I am still confused why his plea agreement has elements and rules of his parole/probation and the information about the sex offender registry??? Is the government now acknowledging that the registry is a from or element of punishment? Doesn't this make it part of his adjudication?

They said that he also secretly recorded video of girls as young as 6 years old....

Well The story I read did say anything about six years old it seems like the story is growing and changing as it goes. I didn't see anything like that in plea deal either

Subway's Jared Fogle Admits To Sex With Minors, Distributing Child Porn
Victims were as young as six years old; plea deal says crimes occurred across several states over five years.

It was also mentioned in the plea deal....

http://tinyurl.com/qea6ano

Way to stand by your man Katie...cut and run. Oh yeah, lets not forget about all the money payments...that's really going to help.

Looks like she'll be getting a lot of Jared's money too!

Just because the media says he admitted to it doesn't mean it's true. I found that out after my husband's story hit the news and then hearing the truth from him. I think the police leak what they want people to believe about him and then the media puts their spin on that leak and exaggerate it.

This was not a leak by the media but a public record of the plea deal. There will be no trial so no dispute of the facts. Jarrod is admitting to all the details. The only thing that's left is the sentencing.

The charging information reads a bit different than the plea agreement. If you read through the charging information take note that's there is no reference to any real evidence linking Fogle to any of the CP. It talks a lot about What Taylor did and had and that Taylor allegedly provided much of it to Fogle but there's absolutely no proof that actually happened. There is a references that Fogle received CP via a thumb drive and that Fogle showed somebody else CP that was stored on a thumb drive but neither thumb drive or the alleged images have been recovered so that's based solely on the statements of Taylor and somebody else the investigation allegedly uncovered. The other alleged witness is not named and presumably hasn't been charged even though they admitted to receiving CP from Fogle.

It's also mentioned that Fogle received CP via text message but there's no mention of recovered texts containing CP from Taylor, just that there were allegedly text messages. The recovered texts that are CP are from Victim 13, the New York prostitute. Supposedly she saved all the messages beginning over three years ago and investigators have interviewed her. Her statements during the interview are the basis for victim 14. She said Fogle asked her for somebody younger and that she provided him with another 16 year old girl. Investigators have not interviewed victim 14 so there's no proof other than the statements of victim 13.

There's also a lot of evidence concerning adult prostitutes. Allegedly he asked many of them for younger associates but again the evidence of this primarily he said she said with very little in the way of concrete evidence.

There are other references that Fogle admitted to having sex with 16 year old girls but the age of consent in Indiana is 16 so was it illegal or not? As far as the feds are concerned yes but again the evidence is very thin.

What I think is Taylor was told he would get a better deal if he implicated Fogle and he knew Fogle had a taste for prostitutes and knew where to tell investigators to look for the dirt. Victim 13 just lucked into a big payday and you can be sure investigators told her once convicted Fogle would have to pay her restitution.

I'm so glad we don't use Facebook as a jury system we would have mass executions everyday from people commiting crimes .

If there was zero evidence against Jared he would not have plead guilty so soon. And yes a lot of innocent people take pleas but Jared is in a different situation. Jared would be in the top 1% as far as wealth goes compared to anyone else on this forum. He has the money to fight this if he really wanted to. And the funny thing about lawyers is they are greedy. If the lawyer thought Jared had a good case they most likely would have recommended Jared to go to trial, one because it would be better for him, and two to make a lot of money.

You say we don't know all the evidence and you are all right, that evidence can cut good for him or bad for him and we simply don't know. However his lawyer knows, and the fact that Jared has the money to fight and took a plea so soon to me points that he is guilty.

Free - I read that as the other guy did the videos and sent them to Jared - I did not see that in the plea? I need to look at it again .....

I have to kind of side with Aladdin here - I agree that there are really weird facts here and the charges and the plea do not seem to match up. When I see all those discrepancies it makes me realize that although Jared may be guilty of certain things it is not as it seems in the media. I agree with Independent that there must be something there for Jared to accept the plea so readily but it seems to me that the plea he is offered is very light IF he was video taping children as young as 6 having sex. Just like there must be a reason he accepted there must also be a reason the plea is a relatively light sentence for the alleged crime(s).

@Independent I didn't say there was zero evidence against Fogle, just zero hard evidence of involvement in the Taylor produced CP. There is evidence Fogle had sex with an underage prostitute (victim 13) and that he received illegal imagery of her. Both of his charges and there's only ever been two, stem from his sexual escapades with this person. She supposedly has text messages, the illegal images of herself she produced for Fogle, has been interviewed and is apparently willing to testify against Fogle.That's more than enough for a conviction but having said that everything else being said about Fogle in the charging information and the plea agreement is really pure conjecture based primarily on hearsay statements and the thinnest of circumstantial evidence.

And thus the possession charges...