5 ms·

The responsibility to determine whether the state has a reasonable chance at winning a trial prior to requesting an arrest warrant falls squarely on the shoulde

The responsibility to determine whether the state has a reasonable chance at winning a trial prior to requesting an arrest warrant falls squarely on the shoulders of prosecutors. Because the stigma and expense of even a failed prosecution like this one is so extreme to the defendant, there need to be consequences for prosecutors when they proceed with cases where the statute of limitations has clearly expired or other obvious problems barring a successful prosecution exist. Unfortunately, prosecutors cannot be put in jail for being utter failures at their jobs, and successfully suing them is nearly impossible, so these people got away with seriously damaging someone's life and career for nothing. It happens everyday throughout the US at both the state and federal levels. Sadly, until laws are changed to allow jail time for willful prosecutorial misconduct, it will keep happening.

rayiner 10y ago
I don't think it's correct to say that the statute of limitations has "clearly expired." The alleged fraud included among other things having invoices his company owed submitted to GT for payment. The dispute was about whether the statute of limitations ran from when he put in the orders or submitted the invoices, or when GT later paid them. I also don't think it's fair to presume bad faith on the part of the prosecutor. Outside the loosey-goosey world of incubators and academia, having your employer pay off invoices for your side business (or personal expenses) is classic white collar fraud.
- x0x0 10y ago
  Yeah, everyone but Laskar (even other profs in the article) pretty much agree that he stole $50k. See the quotes from peers saying that eg this was an overreaction, or that their university would have handled it internally, but that all agrees with the facts. Laskar stole $50k. Maybe other places slap people on the hands for doing that, but that doesn't make this prosecution wrong. The fact remains, Laskar stole the $50k. And as for prosecutorial misconduct, if you discover someone stole $50k, it's nothing like misconduct to go see what else he or she may have stolen.
  - pthreads 10y ago
    >The fact remains, Laskar stole the $50k. And as for prosecutorial misconduct, if you discover someone stole $50k, it's nothing like misconduct to go see what else he or she may have stolen. If it is a fact then why was he not charged with stealing $50K? It should have been pretty easy to get a conviction. Many have been convicted for stealing far less.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
btown 10y ago
Prosecutorial overreach is a huge issue at all levels of society, particularly when applied towards youth to an extent that it perpetuates a cycle of crime; it should come as a surprise to none that this disproportionately affects communities of color. The problem is deep: Because prosecutors are elected, by an electorate made of those who fear criminals more than missteps of the criminal justice system, they are instantly biased towards fearing the perception of being "soft on crime" above all else, above even the instinct and professional duty to be fair in their evaluations. Ken White (author of the Popehat law blog) eloquently describes from personal experience the caustic, self-feeding culture of the "brotherhood of prosecutors" that ingrains this trend, a must-read for anyone interested: http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/23/confessions-of-an-ex-prosecutor/ http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/23/confessions-of-an-ex-p... And this article expands on the problems behind electing prosecutors: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/24/it-s-too-dangerous-to-elect-prosecutors.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/24/it-s-too-da... I once asked a question at a panel about whether technology could help to rein in this culture: whether, for instance, easy access to statistics might allow a prosecutor to justify to their peers and the public that they could give certain individuals the benefit of the doubt... that they might press for less than the maximum sentence permissible by law, because the data shows they are statistically unlikely to be repeat offenders or escalate into violence, and that the individuals' contribution to society would be maximized by behaving firmly but fairly as a prosecutor... that they should take into account that the system is stacked in their favor, and that they should not just assume that public defenders have equal adversarial power, in making their decisions. (It's more than a little absurd that the former sentence isn't already the case.) I should have anticipated the answer: such a tool would be tremendously helpful, but to exist, it would require belief and cooperation and adoption at levels not yet seen, a classic chicken-egg problem. I hope thoughtful minds, with more insight into this problem, find a path forward.
- koolba 10y ago
  How about having the prosecutor put up a bond that goes to the defendant if the case is cleared?
  - btown 10y ago
averagewall 10y ago
Most of the damage was done by his employer for firing him and others for misjudging him. Simply being accused of something doesn't mean we should punish that person in advance.
- Sacho 10y ago
  Agreed; There are structural problems with no obvious solution in the justice system. However, there is one thing people can do - adjust their expectations and biases using information of the system's corruption.

