Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Justice For Thee But Not For Me...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I honestly don't think it's very far from the worst kinds of authoritarianism when people are encouraging the prosecution of non-violent protesters over the decision of constitutionally and duly elected officials. It's an explicit abrogation of the rule of law. Once you start violating constitutional powers of prosecution and move judges from arbiters of fact to co-prosecutors, it's downhill and downhill quick.

    --Sam

    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    That's a bit over the top, Sam. It's an odd case, but there's usually more than meets the eye.

    Meanwhile, Mayor Martin Walsh on Wednesday said he’s backing the judges, revealing a split with Rollins.

    “I think the judge, the courts should take those cases on,” Walsh said. “They should go through the court system.”

    Also Wednesday, City Councilor At-Large Michelle Wu took to Twitter, saying she watched videos of police interactions with protesters Saturday and felt police acted professionally.

    “Our law enforcement officers face an incredibly difficult job everyday,” Wu tweeted. “The vast majority of officers in the videos showed restraint, from what I could tell. The City should look into the usage of pepper spray — the short videos don’t show provocation & also don’t give all context.”

    source


    It will be interesting, if the case makes it to court, to see who will actually prosecute the case.
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

    Comment


    • #17
      OK, I figured there had to be more to the story than meets the eye, and, apparently, this battle has been going on for some time. The current situation is just one more event.

      Rollins had apparently campaigned on a social justice platform, of sorts, and was elected on that basis - that she would not prosecute certain crimes. That is, indeed, problematic.

      Elected as Suffolk County’s first female district attorney last year, Rollins has garnered national attention for her progressive criminal justice platform, including a list of 15 petty crimes for which her office’s default stance is to not prosecute. Both disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, as a standalone charge or in combination with another charge on the list, are among the nonviolent offenses on the list.


      While accusing the judge of abusing his office, she appears to have thrown the first stone in making herself the judge of which crimes will not be prosecuted. That's different than deciding which defendants should not be prosecuted for crimes. Like any civil servant, she would have taken an oath to do her job.

      I believe the oath of office for that job is "“I, ___________, do solemnly swear and affirm that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent on me as Suffolk County District Attorney, according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably, to the rules and regulations of the Constitution, and the laws of this Commonwealth, so help me God,”

      That does not include pre-deciding which crimes will not be prosecuted - the authority to codify crimes lies elsewhere.
      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Sam View Post
        I honestly don't think it's very far from the worst kinds of authoritarianism when people are encouraging the prosecution of non-violent protesters over the decision of constitutionally and duly elected officials. It's an explicit abrogation of the rule of law. Once you start violating constitutional powers of prosecution and move judges from arbiters of fact to co-prosecutors, it's downhill and downhill quick.

        --Sam
        Just out of curiosity, and in no way argumentative, why are you the only poster who speaks first, then quotes the other person?
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Sam View Post
          I honestly don't think it's very far from the worst kinds of authoritarianism when people are encouraging the prosecution of non-violent protesters over the decision of constitutionally and duly elected officials. It's an explicit abrogation of the rule of law. Once you start violating constitutional powers of prosecution and move judges from arbiters of fact to co-prosecutors, it's downhill and downhill quick.

          --Sam
          Apparently this is a small battle in a bigger war - the DA appears to be acting as a social justice warrior more so than an officer of the court. Not excusing the judge's actions at all - just sensed there was more to this than "bad judge!!!".
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            OK, I figured there had to be more to the story than meets the eye, and, apparently, this battle has been going on for some time. The current situation is just one more event.

            Rollins had apparently campaigned on a social justice platform, of sorts, and was elected on that basis - that she would not prosecute certain crimes. That is, indeed, problematic.

            Elected as Suffolk County’s first female district attorney last year, Rollins has garnered national attention for her progressive criminal justice platform, including a list of 15 petty crimes for which her office’s default stance is to not prosecute. Both disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, as a standalone charge or in combination with another charge on the list, are among the nonviolent offenses on the list.


            While accusing the judge of abusing his office, she appears to have thrown the first stone in making herself the judge of which crimes will not be prosecuted. That's different than deciding which defendants should not be prosecuted for crimes. Like any civil servant, she would have taken an oath to do her job.

            I believe the oath of office for that job is "“I, ___________, do solemnly swear and affirm that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent on me as Suffolk County District Attorney, according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably, to the rules and regulations of the Constitution, and the laws of this Commonwealth, so help me God,”

            That does not include pre-deciding which crimes will not be prosecuted - the authority to codify crimes lies elsewhere.
            Prosecutorial discretion has a fairly long history and is an important aspect in the balance of powers between the executive branch and the legislative branch. And how a law is applied for the public interest is reserved for the executive branch.

            It's no different, in theory, than a police officer's decision to not pull over every person who drives 5 mph over the speed limit.

            --Sam
            "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              Just out of curiosity, and in no way argumentative, why are you the only poster who speaks first, then quotes the other person?
              Either as a direct form of response, when I figure there won't be a gap between posts or when I'm responding to a point I don't think has enough substance to require it be read first.
              "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                Apparently this is a small battle in a bigger war - the DA appears to be acting as a social justice warrior more so than an officer of the court. Not excusing the judge's actions at all - just sensed there was more to this than "bad judge!!!".
                We're going to see more of this, as many DA candidates are now explicitly running on reversing the trend of aggressive prosecution of low-level crimes. It's important to understand both directions as valid; it's a difference in opinion as to how to use the criminal code to improve society, understanding that an overly-strict penal system is as bad or worse than an overly-lax penal system.

