Useful Distraction posted:

What, even when done under color of law? Cause the federal government already has the power to prosecute cases involving excessive force or sexual assault by cops, why couldn't homicide be covered as well?

ActusRhesus posted:

State level. The speedy trial issue is interesting. A lot of times it's defense counsel who want to slow down to get more time to prepare. I agree that a lot of non violent offenders are held on unnecessarily high bonds, but what do you do about the defendant who really is a danger to the public? A case I'm working on now led to major bond reforms. Attempted murder. Guy posts bond and finishes the job. Gets arrested. Posts bond again. Kills a witness. Some people really are dangerous... A fact this thread sometimes forgets.

ActusRhesus posted:

State level. The speedy trial issue is interesting. A lot of times it's defense counsel who want to slow down to get more time to prepare. I agree that a lot of non violent offenders are held on unnecessarily high bonds, but what do you do about the defendant who really is a danger to the public? A case I'm working on now led to major bond reforms. Attempted murder. Guy posts bond and finishes the job. Gets arrested. Posts bond again. Kills a witness. Some people really are dangerous... A fact this thread sometimes forgets.

quote:

Browder repeatedly told O’Meara, his court-appointed lawyer, that he would never plead guilty and that he wanted to go to trial. O’Meara assumed that his courtroom defense would be “Listen, they got the wrong kid.” After all, the accusation had been made a week or two after the alleged robbery, and the victim had later changed his mind about when it occurred. (The original police report said “on or about May 2,” but Bautista later told a detective that it happened on May 8th.)
...
In order for a trial to start, both the defense attorney and the prosecutor have to declare that they are ready; the court clerk then searches for a trial judge who is free and transfers the case, and jury selection can begin. Not long after Browder was indicted, an assistant district attorney sent the court a “Notice of Readiness,” stating that “the People are ready for trial.” The case was put on the calendar for possible trial on December 10th, but it did not start that day. On January 28, 2011, Browder’s two-hundred-and-fifty-eighth day in jail, he was brought back to the courthouse once again. This time, the prosecutor said, “The People are not ready. We are requesting one week.” The next court date set by the judge—March 9th—was not one week away but six. As it happened, Browder didn’t go to trial anytime that year. An index card in the court file explains:

June 23, 2011: People not ready, request 1 week.
August 24, 2011: People not ready, request 1 day.
November 4, 2011: People not ready, prosecutor on trial, request 2 weeks.
December 2, 2011: Prosecutor on trial, request January 3rd.

The Bronx courts are so clogged that when a lawyer asks for a one-week adjournment the next court date usually doesn’t happen for six weeks or more. As long as a prosecutor has filed a Notice of Readiness, however, delays caused by court congestion don’t count toward the number of days that are officially held to have elapsed. Every time a prosecutor stood before a judge in Browder’s case, requested a one-week adjournment, and got six weeks instead, this counted as only one week against the six-month deadline.

blarzgh posted:

I think the justice system is plagued far more by institutional bias against poverty, and lack of education than it is racism. I think you fix the majority of inequities problems with the justice system by dealing with poverty and civic engagement first.

blarzgh posted:

Its my opinion that ignorance (not the insulting kind) is the largest contributor to unfairness, whether real or perceived in the justice system. Most people don't understand how the system works, and people who don't understand the system feel frustrated by it, and dis-empowered. That leads to hurt feels and distrust and resentment. This conversation is a fair microcosm of that interplay.

blarzgh posted:

People on the outside treat the system like this sentient thing, but all society and government is just a bunch of people agreeing to try to play by the same rules. Poverty and lack of education deprive people of the opportunity to learn those rules, and force people to break them to survive. If you want to fix inequality, you should stop harvesting the fruits of the poisoned tree, and start treating the roots.

ActusRhesus posted:

What are the speedy trial rules in your jurisdiction?

quote:

Plus, everyone forgets that "Federal" prosecutors and investigators live in the same places, and go to the same functions as state and local guys. These people don't fly in from Washington - they live and work in the same place as the State level employees. Any time there was a perceived 'unfair result' under the proposed federal system, they would still blame it on prosecutorial bias, and argue different reasons for the bias.

ActusRhesus posted:

State level. The speedy trial issue is interesting. A lot of times it's defense counsel who want to slow down to get more time to prepare. I agree that a lot of non violent offenders are held on unnecessarily high bonds, but what do you do about the defendant who really is a danger to the public? A case I'm working on now led to major bond reforms. Attempted murder. Guy posts bond and finishes the job. Gets arrested. Posts bond again. Kills a witness. Some people really are dangerous... A fact this thread sometimes forgets.

