JLM *GUILTY* in 2005 Fairfax County Rape Case #2

[themom]

So maybe someone with more legal knowledge (I have none) can shed some light on this plea and what it means. As I have read, it is treated like a guilty plea with respect to appeals, meaning that his options to appeal would be very limited. So it seems odd that he would enter that plea. Except that one of the reasons you could win an appeal would be ineffective counsel, or proving that you involuntarily entered that plea. Does anyone think perhaps he entered the plea because things weren't going his way and will try later to say his counsel was not doing its job to try to get a new team/new trial?

MOO

I'm curious why he used the plea also. Was there lesser sentencing? I'm so confused.

 

[Just K]

Although a true guilty verdict from a jury would have been so much more appropriate, he will be sentenced harshly, IMO.

He really just can't stand not being in control... JLM, IMO, is the epitome of evil... a wolf in sheep's clothing. I'm just glad that his record will say "Guilty of Attempted Murder."

 

[Dr. Know?]

This short video sums up the advantage of JM going with the Alford Plea. Doubt there's a chance the judge will be lenient.

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/what-is-an-alford-plea/33506076

 

[Hraefn]

So maybe someone with more legal knowledge (I have none) can shed some light on this plea and what it means. As I have read, it is treated like a guilty plea with respect to appeals, meaning that his options to appeal would be very limited. So it seems odd that he would enter that plea. Except that one of the reasons you could win an appeal would be ineffective counsel, or proving that you involuntarily entered that plea. Does anyone think perhaps he entered the plea because things weren't going his way and will try later to say his counsel was not doing its job to try to get a new team/new trial?

MOO

By entering the Alford Plea, he maintains a claim of innocence (ughhhhh), but agrees the evidence proves he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. So he pleads guilty, but does not have to specifically admit to the guilt itself. He must somehow believe that a guilty plea was in his best interest. Typically defendants plead guilty for lesser or more ease at sentencing. But one of the main mitigating factors at sentencing is showing remorse or accepting responsibility for the crimes (in some jurisdictions it's treated in the negative: it's an aggravating factor at sentencing if a defendant doesn't show remorse or accept responsibility). So by entering an Alford plea, a defendant can make his sentencing worse in the end. The procedural consequences are the same as for a regular guilty plea (including rights to appeal).

The only logical justification I see is that the DNA evidence was so damning to him that a guilty plea was the only thing that made sense. And maybe the only way his attorneys could get him to enter a guilty plea was if he could maintain his innocence (again...ughhhh). Even though in my opinion that will hurt him at sentencing, a jury still may have been harsher because they are more sensitive to a victim's words and experiences than a Judge, who has been trained to be a neutral fact finder. The judge always has the ultimate sentencing decision, but in a jury trial the jury can set the ceiling or cap on a sentence. A lot of times in the summer too juries will have several teachers on them. Since teachers are more often females, the logic may have been that a jury of females will be even more sympathetic to the victim here (but let's be honest, who wouldn't?).

Here's an interesting law review article I found on Alford Pleas, it happens to mention VA's attempt to soften the blow of the Alford contradiction at sentencing (maintaining innocence versus showing remorse).
Plea Best Not Taken: Why Criminal Defendants Should Avoid the Alford Plea

The Virginia Court of Appeals . . . made a
valiant attempt to impose some safety valve for the wayward Alford-type
defendant in Smith v. Commonwealth." However, this effort merely reenforces
the illogic of the situation. In Smith the defendant, Damien Smith, Jr., argued
that entering an Alford plea required the court to disregard his lack of remorse at
the time of sentencing.
The court . . . concluded
that an Alford plea was like any other guilty plea for sentencing purposes. The
court went on, however, to attempt to minimize the harsh nature of such a finding
by observing, "Appellant's denial of responsibility would not be inconsistent with
an expression of sympathy for the victims of the 'situation' to which he referred
during allocution. . . .[A]n expression of remorse does not presuppose
acceptance of criminal responsibility." . . . One need not be unduly
cynical to have serious reservations about the "advice" given by the Smith court.
It seems very unlikely that a court willing to consider an Alford-type defendant's
remorse, or lack thereof, would accept a denial of responsibility coupled with an
expression of sympathy for the victim as an adequate expression of sincere
remorse. That such "advice" would be suggested merely illustrates the
irrationality of considering the remorse of Alford-type defendants at sentencing
and again forces the question-why would you ever choose the Alford plea?

