Our system is not the "Criminal Justice" system. This article confirms it has no interest in Justice. It is a legal system following laws and serving a segment of society seeking vengeance while promoting the Prison Industry. Nation wide laws requiring jurors have Jury Nullification explained to them would be a start. Overturning any law blocking new evidence from being considered is also needed. AG Barr has made it clear conviction over justice is his goal. Except for his buddies.
5
How is refusing to let someone out of jail because he did not commit a crime akin to 'letting criminals off the hook'?
9
It is not the justice system it is the Justice industry.
4
This article just goes to show we need to get rid of as many republicans from office as possible.
2
Although the sentiment of this article may be correct, it doesn't appear to be comparing apples to apples. The examples appear to be a mix of areas where the DA has discretion and does not. If the Times wants to prove unfair interference to the public, they need to present a more detailed picture of the jurisdiction's law.
The resistance to reforming prosecution seems greatest in some districts. What is the cause of this clustering of effort? Is it driven by racism, religion driven willingness to condemn, high crime rates spurring fear for individual safety or, and this is a big motivator, a large number of for profit prisons!!!
Taking a deeper step into our flawed system of "justice" why is our society willing to convict and incarcerate for a long, long time poor or average people who cause the death of someone while we don't punish those whose profit driven decisions put a plane like the Boeing MAX in service after many indications during its development, manufacture, testing and training demonstrated it had serious safety issues??
1
Barr more properly belongs back in the Inquisition. He proclaims the law but with dirty hands.
USA is now so corrupt, like the Banana Republics.
Both of our political parties are very corrupt, and any third party attempt is squashed.
We have destroyed any attempt for democracy.
USA just another authoritarian regime of rich old white guys.
It is all over now.
2
Another tool in their march to destroy the democratic rule. These DA' were elected. As in other states across the country where people have elected the "wrong" governors Republican legislatures are changing the rules to undermine the Will of The People.
6
While an unwillingness to revisit a case where someone appears to have been wrongfully convicted cannot be justified, what the reformist District Attorneys are doing is something entirely different.
DA's seem to be taking the position that if they don't like a section of the penal law they are going to disregard it. This is not part of any prosecutorial discretion that I have ever heard of. If it is felt that a section of the penal law is unjust, then the proper action is to lobby the legislature or perhaps run for office.
It seems to me that if a DA can't in good conscience apply the law as it is written, then he or she should resign and make it clear why they are resigning.
21
nonsense. das have broad discretion and always have. it is merely white privilege to say that power should be curbed now, and not when it wrongly punished blacks.
11
William Barr says correcting injustice endangers public safety. How dare he! As an American I deeply resent the notion that an innocent person should rot in jail to protect my safety. Don't hide your incompetence by pretending to protect me. I never asked to be safe at the expense of the innocent.
77
@Mark Trump definitely found his corrupt man. This is ridiculous. It's amazing how America can be going in two directions at once: freeing the innocent and letting the corrupt be.
2
I was a criminal defense attorney for over 20 years. Anyone who thinks that prosecutors care about guilt or innocence are living in fantasy land. As a class, prosecutors see themselves as cops in suits so they believe anything the cops tell them. They refuse to admit that cops lie and will knowingly let a cop lie during a criminal trial. They will shield and protect lying cops. They will use false evidence if it will get a conviction and hide all evidence of innocence. Prosecutors not only ride along with cops but they party with them. Of course I dealt with honest, ethical prosecutors but they didn't last long.
110
@Jeff I once worked in a DA's office. If anyone there had done what you mentioned, they would have been immediately dismissed. Perhaps some offices are more corrupt than others...maybe it comes from the top down.
14
@Jeff I know numerous cops that make the lies by trump look like just another day at the office.
3
Nothing will change as long as convictions and incarcerations are considered to be 'success'.
3
DAs are elected. High conviction rates and extreme senternces win votes friom right-wing voters who are afraid of their own shadows (shadows, after all, are black) and demand that someone, anyone, be punished because they were frightened. Heaven forfend that justice be done in the US if it doesn't contribute to their sense of security! "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave"--what a joke.
4
It's not like the US hasn't been headed down the narrow police state road for quite some time, but this just shows how pervasive, vindictive, and likely racist the old guard is turning out to be. Forget corruption in Ukraine, we seem to have plenty of it at home, condoned by establishment politicians (and politicized law enforcement officials).
13
Great, pandering nobodies, like Barr, want us to assume all police and all police actions are righteous and irreversible.
