[deleted]
Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.
21–30 of 33 posts
Re: Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.
#22In situations where accusations of widespread corruption, misconduct, unethical action, etc are made, a phrase that is often trotted out in defense of the accused is "just a few bad apples" . It's not WhereEver Police Department that has an issue with racial bias and violent escalation, it's just a few bad apples . Our school district does not have a bullying problem, it's just a few bad apples . Etc. What is interes…
What always amuses me about the "bad apple" defense is that in many situations I would imagine that if you objectively looked at the size of an organization vs the number of people involved in scandals over the years, it's not just a couple of bad apples but quite the opposite - say a statistically significant higher rate of xxx crime or behavior vs the general population.
I would imagine this happens by itself really: once something like corruption/bullying/sadism becomes established enough in any small or large institution, it tends to drive people with a conscience away (instead of attracting them to where they are most desperately needed) - where that doesn't happen actively, that is, as a sort of self-defense against likely snitches. So over time, left unchecked, it just compounds.
Re: Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.
#23I'm glad someone is finally standing up for the rights of common citizens. I really don't want to see the social experiment of the United States end in a failure, and every day our rights are eroded, we get closer to that. I like this country, and consider myself a patriot. I just also have to recognize that the people who participate in running this country do not always have our best interests at heart.
I really don't want to see the social experiment of the United States end in a failure, and every day our rights are eroded, we get closer to that. If you watch television, you will think that the world is becoming worse. After all, news is only when rare things happen, and usually very bad things at that. Now, I am not saying that that criminal justice system is in need of a huge overhaul. It is a real human right p…
Popular issues like environmentalism and LGBT rights may be advancing, but more niche yet equally important issues, such as excessive privacy intrusions (mass surveillance, TSA), software and "DNA" patents are not. And these are important issues that will shape the future.
Re: Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.
#24Two things: 1. I suspect the genisis of this immunity was to inoculate prosecutors from coercion by politicians - which is probably a good thing. But I would be curious to know about the logic behind it. 2. While perhaps it might be worthwhile to have some level of immunity that logic frays somewhat when acts that would generally be considered immoral and perhaps criminal are unaddressable.
The "absolute immunity" for prosecutors was established in Imbler v. Pachtman (1976). The logic is that if prosecutors could be sued by people they accused but failed to convict,
that "would cause a deflection of the prosecutor's energies from his public duties, and the possibility that he would shade his decisions instead of exercising the independence of judgment required by his public trust."
(http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=Imbler+v.+Pachtman&...)
Re: Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Related: I don't understand how the "few bad apples" defense always seems to be used to argue for "so ignore it" rather than "and by the way, when we find a bad apple, it goes straight in the garbage disposal where it belongs". Like, all these prosecutors are going apeshit because a judge dared to say they should possibly lose their licenses -- what about the idea that they should serve time, time comparable to what…
I don't think they should lose their licenses, they should be tried for contempt and the mandatory minimum applied. Prosecutors might be well served in these instances by the judge refusing a plea bargain as is their prerogative.
> mandatory minimum applied
I’m not familiar with mandatory minimum for contempt. I would believe it fails to match the point, that is to allow the judge to operate his or her courtroom reasonably.
Re: Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mike Nifong is a good example of someone who abused his office. Wikipedia calls him a "rouge" prosecutor. Maybe he wasn't so rouge...
Off-topic pedantic point. Ro_gu_e is an adjective that means without guidance or lacking oversight. Ro_ug_e is a type of cosmetic, namely one for making the cheeks redder. While the image of a red-faced prosecutor screaming at his clerks is amusing, I don't think it's what you had in mind. Sorry to distract from your otherwise valid comment.
Completely relevant point, I would say: I assumed ‘rouge’ meant ‘red’ in that context, a.k.a. presumed socialo-communist, a.k.a. a prosecutor trying to redress economic and political injustices, going after the rich and powerful and ignoring petty crimes, like several prosecutors have been accused of doing in France and Italy. That made the original common odd.
Re: Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.
