Double-edged sword

Being a celebrity could help -- or hurt -- Iverson

Sports Illustrated legal analyst Lester Munson breaks down the charges brought against Allen Iverson on Thursday:

CNNSI.com: What do all these charges mean?

Lester Munson: These are a series of charges that typically would result from a threat made with a gun, the kind of threat that causes people to fear for their lives.

The police and prosecutors have evidence that Iverson was there, that he had a gun and was expressing his willingness to use it on whomever these people might be. These charges are all variations of the crime of assault.

"Assault" means you're threatening someone with bodily harm -- it's just a threat. You haven't actually touched the victim yet. And when you have a gun involved in an assault charge, that produces -- in almost every state -- additional charges on the theme of assault.

What the prosecutors are doing is listing every possible charge they can think of because of this nighttime visit. It's a form of “prosecutorial piling on” -- something which is totally normal in a case like this, it’s not because he’s Allen Iverson. This gives prosecutors room to negotiate if they move to plea bargain.

Two things are happening right now: the charging of Iverson with a crime, and the first step of disposing of the charge by negotiating or by trial.

CNNSI.com: One of the charges is "terroristic threats." What does that mean?

Munson: That is using a weapon to cause someone, or some people, to be in fear of injury or death. It’s not "terrorist" in the same context as the World Trade Center. It just means striking terror in mind of victim.

CNNSI.com: How serious are these charges?

Munson: This is very serious for Iverson. It's a serious thing to invade someone's home with a gun.

CNNSI.com: Is Iverson being hounded because he is a celebrity? Would the police and prosecution pursue this incident as aggressively as they are if it had involved a non-celebrity?

Munson: If anything, as a celebrity, Iverson would have been given the benefit of the doubt here. In that case, the police and prosecution would want even more proof than if it were just you or me. They know there will be expensive lawyers who will fight every inch of the case. A celebrity is more likely to get a wink from the prosecution, believe me.

But the celebrity factor is double-edged in that some prosecutors and judges want to show that celebrity does not impress them, so they treat someone like Iverson or Mike Tyson more severely than otherwise -- but that's the minority of the time. The majority of the time, the celebrities get the benefit of the doubt with expensive lawyers.

CNNSI.com: What are the possible legal outcomes? Give us the best- and worst-case scenarios.

Munson: The best scenario is that Iverson is able to make peace with the victims in some form of settlement, and the victims will then tell the police and prosecution that they will not testify against Iverson in court. That makes the prosecutors’ case very weak and Iverson would be able to enter a plea bargain that would be advantageous to him with the new charges [Thursday’s charges] and the violation of probation. That's the best he could do. The legal outcome there likely would be more probation, a fine, community service and a civil settlement with victims. That's how Iverson could work himself out of this.

The worst-case scenario is if Iverson is unable to make peace with the victims and they aggressively pursue him in court. He would face trial on serious charges and a violation of probation. At that time, jail time becomes a probability. So what he has to do is go and make peace with whomever he visited that night.

Sports Illustrated legal analyst Lester Munson regularly holds court on sports law and business matters on CNNSI.com.

 

Related information

Stories

Police search home of Iverson's uncle SI's Jack McCallum: Running out of Answers Iverson to turn himself Tuesday

Multimedia

Visit Video Plus for the latest audio and video