Home Off Topic
Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:

- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)

- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans

- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum

- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.

Adam Anderson

DestinDawgDestinDawg Posts: 614 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

Adam Anderson rape charges dismissed, pleaded guilty to misdemeanor battery



  • YaleDawgYaleDawg Posts: 7,021 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    He has additional charges from unrelated incidents after his first arrest

  • YaleDawgYaleDawg Posts: 7,021 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    I don’t think he had any charges dismissed. They were downgraded to misdemeanors as part of a plea deal

  • CigarDawgCigarDawg Posts: 2,245 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    As a point of clarification, the charges are sexual battery, not just battery.

  • YaleDawgYaleDawg Posts: 7,021 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
  • YaleDawgYaleDawg Posts: 7,021 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited July 24
  • RSDawgRSDawg Posts: 1,759 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited July 25

    I would guess she had at least some degree of baseline credibility as well, i.e. her account was not readily disprovable or inconsistent. That is not to say I think he is certainly guilty by any stretch, but it presents a conundrum for the State, you just have to charge such a case and let the jury decide if need be. People can say "oh the system sucks" and what not but in such a case letting 12 of your peers decide who they believe is as fair as anything else, more fair probably. The advantage here was still to the defendant because of the State's high burden of proof, but this apparently wasn't a Jah Jarrett situation either. Her account had to have been at least plausible. Having been on both sides of these cases I'm not an ideological zealot either way, I just think the fact that both sides agreed to this deal indicates both sides appreciated the fact that there was a real and substantial risk of losing at trial.

  • HemingweyHemingwey Posts: 3,770 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    I agree with you.

    I am unsure about the admissibility of the subsequent, arguably similar, alleged conduct in other instances, but there appears to be evidence of a pattern of assaults and bad behavior. I am not a crimminal attorney; however, my initial thought is that, if I were prosecuting this case at trial, I would certainly attempt to get similar conduct evidence before the jury.

  • JimWallaceJimWallace Posts: 5,585 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    "In Fulton County, he was arrested on June 2, 2022, on charges of kidnapping, false imprisonment, battery, simple battery, theft by taking and reckless conduct. Those charges were filed by Georgia Tech police, according to documents filed by the district attorney.

    "The charges are still pending, according to the document.

    "In May 2022, he was arrested by Cobb County police on charges of DUI and simple assault. The DUI was later dismissed, but he was sentenced to almost a year on probation for the assault charge, according to documents."

    This is very bad news. Very sad. Tragic.

  • donniemdonniem Posts: 5,241 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    better 10 guilty creeps go free than one innocent saint be found guilty. I see how it is set up.

  • CigarDawgCigarDawg Posts: 2,245 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited July 25

    Thank you and our other legal pros here for your first person insights, it really helps someone like me understand the reality behind the curtain, though it's a bit disheartening at times to hear about the backroom stuff.

    My perspective on the various explanations here is that it seems the purpose of these deals is to make sure some punishment is meted out in cases where the original charges, ostensibly believed to be true when they were applied, are not air tight and the prosecutor does not want to take an "L" on an all-or-nothing situation. This might be cynical, but I don't understand why DA's would press charges and then not be willing to stand behind their prosecutors' support for them in court. As much as we all want the victims to receive some justice, or at least some sense of of it, isn't it better to let the case play out and and risk having the defendant either walk or go all the way down on the original charges based on the strength of the evidence and the deliberations of the jury? This seems more like a contract negotiation in which both sides use the other's fear of losing out than it does the application of law and due process. I guess the end result is an outcome that "S-u-c-k-s Less" for both sides than it could have for either side.

Sign In or Register to comment.