Bronx DA's Office Riddled With Sex, Booze & Fights

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
74,622
43,346
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
#32
You think a prosecutor can lie to the court in order to imprison an innocent person and "no crime occurred"?
Prosecutorial misconduct is not, AFAIK, a criminal act. It forms the basis for appeal, reversal of a conviction, a lawsuit by the defendant, and bar discipline. But unless there is a criminal statute, there is no criminal act involved.

I did not read the entire article, just your OP, so I do not know the nature of any prosecutorial misconduct beyond the mere statement to that effect that you posted.
 
Likes: 1 person
Jun 2014
60,492
34,752
Cleveland, Ohio
#33
Yeah ya do.

Texas Rep. Joe Barton, embarrassed by sex scandal, to retire - Chicago Tribune

And that is just ONE link. You wingers are so afraid of facts.
I don't mean to sound sanctimonious, but nobody sits on death row, innocent as the day is long, because of their shithead Congresscritter.

Prosecutors occupy a position of extreme trust, and for an entire DA's office to go so far off the reservation, for so long, is just horrific to me.

It's as if the prosecutors here had NO CARE for the citizens whose lives they impact. How many murderers escaped criminal liability under this FUBAR office?

If these allegations are true.
 
Jun 2014
60,492
34,752
Cleveland, Ohio
#34
Prosecutorial misconduct is not, AFAIK, a criminal act. It forms the basis for appeal, reversal of a conviction, a lawsuit by the defendant, and bar discipline. But unless there is a criminal statute, there is no criminal act involved.

I did not read the entire article, just your OP, so I do not know the nature of any prosecutorial misconduct beyond the mere statement to that effect that you posted.
IMO, it would be attempted first degree murder, if that prosecutor had sought the death penalty on an arrested person she knew or should have known was innocent.

And if the actual killer went on to kill again, that would be negligent homicide or accessory to first degree murder, etc. IMO.

The state bars around the country have been extremely reluctant to pursue ethics violations by prosecutors, which I think is condemnation-worthy. Worse, on the rare occasion that the bar does impose discipline on a prosecutor, they never (to my knowledge) refer the matter to the authorities for criminal prosecution, state or federal.

So, what countervailing influence keeps prosecutors from gross violations of the justice system? All their bosses and the public seem to care about is WINNING -- a verb prosecutors should never even use.
 
Last edited:
Jul 2011
3,766
5,611
UK/Australia
#35
IMO, it would be attempted first degree murder, if that prosecutor had sought the death penalty on an arrested person she knew or should have known was innocent.

And if the actual killer went on to kill again, that would be negligent homicide or accessory to first degree murder, etc. IMO.

The state bars around the country have been extremely reluctant to pursue ethics violations by prosecutors, which I think is condemnation-worthy. Worse, on the rare occasion that the bar does impose discipline on a prosecutor, they never (to my knowledge) refer the matter to the authorities for criminal prosecution, state or federal.

So, what countervailing influence keeps prosecutors from gross violations of the justice system? All their bosses and the public seem to care about is WINNING -- a verb prosecutors should never even use.
I agree with your sentiments upon this matter. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is an independent judicial agency responsible for the preparation and presentation of criminal prosecutions in the UK. The CPS in Britain has not been without its problems, including funding cuts and a predisposition to act in concert with the police.

To satisfy the requirements of the Human Rights Act 1998, Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) - an independent agency – was formed and is responsible for inspecting, assessing and reporting on the probity of the operations of the CPS. This scrutiny assists in constraining the CPS from the excesses of which you complain in your system.
 
Likes: 3 people
Jun 2014
60,492
34,752
Cleveland, Ohio
#36
I agree with your sentiments upon this matter. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is an independent judicial agency responsible for the preparation and presentation of criminal prosecutions in the UK. The CPS in Britain has not been without its problems, including funding cuts and a predisposition to act in concert with the police.

To satisfy the requirements of the Human Rights Act 1998, Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) - an independent agency – was formed and is responsible for inspecting, assessing and reporting on the probity of the operations of the CPS. This scrutiny assists in constraining the CPS from the excesses of which you complain in your system.
Most people go to law school because they are idealistic. I have no doubt, most prosecutors do their damndest and create as much justice as our broken system will permit.

But as with cops, there are a few terrible human beings working as prosecutors, and like cops, when they breach their duty and someone dies, gets raped or beaten, those prosecutors should be charged with their crimes.