They also want us to believe these heroes of civilization are such snowflakes they can't stand to be questioned or supervised regardless of what they've done. Its the same thing Barr says about our mentally challenged snowflake of a President.
The anti-American Barr asserts the will of the people is a meaningless concept and whatever entrenched powers may do to limit or dis-empower those elected to office is the only legitimate course, not subject to question or doubt.
That man is a squishy barrel of political lard committed only to his own beliefs, convinced he is legally superior to all comers. He is a liar and a fraud.
As are the police, corrupt prosecutors, legislators, and the judges who share this anti-democratic belief.
Of course, the commenters here who consider any attempt to achieve rational justice that runs afoul of their personal fears and biases is "being on the side of criminals" and "wanting to set criminals free". People unable, it appears, to think even simple thoughts for themselves. What a shame.
How one can deny a new trial to a man with no witnesses against him and who has seen others confess to and be imprisoned for the crime he was fund guilty of beggars understanding. It's the opposite of freedom and fairness. That it frightens some so speaks to the success of Conservative propaganda.
9
I can't speak about the other prosecutors, but as for Kim Gardner in St. Louis, there's a very good reason people are trying to strip away her power. She's incompetent.
Since she was elected, turnover at her office has topped 100%, with dozens of experienced attorneys leaving to flee the chaos. The criminal conviction rate has also dropped to 20%, compared with 80% for the previous prosecutor.
This, in a city with murders and carjackings nearly every day, where a strong prosecutor is desperately needed, And don't even ask about Kim Gardner's PERSONAL legal bills, all being footed by St. Louis taxpayers.
Frankly, I'm tired of hearing sob stories for "progressive" prosecutors like this. Perhaps it's not their race or gender that's the problem but rather their inability to do their job and effectively prosecute criminals.
12
Lamar Johnson has already spent 24 years in a Missouri prison to a crime Where there is no evidence to convict him! The eyewitness recanted and two other men have confessed to the murder and said Johnson didn't do it!!!!! Missouri has a reputation for being racist but this makes the state lawless!!! The people who belong in prison are the judges and corrupt police
15
When you have districts attorney who are essentially on the side of the criminals, it's not surprising the states would take action. It's surprising it took so long.
16
@Michael Livingston’s They're on the side of justice, if they're doing the jobs. Presumably you didn't or were unable to read the article because your ideological blinders made it impossible. The defendents under discussion were prosecuted, quite possibly by DA's who lied about evidence and subborned perjury, for crimes they demonstrably did not commit. The prosecutors themselves and the lying cops who abetted their lies are the ones who belonged in prison.
20
@Michael Livingston’s
District Attorney's have a duty to seek justice, even when that means exonerating a person already convicted. They should prosecute criminals but help exonerate those who were wrongfully convicted.
15
So Mr. Barr believes the new crop of prosecutors, “style themselves as social justice reformers, who spend their time undercutting the police, letting criminals off the hook and refusing to enforce the law". He certainly has a different standard for members of his administration, who can ignore subpoenas and can pardon convicted war criminals. In addition he is asserting not only that a president cannot be indicted while in office, but that he cannot even be criminally investigated. Rule of law indeed!
Incidentally, the Constitution in the section on impeachment says "but the Party convicted (i.e. by the Senate) shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law." The Justice Department dictum that sitting presidents cannot be indicted seems to have been invented whole cloth.
29
The resistance from Republicans to efforts at reform will fail--IF people learn about what they are doing and VOTE.
8
I am bewildered by the number of cases where our legal system refuses to reexamine cases where a preponderance of evidence indicates a person is innocent.
There are also numerous cases where prisoners have asserted their innocence - which could be proved or disproved by DNA testing yet the state refuses to take this step despite the advances in technology.
Why is it that Justice Departments so often seems determined NOT to find the truth? Is this a refusal to admit ANY errors be they deliberate wrongdoing or simple mistakes?
The number of capital cases where an executed person was later proved innocent is reason enough to eliminate the death penalty.
13
I'm really tired of the way that the Republican Party refuses to honor the results of elections. Whether it's stripping incoming Democratic governors of their authority, as in North Carolina, or doing the same to prosecutors, as described in this article, far too many Republican politicians believe that elections only have consequences when their chosen candidate wins.
No democracy can survive with such people in power.
33
This is a column, right?
These “prosecutors” are almost entirely political newcomers, interested only in releasing criminals.
The incredible work done by real prosecutors is utterly absent in this op-Ed.
