Oklahoma is going backwards

Tulsa police disciplined six officers suspected of driving drunk, some weren’t criminally charged
September 29, 2025
Most officers suspected of driving under the influence received suspensions ranging from three to 16 days, records the Tulsa police union tried to keep secret show.

Tulsa police disciplined six officers suspected of driving drunk, some weren’t criminally charged - The Frontier https://share.google/RkItPF1i3hHMZlCPF
 
Don’t believe me that Oklahomans are going to be hurt by the Republican healthcare cuts? Then take it from Oklahoma’s Republican Insurance Commissioner...

“Unfortunately, we believe that out of those 300,000 plus folks [currently insured through ACA], there’s going to be maybe 100,000 people that are going to drop off and no longer have insurance because of those increases."
 
Don’t believe me that Oklahomans are going to be hurt by the Republican healthcare cuts? Then take it from Oklahoma’s Republican Insurance Commissioner...

“Unfortunately, we believe that out of those 300,000 plus folks [currently insured through ACA], there’s going to be maybe 100,000 people that are going to drop off and no longer have insurance because of those increases."
Those people will simply have to live without health insurance as I did when I was in my 20s and hope for the best. I figured I wouldn't get severely sick and was right. I also risked I wouldn't get hurt in a bicycle wreck while going to and from work during the first years to eventually earn enough money to buy my first car. No wreck happened.
 
I'll tell you that, as much as I hate it, this is not unusual in YO cases.

It's not really a case of Oklahoma "going backwards" as it's been the case for quite some time.
Is it unusual to sentence him as an adult and then reverse it to a YO case?
 
I'll tell you that, as much as I hate it, this is not unusual in YO cases.

It's not really a case of Oklahoma "going backwards" as it's been the case for quite some time.
 
Both parents work for OSU Athletics.
Screenshot_20251014_110356_Facebook.jpg
 
Is it unusual to sentence him as an adult and then reverse it to a YO case?
That's not what happened in this case.

YO cases are very complicated.

Someone 17 when they commit 1st Degree Murder HAS to be charged as an adult.

Someone 17 when they commit some (most) of the crimes for which this person was convicted HAVE to be filed as YO cases.

Someone 17 when they commit first degree rape or attempted first degree rape can be filed as a YO or an adult at the sole discretion of the DA.

Once a case is filed as a Youthful Offender case, the Defendant can file a Motion to Certify as a Juvenile. The State can file a Motion to change a YO case into an adult case. That procedure is very complicated in when you can do it and what you have to show to win it. If the Youthful Offender pleads guilty as a YO, the State can't then try to bump it up to adult punishment.

If the Defendant is found guilty as a YO, the best way to explain it is that the offender gets an "adult sentence", but he will never have to serve that "sentence" if he successfully completes his "rehabilitation plan" by the time he is 19. The OJA determines what that "rehabilitation plan" involves and have different levels of security they can place the YO in.....all the way from in-custody and a juvenile corrections facility to secure group homes they can't leave, to doing their rehab plan in the community (like this guy). YOs are supervised by the Oklahoma Juvenile Authority (not the Department of Corrections.

It's only IF he doesn't successfully complete his rehabilitation plan by the time he is 19 that he could be "bridged over" into DOC supervision and have to serve his "adult sentence".

In my experience OJA is way to lenient on Youthful Offenders regarding their rehabilitation plans and where the YO completes them. They have very limited juvenile corrections space, and not much more than that group home space.

The way YO cases usually go in my experience is:

1. The DA has to file it as a YO.
2. The offender comes in and either files to turn it into a juvenile case or pleads immediately to a YO case.
3. For a whole lot of very complicated and boring reasons, it's very hard to get a YO certified as an adult in the worst of cases. Rarely successful. It's almost as hard to get them certified as a juvenile in a YO case. Consequently, they almost always get sentenced as a YO.

Then they get an "adult sentence", but they only have to serve that sentence if they do not successfully complete their rehab plan and get "bridge over" into DOC supervision. Even then, there is no guarantee that they serve all of that sentence in prison, they could (and often do) end up on DOC probation rather than DOC incarceration.

That's a very long explanation to call it "in a nutshell", but the ins and outs of YO cases is even more complicated than what I explained.





.
 
That's not what happened in this case.

YO cases are very complicated.

Someone 17 when they commit 1st Degree Murder HAS to be charged as an adult.

Someone 17 when they commit some (most) of the crimes for which this person was convicted HAVE to be filed as YO cases.

Someone 17 when they commit first degree rape or attempted first degree rape can be filed as a YO or an adult at the sole discretion of the DA.

Once a case is filed as a Youthful Offender case, the Defendant can file a Motion to Certify as a Juvenile. The State can file a Motion to change a YO case into an adult case. That procedure is very complicated in when you can do it and what you have to show to win it. If the Youthful Offender pleads guilty as a YO, the State can't then try to bump it up to adult punishment.

If the Defendant is found guilty as a YO, the best way to explain it is that the offender gets an "adult sentence", but he will never have to serve that "sentence" if he successfully completes his "rehabilitation plan" by the time he is 19. The OJA determines what that "rehabilitation plan" involves and have different levels of security they can place the YO in.....all the way from in-custody and a juvenile corrections facility to secure group homes they can't leave, to doing their rehab plan in the community (like this guy). YOs are supervised by the Oklahoma Juvenile Authority (not the Department of Corrections.

