?
I'm not sure if he's facing jail time or not.. but if he's not, what's the downside?
Second degree felony - I don’t know what penalty could accompany that
Pitt guard Ithiel Horton arrested after allegedly hitting police officer in the face
Police were called to the scene after Ithiel Horton grew upset with a tow-truck driver.
sports.yahoo.com
Pennsylvania Crime Classification | David J. Cohen Law Firm, LLC
Being convicted of a misdemeanor or felony crime in Pennsylvania can carry harsh penalties that extend beyond the criminal justice system.
www.davidcohenlawfirm.com
5-10 years and 25,000 dollar fine.
I don’t think we just let him play?
According to his lawyer, it was the police officer who requested the delay, because he wanted more officers to testify about the events. Which leads to the question, why were those officers not prepared to testify today - this hearing has been scheduled for weeks.
Needed a better or better connected attorney.
Should have hired Blaine Jones. Jones may have found a better angle. Tried the case in the media with more success than DiLucente. (Just joking)
I'm thinking the same situation plays out like it did with Hugley.
The standard for a preliminary hearing is far lower than it is at trial. If you need four cops to testify just to prove that it’s more likely than not that a crime was committed, then I’d suggest that you probably don’t have enough evidence to prove that a crime was committed. Which is probably what DiLucente was upset about - that, and he won’t be able to clear this thing off of his books by the end of the year.
Yes, it leads to several questions for me. 1. The right to a speedy trial should be a top priority, the government should not be allowed to ask for a continuence(sp). 2. Does the politicizing of the Head Coaching position have an effect on this situation?
Defund the Police
The government can ask for a continuance, but they have 365 days from the day of the arrest until the trial to obey speedy trial rules. Any government-requested continuance counts against that time, but any defense continuance doesn’t.
That’s a different question than whether a continuance was necessary here - especially since the only thing necessary at a preliminary hearing is the cop who was hit (who was apparently present today) to get up there and say, “yes, that’s the guy who intentionally hit me, a police officer, while I was performing my duties.” That’s pretty much all you need to say at this point to bind over for trial.
I mean, this is how it works for anyone. It isnt being charged then a final hearing in a few weeks.
People heard there was a hearing yesterday and thought it was something it wasnt, it was the preliminary hearing. No jury, just both sides showing what they had so the judge can determine if it will move forward or not. I mean if it actually goes to trial they don't even have a jury yet.
At all stages of the process there can be negotiations, but the "pressure" to do so varies for both sides depending on a variety of factors.
It isn't a speeding ticket in a magisterial court. If its in the court of the common pleas a jury trial is half a year out, give or take.
Speaking generically (not just Pittsburgh & PA), it isn't the police causing a lack of a speedy trial it is the courts and the local DA's offices. There are too many cases and not enough prosecuting attorneys and judges to meet the "speedy trial" ideal. That comes down to a lack of sufficient government funding which, in turn, in the end comes down to taxpayers not willing to fund a larger legal system.
I get that, but what has been stated here is that the police officer wanted to wait until he could call on more officers as witnesses ... if so why should that happen, the state accuses you of a crime, they should show up when scheduled ready to put the facts as they are written up before the judge, talk about lack of efficiency....but all in all it doesn't matter, the kid is gone for the season.....................
In the old days this would have be taken care of quickly and easily.
When I was 12 years old, casually mentioning it to my grandfather would have been enough.
It would have been exactly like getting a traffic ticket fixed.
People that can help or hurt people in authority ask for a “favor”. Those in authority lean down.
Even today, People like that still exist, they are just much more reluctant and selective on leaning down.
Last edited:
I'm going to guess yes, haha. Everything he's said on here and the free board about this has been spot on.
Great explanation. At this stage, you’re pretty much at the mercy of the officer/DA. I’m not a legal scholar, but it’s my understanding that Horton’s lawyer could speak with the officer/DA beforehand and try to negotiate a plea/quick resolution. Just reading the tea leaves here, but it doesn’t seem like there was an interest in an expedited resolution at this stage by the officer/DA
You would just add fuel to creating a toxic culture if you allowed him on the team and to play at this point. Yo want to give players the feeling they are above the law, school rules, and coach's guidelines? thats how you lose a team when you let the inmates run the asylum. It hurts the team short term for him not to play but long term it is best for the program.
This, and it is also about having the "air" to get things work out properly.
Of course you want a "speedy trial" in that you don't want someone hanging in limbo for years.
But, at the same time there is a lot of injustice that occurs when things get jammed through.
Similar threads