11
@Joshua Marquis 1) Cite sources of evidence. 2) So what? The newcomers were elected based on their platforms, so are just as real as the rest. And if people weren't tired of the blatant unfairness of the status quo, why elect them? Times are changing, no room left for dinosaurs. Evolve.
18
@Joshua Marquis, these people are duly elected officials interested in criminal justice reform. Prosecutors have an obligation to see that justice is done, not maximize their conviction rates via plea bargains and legal gamesmanship.
14
@Jason It seems to me that District Attorneys do not have the authority to decide a law passed by the legislature should be ignored. If the penal law seems to be unjust, then lobby the legislature to change the law.
5
There have to be ways to right past wrongs, and to re-evaluate flawed prosecutions. The Missouri case seems egregious, and the judge's reasoning thin. As the St Louis Post argued, "St. Louis Circuit Judge Elizabeth Hogan punted."
7
Just to be clear: "Traditional view of law and order" is code for "opposed to justice," right? Because opposing the retrial of someone wrongly convicted is neither law nor order.
23
I was brought up in such a naive time. Policemen were our friends and could be trusted to help us, we had the most wonderful country in the world, every one was equal....
Then I had to grow up and discover that black people could be hung and tortured without any punishment for the evil doers. I was young and found a magazine, my Mom had hidden, in it were these awful pictures. I told my Mom I had seen them and the people who did this should be in prison. She told me I was too young to know right from wrong. I went on to learn so much more wrong was going on, we continue to mistreat each other. I did not understand my mother was prejudiced, I did not know so many things, we all need to continue learning, if we are to make real changes. It is a marathon, we will not see the end, but we can join the race.
Perhaps we need have children watch us all, and report to us what we say and do that hurts others. If someone that is supposed to be upholding the law breaks it, they should serve the time they caused others to serve. Justice is justice...
10
"Critics of the new cohort of prosecutors, such as William P. Barr, the attorney general, say their efforts are demoralizing to law enforcement and dangerous to public safety."
Yes, it must be demoralizing to consider that you had a hand in an injustice, and no one cares. Your conviction record might suffer!! Not as demoralizing as being imprisoned for a few decades, only to find that evidence that supports your innocence is to be brushed aside because it demoralizes prosecutors and investigators.
Not as demoralizing as spending a decade or three in prison because the prosecutors hid exculpatory evidence.
Folks. This is not about demoralizing cops, prosecutors. This is about the fact that they should be on the side of **justice** not a conviction record. And that means if a person should not be in prison, we should let him out.
And we sure perdition - just saying Texas - should not execute him.
20
Wonder if these anti reform prosecutors, judges and cops are getting campaign money and perks from the private prison industrial complex? They’d be hurt financially by this.
21
The "more traditional view of law and order" is fundamentally and unequivocally racist.
23
@Bradley Bleck can you expand on this?
3
@Steven C
It means, as supported by data, that persons of color are charged with more serious crimes than are whites who commit the same offense. It also means, again supported by data, that persons of color are sentenced more severely on average than are whites convicted of the same crime.
7
If stamping out prosecutorial misconduct and prosecutorial overreach is "stripping power", then great. Strip their power. They're abusing it.
9
@Objectivist
Sure. We probably disagree 100% on what is prosecutorial misconduct and overreach. I would say, for example, that railroading defendants into plea bargains by threatening them with far heavier charges than are justified by the alleged actions is both misconduct and overreach. I'm sure you know that is common practice.
12
I have a far more cynical view. Depending upon the size of a typically large city or county, the cost of criminal prosecution, including DA staff, public defender’s office, court staff, appeal courts, police, and sheriff [jail and prison], medical care, mental health commitment, could range from $100 million to $600 million per year.
Fear is a huge industry, money maker.
Politicians who debate prosecutorial discretion are actually more concerned whether their political allies have control over how those millions of dollars are spent, who gets to get on the boob tube and create name recognition and build an economic and political base.
None of these hypocrites care about discretion until one of their own gets caught in the vise of the justice system - just look at the GOP demanding Due Process for Trump.
18
"in August ... Mr. Barr criticized 'district attorneys that style themselves as social justice reformers, who spend their time undercutting the police, letting criminals off the hook and refusing to enforce the law.'”
Uhmm, how does Mr. Barr square his criticism here with DJT's undercutting of the military justice system, issuing pardons and/or orders to reverse demotions for U.S. military men courtmartialed for war crimes and/or awaiting trial for such?
