>I'm not the one that is expressing bitterness about this reality. Proposing a solution (a crowdsourced public platform for investigating crimes for/with law e

>I'm not the one that is expressing bitterness about this reality. Proposing a solution (a crowdsourced public platform for investigating crimes for/with law enforcement) is not bitter. Your response of shitting on the idea and saying civil courts already exist...is seemly bitter about your own experience. I noticed you didn’t answer my question about your own cases, which makes me think you didn’t follow your own legal advice and pursue anything in civil court. That’s very telling. >Because, where criminal prosecution already serves the public interest This is where you begin to sound like a troll...I know you’re not for the record...but what you are doing in this thread is telling victims of crimes, that persecuting these cases doesn’t serve the public interest. Who are you to make that determination? It would appear you are using a self fulfilling definition...that is if your case isn’t prosecuted then there either aren’t resources or it’s not in the public interest. But that’s not true. First you don’t know what happened factually so you have no idea if it’s in the public interest, and second you have no idea whether there are resources for this crime in this jurisdiction. And you keep bringing up restitution...that’s the least of my concerns. Can you even set forth a standard for what cases are in the public interest? And can you distinguish why my case isn’t in the public interest? Why weren’t your cases in the public interest?