#27In situations where accusations of widespread corruption, misconduct, unethical action, etc are made, a phrase that is often trotted out in defense of the accused is "just a few bad apples" . It's not WhereEver Police Department that has an issue with racial bias and violent escalation, it's just a few bad apples . Our school district does not have a bullying problem, it's just a few bad apples . Etc. What is interes…
Add on top of the few bad apples spoiling the barrel the fact that certain positions and jobs create quite strong arrogant bastard self-selection pressures and it's an extra recipe for disaster. It's the same as the NSA -- people who have doubts about the system or feel like being lenient will self-select out, just like those who believe in actual privacy and civil liberties will self-select out of the NSA, creating…
I appreciate the intent to use random citizens to hold power, but prosecutor might be the position where years of professional training matters. Remember what Churchill said about five minutes with the average voters? Well, there is one bigger scandal in any democracy (it is actually mentioned in the article) and that’s how much someone accused of anything, specially if he happens to be unattractive, socially isolated, poor and male, is presumed guilty. This is far worst for ‘random people’, and allowing non-experts to choose who to prosecute without consequence would lead to spectacular injustices.
That’s why it is the jury who is made of inexperienced citizens selected at random: prosecutors now have the burden to convince them all, including those who empathise with the accused. They are judged over their career by how their prejudice leads them to bad cases, and prevents them from winning cases.
If prosecutors saw acquittals as failure on their part, and need to re-consider their world-view, that would work. I believe the article and the judge see the problem as them seeing such (rare) events as abuse of the system against them, personification of the innocent defendent public, and that’s the source of the issue.
Re: Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really don't want to see the social experiment of the United States end in a failure, and every day our rights are eroded, we get closer to that. If you watch television, you will think that the world is becoming worse. After all, news is only when rare things happen, and usually very bad things at that. Now, I am not saying that that criminal justice system is in need of a huge overhaul. It is a real human right p…
I don't disagree with your analysis, but people don't gain or lose rights based on government whims. People have inalienable rights that can be respected or violated. This may seem like a semantic point, but I think it's important that to remember that fundamental rights, like the right to to a fair trial, exist no matter whether the law and its agents honor those rights. When governments fail to respect inalienable…
Inalienable rights is verbage that sounds good, but means practically nothing.
Do you have a right to life? Well no - America is one of the only first world nations to still have the death penalty.
Liberty? The standard faire of our justice systems is to remove that.
Pursuit of happiness? This is the only one I'd argue everyone does have, that actually is inalienable. The loss of that tends to actually cause problems.
But everything else comes stamped with some big provisos about one's place and actions within society, and a discussion where we hamstring ourselves over what is and isn't a right ultimately is what erodes those we do have - worrying too much about whether something is a right, rather then if what we're doing is right.
Re: Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.
#29I'm glad someone is finally standing up for the rights of common citizens. I really don't want to see the social experiment of the United States end in a failure, and every day our rights are eroded, we get closer to that. I like this country, and consider myself a patriot. I just also have to recognize that the people who participate in running this country do not always have our best interests at heart.
I really don't want to see the social experiment of the United States end in a failure, and every day our rights are eroded, we get closer to that. If you watch television, you will think that the world is becoming worse. After all, news is only when rare things happen, and usually very bad things at that. Now, I am not saying that that criminal justice system is in need of a huge overhaul. It is a real human right p…
I agree with what you said, but I actually quit watching TV (I got rid of cable like 3+ years ago, Netflix only nowadays) because its just talking heads on the news and no actual news.
I'm 30. What happened 50 years ago I wasn't here for. What happened 20 years ago I didn't really understand. All I know is what has happened over the past 10-15 years.
What I see is a worldwide communication network (the Internet) slowly being criminalized because of the actions of a few people: the big bad pedo/piracy/terrorist boogie man that some elected officials keep dragging out to shove anti-free speech and anti-small business legislation through the system.
Those who give up liberty for safety deserve neither.
Re: Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't disagree with your analysis, but people don't gain or lose rights based on government whims. People have inalienable rights that can be respected or violated. This may seem like a semantic point, but I think it's important that to remember that fundamental rights, like the right to to a fair trial, exist no matter whether the law and its agents honor those rights. When governments fail to respect inalienable…
Inalienable rights is verbage that sounds good, but means practically nothing. Do you have a right to life? Well no - America is one of the only first world nations to still have the death penalty. Liberty? The standard faire of our justice systems is to remove that. Pursuit of happiness? This is the only one I'd argue everyone does have, that actually is inalienable. The loss of that tends to actually cause problems…
I sounds like you agree that what is right exists outside of legal definitions, which was my point. The point being that moral authority does not derive from the legal code. To the extent that governments can be blamed for failing to protect the rights to life, liberty, property, conscience, etc., they can be found to be immoral or unjust. And at a certain point, the laws of the government (or even the government itself) loses legitimacy.
This was really the thesis of the Declaration of Independence.