Just one more question on Debra Lafave – St. Petersburg Times

Just one more question on Debra Lafave – St. Petersburg Times.

Great column by Sue Carlton.  She asks why a judge would let a probationer off probation early, when the original plea deal called for the probationer to do the entire probation sentence.  No early termination.

I have routinely seen judges refuse to terminate probation sentences where there was a “no early termination” clause in the plea.  That means that in order to get the probation sentence to begin with (as opposed to jail), the defendant had to agree to do the whole probation.  Agreed to 5 years?  Then you’re doing 5 years.

Lafave is, as usual, an exception to every rule.  I want to know why she was permitted to terminate her probation in the face of an agreement not to, when so many clients I have seen are required to do the whole thing.  So what if you have nothing left but time (no community service left to do, no costs left to pay . . .), you have to do it.  It’s ridiculous.

I hope that the State Attorney’s Office will look closely at the Lafave situation.  Personally, I couldn’t give less of a rat’s ass about Debra Lafave.  But I am concerned that the State Attorney’s Office may look the other way on this one when holding everyone else’s feet to the fire.

We are all entitled to some answers:  State Attorney, tell us why you are not going to fight this (if you aren’t) . . . if not, then don’t object the next time anyone other than Lafave tries to get off of probation.