There's a huge difference between being convicted and being plead guilty. The plea is entered before the trial begins. The conviction or acquittal are the result of the trial, which could go on for months after the plea is entered.
P.S. "How do you plead?" "I plead not guilty, your honor."
Dang this brutal expiration! It's so distractiing I keep ******** up. I misspelled the past of "plead," which should be "pled." Maybe I'm about to be weeded out. - or wed out.
Hi Avangi, I am very curiously intrigued by your comment. <<<"He shouldn't be plead guilty.">>>Why passive? I believe only the accused can plead his innocence or guilt.
Hi Goodman, your point is well taken. Actually if it were in my power, I'd scrap this thread and start over. I wasn't really the author of your quote. I erroneously corrected the verb form which was correct to begin with.
But I also have a feeling that when an attorney enters a guilty plea on behalf of his (absent) client, the client may be said to have been pled (or pleaded) guilty.
The person who is accused enters a plea before trial. If he wants, he can plead guilty. That means that he admits that he did whatever he is accused of.
If he pleads not guilty, then it's up to the prosecuter to prove his guilt. If he does this successfully, the jury will find him guily, and he will be convicted.
Sorry, Angliholic, never really answered your question.
I believe the standard of evidence is different. If the prosecution can't show enough evidence for a prima-facie case, I believe the judge may reject a guilty plea.
In many cases the jury must be convinced of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict. Those concepts are way different.