[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the 10-year sentence was the judge's version of a "make right" for the jury's inability to convict on the rape charge.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you have any actual information on this other charge? I don't see anything in the article and haven't heard anything on CNN (though that certainly doesn't mean that it didn't happen).

It's irrelevant anyways though. Courts should be making decisions as they rightfully apply to the case in front of them. Not screwing things up and then further undermining their credibility by supposedly making up for it later. This isn't the NBA. You don't do makeup calls and then say the legal system is working fine.

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless, no one has mentioned in this thread yet that his release has been ordered and he'll end up having served about 2 years for all of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

No one's mentioned it because it's the headline and the first sentence of the article that I linked at the beginning of my OP. No one was trying to hide this obvious part of the story. The point is that a court in the United States of America made this TEN YEAR ruling, and then it took over two years of incarceration to appeal.

The fact that you think two+ years (and the scare that it could have been as much as 10) in prison for something that hardly deserves a sorry is an OK result is pretty amazing. I wonder if you'd feel the same way if you were accused of something petty that rested 2 years of your free life in a state judge's hands.