And a :tyou: to klily for putting the sentencing estimate up earlier today!

 

[Hoosgirl]

SBHack created a sentencing estimate for us; she is super busy today so I'm posting for her. We can all thank her when she gets back online, hopefully this evening. In summary: he will face 45 years to 3 life sentences.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iWbQzbnU5B-H7lIdUjmo2xGrJaNhwLPb7SA--Cgk-W0/edit?usp=sharing

Fantastic summary! Thank you so much for posting, and to SBHack for doing this. Very helpful.

ETA I just read your info about the Alford plea, thank you for that too!

 

[Hoosgirl]

Looks like 48 Hours will be doing a show on JM?

@nadine_maeser

@AugensteinWTOP being interviewed about #JesseMatthew trial by @48hours A lot of hard work went into this week. pic.twitter.com/00oRaBW7Ra
7:02pm - 10 Jun 15

 

[Hoosgirl]

@lfrenchnews

Chances #JesseMatthew will see light of day? @fairfaxcounty DA: "I hope nil but you never know." CW will seek substantial jail time @CBS6
6:02pm - 10 Jun 15

#GilHarrington after verdict: "I am happy that it's very unlikely this criminal will ever hurt anyone again." #JesseMatthew @CBS6
6:39pm - 10 Jun 15

 

[Hoosgirl]

@toddbstone (lawyer)

From legal perspective, benefit of plea for #JesseMatthew? None that I can see. @CBS6 @lfrenchnews
12:51pm - 10 Jun 15

@sjkduke @CBS6 @lfrenchnews Anyone (#JesseMatthew) has a right to plead guilty at any point up until the jury verdict. Doesn't mean a "deal"
12:55pm - 10 Jun 15

@AlienAiden @CBS6 @lfrenchnews #JesseMatthew admits sufficient evidence for guilt. But not admitting he committed offense.
12:57pm - 10 Jun 15

 

[Hoosgirl]

What it was like in the courtroom when the plea was made:

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/l...for-Jesse-Matthews-Plea-306822341.html?update

 

[Hoosgirl]

@Klovereporter

This sketch by Jane Vance says it all. Let's hope #JesseMatthew's Alford Plea gives some peace to courageous victim. pic.twitter.com/E69PbIoyq4
2:11pm - 10 Jun 15

Jane is Morgan's former professor and VP of Help Save the Next Girl.

 

[Hoosgirl]

@PeggyTV

Juror Willie McDuffy says he would have found #JesseMatthew guilty; he found DNA evidence convincing @wusa9 pic.twitter.com/dvjgiigUaa
1:26pm - 10 Jun 15

 

[Hoosgirl]

@PeggyTV

Ray Morrogh:talked to victim who said she was really moved that so many people worked so hard to bring justice @wusa9 pic.twitter.com/IRq1g2gFtq
1:19pm - 10 Jun 15

 

[Hoosgirl]

@AugensteinWTOP

Gil Harrington says she won't be able to hold a wedding for Morgan, or have grandchildren, here to support "a brave woman" #JesseMatthew
1:07pm - 10 Jun 15

@jdeanseal

"We're 1/3 of the way there" mother of #MorganHarrington on #JesseMatthew guilty convictions.
12:54pm - 10 Jun 15

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Looks like 48 Hours will be doing a show on JM?

@nadine_maeser

@AugensteinWTOP being interviewed about #JesseMatthew trial by @48hours A lot of hard work went into this week. pic.twitter.com/00oRaBW7Ra
7:02pm - 10 Jun 15

Not surprising. They definitely have enough for an episode and the entire saga is compelling.

 

[FindHG]

@PeggyTV

Ray Morrogh:talked to victim who said she was really moved that so many people worked so hard to bring justice @wusa9 pic.twitter.com/IRq1g2gFtq
1:19pm - 10 Jun 15

Hoosgirl

Thank you ever so very much. Would have been lost without you trying to keep up with this head spinning outcome with this uniquely rich press coverage. Who could have imagined this? As Gil Harrington states, radiant Morgan's and Hannah Graham's days in court are yet to come. May it continue to be justice at its best for them and all their families and all those who wait for answers. May they all continue to persevere. One brave woman, whose existence puts me in awe, leaves me just gasping in gratitude.