It's only IF he doesn't successfully complete his rehabilitation plan by the time he is 19 that he could be "bridged over" into DOC supervision and have to serve his "adult sentence".

In my experience OJA is way to lenient on Youthful Offenders regarding their rehabilitation plans and where the YO completes them. They have very limited juvenile corrections space, and not much more than that group home space.

The way YO cases usually go in my experience is:

1. The DA has to file it as a YO.
2. The offender comes in and either files to turn it into a juvenile case or pleads immediately to a YO case.
3. For a whole lot of very complicated and boring reasons, it's very hard to get a YO certified as an adult in the worst of cases. Rarely successful. It's almost as hard to get them certified as a juvenile in a YO case. Consequently, they almost always get sentenced as a YO.

Then they get an "adult sentence", but they only have to serve that sentence if they do not successfully complete their rehab plan and get "bridge over" into DOC supervision. Even then, there is no guarantee that they serve all of that sentence in prison, they could (and often do) end up on DOC probation rather than DOC incarceration.

That's a very long explanation to call it "in a nutshell", but the ins and outs of YO cases is even more complicated than what I explained.





.
I'm just reading the various articles, and not arguing with you about something you obviously have much more knowledge and experience in, but they make it sound like he was given a 78 yr sentence then reduced it to a YO case. Maybe just the wording threw me off base.
 
I'm not defending the offender. He sounds like a real POS.

I'm not even defending the DA's office in Payne County.

But I'm also not condemning the DA's office because I understand what their options were and the fact that there are other people (OJA) involved in determining where and how a Youthful Offender is required to complete his rehabilitation plan.

I looked it up on OSCN. DA originally filed ALL the charges as adult charges. Some of them he was justified legally in doing so. Other ones, he would have had to file as YOs he had no other option. I also understand all of the difficulties involved when you have YO crimes that can't be filed as adult mixed in with crimes you have the option to file as an adult. When faced with a motion to certify all of them as a juvenile, I have a hard time criticizing the DA for making the decision to certify all of them as a YO.

I also understand that the video you responded with is designed to enrage. I also understand that that video makes several misstatements of law about what happened (after looking at OSCN.net). I also know that I'm not interested in arguing with whomever happens to be posting under the Polds screen name today about it.

Hopefully the POS will screw up doing his rehab plan and get bridged over.
 
I also understand that the video you responded with is designed to enrage. I also understand that that video makes several misstatements of law about what happened (after looking at OSCN.net). I also know that I'm not interested in arguing with whomever happens to be posting under the Polds screen name today about it.

Hopefully the POS will screw up doing his rehab plan and get bridged over.
Posted because of the number of Interactions with the Video 250K+ and trying to build a bridge between his family ties and his court outcome and its relation to OSU.

The traction this story and specifically that video have (even with its mistakes) are going to have much further reach and traction than the actual Legality and complications of the Legal System.

This is a story that is sadly going national and this video will house the incorrect talking points it has made and the anger it generates will be pointed at Prosecution in Oklahoma, Legal system in Oklahoma and Oklahoma State University.

I don't expect they will be positive, and it is still gaining traction and could potentially become a black eye for the state and OSU if they don't get ahead of it.

Please always remember, because I post something doesn't mean I agree or disagree with it. It is just a talking point and example of the kind of information being passed around the topic and subject at hand
 
I'm just reading the various articles, and not arguing with you about something you obviously have much more knowledge and experience in, but they make it sound like he was given a 78 yr sentence then reduced it to a YO case. Maybe just the wording threw me off base.
I looked up on oscn.

Some of the charges, the DAs office could have charged as adult charges. Some of the charges would HAVE TO BE charged as YO. To start with, the DA filed all the charges, even the charges he didn't have legal authority to do so on, as adult.

Then the Defense filed a Motion to Certify as a Juvenile or in the alternative as a YO. The DA offense agreed to certify him as a YO. That happened on 7/24/25. He was certified as a YO on that date.

He didn't enter a plea until 8/25/25. On that date he was given his sentence and OJA was ordered to prepare their "dispositional report" (which is the rehabilitation plan).

DEFENDANT WAIVES READING OF THE INFORMATION. DEFENDANT IS PLACED UNDER OATH AND ENTERS A PLEA OF NO-CONTEST TO ALL ELEVEN (11) COUNTS IN THE FIRST AMENDED INFORMATION....EFENDANT IS PLACED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS AS A YOUTHFUL OFFENDER INSTANTER. DEFENDANT IS ORDERED TO COMPLY WITH ALL RULES OF SUPERVISION AS DICTATED BY THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS. THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS IS ORDERED TO PREPARE A DISPOSITIONAL REPORT HEREIN. DEFENDANT IS ORDERED TO COOPERATE FULLY WITH THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS TO ASSIST THEM IN PREPARING THE DISPOSITIONAL REPORT. THE MATTER IS SET FOR DISPOSITIONAL HEARING ON THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 AT 3:30 P.M.

