Getting away with murder

[wallnutz14]

This is absolute BS. I love our judicial system.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2993329

[JOHN BLUEBLOOD]

This is absolute BS. I love our judicial system.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2993329

So the murdering, rich-boy, creep is out. God I feel for Trent's family.

[TrueblueCATfan]

A absolute JOKE..............he belongs behind bars..............I feel for Trents familys

[Gunsmoke]

This is a travesty but nothing much surprises me anymore.:thumbdn:

[BamaCat86]

Unbelievable!

[Blue4ever]

To paraphrase Charlie Daniels "rich man gets manslaughter a poor man gets the chair".

Who says money can't buy everything. Pathetic. :tongue3::thumbdn::mad:

[bluescat]

I'd say his Karma will get him in the end.
Just feel really awful for Trent's family.
What a total bunch of horse manure. I guess his daddy being the wealthy land baron that owns and brokers leases on a lot of offices and buildings utilized by state government didn't help at all, right?

[Brian McCat]

I'd say his Karma will get him in the end.


Justice was not served, but consider this; he will never have any kind of respectable name to follow him wherever he chooses to go. The name of Trent DiGuiro will follow him no matter what.

He´s well into his 30s now, and has neither finished a degree, nor has he been able to establish himself in the work force. Daddy may give him a cushy job, but at great detriment to his father´s business.

IMO, he has a pretty tough row ahead of him.

[UK78ALUM]

I actually called into WVLK yesterday afternoon and talked with Ray Larson. So, before anyone objects to my comments, yes I said it to him personally before I ever posted them here.

Justice had nothing to lose by taking this to trial again. Nothing. If he was acquited, then he would have walked. By taking the deal he took, he still walked. So, what was the difference?

The difference is that Ray gets to put a "W" on his own scorecard, which would not have happened with an acquital. So, justice suffers for Ray's sake.

Now his story is that he didn't want to subject the witness to the stress of a trial all over again. Right. That sound you hear is the ruffle of the BS flags being thrown.

If there is any good news out of all of this it's that the victim's family now may have a better chance at a wrongful death civil suit, a la OJ Simpson.

[poodoo]

I actually called into WVLK yesterday afternoon and talked with Ray Larson. So, before anyone objects to my comments, yes I said it to him personally before I ever posted them here.

Justice had nothing to lose by taking this to trial again. Nothing. If he was acquited, then he would have walked. By taking the deal he took, he still walked. So, what was the difference?

The difference is that Ray gets to put a "W" on his own scorecard, which would not have happened with an acquital. So, justice suffers for Ray's sake.

Now his story is that he didn't want to subject the witness to the stress of a trial all over again. Right. That sound you hear is the ruffle of the BS flags being thrown.

If there is any good news out of all of this it's that the victim's family now may have a better chance at a wrongful death civil suit, a la OJ Simpson.

I felt sick for Trent's parents when it happened and still feel sick for them. At least Trent's father's comment made me feel a little better. Trent's father was at least thankful to hear Ragland ADMIT to murder. That happening seemed to help him and his wife at least a bit, based on what Mr. DiGuiro said in his classy response. Bless their hearts both then and now. :icon_sad:

[devil duckie]

Mr. Wallace I Couldnt Agree With You More. This Guy Is From Our Home Town And It Just Goes To Show That No Matter What The Situation Is Money Will Always Triumph. What A Joke Our Judicial System Is. One Bad Thing About This Is The He Is Dating A Promanant Judge In Frankforts Daughter, That Cant Look Good Either

[TrueblueCATfan]

We got into a discussion about this at lunch today...........He might be clear and free..but He better be looking over his shoulder every where he goes

[The Old School JPS]

A civil suit will now succeed easily, as Dave points out. Also the guy is a convicted felon; he cannot legally possess a firearm again anywhere in the United States. And if he commits another felony his sentence can be doubled. And the DiGuiros get some form of closure. It is disappointing that Ragland did not serve a longer sentence for shooting DiGuiro. Ray Larson and the people in his office would not have done this if they felt they were more likely than not to win at trial this time. Weighed against the strong likelihood of a retrial going south, I think the decision to settle this case as it was was wise. The fact that Trent's parents are supportive - disappointed, but supportive - speaks volumes about the situation.

