Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Each of the 3 submitted a motion to quash the "Endangering the welfare of a child" charge, and each was denied.I saw "DENIED" a lot though.
to me, it looks like there are still endangering the welfare of a child charges pending. Please correct me if I am wrong.Any remaining charges?
Each of the 3 submitted a motion to quash the "Endangering the welfare of a child" charge, and each was denied.
They will throw those charges out in another five years!to me, it looks like there are still endangering the welfare of a child charges pending. Please correct me if I am wrong.
to me, it looks like there are still endangering the welfare of a child charges pending. Please correct me if I am wrong.
so? Don Blankenship went to prison for 1 year on Misdemeanor conviction, sure would nt want that for CSSMisdemeanor.
What are the chances the state offers to drop the charges in exchange for a lifetime gag?Soon, they can speak.
So the victory here is on the basis of the SOL, as opposed to, for example, not being mandated reporters, which the court was able to avoid ruling on by denying as moot. The media will spin this not as vindication, but rather prevailing on a technicality.
March 20th is the scheduled date for the trial on remaining charge(s).So, where does this leave things?
Reduced now that we have a new PA AG (IMHO).What are the chances the state offers to drop the charges in exchange for a lifetime gag?
What are the chances the state offers to drop the charges in exchange for a lifetime gag?
No they don't. Please see my post above. Like all the other charges, this charge is a sham.The Max Penalty if found guilty is 5 years in jail and a $10,000 fine. If you"re C/S/S there is still much to be worried about.
Good for those 3. Witchhunt was so GD silly.
Endangerment charges in this case are felonies and there are two a piece. Not clear whether the conspiracy to endanger was allowed which the OAG wanted. I think it was. If so that's three felonies per person.
so the OAG must be trying to say that they "prevented or interfered with the making of a report of suspected child abuse."
What are the chances the state offers to drop the charges in exchange for a lifetime gag?
So are they (the OAG) saying the two cases of endangerment are 1998 and 2001?
1998 was reported, so that seems like a non-starter, but I can't imagine what the second charge would be.
2001 is a non-starter for the reasons I stated above. One question by the defense loses the case for the state.
Failure to report was dropped. ONLY charge left, is Endangered Charges and they could be problem for these guys.
Understood, I was more asking for speculation.OAG hasn't specified why the two and for what specifically. Judge denied a motion for particulars on the charges.
It's conspiracy to EWC. So that's a loser too.I think Conspiracy remains?
Soon, they can speak.
It's only a felony if there is a "course of conduct" meaning a pattern of behavior. The OAG is grasping at straws and has been all along.Misdemeanor.
And others may feel unencumbered as well.
Heh. They once again time these things on purpose.