IMO.
 

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
74,622
43,346
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
#37
IMO, it would be attempted first degree murder, if that prosecutor had sought the death penalty on an arrested person she knew or should have known was innocent.

And if the actual killer went on to kill again, that would be negligent homicide or accessory to first degree murder, etc. IMO.
I disagree with all of this. Note, of course, that a prosecutor does not (and cannot) seek any penalty until a person is convicted, at which point it is fair to do so. A prosecutor does not prosecute someone unless they believe the person to be guilty. Additionally, many - perhaps most - murder cases are not a case of identification, but rather whether the act in question constituted murder or some other crime. In the case we are discussing in the other thread, for example, there was no question as to who killed the victim, but rather whether the killing was murder (the jury decided that it was).

The state bars around the country have been extremely reluctant to pursue ethics violations by prosecutors, which I think is condemnation-worthy.
I do not have sufficient information to comment on this.

Worse, on the rare occasion that the bar does impose discipline on a prosecutor, they never (to my knowledge) refer the matter to the authorities for criminal prosecution, state or federal.
That is almost certainly because disciplinary issues rarely involve criminal acts. Even Mike Nifong, the disgraced prosecutor in the Duke lacrosse case, was disbarred and only served one day in jail on account of criminal contempt, and the alleged victim who filed the false reports was never prosecuted for having done so.
 
Likes: 1 person

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
74,622
43,346
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
#38
Most people go to law school because they are idealistic.
I do not believe this is true at all. Certainly, many do. But just as many do it for the money. I had one classmate in a summer income tax class I took* who expressly said she "wasn't in it for the integrity of it, but for the money." Since the class was not at my school (I traveled to another town for the class & transferred the credits), I never saw her after the class was over. But I have no reason to suspect this is the case for many law students. And, to be fair, the cost of a legal education justifies this attitude (though it also does not necessarily obviate one's idealism, if he or she possesses it, as it is possible to have both).
 
Likes: 1 person
Jun 2014
60,492
34,752
Cleveland, Ohio
#39
I do not believe this is true at all. Certainly, many do. But just as many do it for the money. I had one classmate in a summer income tax class I took* who expressly said she "wasn't in it for the integrity of it, but for the money." Since the class was not at my school (I traveled to another town for the class & transferred the credits), I never saw her after the class was over. But I have no reason to suspect this is the case for many law students. And, to be fair, the cost of a legal education justifies this attitude (though it also does not necessarily obviate one's idealism, if he or she possesses it, as it is possible to have both).
Well, I don't think anyone goes to law school in hopes of becoming a horrible prosecutor, sending innocent people to death row.

Maybe my classmates were just especially likeable, although oddly, the entire top 5% of my class was my female friends. Upon graduation, only two of us planned a career in law, and the other lady left to become a farmer after a couple of years.

I was really shocked. Nobody ever said a word about dropping out, etc. whilst we were in school.

Practicing law is so different from law school. I wish I had had a mentor then who could have told me how much I would hate doing tax law for the rich. That would have saved me a fucking fortune.
 
Last edited:
Jun 2014
60,492
34,752
Cleveland, Ohio
#40
I disagree with all of this. Note, of course, that a prosecutor does not (and cannot) seek any penalty until a person is convicted, at which point it is fair to do so. A prosecutor does not prosecute someone unless they believe the person to be guilty. Additionally, many - perhaps most - murder cases are not a case of identification, but rather whether the act in question constituted murder or some other crime. In the case we are discussing in the other thread, for example, there was no question as to who killed the victim, but rather whether the killing was murder (the jury decided that it was).


I do not have sufficient information to comment on this.


That is almost certainly because disciplinary issues rarely involve criminal acts. Even Mike Nifong, the disgraced prosecutor in the Duke lacrosse case, was disbarred and only served one day in jail on account of criminal contempt, and the alleged victim who filed the false reports was never prosecuted for having done so.
I did a thread last year about a prosecutor who was in trouble for lying to a federal judge, I think, but fuck if I can recall the thread title.

[MENTION=27033]John T Ford[/MENTION].....I think you were a participant in it. Can you remember the thread title?

Anyway, that person appeared to have a criminal charge in his future. Withheld Brady material and lied to the judge about it, because the defendant was innocent in fact.
 
Last edited: