- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: DA’s should be held accountable
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:18 pm to AggieHank86
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:18 pm to AggieHank86
Well you have to admit something is wrong with the current approach and accountability should not exist solely in the political arena.
How does a DA not prosecuting a crime and releasing someone on zero bail then the accused goes out and kills someone else not raise to the level of negligence? In any other arena (eg health care) if I'm the family of the second victim I see immediate culpability in the negligent DA and sue them.
How does a DA not prosecuting a crime and releasing someone on zero bail then the accused goes out and kills someone else not raise to the level of negligence? In any other arena (eg health care) if I'm the family of the second victim I see immediate culpability in the negligent DA and sue them.
0
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:20 pm to Masterag
quote:It's interesting that you are now all of a sudden outraged. In the past, they have been ENTIRELY UNACCOUNTABLE for false/shaky convictions - even after misbehavior is clearly revealed.
For crimes committed by people they refused to prosecute. We need to pass state and federal laws where if someone they refused to prosecute or let off with a leaser penalty and commits a violent crime, the DA should be disbarred for 10 years and spend at least 5 in prison dependent on the crime.
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:24 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
And, under the OP proposal, the prosecutor in both of those cases would be subjecting himself to civil liability (or possibly criminal responsibility) if he DID NOT prosecute both of those cases.
It was obvious Rittenhouse was innocent.
That fairy boy chose to prosecute.
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:26 pm to AggieHank86
quote:Just another quality small government idea from a small government conservative - who no doubt rants about the law of unintended consequences in most other areas.
And, under the OP proposal, the prosecutor in both of those cases would be essentially COMPELLED to prosecute. Otherwise, he would be subjecting himself to civil liability (or possibly criminal responsibility) if he DID NOT prosecute both of those cases.
If he just dismissed them, or pleaded them down, he would be looking at the possibility of losing his career if any of the defendants engaged in recidivism.
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:26 pm to 93and99
quote:Under the OP proposal, that would be utterly irrelevant. If the prosecutor declines to pursue those charges (for whatever reason), and Rittenhouse later committed a felony, the prosecutor would be looking at jail time and loss of his ability to make a living.
It was obvious Rittenhouse was innocent.
He would have no choice whatsoever but to try every case to the jury.
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:28 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:Maybe he can show what flaw he sees in the analysis. If a prosecutor is facing jail time and loss of licensure for pleading down the case, is he going to try every case? Yes or no?
Just another quality small government idea from a small government conservative - who no doubt rants about the law of unintended consequences in most other areas.
This post was edited on 9/29/22 at 5:42 pm
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:35 pm to Masterag
DA’s need to prosecute the law whether they agree with it or not. Changing laws is the responsibility of the legislature…not the DA.
We’re not talking about not pursuing a case because of shoddy evidence. We’re talking about not pursuing charges when the evidence is clear or letting people out without bail that are clear dangers to society.
Any that refuse to do it should be impeached and replaced.
We’re not talking about not pursuing a case because of shoddy evidence. We’re talking about not pursuing charges when the evidence is clear or letting people out without bail that are clear dangers to society.
Any that refuse to do it should be impeached and replaced.
This post was edited on 9/29/22 at 5:38 pm
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:37 pm to AggieHank86
quote:This will be the ONE time when government employees don't respond to obvious incentives.
Maybe he can what flaw he sees in the analysis. If a prosecutor is facing jail time and loss of licensure for pleading down the case, is he going to try every case? Yes or no?
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:38 pm to SquatchDawg
quote:How often would you say that happens?
We’re talking about not pursuing charges when the evidence is clear
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:40 pm to Masterag
yep
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:45 pm to SquatchDawg
quote:And WHO will be deciding, after the fact, whether a case meets this odd, subjective set of standards?
We’re not talking about not pursuing a case because of shoddy evidence. We’re talking about not pursuing charges when the evidence is clear or letting people out without bail that are clear dangers to society.
AGAIN, the DA will prosecute EVERY case, rather that risking his career and/or his freedom by pleading a case down.
The OP presents perhaps the dumbest conceivable “reform” of the criminal justice system.
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:47 pm to Masterag
The entire judicial system should be held accountable
FIFY
FIFY
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:48 pm to Masterag
I agree. Doesn't TX AG have an issue with DAs being able to do what they want? Heard national interviews with saying this.
Sounds like he's trying to push for the state legislature to do something about it. Perhaps they can throw this in it whatever they come up with. If TX legislature does anything as I hear it's pretty dem friendly rinos filled.
Sounds like he's trying to push for the state legislature to do something about it. Perhaps they can throw this in it whatever they come up with. If TX legislature does anything as I hear it's pretty dem friendly rinos filled.
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:53 pm to Masterag
End implied immunity, they lock the wrong people up all the time. They should have to stand up and be accountable for it.
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:54 pm to Jasharts77
quote:
They should have to stand up and be accountable for it.
DA is an elected position.
Posted on 9/29/22 at 5:57 pm to Masterag
Nobody will take the job. Or you will have the injustice flow hard in the other direction.
The default on both sides appears to be to massively over correct and end up in the opposite ditch.
The default on both sides appears to be to massively over correct and end up in the opposite ditch.
This post was edited on 9/29/22 at 5:59 pm
Posted on 9/29/22 at 6:05 pm to cwill
quote:
The default on both sides appears to be to massively over correct and end up in the opposite ditch.
Setting the expectation for someone to do their job isn't an overcorrection.
Posted on 9/29/22 at 6:07 pm to cwill
quote:Not buying it.
Nobody will take the job.
The malpractice threat for these goobs is a fraction of what their field impacts on others.
Posted on 9/29/22 at 6:15 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Setting the expectation for someone to do their job isn't an overcorrection.
Throwing someone in jail that doesn't do their job to your satisfaction is an overcorrection and the unintended consequences would likely be severe
Posted on 9/29/22 at 6:20 pm to Powerman
quote:
Throwing someone in jail that doesn't do their job to your satisfaction is an overcorrection and the unintended consequences would likely be severe
It isn't about an individual's personal satisfaction. They're not doing their job according to the law. I probably wouldn't throw everyone in jail, but they shouldn't be immune from consequences up to and including criminal sanctions in severe cases.
Page 2 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News