 

[jojo87]

He should have pleaded guilty from the start and not put his victim through this ordeal. Awful man I hope they throw away the key.

 

[themom]

He should have pleaded guilty from the start and not put his victim through this ordeal. Awful man I hope they throw away the key.

I was oddly more angry w the Defense for trying to discredit the victims testimony and trying to discount the DNA evidence.

I understand wanting to give everyone -including those accused - with a fair trial, but when you are blatantly trying to hide factual data that shows your client raped and attempted murder, something is wrong with that.

 

[FindHG]

By entering the Alford Plea, he maintains a claim of innocence (ughhhhh), but agrees the evidence proves he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. So he pleads guilty, but does not have to specifically admit to the guilt itself. He must somehow believe that a guilty plea was in his best interest. Typically defendants plead guilty for lesser or more ease at sentencing. But one of the main mitigating factors at sentencing is showing remorse or accepting responsibility for the crimes (in some jurisdictions it's treated in the negative: it's an aggravating factor at sentencing if a defendant doesn't show remorse or accept responsibility). So by entering an Alford plea, a defendant can make his sentencing worse in the end. The procedural consequences are the same as for a regular guilty plea (including rights to appeal).

The only logical justification I see is that the DNA evidence was so damning to him that a guilty plea was the only thing that made sense. And maybe the only way his attorneys could get him to enter a guilty plea was if he could maintain his innocence (again...ughhhh). Even though in my opinion that will hurt him at sentencing, a jury still may have been harsher because they are more sensitive to a victim's words and experiences than a Judge, who has been trained to be a neutral fact finder. The judge always has the ultimate sentencing decision, but in a jury trial the jury can set the ceiling or cap on a sentence. A lot of times in the summer too juries will have several teachers on them. Since teachers are more often females, the logic may have been that a jury of females will be even more sympathetic to the victim here (but let's be honest, who wouldn't?).

Here's an interesting law review article I found on Alford Pleas, it happens to mention VA's attempt to soften the blow of the Alford contradiction at sentencing (maintaining innocence versus showing remorse).
Plea Best Not Taken: Why Criminal Defendants Should Avoid the Alford Plea



And a :tyou: to klily for putting the sentencing estimate up earlier today!

:goodpost:

SBHack, thank you for this, very helpful, and to Klily.

SBHack created a sentencing estimate for us; she is super busy today so I'm posting for her. We can all thank her when she gets back online, hopefully this evening. In summary: he will face 45 years to 3 life sentences.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iWbQzbnU5B-H7lIdUjmo2xGrJaNhwLPb7SA--Cgk-W0/edit?usp=sharing

 

[FindHG]

I was oddly more angry w the Defense for trying to discredit the victims testimony and trying to discount the DNA evidence.

I understand wanting to give everyone -including those accused - with a fair trial, but when you are blatantly trying to hide factual data that shows your client raped and attempted murder, something is wrong with that.

I found it interesting that when DA Morrogh commented about the brave witness being brought in to court when she first arrived. He seemed to not approve of the tactic, so you may be right about something being wrong with it. I also found it interesting that DA Morrogh expressed his fear of doing everything to avoid a mistrial, that has always been a potential tactic by his defense it seems to me, about the only one left to him, given what the evidence may turn out to be, in the upcoming cases. The story below is more recent, and links to the DA Morrogh's full statement post trial.

Jesse Matthew enters Alford Plea in Fairfax case
Peggy Fox and Surae Chinn, WUSA ,
7:54 pm edt June 10, '15 report on all aspects,

He should have pleaded guilty from the start and not put his victim through this ordeal. Awful man I hope they throw away the key.

He should, but then he is a predator who still thinks like one.

 

[JDauxa]

I believe I heard on a interview today that should JM have been found guilty by a jury of his peers in the fairfax case, that information would then be admissible in the Hannah Graham case. Whereas by taking the Alford plea the Fairfax case can not be brought up in the HG case. If this is true do you think the strategy was to take an Alford plea to keep the Fairfax case out of the equation since he is facing death in the HG case? Just wondering


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk