Jimmy Stewart in trouble with the law

[JP37R]

he has some things going for him.

1: No criminal history
2: Not a threat to society
3: Money to buy good lawyers
4: A large fanbase that could very well fill the Jury box, and he's well liked in his community.
5: Being in prison would be detrimental to his livelyhood.
6: It could be demonstrated that being in prison could influence him to walk the wrong path in life instead of continuing on with a harsh lesson learned.

[DJD]

His fame could equally work against him, they could want to make an "example" out of him to discourage others from impersonating officers.

Will he be at Dallas? I haven't heard anything.

[MXJProductions]

I don't really think it will go that far, as his good lawyers will most likely come to some agreement, community service hours, a fine or something small, if it did get that far, then everything except #4 is true. He is liked in his community, however when filing the jury, they tend to go threw an extensive process to make sure not one member would be bios to the trial....

It will be a slap on the wrist, at least I would imagine.. Fleeding the scene even with off duty officers can still be a no-no, and can looked at as a threat to society. ( In a judges eye maybe )... I'm waitting to see what sorta statement he giv es....

And also how funny ( doubtful ) if erin bates asked him about it on pdium after a win..... Lol

------ and as djd just mentioned sometimes fame can be a bad thing, esp if the judge has had previous cases with teens or community of mx riders, so to speak...

[Voutare]

he has some things going for him.

1: No criminal history
2: Not a threat to society
3: Money to buy good lawyers
4: A large fanbase that could very well fill the Jury box, and he's well liked in his community.
5: Being in prison would be detrimental to his livelyhood.
6: It could be demonstrated that being in prison could influence him to walk the wrong path in life instead of continuing on with a harsh lesson learned.

Number 2 doesn't matter. It's not about if your a threat, it's about the crime you commit. And a good defense attorney would be able to argue he is. Take a look at JT or the dude from Phoenix last year.
Number 4 doesn't work, because again any good attorney would know what a conflict of interest is.
Number 5 is retarded, because going to prison is detrimental to everyone. It's not about your feeling or your monetary worth, it's about paying your debt to society.

[Phathry25]

[wheels1758]

it's about paying your debt to society.

I'm part of this society and I'd gladly let him stay out of prison if I could pocket said "debt"

Any one else read this yet? Pretty good if you ask me

http://www.racerxonline.com/2011/03/30/ ... ge-stories

[Voutare]

Just read it literally 10 seconds ago. And Phathry, that is the greatest picture I have ever seen.

How epic would it be if Stewart comes out for Dallas with flashing lights on his handlebars and a orange jumpsuit for opening ceremonies? I would definitely do that. Haha

[Phathry25]

VitalMX is a great place to surf in these times.

[rideblue56]

thats funny as shit. lol. wouldve been better if the lights alternated though

[JP37R]

Number 2 doesn't matter. It's not about if your a threat, it's about the crime you commit. And a good defense attorney would be able to argue he is. Take a look at JT or the dude from Phoenix last year.
Number 4 doesn't work, because again any good attorney would know what a conflict of interest is.
Number 5 is retarded, because going to prison is detrimental to everyone. It's not about your feeling or your monetary worth, it's about paying your debt to society.

#2 That actually wasnt about if he is guilty or not, it's about sentencing, I should have stated that. If he has to serve time, he may be able to spend a larger amount of it on parole rather than inside the prison walls if it is sufficiently believed that he poses no threat to society, although that could change depending on his disciplinary record while incarcerated. Also his crime, while still a crime and punishable, caused no real harm to anyone (although it could have been entirely different if JS was a gun-toting trigger happy thug, but this isn't about what could have happened)
#4 you have a point, but still it will be difficult to fill a Jury box that isn't biased.
#5 It's not retarded, you just think it is. You better believe the impact on his life will be argued, or at least talked about if there is any type of plea bargain. I believe in paying a debt to society, but that doesnt mean we should lock him up and throw away the keys. There better ways he can repay his debt to society. The guys I don't want living in freedom are the murderers, rapist's, chomo's and thieves. James may have done something really dumb, but I wouldnt even bat an eye if he wanted to move in next door and I doubt you could find many who would have an issue with a guy like James as their neighbor. Unless the judge is a complete Communist, he won't simply assign the maximum punishment and call it a day.

