You again just say nonsense. I clearly told you one thing then you pretend it was another.
I didn't say that was why this deal went south, I said that was why it happened on the one trial where I saw a plea rejected that it was stated that way during the explanations for that one trial. Hence I didn't think it would be quite as "unusual" as you did, but remained silent because I did not feel I was expert having seen a plea rejected only one time.
The reality: Noting that they predicted something and implying how you didn't think it would happen because it would be "highly unusual" is you predicting that they would be wrong. In this case, you were wrong.
The judge seemed skeptical of referring him to treatment instead of prosecuting him was the right thing to do. While you try to back away from your original prediction and pretend that this was something that was "highly unusual", I simply raise an eyebrow and wonder what you will say when you are wrong on your next prediction.
Your "careful" consideration of your words wasn't good enough. You (wrongly) predicted the failure of other (imaginary it seems as you had not even one actual prediction just a vague "you guys that said this") folks' predictions, that is in itself a prediction.