The entire case would have hinged on the testimony of a witness who was in hiding, difficult if not impossible to find, difficult if not impossible to return to whatever hidden life she has had to rebuild, and who would've been humiliated - again, but worse this time - because criminal defense attorneys generally get to do that to witnesses. In the last trial every last embarrassing and private detail about her sex life or anything else one generally wishes to be private was aired for the whole world to hear, right in her face in front of reporters and other strangers. While a lot of people are upset that she would not go through that again, it is fair for us to also recognize that she did, in fact, step up and report all this to authorities, wear a wire for them, and cooperate and go through that hell on the stand once already. If not for that, Shane Ragland would still to this day not even be a suspect, people would not know who he is or how dangerous he is, the DiGuiro family would still wonder every night what happened to their son and why . . . small solace in some senses but at least we do have that - they know what happened and have some closure and Ragland is a known and convicted killer who can get put back in prison if he ever has another gun again.

If they thought they would win, they would have pressed forward to trial. I can't blame them for salvaging what they could. It is not satisfying, but sometimes that's the hand that is dealt. They played their cards as best they could IMO.

[poodoo]

You make some excellent points, JPS. Also, I expressed sympathy for the DiGuiros, sympathy that began the day of their son's murder. I also "so feel" for that young lady who went through so much by trying "to do the right thing." :icon_sad:

[wallnutz14]

I feel pretty bad for Ragland's parents as well. I know they bought his way out of trouble here (which I think a lot of people would do in this situation if they had the $). They have to live with the fact that not only is their oldest son a murderer, but their younger son shot himself at age 16. This happened right around the time DiGuro died and I wonder if Shane confessed to him and he couldn't handle knowing but didn't want to turn his brother in...

[Will Lavender]

I feel pretty bad for Ragland's parents as well. I know they bought his way out of trouble here (which I think a lot of people would do in this situation if they had the $). They have to live with the fact that not only is their oldest son a murderer, but their younger son shot himself at age 16. This happened right around the time DiGuro died and I wonder if Shane confessed to him and he couldn't handle knowing but didn't want to turn his brother in...

I didn't know that.

That's awful. :icon_cry:

[largebluej]

. . . . .
Justice had nothing to lose by taking this to trial again. Nothing. If he was acquited, then he would have walked. By taking the deal he took, he still walked. So, what was the difference?

The difference is that Ray gets to put a "W" on his own scorecard, which would not have happened with an acquital. So, justice suffers for Ray's sake ..............

That's just not true. . .. . .there was a lot to lose by going to trial again. . . . .at least they got him under oath admitting to the killing. . . .as later posters pointed out, at least this way this crime is officially tied to him for the rest of his life.. . . . .that is much better than him being acquitted at the 2nd trial. . . .I think it sucks just like seemingly everyone else, but I believe it was the best that could be done under the circumstances. . .

[UK78ALUM]

That's just not true. . .. . .there was a lot to lose by going to trial again. . . . .at least they got him under oath admitting to the killing. . . .as later posters pointed out, at least this way this crime is officially tied to him for the rest of his life.. . . . .that is much better than him being acquitted at the 2nd trial. . . .I think it sucks just like seemingly everyone else, but I believe it was the best that could be done under the circumstances. . .

Sorry, I just don't think any of your scenario applies here. Just to clarify - if we were talking about average Joe Citizen, I would completely agree with you. However, for this guy, I completely disagree with your scenario. Having a criminal record is not going to slow down his spending of Daddy's millions in the slightest. The only thing that will change is that he will do it somewhere else where he is not so notorious.

His record now prevents him from entering the military, getting a concealed carry permit, getting a job with a reputable company, voting, etc. - none of which are missed in the slightest when you're independently wealthy.

On the other hand, sharing a cell with Tyrone for the rest of your life :eek: is somewhat different, wouldn't you agree?

[The Old School JPS]

Ragland's guilty plea makes a civil judgment against him almost a certainty. Any of daddy's money or assets that enters his hands can probably be taken away by the DiGuiro family - similar to how the Goldman family has taken away everything from O.J. Simpson including the rights to his likeness, the book he wrote, etc.

It doesn't fix everything, but it'll keep Ragland from making his father's wealth his own.

[UK78ALUM]

Ragland's guilty plea makes a civil judgment against him almost a certainty. Any of daddy's money or assets that enters his hands can probably be taken away by the DiGuiro family - similar to how the Goldman family has taken away everything from O.J. Simpson including the rights to his likeness, the book he wrote, etc.

It doesn't fix everything, but it'll keep Ragland from making his father's wealth his own.