                --Sam
                "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Sam View Post
                  For the record:

                  Source: Rachael Rollins blasts judge for refusing to dismiss charges against nonviolent ‘Straight Pride Parade’ protesters. Nik DeCosta-Klipa. Boston.com 2019.09.03

                  A total of 36 people were arrested during the parade Saturday. According to Rollins’s office, prosecutors are pressing forward in the cases in which the charges are violent in nature, including assault and battery on a police officer. However, 20 of the people arrested were charged only with disorderly conduct alone or disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. And in those cases, prosecutors have been asking Sinnott to drop the charges, according to the DA’s office.

                  © Copyright Original Source



                  Great to see just how readily some folks here are ready to put on the jackboots, tho.

                  --Sam
                  Sounds like there is more going on here than just this case. The prosecutor isn't doing her job in prosecuting many crimes in general.

                  From your article:



                  Elected as Suffolk County’s first female district attorney last year, Rollins has garnered national attention for her progressive criminal justice platform, including a list of 15 petty crimes for which her office’s default stance is to not prosecute. Both disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, as a standalone charge or in combination with another charge on the list, are among the nonviolent offenses on the list.

                  Rollins said Tuesday that, at her request, prosecutors were using their constitutional discretion “to triage cases and use our resources most effectively to protect public safety.”

                  However, in one exchange Tuesday, Sinnott reportedly chided a prosecutor for suggesting that while the actions of Lowell man — charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest for allegedly forming a human chain with other protesters — were “not appropriate,” prosecuting the 26-year-old would not do anything to make the community safer.

                  “Not appropriate? It sounds like he picked up the wrong fork at dinner,” Sinnott shot back, according to the Globe.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    A prosecutor's job includes exercising prosecutorial discretion. If the public interest is better served by not pursuing certain offenses, it's wholly within a prosecutor's power to make that decision. It is, quite explicitly, what we elect them to do.

                    --Sam

                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    Sounds like there is more going on here than just this case. The prosecutor isn't doing her job in prosecuting many crimes in general.

                    From your article:



                    Elected as Suffolk County’s first female district attorney last year, Rollins has garnered national attention for her progressive criminal justice platform, including a list of 15 petty crimes for which her office’s default stance is to not prosecute. Both disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, as a standalone charge or in combination with another charge on the list, are among the nonviolent offenses on the list.

                    Rollins said Tuesday that, at her request, prosecutors were using their constitutional discretion “to triage cases and use our resources most effectively to protect public safety.”

                    However, in one exchange Tuesday, Sinnott reportedly chided a prosecutor for suggesting that while the actions of Lowell man — charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest for allegedly forming a human chain with other protesters — were “not appropriate,” prosecuting the 26-year-old would not do anything to make the community safer.

                    “Not appropriate? It sounds like he picked up the wrong fork at dinner,” Sinnott shot back, according to the Globe.
                    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Regardless, it's not for a judge to decide who gets prosecuted and who doesn't. That's antithetical to the very nature of the judiciary.
                      "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Sam View Post
                        We're going to see more of this, as many DA candidates are now explicitly running on reversing the trend of aggressive prosecution of low-level crimes.
                        That sounds a bit simplistic, Sam. If the "low-level crimes" don't need to be prosecuted, there's a way to do that. You have them decodified.

                        It's important to understand both directions as valid; it's a difference in opinion as to how to use the criminal code to improve society, understanding that an overly-strict penal system is as bad or worse than an overly-lax penal system.

                        --Sam
                        It's important to understand that the judge's reaction is in response to a DA's decision not to uphold the laws as written.

                        Your bad analogy of a police officer fails because the police officer has no power to de-criminalize whole categories of crimes. Sure, he can exercise discretion, he cannot invalidate codified ordinances.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Sam View Post
                          Regardless, it's not for a judge to decide who gets prosecuted and who doesn't. That's antithetical to the very nature of the judiciary.
                          It's not for a District Attorney to decided whole classes of crimes that are not to be prosecuted. The system is broken at both ends.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Sam View Post
                            A prosecutor's job includes exercising prosecutorial discretion. If the public interest is better served by not pursuing certain offenses, it's wholly within a prosecutor's power to make that decision. It is, quite explicitly, what we elect them to do.

                            --Sam
                            But as Teal pointed out, the decision had already been made to prosecute.
                            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                            Than a fool in the eyes of God


                            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              The State can, at any time, decide not to continue with charges.

                              From the reporting I've seen, I can't even tell if this happened after or during arraignment. But it doesn't matter. If the prosecution decides a minute before trial that it won't prosecute, it can make that decision. And absent some extraordinary showing of injustice, a judge doesn't have the authority to override.

                              --Sam

                              Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                              But as Teal pointed out, the decision had already been made to prosecute.
                              "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Sam View Post
                                A prosecutor's job includes exercising prosecutorial discretion. If the public interest is better served by not pursuing certain offenses, it's wholly within a prosecutor's power to make that decision. It is, quite explicitly, what we elect them to do.

                                --Sam
                                on a case by case basis - depending on extenuating circumstances, not on ignoring the law altogether.

                                What if a prosecutor said, "We will no longer prosecute any burglaries, rapes or murders"

                                What would you be saying in that case?

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                157 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                373 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X