Great point. That could definitely also be a consideration. Given how high-profile this would be, I could also see the uncertainty of trial along with the cost of losing being higher than normal.
It is usually to mitigate risk of the trial going sideways. Juries and trials can be very unpredictable. In my mind, the question is whether the prosecutor offered the deal because it was in the best interest of the community and the Lowe’s, or of the prosecutor’s career.
I agree 100%. (2)(a)(iii) “the actor knowingly created a great risk of death to another individual other than the deceased individual and the actor” would have been another easy path to aggravated murder.
Below is the list of prior convictions that can form part of aggravated murder. So, it isn’t any prior conviction, it has to be one of the list.
I agree they had good reason to charge him with aggravated murder. I don’t like the plea deal, but I’d guess it was done because they felt there were some weakness in the case that could lead to the trial going sideways.
(ix) the actor previously committed or was convicted of:
(A) aggravated murder under this section;
(B) attempted aggravated murder under this section;
(C) murder, under Section 76-5-203;
(D) attempted murder, under Section 76-5-203; or
(E) an offense committed in another jurisdiction which if committed in this state would be a violation of a crime listed in this Subsection (2)(a)(ix);
(x) the actor was previously convicted of:
(A) aggravated assault, under Section 76-5-103;
(B) mayhem, under Section 76-5-105;
(C) kidnapping, under Section 76-5-301;
(D) child kidnapping, under Section 76-5-301.1;
(E) aggravated kidnapping, under Section 76-5-302;
(F) rape, under Section 76-5-402;
(G) rape of a child, under Section 76-5-402.1;
(H) object rape, under Section 76-5-402.2;
(I) object rape of a child, under Section 76-5-402.3;
(J) forcible sodomy, under Section 76-5-403;
(K) sodomy on a child, under Section 76-5-403.1;
(L) aggravated sexual abuse of a child, under Section 76-5-404.3;
(M) aggravated sexual assault, under Section 76-5-405;
(N) aggravated arson, under Section 76-6-103;
(O) aggravated burglary, under Section 76-6-203;
(P) aggravated robbery, under Section 76-6-302;
(Q) felony discharge of a firearm, under Section 76-10-508.1; or
(R) an offense committed in another jurisdiction which if committed in this state would be a violation of a crime listed in this Subsection (2)(a)(x);
Under the Utah code, certain prior convictions make a murder an “aggravated murder.” Because evidence of those prior convictions would be probative, the judge would absolutely allow that evidence. You can’t use evidence of prior crimes/offenses to prove likelihood that a person committed an offense, but in this instance, the evidence of prior conviction proves one of the elements of the crime and doesn’t go to the defendant’s character.
The path to “aggravated” that would have been the most likely is that “the actor, during commission of the homicide, attempted to kill one or more other individuals in addition to the deceased individual” or “the actor knowingly created a great risk of death to another individual other than the deceased individual and the actor.”
I don’t think proving the aggravation would be challenge, the prosecutor probably offered/accepted the plea deal to eliminate some risk of the trial going sideways and not getting any murder conviction.
Everybody wishes the results were different last year, and there are things we wish had played out different. Also, there are some decisions that are inexplicable (e.g., giving practice reps to Cam instead of to NJ or BB).
Regarding a transfer portal QB – (1) I assume that they looked for one; and (2) Our NLI probably doesn’t allow deep-stacking of top-notch portal QBs. Given that, I can’t say that anything there was mismanaged.
For how much we beat this dead horse of coaching decisions last year, does anybody really believe that giving NJ or BB a couple more reps in practice would have made a difference? From his body of work, NJ was never going to be a competent FBS quarterback, and BB had game-related mental processing issues. In a best-case scenario, giving BB more reps might (but I really doubt it) have led to another win.
The decision that made the biggest impact on the season was letting Rose go full contact in camp. But, I see that as a decision with no right or wrong answer.
I get that we wish the season went better, but those who are really upset about last year seem to be focusing on make-believe scenarios that read more like a disney film than real life.
Not taking anything away from Sione and Cole, but them paired together was a situation where the sum was less than the parts. (We were playing with two box safeties and no FS). Assuming that Tao can turn into a competent FS (and his ceiling appears to be ridiculously high), I expect our combined safety play to be better than last year.
That doesn’t explain why Utah’s viewership was higher that other Pac12 teams.
The bowl games aren’t meaningless, but the 23 FSU players opting out of an NY6 bowl tells you that the games don’t mean nearly what they used to.
Other than the playoffs, bowl games are now just exhibition games. Of course you want to look good and you use it to develop your upcoming players, but with the opt-outs, the result of many bowls don’t really reflect on the season.
Here is the link to his 4.74 40 run:
https://www.nfl.com/videos/tavion-thomas-runs-40-yard-dash-at-2023-combine
Rate your excitement level for Utah Men's Basketball playing in the NIT
Total Voters: 101
© Copyright 2015-2024
Website and Mobile App by Tony Korologos