Anyway, all the above is IF he is actually arraigned on the charges he is accused of. For all we know his lawyer will walk into the arraignment, sweet talk the judge, get a nice plea bargain with a reduction to a misdemeanor charge like disturbing the peace, set up some time for community service and call it good.

[MXJProductions]

Umm not sure If you are aware, but stewart is a resident of polk county , not orange county, which is a rather larger county, I would bet about 50-75 percent of them has no clue about who he is, nor keep up to date with sx/mx....

Regardless
HE IS INNOCENT, THE GLOVE DIDN'T FIT.......

[jbob23]

VitalMX is a great place to surf in these times.

http://makeagif.com/media/3-29-2011/g40cMi.gif

holy shit i'm not sure that this photo can be beaten! haha that is so perfect!

[MXJProductions]

Edit sorry for dp- orange cty is where he will or would attend court not polk so is his popularity wouldn't be as known....

According to my wifes basic law book from when she was a sheriffs deputy in sumter county it reads, 1 year max sentence if convicted, which I don't see him getting.

Phathry loving the pics.....

[Voutare]

Number 2 doesn't matter. It's not about if your a threat, it's about the crime you commit. And a good defense attorney would be able to argue he is. Take a look at JT or the dude from Phoenix last year.
Number 4 doesn't work, because again any good attorney would know what a conflict of interest is.
Number 5 is retarded, because going to prison is detrimental to everyone. It's not about your feeling or your monetary worth, it's about paying your debt to society.

#2 That actually wasnt about if he is guilty or not, it's about sentencing, I should have stated that. If he has to serve time, he may be able to spend a larger amount of it on parole rather than inside the prison walls if it is sufficiently believed that he poses no threat to society, although that could change depending on his disciplinary record while incarcerated. Also his crime, while still a crime and punishable, caused no real harm to anyone (although it could have been entirely different if JS was a gun-toting trigger happy thug, but this isn't about what could have happened)
#4 you have a point, but still it will be difficult to fill a Jury box that isn't biased.
#5 It's not retarded, you just think it is. You better believe the impact on his life will be argued, or at least talked about if there is any type of plea bargain. I believe in paying a debt to society, but that doesnt mean we should lock him up and throw away the keys. There better ways he can repay his debt to society. The guys I don't want living in freedom are the murderers, rapist's, chomo's and thieves. James may have done something really dumb, but I wouldnt even bat an eye if he wanted to move in next door and I doubt you could find many who would have an issue with a guy like James as their neighbor. Unless the judge is a complete Communist, he won't simply assign the maximum punishment and call it a day.

Anyway, all the above is IF he is actually arraigned on the charges he is accused of. For all we know his lawyer will walk into the arraignment, sweet talk the judge, get a nice plea bargain with a reduction to a misdemeanor charge like disturbing the peace, set up some time for community service and call it good.

It's not about being a threat to society. Obviously Stewart isn't. What I am saying is that it won't even be brought up in court because the point is irrelevant. What I am saying, is that your threat to society can only be dependent on the crime(s) you commit. So if you rape someone, you will obviously be considered one. In his case, the crime he was charged with was non-violent. So, that being said, saying he isn't a threat to society has no bearing on his sentence given the fact that it's a non-violent crime in the first place.

The jury is a crap shoot really. Of course both sides would try to get bias in their favor, but there are two simple questions they will ask: Do you know who James Stewart is? and Are you a fan of Motocross? If you answer yes to either of those questions, you will be removed. If you answer No, chances are you really won't give a fuck. Also I do not think anyone would risk a perjury trial for that.

It's pretty obvious he won't serve jail time here. He already got it decreased to a misdemeanor offense, and given that it is a 1st offense, the most he would get is a decent fine and probation. Rado is the one that got charged with the felony (tampering with evidence).

I'm kind of liking how there's people around here that can actually debate law though. Thanks.


And off the subject, but relevant, the impact on life debate is pretty useless. The sentence is meant as a punishment. A sentence is handed down by means of the crime commited. If I were to rob a bank with a toy gun, it would still be armed robbery, but you'd get less of a sentence than with a real gun. It's case-by-case, and the 'impact' on the defendants life should play no role, personally.

[KTM57]