Just reading this confusing story without having any actual knowledge of the events it sounds like:
-The dude was on probation for some prior crime.
-He was accused of another crime while on probation.
-The dude tried to enter an "Alford plea" (no admission of guilt) for the new crime.
-The plea was either rejected by the court or rescinded by the prosecution or the defense.
-The case went to trial.
-The defendant won.
-The judge violated the defendant on the crime that the defendant was on probation for.
The issue seems to be that the judge believes that the Alford plea was substantial enough to violate the defendant. Yes it is some bull.