Jason, excellent point, thanks!

And I don't foresee a book deal either....."If I Did It, Well Actually I Did Do It, But I Won't Really Admit It" :thumbdn:

[johnkyblue]

His time served was about 4 years in jail and another 3 on home arrest I think. How does that compare to a normal Murder 1 sentence?

I heard you Dave, from what you said I'm amazed you were polite as you were.

I am glad to hear he is moving out of here, I would have hated to hear he was somewhere near me.

[Seymour]

..................he won a new trial after the state Supreme Court agreed that the prosecutor had made an inappropriate comment during trial and used inadmissible evidence concerning a bullet.


This is the thing that gets under my skin. The State Supreme Court essentially gave him his freedom, not because he was innocent, but because they felt that some piece of evidence and some comment made during the trial was improper.

If you are ever on jury duty, just remember the court is not allowing you to see all the evidence, just the selected parts that the lawyers and judges decided that you should be allowed to see. What we should be demanding, is a full disclosure of all the evidence even though it may have not been collected in some prescribed method. Present all the evidence, if he is guilty, convict him. If the prosecutors collected evidence in an illegal manner, indict and try them for breaking the law.

None of these Micky Mouse rulings have anything to do with justice.

[FeralKat]

This may be totally off-base, but not being from the area....is the Shannon Ragland that just released the book "The Thin Thirty" about UK football any relation to the Shane Ragland family? The similarity of their names and the UK football connection (loosely) had me wondering....anyone know?

[The Old School JPS]

His time served was about 4 years in jail and another 3 on home arrest I think. How does that compare to a normal Murder 1 sentence?

I heard you Dave, from what you said I'm amazed you were polite as you were.

I am glad to hear he is moving out of here, I would have hated to hear he was somewhere near me.

Hard to say. There is no Murder 1 or 2 in Kentucky. And, keep in mind that you basically get 15% of your sentence automatically knocked off for good time; you have to 'earn' it back by doing bad things in prison. And, also keep in mind that the Kentucky Parole Board hands out free passes like they are candy; the Parole Board, unfortunately, seems to function as if their role is to save Corrections money by putting as many criminals back on the street as quickly as possible. The criminal homicide offenses are:

Reckless Homicide: recklessly causing someone's death - penalty is 1 to 5 years, probation eligible, shock probation eligible, parole eligibility after serving 20% of the sentence - you could potentially not serve a single day behind bars, or up to 4.25 years (due to time off for good behavior)

Manslaughter 2nd Degree: wantonly (being aware of, and consciously disregarding, a substantial and unjustifiable risk; a gross deviation from a reasonable person's standard of conduct) causing someone's death - sentence is 5 to 10 years, probation eligible, shock probation eligible after serving 30-180 days, parole eligibility after serving 20% of the sentence - you could serve 0 days to 8.5 years (time off for good behavior)

Manslaughter 1st Degree: intending to cause serious physical injury (disfigurement, injury to an organ, etc.) and causing death instead, or killing under extreme emotional disturbance (you find your wife in bed with someone else, say) - sentence is 10 to 20 years, not eligible for probation or shock probation, not eligible for parole until 85% of sentence is served. For this a defendant would serve 8.5 to 17 years generally.

Murder: intentionally killing someone, or wantonly engaging in conduct that creates a grave risk of death to another person and thereby causing someone's death - capital offense if aggravators apply; sentence is 20 to 50 years or life (or, potentially, death if aggravators are found and the jury gives that sentence); you get to see the Parole Board after serving 85% of the sentence, and for a life sentence, after 25 years (I think that's right but should double-check) unless given the specific sentence of life without parole by the jury.

So, in Kentucky, for a murder conviction (not a lesser offense - generally that a jury finds beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intended to kill someone, and did so) someone is usually incarcerated for at least 17 years - if convicted of murder and not a lesser offense. For homicide of all types, anywhere from 0 days to the rest of their life.

I don't have any statistics or averages, though. Sorry. I can tell you that it was not that long ago that the 85% rule for parole eligibility was enacted; before that it was 50% and before that 25% so you had a lot of killers getting out a lot earlier back then.

[bret1555]

..................he won a new trial after the state Supreme Court agreed that the prosecutor had made an inappropriate comment during trial and used inadmissible evidence concerning a bullet.


This is the thing that gets under my skin. The State Supreme Court essentially gave him his freedom, not because he was innocent, but because they felt that some piece of evidence and some comment made during the trial was improper.