74
@StiWi
When you are in power I hold you to accountability because that is what you believe in. When I am in power we will have none because that is what I believe in.
10
@StiWi
Anyway, Barr is lying through his teeth. Most of these maximalists on punishment probably had very punitive, verbally abusive childhoods and can't imagine life without viciousness and lying (Barr, I'm looking at you).
3
Yes, this new LA prosecutor has been so touched by losing his parents to the criminal justice system. I wonder if the family members of the 3 killed in the crime, which the parents were integral to, were also touched by those events? I'm pretty sure they were. But his parents were Leftists, so what they did was for a greater cause? And the murdered were just cops and a security guard, nobody anyone on the Left believes should be alive anyway.
And if it's true that more were imprisoned here than at the peak of the Gulags (which I'm not sure I believe) it woukd be because so many ended up in front of firing squads after their show trials.
13
It's becoming more and more clear that nothing is about right and wrong anymore. it's all about power and protect those who create a dubious form of justice that is not justice at all. Everyone wants to jail that misdemeanor offender until it's his son, or daughter, or brother or sister. Then, they want justice. The right kind of justice were you don't put children in jail for doing exactly what you did when you were their age. Where you have more than one witness to an actual crime before you try to take away someone's life. Where when you find proof of someone's innocence you don't try to negate it because of your ego and reputation. And where tough on crime is changed to smart on crime for the good of humankind. What kind of people want draconian and unfair laws enforced? People who consider themselves and their families above the law. People who are protected by wealth and power. People today not only lack compassion for their fellow man but also common human dignity. We are now a society of sociopaths.
22
Yet another article in the NYT’s ongoing efforts to develop sympathy for criminals and make it appear that criminals are actually victims.
To set the record straight, victims of crimes are the true victims; the perpetrators—and those who aid, abet and participate in crime with them—are criminals.
I hope all the progressive prosecutors--and Democratic Presidential candidates--will give serious thought to what it means to eliminate bail, reduce sentences and allow criminals to run loose in our communities.
Who is responsible for post-release crimes committed by those released early? An apology to their future victims will be of small consolation for those who are harmed; and how about compensation and restitution for the actual victims?
Early release or release without bail of thousands of criminals is a recipe for increased crime, and increased numbers of victims. (Check federal statistics on recidivism rates—very sobering.)
Virtually no criminals are forced to commit their crimes; there is such a thing as free will.
It's simple:
Just don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
34
@Mon Ray But what if, as in the story in fact you did not commit the crime?
50
@Mon Ray You do realize we are talking about innocent people jailed unjustly here don't you?
57
@Mon Ray Are you familiar with a little idea known as presumed innocence? Perhaps you should move somewhere that doesn't have a robust system for protecting the innocence of the accused.
28
The criminal justice system has become foul and corrupt. It's no surprise that attempts to shine a light under this rock are being resisted by its own deep state. We must keep voting for - and supporting - prosecutors who seek actual justice, not just retribution.
11
There is no difference between a prosecutor who always goes for the death penalty whenever possible, and Aramis Ayala, who refused to go for the death penalty at all. One says always, the other never. Both are absolute positions bereft of discretion. Ain't that right, Florida Supreme Court?
Well, there is one minor difference. The former puts blacks and the poor on death row, the later does not.
I guess that makes all the difference to the Florida Supreme Court.
BTW, what about all the prosecutors who vow to never enforce gun control laws?
4
Why did the NYT forget to mention that Mr. Boudin parents were part of the Weather Underground, a radical left wing militant group? The linked article only mentions Mr. Boudin being raised by Bill Ayers, the founder of the Weather Underground terrorist movement.
And you wonder why nobody trusts the liberal media?
19
And that is relevant how?
8
The article mentions them being involved in a deadly armored car robbery. It’s pretty obvious the his mother is Kathy Boudin.
6
@Jon Barecky
The sins of the fathers must be visited upon the sons unto the 7th generation -- in secular law?
4
We don't live for what is good for law enforcement. The public is not their subordinates.
7
As usual, when conservatives lose, they cheat to nullify the will of the people. They don't believe in democracy. They are authoritarians at their core.
27
When I left my job as in house counsel to become an assistant DA, my boss (a retired US magistrate) gave me lots of good advice , but one thing he told me I used every day.
He said to remember that the police have their own agenda, which may or may not be compatible with mine, or even the DA's office. He was right.
Here we have that dynamic playing out in macro. The prosecutors are looking for justice, and the cops are clearly looking for something else, since they can't even sign on to that as a laudable goal.
