Comment by TrackerFF

16 days ago

The DA (District Attorney) is elected, so they love to cite their tough-on-crime statistics. There are few incentives for them to not "win".

51 comments

TrackerFF

Reply
shagie  16 days ago

They're still a lawyer. Getting disbarred often means the end of their professional career. So file a bar complaint.

https://arcourts.gov/professional-conduct

https://opinions.arcourts.gov/ark/cr/en/item/1868/index.do#!...

    Rule 3.8. Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor.
    The prosecutor in a criminal case shall:

    (a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause;

    ...

    COMMENT
    [1] A prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate. This responsibility carries with it specific obligations to see that the defendant is accorded procedural justice and that guilt is decided upon the basis of sufficient evidence. Precisely how far the prosecutor is required to go in this direction is a matter of debate and varies in different jurisdictions. Many jurisdictions have adopted the ABA Standards of Criminal Justice Relating to the Prosecution Function, which in turn are the product of prolonged and careful deliberation by lawyers experienced in both criminal prosecution and defense. Applicable law may require other measures by the prosecutor and knowing disregard of those obligations or a systematic abuse of prosecutorial discretion could constitute a violation of Rule 8.4.

  • noisy_boy  15 days ago

    Isn't the onus of proving the violation is on the complaint? So now she has to fight two cases and one of them is against someone who wields lot of power in the other case? Not saying we shouldn't hold the prosecutors' feet to fire but there are practical considerations.

    • shagie  15 days ago

      A bar complaint isn't something you fight. It's a strongly worded letter to their manager that may have professional consequences.

      One complaint may not have a "they're disbarred". It could result in a slap on the wrist and a note in their file. Multiple ones that show a system of abuse of discretion would be a different story - that would be handled by the state bar itself.

weberer  16 days ago

>The DA (District Attorney) is elected, so they love to cite their tough-on-crime statistics.

Its the opposite nowadays. The current meta is to advertise yourself as light on crime. So you get to the point where Philadelphia has an open-air drug market filled with fentanyl, the DA was actually impeached for dereliction of duty by the Pennsylvania house of representatives, and Philadelphians STILL re-elected him with over 75% of the vote.

  • computerdork  16 days ago

    Think the Philly DA situation is a bit more unique and interesting. Yeah, agree, he was one of the first progressive DA's elected in recent times, and he is in many ways light on crime. But he just got re-elected by a 75% in 2025 for a third term. That's incredible and think there is a reason for this.

    Am no expert on him, but as we're all talking about here, the legal system is really messed up. Yeah, there are a lot of terrible processes and laws that get in the way of justice, and a lot of the things his office did made a lot of sense.

    Probably one of the biggest was the "Elimination of Cash Bail for Low-Level Offenses." The cash bail system for minor crimes really screws poor people, who can't make bail for things like shoplifting, and have to stay in jail until their pre-trial. (it's often something like $1000, which for middle-class people is not a big deal at all). But imagine a teen who had to stay out of school for a month or even two just because they stole something for $20 and his family can't put together $1k. The teen gets behind in class and stops trying, and this becomes the start of getting further and further behind in life. And a similar situation happens with poor working-class people for a minor crime, they can't pay bail, so they are in jail and can't work. They are often fired or just get into debt because they're not drawing a salary.

    I don't know about anything about open drug markets, but think overall what the Philly DA seemed sensible (and just looked briefly and it seems like the crime statistics turned out well in Philly, but that could be from a number of things).

  • fc417fc802  16 days ago

    You're not entirely wrong but I think that description of the situation is rather heavily colored by partisanship. Being lenient about a very limited subset of crime that "the system" is particularly ineffective at dealing with (to the point that it is arguably racist/classist/etc) is viewed favorably by certain (primarily urban) demographics. When you have broad support for an elected official who is exercising a great deal of discretion to not enforce the law that should trigger fundamental changes to the system as opposed to impeachment.

  • npc99  16 days ago

    Good. DA should focus on a rational plan to tackle high-impact crimes, not drug offenses.

usefulcat  16 days ago

Don't they also hate to lose though? This seems an unlikely case for a prosecutor to win. If it were a civil case, sure, the standard is much lower there, but for a criminal case the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt".