If you are ever on jury duty, just remember the court is not allowing you to see all the evidence, just the selected parts that the lawyers and judges decided that you should be allowed to see. What we should be demanding, is a full disclosure of all the evidence even though it may have not been collected in some prescribed method. Present all the evidence, if he is guilty, convict him. If the prosecutors collected evidence in an illegal manner, indict and try them for breaking the law.

None of these Micky Mouse rulings have anything to do with justice.

All this is a moot discussion if the Commonwealth's Attorney does his job in the first place. . . You don't use questionable evidence. Period. While it may have not been a palatable ruling, the court was privy to much more information than any of us were. It sucks in this case, but not everyone who is arrested is necessarily guilty.

[The Old School JPS]

All this is a moot discussion if the Commonwealth's Attorney does his job in the first place. . . You don't use questionable evidence. Period. While it may have not been a palatable ruling, the court was privy to much more information than any of us were. It sucks in this case, but not everyone who is arrested is necessarily guilty.

An FBI analyst explains a ballistics test used by the FBI and testifies to it under oath, and you think someone is supposed to have the foresight to know that the method would later be scientifically discredited or that the analyst would later be found to have been derelict in her work? Sorry to break it to you but the prosecutor on that case was human just like the rest of us.

Not everyone arrested is necessarily guilty, but Shane Ragland was. He said so under oath a few days ago.

[boomdaddy]

Where's Charles Bronson, when you need him? A rich mans justice wouldn't be able to buy his way out of justice handed out by a family member of a victim.

[bret1555]

An FBI analyst explains a ballistics test used by the FBI and testifies to it under oath, and you think someone is supposed to have the foresight to know that the method would later be scientifically discredited or that the analyst would later be found to have been derelict in her work? Sorry to break it to you but the prosecutor on that case was human just like the rest of us.

Not everyone arrested is necessarily guilty, but Shane Ragland was. He said so under oath a few days ago.

I agree that Shane Ragland was probably guilty, although a plea to manslaughter in order to avoid further prison time is not necessarily an admission of guilt. The Commonwealth's Attorney apparently still didn't have enough good evidence on Ragland to close on a murder conviction, otherwise he wouldn't have allowed the plea deal. Again, not saying he was innocent, and I definitely don't understand how someone can commit manslaughter with a high-powered rifle, but it is not as simple a case as many would make it out to be. The fact remains, if the authorities do their jobs, Ragland is still in prison.

I don't understand why cases in which rich defendents get off draw so much more ire than the cases in which poor defendents are convicted with questionable evidence.

[boomdaddy]

I agree that Shane Ragland was probably guilty, although a plea to manslaughter in order to avoid further prison time is not necessarily an admission of guilt. The Commonwealth's Attorney apparently still didn't have enough good evidence on Ragland to close on a murder conviction, otherwise he wouldn't have allowed the plea deal. Again, not saying he was innocent, and I definitely don't understand how someone can commit manslaughter with a high-powered rifle, but it is not as simple a case as many would make it out to be. The fact remains, if the authorities do their jobs, Ragland is still in prison.

I don't understand why cases in which rich defendents get off draw so much more ire than the cases in which poor defendents are convicted with questionable evidence.


If you were an innocent poor man in prison for a trumped up rape charge or the family member of a murder victim watching a rich man beat the justice system, you would understand the outrage. Wealth has its privilidges. It is a sad fact, in any country, that being poor is a crime and being wealthy improves your chances of getting away with murder.

[lotsaloans]

One Bad Thing About This Is The He Is Dating A Promanant Judge In Frankforts Daughter, That Cant Look Good Either



Your information is incorrect. It used to be true, but not for the last two years or so. He was dating L long before he was arrested. You have to remember that before his arrest Shane was popular and from a politically connected family. It wasn't a stretch at all for him to be dating a judge's daughter. L is a fine person, and they remain friends.

[lotsaloans]

I feel pretty bad for Ragland's parents as well. I know they bought his way out of trouble here (which I think a lot of people would do in this situation if they had the $). They have to live with the fact that not only is their oldest son a murderer, but their younger son shot himself at age 16. This happened right around the time DiGuro died and I wonder if Shane confessed to him and he couldn't handle knowing but didn't want to turn his brother in...



Mark's death had absolutely nothing to do with Shane. Your speculation is 180 degrees off track here.

