A judge might not dismiss, but could the DA decide to drop or downgrade the charges at that time?
There has to be a deal in place. I have been hard on the DA but do have to back off that some. I have heard many posts referencing corruption. That is all speculation, and this thread has had several hundred pages of that.
I do not believe there is corruption here. Corruption requires a motive and it does not have to be financial. Mike Nifong ran with a bogus prosecution to appeal to a certain constituency he wanted to court for political purposes. He was even stupid enough to admit it, at least the motivation part. Here the DA ran on a platform largely the existing DA was not doing enough on sexual crimes prosecution. Ok, good for her. But Nifong put his case on front street. Plenty of TV, press conferences and microphones. That did not happen here. Look how Illinois learned of the charges. He was under investigation, they knew he had a lawyer, he gave an interview, so they decide to press charges they exercise some professional courtesy and let his attorney know and tell him arrange to surrender so we do not have to extradite. All low key. No soapbox and the DA should actually be applauded for that.
No, I think what you have is someone who might not be the most grounded individual out there, certainly inexperienced, possible competence issues with a fair sized ego thrown in. Not necessarily good. With corruption you normally can eventually figure out where the individual is coming from. I think we have a wild card.
The best shot for an early resolution here is a deal. Insiders have hinted they expect him back. They have even intimated a deal is in the works. I am going to take them at their word. But this is no ordinary deal and it is going to take time to hash it out.
It is almost impossible to bring a state court action for a wrongful prosecution. Too much immunity and protection at the state level, deserved are not. But as all attorneys and likely some others know there is something called 1983 out there. Ask Mike Nifong and Durham County, it was a nightmare. Now Shannon's lawyer may think he has a great 1983 case and can get a gazillion dollars from Douglas County. Some have mentioned an action against the accuser. Forget that, it might be dischargeable and even if not, I doubt the accuser is Warren Buffet. You do not spend the rest of your life chasing a pittance. 1983 is the elephant in the room. Problem is, Douglas County says go ahead and try the case, get your not guilty verdict and file your 1983 case and we will see you in 5 years. Meantime there is no way they dismiss the charges. Shannon could be retired by the time that is resolved.
But you better believe Douglas County does not want a 1983 knock at the door and someone is smart enough to realize that. I think everyone is looking for an out here. This was a flawed prosecution from day one and at this point, I think the powers that be are also smart enough to realize that. Plead to sexual battery as a misdemeanor? Not workable. Zero tolerance policy plus any time you plead guilty you have to establish a factual basis for the plea on the record. So Shannon has to testify to some sexual misdemeanor. No. Or the prosecutor can establish the factual basis and so can the defense attorney but Shannon has to go on record agreeing to it.
So plead guilty to some innocuous non-sexual misdemeanor should satisfy everyone. Of course you to find a factual basis for that too. Public intox? Disorderly conduct? Where there is a will there is a way.