I think that the police go down this road upon which they resist any efforts to admit their excesses, let alone rein them in, at their own peril. Consent to govern comes from the governed, at least theoretically, and when that consent is revoked, it doesn't come with a warning. There's a lot of resentment simmering in our communities these days, and I see the election of these prosecutors as a venting of that resentment. Block it at your own peril.
18
Not hard to see what's going on here. Duly elected BLACK prosecutors, mostly women, being put in their place by older white men. Black prisoners convicted by racist cops and racist prosecutors who can't get justivce from white cops or white prosecutors. This is sick. This is unAmerican.
Meanwhile the President who wanted the Central Park Five to face the death sentence and continued his hostility towards them after they were exonerated, pardons white war criminals. We live in a sick viciously racist and sexist country. And Trump and Barr, the later a vicious partisan and cruel racist, could care less about the law or about justice...except for the wealthy and the white.
28
@BSargent
They were never exonerated.
5
@Somebody Their convictions were vacated. The charges against them were withdrawn. In municipal and state courts their suits wrongful convictions were won and upheld. They were exonerated by everyone involved...except white racists.
23
@Somebody
They were in fact exonerated by DNA testing, which found the true rapist.
9
Throttling back on abuses by cops and prosecutors will also have the effect of increasing respect for the prosecutorial side of our criminal "justice" system. Yes, I suspect most police take a well considered and fair approach to doing their job; so they shouldn't be effected by this new batch of DA's. As for the past prosecutors goal of "win at all cost," that will be a welcome relief to see it disappear.
5
Civil rights advocates risked death and suffered beatings. Aramis Ayala decided not to stand for reelection when her budget was cut $1.3 million by a vengeful state legislature and the Florida Supreme Court limited her discretion. Progress depends on finding advocates with strength and fortitude as well as good intentions. Hopefully the people of Orlando will find such a candidate to run in the next election. The freedom of the unjustly convicted depends on it.
7
Our system claims to seek justice, but reprehensible actions like refusing a new trial amidst growing evidence that mistakes were made the first time around shows that we really have an injustice system that focuses more on punishment and retribution.
Not in our name.
Throw the Missouri attorney general out at the next election. They deserve no less, perhaps even should face some well-earned prison time for such a shoffy disregard pf Mr. Johnson's rights. A helping, heaping dose of their own medicine might make prosecutors more reticent to engage in selectively ignoring evidence.
9
@Mike nice sentiment, but not sure you've been to Missouri. Majority of state is ever-Trump country. Segregation (housimg, jobs) still rules there.
@rbyteme
Been to Missouri many times. Yes, things there can be stuck in the past. However, there are also many good people in Missouri, so I think it's wrong to write the whole state off. Much the same could be said of Illinois south of I-80. Yet we also produced Obama.
America, the land of the free, has incarceration rates higher than the Soviet Union at the peak of the gulag era, and presently ranks first among all nations in the world. When race is factored in, the statistics look far worse. The political empowerment of "tough on criminals" DA's makes over-incarceration the horse that many, many political leaders have ridden into high elected office. The power behind that throne won't easily let go. With no universal healthcare, this is yet another way the US is more like a 3rd world country than its OECD peers.
11
@Jack Two things: 1. Voters elect these "tough on crime" officials , due to prior contact with criminals, or living in areas where criminals have blighted their way of life. 2. Throwing in health care, does not help your "3rd wold case". Perhaps pointing out white-collar crime and their lack of punishment would have helped your points more...
6
@Jack I doubt your statistics but in any case, prisoners in the gulags were innocent. Most were arrested randomly, just to fill the quota (see Ann Appelbaum’s great history “Gulag”). You are not seriously suggesting that all the prisoners in the American system are innocent of any wrongdoing, are you? Some, of course, are unjustly convicted but they are a small percentage. The US has high crime rates compared to other developed countries. We can argue about the reasons for that, but it is a fact. Criminals belong in jail regardless of their skin color or economic circumstances.
6
@Mor wrong. Huge numbers of people are wrongfully convicted through the plea bargain system. A vanishingly small number of cases come to trial because faced with a potential wrongful conviction for a trumped up felony charge a poor person will take a plea deal so they can get back to work or simply not have a felony record when they are released. This is well documented and openly known among scholars in the corrections field.
Our current system is nothing more than the 13th amendment intended it to be, an ad hoc system of legal slavery intended to punish the poorest and most marginalized communities. Facts, while difficult to come by for some, are plentiful if you look at the research.