[bret1555]

If you were an innocent poor man in prison for a trumped up rape charge or the family member of a murder victim watching a rich man beat the justice system, you would understand the outrage. Wealth has its privilidges. It is a sad fact, in any country, that being poor is a crime and being wealthy improves your chances of getting away with murder.

I understand the outrage. . . What I said is that I don't understand why it never swings the other way.

[wallnutz14]

Mark's death had absolutely nothing to do with Shane. Your speculation is 180 degrees off track here.

Even so, it would still suck to lose one son at age 16, and then have another son murder someone. I don't know if I could handle that as a parent.

[wallnutz14]

Your information is incorrect. It used to be true, but not for the last two years or so. He was dating L long before he was arrested. You have to remember that before his arrest Shane was popular and from a politically connected family. It wasn't a stretch at all for him to be dating a judge's daughter. L is a fine person, and they remain friends.

If L is such a fine person you'd think she would chose her friends a little more wisely. Associating with this guy could prove to ruin anyone's reputation.

[Blue4ever]

I agree that Shane Ragland was probably guilty, although a plea to manslaughter in order to avoid further prison time is not necessarily an admission of guilt. The Commonwealth's Attorney apparently still didn't have enough good evidence on Ragland to close on a murder conviction, otherwise he wouldn't have allowed the plea deal. Again, not saying he was innocent, and I definitely don't understand how someone can commit manslaughter with a high-powered rifle, but it is not as simple a case as many would make it out to be. The fact remains, if the authorities do their jobs, Ragland is still in prison.

I don't understand why cases in which rich defendents get off draw so much more ire than the cases in which poor defendents are convicted with questionable evidence.

What? What? He was asked twice in court if he killed Trent and twice said yes. Ragland is a sociopath and in his mind probably believes he's innocent or at least believes in his own twisted mind that the killing was justified. Larson dropped the case because the main witness was afraid of Ragland and didn't want to testify a second time.

I hope there's a special spot in hell for punks like Ragland and OJ.

[bleedblue79]

Yes he did plead guilty to manslaughter in court and that is on record for the rest of his miserable life. I saw his attorney giving an interview after the hearing and he said that Ragland is really innocent but that anytime you have the opportunity to plead a client out of a murder charge with time served you have to take it because you never know what will happen at trial and many an innocent man has been convicted. This is paraphrased but that was the gist of his statement to the press.

The fact that the wheels of justice can be greased with money is certainly not a new concept. It has been so since the beginning of organized society. History is full of stories of people with means walking away from the crimes they committed.

This person took a high powered rifle and laid in the weeds across the street and waited for Trent to appear. If ever a murder was pre-meditated this one was. He may not pay for this crime by being incarcerated, but he will surely pay. He will pay in many small and large ways for the rest of his life. You just can't run away from something like that. He will pay.

[lotsaloans]

I hope there's a special spot in hell for punks like Ragland and OJ.



I believe that the blood of Jesus Christ has the power to remove our sins as far as the east is from the west. I pray that the blood of Jesus saves each and every one of us who turn from our wicked ways.

[lotsaloans]

If L is such a fine person you'd think she would chose her friends a little more wisely. Associating with this guy could prove to ruin anyone's reputation.



First of all, my understanding is that L has had very limited contact with Shane over the last couple of years, taking the form of the occasional phone call. Next, you are talking about a lifelong friendship. To me, a friend is someone who is willing to be there for you through thick and thin. I have had my own share of ups and downs in life. I have had people in my life who are acquaintances, and I've had people in my life who are friends. I'm blessed enough to be able to discern the difference. If you are a true friend to somebody you don't run out on them when they need you.

[CarterHall]

I'd take my money out now.

[wallnutz14]

First of all, my understanding is that L has had very limited contact with Shane over the last couple of years, taking the form of the occasional phone call. Next, you are talking about a lifelong friendship. To me, a friend is someone who is willing to be there for you through thick and thin. I have had my own share of ups and downs in life. I have had people in my life who are acquaintances, and I've had people in my life who are friends. I'm blessed enough to be able to discern the difference. If you are a true friend to somebody you don't run out on them when they need you.

Unless you're afraid they might kill you...

[katfever]

This was a tragic case- it is sickening how it turned out. But let there be no doubt, the criminal justice system in the United States is by far the best in the world. For there is no mention of the millions of cases that are handled properly- only the screwups make the headlines.