5 ms·
> "It's unsettling and maddening, because you're now going to have a lot of people get released to the street prematurely," says Middlesex County District attor
by chimeracoder 13y ago
> "It's unsettling and maddening, because you're now going to have a lot of people get released to the street prematurely," says Middlesex County District attorney Gerry Leone, one of many hoping the state supreme court will curb the releases.
That's a pretty bad way of looking at this, because it assumes that those people deserved to be behind bars to begin with, and ignores those that didn't.
How about, "It's unsettling and maddening, because we now realize we have a lot of people behind bars without the [proper] due process they deserved"?
- girvo 13y agoThat is not how the police work nor think about cases, though. One of the many reasons I dislike them.
- drjesusphd 13y agoHe's not a cop though, he's a district attorney.
- girvo 13y agoPotato, potahto. Actually, DA's are even worse as far as I'm concerned. Funny to think I actually studied Law.
- ensignavenger 13y agoAll suspects a guilty, period. Or else they wouldn't be suspects, now would they?
- Taniwha 13y agono, all suspects are innocent until proven guilty - the problem here is that the proving has been done in error so they are still innocent until proven guilty
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- scotch_drinker 13y agoAt the risk of painting with a very wide brush, DAs aren't incentivized to make sure people get due process. They are incentivized to convict as many people as possible. In multiple cases here in Texas where later DNA evidence overturned rape and murder charges, the DA argued right up until the moment of reversal that they believed totally in the guilt of the accused. They have to, it's their job and to have public doubt in the people they are trying will only result in them looking for a new job pretty quickly. Not saying it's right, just how it is.
- Zigurd 13y agoHow likely this went on as long as it did without the collaboration of prosecutors?
- lvs 13y agoWorse: >"We tell them, 'Listen, we know what you were doing before and we're watching you. And if you go back into the life, that Dookhan's not there anymore. So when you go [back] in on this charge, it's gonna stick,'" Davis says. So, Ed Davis is sending officers to threaten people who, from a legal perspective, have not been convicted of a crime and have been erroneously jailed for years. Lovely. That's really icing on the cake. I'm not happy about putting potential dealers back on the street, but we are a nation of laws, and these people will be freed by our courts. You can't have the police commissioner sending people to threaten them.
- marrs 13y agoHow is he threatening them? He was telling repeat offenders that the police are going to be keeping a close eye on them. That's their job, isn't it? Or would you rather he tell them that the police will be away on holiday all next week, "but please call our support centre if you plan on committing any crime and we'll get our duty officer to log a ticket"?
- Shivetya 13y agothey aren't repeat offenders if the evidence used against them was fraudulent. If that evidence was the basis of their conviction they should be free and this prosecutor should be out of a job for such threats. Look, he only does this because his position is mostly safe for him to abuse. He has already declared all these people guilty, sadly I bet he is more upset the chemist was caught than the possibility people were wrongfully convicted.
- chris_wot 13y agoThat's their job isn't it? No. That's called harassment. They need to focus on actual crimes being committed.
- chris_wot 13y agoIn other words, all you need to say to the officer is - "Actually, you don't know what I was doing. Because it was nothing".
- weixiyen 13y agoor both?