3
Atty. General Barr, criticizes the prosecutors who are the subject of this article for "letting criminals off the hook and refusing to enforce the law.”
Isn't that exactly what Barr has been doing relative to Trump, letting a criminal off the hook and refusing to enforce the law?
32
Consistent with Trump and his followers choices throughout, his Attorney General included, all claim to be followers of Jesus who healed the afflicted, fed the hungry, and saved lives through his miracles, taught thousands of years of followers to forgive, so would you all please tell the nation why you won't forgive others, or you won't spare their lives, or feed the hungry, and why did you try to sabotage health care?
Where your victims witnesses against you? I think so.
All martyrs of your injustices have a soul with faith and you have none, or a bad one.
But like many like to write here; "The arc of the universe always bends to Justice."
3
“Opponents with a more traditional view of law and order”
Please call it what it is. “Traditional law and order” means locking up black people. It always has and it was never more than a thinly veiled dog whistle.
16
@dude
Actually, it means locking up poor people just as much.
3
@Thomas Zaslavsky no, not really. This has studied extensively.
@Thomas Zaslavsky
Only if they are persons of color.
Our great protector of American justice, Atty. General Barr, criticizes the prosecutors who are the subject of this article for "letting criminals off the hook and refusing to enforce the law.”
Isn't that what has been done for many decades by the prosecutors Barr approves of for the group of criminals who are police who physically abuse and often murder citizens?
4
I am in general agreement that incarceration rates far outstrip the need to protect the general public, but this flock of nouveau crusaders let their mouths out run their brains. Even counting the two coasts this is still a fairly conservative country and hearing hearing press conferences and campaign promises of freeing thousands and not prosecuting various crimes is more than many people want to hear. The PR was terrible and push back is the result.
23
@TED338
It’s not just PR, TED338. It’s the guy with convictions for violence who learns, from his and his friends’ light sentences, that punching your mother and breaking her jaw while looting her purse is a practical profession.
14
@TED338
The PR is terrible only because of the power-hungry politicians who run on justice = vengeance and can't keep their ignorant mouths shut.
6
@TED338
Regarding the quote, "this is still a fairly conservative country, " the American justice system in no way supports the conviction of innocent people by relying on perjury. You appear to be sort of using "conservative" as a euphemism to excuse "corruption."
7
These prosecutors don't care how many people's lives they ruin--especially the lives of people of color. They just want to show how "tough"--i.e, cruel--they are, and to cover up their own misconduct and the misconduct of police in their jurisdiction.
12
As an ex-prosecutor who has dropped charges against defendants more than once when I learned of convincing exculpatory evidence, and whose worst nightmare was convicting an innocent person, this story is disheartening.
Also, before attending law school, I lectured sociology students on social control and the philosophical and practical purposes of punishment, and the actions taken by the individuals and groups outlined in this story are deeply troubling, in that they do not seem to be moored to any rational theory of social control. Instead, they seem to reflect a desire for vengeance--but even then, vengeance for its own sake, in that the targets of this free-floating wrath don't even have to be guilty of the crime.
This bizarre, randomized urge to do violence--and to back into a justification for doing it--seems to describe an emergent trend in Trump's America. What is truly frightening is that its proponents don't seem to care at all whether they can link fault to punishment. That leaves any of us vulnerable to loss of liberty or even life for any reason or no reason at all--and in a country where the chief role model is clearly unhinged and vengeful above all else.
127
vote blue in 2020 and all years thereafter. that's the only way to start fixing this horrific problem. that and more dash and body cams.
9
@J Young
Thanks for the description. The trend, however, is not at all new.
6
@J Young
I agree with your criticisms. However, I strongly disagree with you implicitly limiting them to Trump and his hard core supporters. The situation was no different before Trump regardless whether it was Democrats or Republicans in control in Washington or in the local areas.
Your intense partisanship blinds you to how widespread and severe the problem has long been, is now, and almost certainly will continue to be.
7
Here in New York, I don’t know why we bother paying all these state legislators when our anti-law-enforcement District Attorneys are busily legislating their own codes of criminal law. Here in enlightened, progressive New York City, even law enforcement officials like District Attorneys and Mayors recognize the right of lawbreakers to break into our subways and busses.
Now we can finally end mass incarceration by loosing among us violent men who have pled down to nonviolent crimes. Do authors who discuss only convictions, not the real crimes, know this? Yes, but they’re not telling you.