rayiner 10y ago

I don't think it's correct to say that the statute of limitations has "clearly expired." The alleged fraud included among other things having invoices his company owed submitted to GT for payment. The dispute was about whether the statute of limitations ran from when he put in the orders or submitted the invoices, or when GT later paid them. I also don't think it's fair to presume bad faith on the part of the prosecutor. Outside the loosey-goosey world of incubators and academia, having your employer pay off invoices for your side business (or personal expenses) is classic white collar fraud.

x0x0 10y ago
Yeah, everyone but Laskar (even other profs in the article) pretty much agree that he stole $50k. See the quotes from peers saying that eg this was an overreaction, or that their university would have handled it internally, but that all agrees with the facts. Laskar stole $50k. Maybe other places slap people on the hands for doing that, but that doesn't make this prosecution wrong. The fact remains, Laskar stole the $50k. And as for prosecutorial misconduct, if you discover someone stole $50k, it's nothing like misconduct to go see what else he or she may have stolen.
- pthreads 10y ago
  >The fact remains, Laskar stole the $50k. And as for prosecutorial misconduct, if you discover someone stole $50k, it's nothing like misconduct to go see what else he or she may have stolen. If it is a fact then why was he not charged with stealing $50K? It should have been pretty easy to get a conviction. Many have been convicted for stealing far less.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

btown 10y ago

Prosecutorial overreach is a huge issue at all levels of society, particularly when applied towards youth to an extent that it perpetuates a cycle of crime; it should come as a surprise to none that this disproportionately affects communities of color. The problem is deep: Because prosecutors are elected, by an electorate made of those who fear criminals more than missteps of the criminal justice system, they are instantly biased towards fearing the perception of being "soft on crime" above all else, above even the instinct and professional duty to be fair in their evaluations. Ken White (author of the Popehat law blog) eloquently describes from personal experience the caustic, self-feeding culture of the "brotherhood of prosecutors" that ingrains this trend, a must-read for anyone interested: http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/23/confessions-of-an-ex-prosecutor/ http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/23/confessions-of-an-ex-p... And this article expands on the problems behind electing prosecutors: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/24/it-s-too-dangerous-to-elect-prosecutors.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/24/it-s-too-da... I once asked a question at a panel about whether technology could help to rein in this culture: whether, for instance, easy access to statistics might allow a prosecutor to justify to their peers and the public that they could give certain individuals the benefit of the doubt... that they might press for less than the maximum sentence permissible by law, because the data shows they are statistically unlikely to be repeat offenders or escalate into violence, and that the individuals' contribution to society would be maximized by behaving firmly but fairly as a prosecutor... that they should take into account that the system is stacked in their favor, and that they should not just assume that public defenders have equal adversarial power, in making their decisions. (It's more than a little absurd that the former sentence isn't already the case.) I should have anticipated the answer: such a tool would be tremendously helpful, but to exist, it would require belief and cooperation and adoption at levels not yet seen, a classic chicken-egg problem. I hope thoughtful minds, with more insight into this problem, find a path forward.

koolba 10y ago
How about having the prosecutor put up a bond that goes to the defendant if the case is cleared?
- btown 10y ago

averagewall 10y ago

Most of the damage was done by his employer for firing him and others for misjudging him. Simply being accused of something doesn't mean we should punish that person in advance.

Sacho 10y ago
Agreed; There are structural problems with no obvious solution in the justice system. However, there is one thing people can do - adjust their expectations and biases using information of the system's corruption.