Logan Tulley-Tillman pleads guilty

Submitted by Lionsfan on February 8th, 2016 at 7:45 PM
Logan Tuley-Tillman, 20, pleaded guilty to capturing or distributing an image of an unclothed person and using a computer to commit a crime during a pretrial hearing on Feb. 8 in Washtenaw County Trial Court. Under an agreement with the Washtenaw County Prosecutor's Office, an additional count of capturing or distributing an image of an unclothed person will be dismissed at sentencing.

Worth noting is that he's being sentenced under the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act, which is fortunate for LTT because otherwise


Without the Act affecting the sentence, Swartz said capturing the image is a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prions and a $5,000 fine and using a computer to commit a crime is a felony punishable by up to 7 years in prison and a $5,000 fine.



The Mad Hatter

February 9th, 2016 at 10:44 AM ^

Had he not given a statement to the police before speaking to a lawyer he would have never been charged in the first place.

I tell my kids that if they're ever in a situation where they're going to be questioned by any LEO to clam up and demand a lawyer or call me.  No good ever comes from talking to the police when you're the suspect in a crime.

Funny thing is, I work with a couple of former FBI guys, and they tell their kids the same thing.


February 8th, 2016 at 7:49 PM ^

With an attitude like that, he has a very good chance of turning things around. 

And honestly--taking responsibility for bad decisions is something the vast majority of adults cannot do. 

The Mad Hatter

February 8th, 2016 at 8:34 PM ^

What it usually means is that they don't have the resources to defend themselves effectively at trial.

Well over 90% of cases charged at the federal level result in a plea agreement. Why? Because they charge you with everything they possibly can and people don't want to risk 50 years in prison for a minor crime when they could be out in 5.

Oregon Wolverine

February 8th, 2016 at 9:26 PM ^

Not necessarily the number of charges in federal cases but the manner in which:

1. The laws are stacked against the accused,

2. The severity of sentences under the US Sentencing Guidelines and mandatory minimums with relief contingent upon "cooperation" with the govt, i.e. snitching followed by plea, and

3. The culture of defense, especially in federal cases but many state court jurisdictions too where defense lawyers simply don't do their jobs properly, oversell the plea, oversell the chances of conviction, and don't like the stressors experienced when going to trial, getting yelled at by federal judges, and being seen as "difficult" -- ruining the chances for pleas for other clients. Add in too that the economics of most appointed defense practices have a built-in disincentive for trial which include no added pay for trial, caseload stressors when you are in trial, and trials create a "you're not a team player" reputation.

I was a "non-team player" public defender for almost 7 years (battled w/many judges, DDAs, and fellow PDs who would not do their jobs) and later took occasional federal appointments for another seven. In one of those years I was told (not sure if it's true) that I tried more federal cases than the entire local federal PD office.

Our nation's criminal justice system is broken in more ways than you can imagine. A recent study suggests there are 33,000 wrongful felony convictions a year in America.

I suspect there's more.

M '88, M JD '91
25+ years defending the accused

There's always more to the story.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Everyone Murders

February 9th, 2016 at 8:58 AM ^

I don't disagree with the thrust of your message, but I had to smile at "the laws are stacked against the accused."  It's almost axiomatic, what with the accused being accused of breaking the law.

But one thing you left out is that many prosecuting attorney/DA types are self-righteous twats with political aspirations.  So the elected official (at least in MI, where the county prosecutor is elected) is sorely tempted to aim for a conviction rather than aiming for justice.  I've known some very fine prosecutors who don't roll this way, but have also known some that were insufferably self-impressed because of their "conviction rate" against defendants who, in many cases, can't afford to mount a proper defense.

All of this though, seems to have little to do with LTT.  Whether we like it or not, it seems that LTT violated the letter of the law.  There was no profit in him fighting a case like this, where he had already admitted to the elements of the crime (per the police report).  Here it was smart to take the plea - because his chances at trial were very dim.

The Holmes Youthful Offendor sentence is tailor-made for circumstances like this, and should enable him to put this behind him.  While not quite a victimless crime, the fact that the pictures were not published (beyond the initial transmission) doesn't put this in "shock my conscience" territory. 

Oregon Wolverine

February 10th, 2016 at 10:02 AM ^

Self-righteous, political DAs seem to be a bigger problem in smaller jurisdictions in my experience, and seldom an issue in federal prosecutions as, at least in my jurisdiction, the federal prosecutors are pretty professional by and large past political aspirations. Not all, but by and large.

My main problem with prosecutors (both state and federal) start with their unwillingness to question or second guess tunnel-vision cops who, rather than look at all the facts and make a decision, all-too-frequently make a snap decision who the bad guy is and then are hell bent on gathering all the evidence that supports that conclusion, ignoring all of the evidence to the contrary.

Tunnel-vision investigations are especially dangerous in homicide cases (witness Serial), cases which often hinge on an eyewitness ID (often homicide cases), cases involving forensic evidence (you would not believe the junk science and half-hearted crime scene work that is presented w/high degree of confidence, often "conclusive" air in court) and those where witnesses are extremely vulnerable to suggestion (homicide and child witness cases).

Toss in what we now know about memory (we are highly suggestible creatures, easily subject to unintentional influences -- "we've got the bad guy mam, just need you to confirm..."), how effective cops are at getting false confessions (Google New Yorker Mag and Reid Technique), and poorly trained, over worked, unmotivated PDs, and presto, wrongful convictions galore.

It's hard work, I've seen a lot of train wrecks, and it takes a huge physical, mental and emotional toll, but (setting aside the Maize and Blue cells) it's in my blood. It's my calling.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad


February 8th, 2016 at 8:15 PM ^

I have no first or even second hand knowledge of either the victim or LTT.  I have read nothing on the case itself nor have I even bothered to listen or learn anything remotely connected to this situation, the principles, the police investigation or the law being violated.  In short I could not possibly be less qualified to offer anything resembling an informed opinion on this matter.

Based on that it's beyond clear to me that he/she is innocent/guilty and the victim/LTT are clearly lying/telling the truth.