24
@Charlierf Your biases are showing, in criminal law it is the record that stands not your accusation. If they pled down and the DA accepted it, then they have not been convicted of the violence you assume they committed. Try to have a better understanding of the issue before passing of your judgment as an accurate account.
7
@Nick
Really Nick? That these men with nonviolent convictions actually live a violent, criminal lifestyle does not concern you, that your policies will neither confine nor deter them does not concern you, that they will prey on your loved ones does not concern you?
1
Sounds like DA's, like Presidential candidates, like to stretch the definition of what their job actually is, in order to get elected. Many were elected on what turned out to be false promises. Hardly a surprise, then, that legislatures are reining them in.
The article makes similarly bogus claims: DA's do not send people to prison, judges do. DA's may ask for leniency or pardon but granting either one is in not their actual power.
6
@Daedalus DA's have discretion regarding who to charge and what to charge them with. So, actually, they have traditionally had a fair amount of power, and only when they use that power to be lenient is it suddenly "overreach."
6
@Daedalus [snark on] And I naively thought it was part of the DA's job description to bring charges and decide which charges to bring. Is this just in Rochester, NY or do judges in other states have this power? [snark off]
BTW, if plea bargaining is done which is how most cases are resolved, the judge doesn't enter into the picture.
Talk about bogus claims!
3
@edwardc All plea bargains have to be signed off by the presiding judge. The judge can dismiss the bargain or ignore it. You may want to cut back on your consumption of California's favorite legal substance, particularly since you seem to think DA's and judges are the same.
3
I'm continually astonished at the apparent lack of history education and common sense. What do conservatives think is going to happen over time if people are cheated of wielding the levers of power? What do they think will happen if they continually oppress people and deny them justice? What do they think will happen if they constantly look out for their own financial interests instead of the good of the people as a whole?
I could tell them, but they'd really be better off reading a history book. I'll hint at the ending, though--it won't be pretty for anyone.
22
America needs to shift its thinking. Unfortunately, we have decided as a society that it is easier and more effective to punish bad behavior than to have programs to support vulnerable people and communities. Prison breaks far more people, families, and communities than it fixes.
We need to invest in our communities in need rather than pretend that if we quarantine enough of the population, especially male, that the crime will go away.
9
Why would anyone want to stop an man from being let out of prison if he is shown to be innocent ?
21
@robert conger
Anyone who:
(1) is making money off the incarceration, and
(2) has no moral compass.
8
@robert conger
This is what I don't understand, even Republicans should not want an innocent in jail.
5
@robert conger One who believes that finality of the result is more socially valuable than the justice of the result.
Those who live in terror of disorder or blind faith in the perfection of American justice are averse to recognising that it is ever wrong. Thus, they (or their elected legal representatives, including DAs, AGs and non-Federal judges) bend their efforts to securing results, preserving order and resisting challenges to either.
Any legal system is imperfect. Things do go wrong, whether by inattention or design. However, the lengths to which these people are prepared to go in resisting any suggestion of error are extraordinary and, from an outsider's perspective, both absurd and cruel. Any and every point, whether of procedure or substance, good or bad will be taken in an endeavour to preserve the status quo. The larger issue - whether a particular individual has been treated fairly - is often lost altogether.
3
Interesting how when conservatives don't wield the in every office, they use what remaining power they have to change the rules that have have been in place for a long time. They themselves were able to use the discretion granted them, but won't allow others to do the same.
It's shameful.
106
Edit: Should have read:
"Interesting how when conservatives don't wield the power in every office ..."
4
And most of the shame is attributable to racism.
9
So why are people surprised by this? The enemies of democracy will not be stopped by such niceties as elections. Look at Hong Kong for how things will eventually play out in this country.
16
The most important step is to decriminalize drug use. It would reduce pressure on District Attorney offices, drastically reduce the influence of drug cartels in Mexico and South America, and radically lessen the impact of racism both in our justice system as well as society at large.
It wouldn’t be that difficult to accomplish, perhaps only some administrative revisions to the Schedule 1 drug list, though it might require ramping up efforts to provide some rehabilitation services. Of course the money saved from prosecution and incarceration would likely pay for it easily.
Here in California the legalization of cannabis has had an interesting side effect, with local city councils debating where to allow stores to be located. It has inspired all sorts of NIMBY reactions as people fearfully react to all sorts of pretend horrors about the patrons of these stores. The reality? If you have been in one, it’s often just a lot of older people who look extremely sedate, perhaps even mellow.
As has been proven over an over again, prohibition doesn’t work, and in fact usually creates side effects that can be worse that what it is intending to prevent.