ElCondemn posted:

Your belief is stupid

Have you considered people are calling you stupid because you're the "ignorant" one?

blarzgh posted:

Why do you think I grew up ignorant and privileged? Because I don't have the same opinion as you?

blarzgh posted:

I think the justice system is plagued far more by institutional bias against poverty, and lack of education than it is racism. I think you fix the majority of inequities problems with the justice system by dealing with poverty and civic engagement first.

blarzgh posted:

And criminal trials roll out three times faster than civil cases. I have cases that are 2, 3, 4 and one 5 years old. Two years is how long you can generally expect a civil case to wait for trial. When we do eventually get a setting, we have to look and see how many criminal trials are set to go before us (here criminal trials get precedence) to guess if we'll get to go.

There aren't enough courtrooms most places.

ToastyPotato posted:

Did you hear about the recent story in NY where that one kid was held in Riker's for about 3 years without having been to trial or convicted of anything? He was eventually released (I think the charges dropped) and then he killed himself because of the years of abuse he had sustained.
Edit: Beaten.

This isn't even that rare. I personally know of another case where the defendant waited 18 months in Rikers before jury selection began. The Judge's response was "the gears of justice turn slowly" with a smirk. That was a murder case though, to be fair, so I don't know how that changes things. I don't feel like 18 months can be defined as speedy by any stretch though.

Berk Berkly posted:

No, we DO know that some people are very, very dangerous. It is just that sometimes those people can also wear uniforms and can be protected by the very system that should be protecting all of us against them.

I don't think anyone here is a complete anarchist and thinks that cops and the justice system and government in general isn't necessary at some level.

ActusRhesus posted:

State level. The speedy trial issue is interesting. A lot of times it's defense counsel who want to slow down to get more time to prepare. I agree that a lot of non violent offenders are held on unnecessarily high bonds, but what do you do about the defendant who really is a danger to the public? A case I'm working on now led to major bond reforms. Attempted murder. Guy posts bond and finishes the job. Gets arrested. Posts bond again. Kills a witness. Some people really are dangerous... A fact this thread sometimes forgets.

blarzgh posted:

Why do you think I grew up ignorant and privileged? Because I don't have the same opinion as you?

blarzgh posted:

And criminal trials roll out three times faster than civil cases. I have cases that are 2, 3, 4 and one 5 years old. Two years is how long you can generally expect a civil case to wait for trial. When we do eventually get a setting, we have to look and see how many criminal trials are set to go before us (here criminal trials get precedence) to guess if we'll get to go.

There aren't enough courtrooms most places.

ActusRhesus posted:

State level. The speedy trial issue is interesting. A lot of times it's defense counsel who want to slow down to get more time to prepare. I agree that a lot of non violent offenders are held on unnecessarily high bonds, but what do you do about the defendant who really is a danger to the public? A case I'm working on now led to major bond reforms. Attempted murder. Guy posts bond and finishes the job. Gets arrested. Posts bond again. Kills a witness. Some people really are dangerous... A fact this thread sometimes forgets.

Trabisnikof posted:

ElCondemn posted:

Whenever anyone trots out the whole "it's not racism, it's classism" argument it really highlights the privilege these people have had.

blarzgh posted:

Take some time to learn more about me and what my life has been like before you make broad sweeping decisions about who I am.



You cite disparate racial impact of the application of the criminal justice system, an impact I don't disagree with. If your goal is to increase sentencing lengths for whites by 10%, then have at it.

Its my opinion that if you help combat poverty and a lack of education, and help merge cultures mired in distrust and skepticism, you will start to eat at the heart of racism in this country. I think that there is a cultural divide that has grown wider and deeper over the years because of racism and poverty. I don't think you can change the minds of people who don't want to agree with you. I think you can change the world around you for future generations.

So no, I don't think its productive for NYC to spend $35 million dollars training their police force how to properly choke-hold someone. I think its reactionary and short-sighted. Like-wise I don't think rewriting the constitution is a good idea at all for the same reason. I think real change means doing real work; not signing facebook petitions or showing up for an hour at an on-campus rally.

I think breaking down walls makes for change, not digging bunkers.

ActusRhesus posted:

Some people really are dangerous... A fact this thread sometimes forgets.

Ravenfood posted:

They also get disproportionately cited and arrested, compounding the problem.

Kalman posted:

Shut up, you aren't a lawyer and this is incorrect.

Obdicut posted:

This is all nice sounding rhetoric, but do you understand that you were wrong to think that the racial impact is explained through poverty and lack of education? You still seem to be harping on that, but poor black defendants get worse outcomes than poor white defendants. Controlling for other factors, race is still a major factor in every aspect of the justice system.