On 10/06/25, the court ordered as follows:

THE COURT PROCEEDS WITHIN THE DICTATES OF THE OKLAHOMA YOUTHFUL OFFENDER ACT AND APPROVES THE YOUTHFUL OFFENDER REHABILITATION PLAN AS SUBMITTED BY THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS HEREIN. THE YOUTHFUL OFFENDER REHABILITATION PLAN, RULES OF PROBATION, AND ALL INTERLINEATIONS ARE SIGNED IN OPEN COURT. THE DEFENDANT REMAINS SUBJECT TO THE SENTENCE PRONOUNCED ON AUGUST 25, 2025, PENDING HIS COMPLIANCE OR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE YOUTHFUL OFFENDER REHABILITATION PLAN. THE COURT EXTENDS JURISDICTION TO THE DEFENDANT'S 19TH BIRTHDAY. THE DEFENDANT IS PLACED UNDER, AND SUBJECT TO, THE OVERSIGHT OF THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS PENDING HIS COMPLIANCE OR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDERS OF THE COURT. THE MATTER IS SET FOR REVIEW ON DECEMBER 8, 2025, AT 1:30 P.M.

He didn't received a 78 year sentence that was reduced to a YO case. The case was certified by agreement as a YO case, and then he was sentenced to OJA supervision on all of those years (if he is bridged over) and ordered to cooperate in OJA fashioning his "rehabilitation plan"
Then the court approved the disposition plan.

I know I've had to argue tooth and nail with OJA in some cases over their plan being too lenient. I would have done that in this case if it was mine. I also imagine that Payne County did too.

But I don't see any conspiracy by the DA office or Judge Worthington to protect this person or to give him special treatment.

Thus my original statement.
 
I looked up on oscn.

Some of the charges, the DAs office could have charged as adult charges. Some of the charges would HAVE TO BE charged as YO. To start with, the DA filed all the charges, even the charges he didn't have legal authority to do so on, as adult.

Then the Defense filed a Motion to Certify as a Juvenile or in the alternative as a YO. The DA offense agreed to certify him as a YO. That happened on 7/24/25. He was certified as a YO on that date.

He didn't enter a plea until 8/25/25. On that date he was given his sentence and OJA was ordered to prepare their "dispositional report" (which is the rehabilitation plan).

DEFENDANT WAIVES READING OF THE INFORMATION. DEFENDANT IS PLACED UNDER OATH AND ENTERS A PLEA OF NO-CONTEST TO ALL ELEVEN (11) COUNTS IN THE FIRST AMENDED INFORMATION....EFENDANT IS PLACED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS AS A YOUTHFUL OFFENDER INSTANTER. DEFENDANT IS ORDERED TO COMPLY WITH ALL RULES OF SUPERVISION AS DICTATED BY THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS. THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS IS ORDERED TO PREPARE A DISPOSITIONAL REPORT HEREIN. DEFENDANT IS ORDERED TO COOPERATE FULLY WITH THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS TO ASSIST THEM IN PREPARING THE DISPOSITIONAL REPORT. THE MATTER IS SET FOR DISPOSITIONAL HEARING ON THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 AT 3:30 P.M.

On 10/06/25, the court ordered as follows:

THE COURT PROCEEDS WITHIN THE DICTATES OF THE OKLAHOMA YOUTHFUL OFFENDER ACT AND APPROVES THE YOUTHFUL OFFENDER REHABILITATION PLAN AS SUBMITTED BY THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS HEREIN. THE YOUTHFUL OFFENDER REHABILITATION PLAN, RULES OF PROBATION, AND ALL INTERLINEATIONS ARE SIGNED IN OPEN COURT. THE DEFENDANT REMAINS SUBJECT TO THE SENTENCE PRONOUNCED ON AUGUST 25, 2025, PENDING HIS COMPLIANCE OR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE YOUTHFUL OFFENDER REHABILITATION PLAN. THE COURT EXTENDS JURISDICTION TO THE DEFENDANT'S 19TH BIRTHDAY. THE DEFENDANT IS PLACED UNDER, AND SUBJECT TO, THE OVERSIGHT OF THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE AFFAIRS PENDING HIS COMPLIANCE OR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDERS OF THE COURT. THE MATTER IS SET FOR REVIEW ON DECEMBER 8, 2025, AT 1:30 P.M.

He didn't received a 78 year sentence that was reduced to a YO case. The case was certified by agreement as a YO case, and then he was sentenced to OJA supervision on all of those years (if he is bridged over) and ordered to cooperate in OJA fashioning his "rehabilitation plan"
Then the court approved the disposition plan.

I know I've had to argue tooth and nail with OJA in some cases over their plan being too lenient. I would have done that in this case if it was mine. I also imagine that Payne County did too.

But I don't see any conspiracy by the DA office or Judge Worthington to protect this person or to give him special treatment.

Thus my original statement.
Thank you.
 
If he's who he appears to be, he'll be back in court.
And I'd be confident if/when that happens, he'll get hammered.

If he gets his $#!t together, then this all served its purpose.

I'd bet on the former...
 
Back
Top