I guess they could be gambling that she can't afford a good lawyer; many people can't.

  • TrackerFF  16 days ago

    Which is why there's a push to accept a plea deal. Innocent people can easily end up accepting a plea deal after a day in jail, and pushy investigators trying to get out a confession.

  • mandeepj  16 days ago

    > I guess they could be gambling that she can't afford a good lawyer; many people can't.

    Then the government provides a lawyer; you can't be without counsel even if you can't afford them.

    https://www.annenbergclassroom.org/resource/right-assistance...

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/right_to_counsel

    • EPWN3D  16 days ago

      Whether you qualify for a public defender varies by state. It might be that while yes, hiring a lawyer would destroy her financially, she has the assets to afford it. In which case, depending on your local laws, the court might be fine saying she has to get her own lawyer.

    • axus  16 days ago

      Sometimes the public defenders actions are indistinguishable from collusion with the prosecution. The window to appeal can close before your sentence is over.

    • nobody9999  16 days ago

      >> I guess they could be gambling that she can't afford a good lawyer; many people can't.

      >Then the government provides a lawyer; you can't be without counsel even if you can't afford them.

      I'd note that many (most?) state jurisdictions (the Federal judiciary has the Federal Defender's Service[0]) require a defendant to be "indigent"[1] before a lawyer is appointed, rather than requiring the defendant to hire a lawyer.

      Also, in many jurisdictions, private lawyers are appointed by judges to take on the cases of "indigent" defendants. Often there's little in the way of vetting such lawyers, and the fees paid generally aren't very high -- resulting in subpar lawyers and representation.

      Even in places (like NYC[2]) with a more robust public defender system, these lawyers are generally handling dozens of cases at once and don't have the resources of the prosecutor's office (investigators, budgets for forensic testing/analysis, etc.), leaving the defendants' side at a considerable disadvantage.

      As such, it's not just saying "I can't afford a lawyer," and Perry Mason rushes to your rescue.

      [0] https://www.uscourts.gov/topics/defender-services

      [1] Different jurisdictions have different standards for determining if a defendant is "indigent." But many of those won't appoint a lawyer unless you're flat broke. Own a home? Take out a second mortgage. Have a job? You're not indigent. Etc, etc, etc.

      [2] https://www.thecityreporter.nyc/2024/04/08/how-public-defend...

      1 reply →

    • AngryData  16 days ago

      Often a lawyer that doesn't want the case because the pay is lower than private work, and also if the defendant loses their case they must pay both the lawyer and the court their fees and hours.

    • usefulcat  16 days ago

      I'm well aware of that. I was speculating that the prosecutor may think that they could prevail vs a court appointed lawyer.

  • fooqux  16 days ago

    Well, now that this story is coming to light, I'm guessing getting a decent lawyer will be pretty easy.

lesam  16 days ago

Surely a widely read news story about prosecuting an obviously innocent person is bad for this particular DA? Or do the voters not care about that?

chrisjj  16 days ago

> they love to cite their tough-on-crime statistics.

Where can we see their tough-on-innocence statistics?

  • SpicyLemonZest  16 days ago

    A corollary of the “innocent until proven guilty” standard is that there’s just no way to compute such statistics. It’s impossible by design to distinguish between a clearly innocent person and a very suspicious person whose guilt couldn’t quite be proven without looking into the details of their case.

    • giantg2  16 days ago

      "It’s impossible by design to distinguish between a clearly innocent person and a very suspicious person whose guilt couldn’t quite be proven"

      Oh, you mean another innocent person? (Emphais mine)

      5 replies →

    • exe34  16 days ago

      I've never understood that. There's a claim you are guilty of robbery. You get charged and go to court. You plead not guilty. The da insists and you go to trial. During trial, you manage to provide cctv showing that you were 1000 miles away. The jury says "not guilty".

      Is there any reasonable way to say "we don't know, he might be guilty, we just didn't reach 'beyond reasonable doubt '"?

      7 replies →