Obdicut posted:

blarzgh posted:

I don't think racism doesn't exist. I think the things that fix disparate impact aren't what this thread says they are.

Racism exists because of ignorance. Lets loving fix ignorance.


Edit: I know thats not as fun as burning cops in effigy on a saturday night.

Obdicut posted:

Even if your claim were true, it's not like we can't do anything to address the institutional racism in the justice system before it's fixed in society in general.

Obdicut posted:

Racism doesn't exist because of ignorance.

blarzgh posted:

See, I can agree with you, so


Are you just compelled to disagree with me?

blarzgh posted:

Are you just compelled to disagree with me?

Obdicut posted:

No, that's a really strange reaction. Racism doesn't just exist because of ignorance. I don't know why you think it does, but it doesn't matter--it's demonstrably untrue. Racism is certainly helped along by ignorance in some areas, but there are myriad other aspects to and causes of racism.

If being disagreed with really upsets you then you're going to find a lot of conversations rough.

Obdicut posted:

This is all nice sounding rhetoric, but do you understand that you were wrong to think that the racial impact is explained through poverty and lack of education? You still seem to be harping on that, but poor black defendants get worse outcomes than poor white defendants. Controlling for other factors, race is still a major factor in every aspect of the justice system.


Nobody in this thread forgets that. Sanctimony isn't an argument.


Yes. At every point of the justice system, there is quantifiable racism, even to the credibility put into black vs. white witnesses.

ActusRhesus posted:

Did you really forget the guy arguing communal retreats instead of prison for first degree murder?

ActusRhesus posted:

Did you really forget the guy arguing communal retreats instead of prison for first degree murder?

quote:

“Immediately the driver exhibited aggression towards the officers and began making statements consistent with ‘sovereign citizen type beliefs,” the sheriff’s office said in a statement. “Rather than comply with deputies, the driver reached for a gun.”

The deputies feared for their safety but did not shoot, and instead broke out a window in Gunnell’s car and physically removed him from the vehicle.

Gunnells then tried to reach for a gun he kept in a holster at the small of his back, deputies said, but they were able to subdue him and take away his weapon.

One of the deputies suffered minor injuries from broken glass, and they said Gunnells refused medical treatment for minor injuries.

Deputies said they found six guns — a 9mm hand gun, a .45-caliber handgun, a .40-caliber handgun, a .44 magnum caliber short rifle, and a .223-caliber AR-15 military-style rifle — and extra ammunition inside Gunnells’ car.

Each of the weapons was loaded, and all but the AR-15 had rounds within the chamber, authorities said.

blarzgh posted:

I think its telling that the Four Horsemen of the Threadpocalypse are only concerned with talking about the pedantry of how I phrased what I think about racism, and less concerned with parsing the pros and cons of a grass-roots approach to fixing racial disparate impact in the criminal justice system.

Its almost like they'd rather pick someone to make the villain and string them up than talk about the problem.

chitoryu12 posted:

It is, in fact, possible to arrest armed people without killing them as long as they're white.

blarzgh posted:

I think its telling that the Four Horsemen of the Threadpocalypse are only concerned with talking about the pedantry of how I phrased what I think about racism, and less concerned with parsing the pros and cons of a grass-roots approach to fixing racial disparate impact in the criminal justice system.

Its almost like they'd rather pick someone to make the villain and string them up than talk about the problem.

blarzgh posted:

I think its telling that the Four Horsemen of the Threadpocalypse are only concerned with talking about the pedantry of how I phrased what I think about racism, and less concerned with parsing the pros and cons of a grass-roots approach to fixing racial disparate impact in the criminal justice system.

Its almost like they'd rather pick someone to make the villain and string them up than talk about the problem.

Obdicut posted:

It really is annoying how much you skip over substantive posts to pounce on whatever you perceive as low-hanging fruit.

SedanChair posted:

The prison system should in fact be eradicated and replaced by therapeutic retreats. Primitive European notions of retribution have no place in an enlightened society. If the families of victims disagree, they can also attend therapeutic retreats (different ones of course, tailored to condition them out of their retributive mindset). Therapeutic retreats for everyone! It's time to be shut of this hateful, barbarous system, which is no more just or ethical than trial by combat.

ActusRhesus posted:

Thanks for proving my point.

blarzgh posted:

I think its telling that the Four Horsemen of the Threadpocalypse are only concerned with talking about the pedantry of how I phrased what I think about racism, and less concerned with parsing the pros and cons of a grass-roots approach to fixing racial disparate impact in the criminal justice system.

Its almost like they'd rather pick someone to make the villain and string them up than talk about the problem.