33
@Marshall Doris
Why, Marshall Doris, was the prime mover behind our severe crack cocaine laws the Congressional Black Caucus? Why, not many years ago, did so many Black athletes thank their grandmothers, not their mothers?
Take care not to naively extend the lessons of cannabis to truly dangerous drugs.
8
@Marshall Doris
Why don't Democrat legislators vote for new laws? Why do you believe it is preferable for the executive branch to rule with a pen and a cell phone?
When women got the right to vote, the first amendment they got passed in the country was prohibition, an amendment that would never have passed absent the newly enfranchised liberal and civilized women of the Northeast. [In many of the rural states, women already had the right to vote.] It took some time but was ultimately the only reversed amendment.
Why didn't Senator Obama and the rest of the Democrat Congress support immigration reform in 2007-2008? Why didn't the Democrat super majority pass immigration reform or climate change legislation in 2009? Here is the answer: they did not want to take responsibility with the voting public for policy that lacks support. It is far preferable for Democrats to create the pretense that the president has the authority to void any laws that for the small minority of leftists who have purchased the government.
Why should Democrats pass laws that will be unpopular with the voters in their districts when the president or attorney general can just act as though the law is what they want it to be?
It is unfortunate that we suffered through eight years of a president with a third world dictator sense of the law.
It's fun that the California Peoples Republic seeks to blame "older people" for remembering the role of democracy.
5
@ebmem
Since prosecutors have great discretion in how to treat charges, you can hardly accuse them of acting "as though the law is what they want it to be", unless you yourself don't care about the law.
Perhaps I could spell it out for you. These prosecutors are looking for fair and effective and honest law enforcement that instead of pressuring innocent people into pleading guilty to lesser charges to avoid the chance of 10 or 20-year jail term.
3
It appears that the only solution remaining to our over zealous prosecutors and police will be jury nullification. It only takes one juror to stymie the whole system. Who will have the courage?
13
@Vink
I would think twice before suggesting that jury members take on multiple roles of police, prosecutor, judge and jury.
4
@Vink Unfortunately that is not really a solution as the majority of criminal cases in the United States are resolved via plea bargains rather than through jury trials. In fact, recent research has showed that around 90 percent of criminal convictions are plea bargains.
Source: Johnson, B. D., King, R. D., & Spohn, C. (2016). Sociolegal Approaches to the Study of Guilty Pleas and Prosecution. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 12(1), 479–495. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110615-084755
11
@Vink
There is a more obvious and permanent solution that is consistent with democracy. It would never occur to a Democrat elected official. Have the legislature pass laws that are consistent with the wishes of the voters. Then, have the executive branch enforce the laws as written.
Think about it. In 2007, there was massive public sympathy for dreamers: adults who had been brought by their parents to America, had lived the majority of their lives in America, in some cases didn't even know they weren't citizens and had no connection with the country of their birth.
Senator Obama and the Democrat majority Congress did not support immigration reform out of fear that Bush would get credit, which would advantage the Republican candidate for president in 2008 along with down ticket Republicans.
Democrat strategy was successful, bringing Obama to office as well as increasing the Senate majority to 58, 59 or 60 during the next two years while retaining the House majority.
Obama was unable to even get Obamacare passed while he had 60 Democrat Senators and certainly wasn't going to waste any political capital on dreamers or global warming legislation.
Democrats did manage to pass the stimulus plan, which would fund needed infrastructure and prevent the unemployment rate from increasing TO 8% at an addition to the deficit of $0.8 trillion, tripling the deficit.
1
Our judicial system, from lower courts to the Supreme Court, will be changed for decades due to the large & growing number of conservative judges appointed during this administration.
It’s up to each of us. Help save our country - VOTE & encourage everyone you know to do the same.
93
@MRN This was a great idea and insight in 2016. The Supreme Court is going to be christian and conservative for 40 years. Might as well get over it. Check with your friends. More than one of them could not bring themselves to vote for Hillary. I have a couple. Too late. Too sorry.
6
@MRN
The obvious solution would be to pass legislation rather than relying upon bizarre activist judges to replace the rule of law with their personal opinions.
If the laws passed by Congress reflected the will of the voters and were enforced as written, there would be no need for judges to legislate from the bench.
3
@ebmem
This level of ignorance of how the legal system works is amazing. Maybe the legislation you want will be tailored to cover all the details of every single case that will ever arise? I'm not quite sure how you propose to do that. If not, then there is room for judgement in the application of the law.
2