3 ms·

_Could this kind of gross misconduct be considered homicide?_ Here's the painful thing: no jury will determine that without the blessing of a prosecutor. Pros

by ipsin 12y ago

_Could this kind of gross misconduct be considered homicide?_ Here's the painful thing: no jury will determine that without the blessing of a prosecutor. Prosecutors have a lot of power, and few checks on that power, as I think this story illustrates: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/03/07/judge-says-prosecutors-should-follow-the-law-prosecutors-revolt/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/03/07/j...

s_q_b 12y ago
Here's the even worse part: Even direct violation of the law during the course of a prosecutor's job is protected by near-absolute judicial immunity. Even if you had absolutely airtight evidence to convict (difficult), an officer willing to charge and seriously investigate the crime (unlikely), and a zealous and competent DA to bring the charge before a grand jury (impossible), the prosecutor could still argue he was acting as a judicial officer of the court for presentation to a grand jury, and thus be immune from prosecution. The reality is often less "gross misconduct" as in this case, and more "Hey, are you sure you didn't mean the fire started in the corners?" or "I missed that, you said he was 6'2, right?" But even the worst offenders, such as Ex-DA Nifong in the Duke lacrosse case, face reprimand rarely, true sanctions seldom, disbarment nearly never, indictment infrequently, and conviction under no circumstances. It's sad, because its the type of event where everyone involved can convince themselves they're doing the right thing, and it's only in those very few circumstances where evidence is brought forth where outside observers, untainted by the culture, can see the naked abuse of power plain as day. The question that I ponder often is the extent of Western-style law enforcement corruption. Do most police officers and DAs skirt the law in this manner, or is it a low but non-negligible percentage? More importantly, how do we detect and measure it?

by ipsin 12y ago

s_q_b 12y ago

Here's the even worse part: Even direct violation of the law during the course of a prosecutor's job is protected by near-absolute judicial immunity. Even if you had absolutely airtight evidence to convict (difficult), an officer willing to charge and seriously investigate the crime (unlikely), and a zealous and competent DA to bring the charge before a grand jury (impossible), the prosecutor could still argue he was acting as a judicial officer of the court for presentation to a grand jury, and thus be immune from prosecution. The reality is often less "gross misconduct" as in this case, and more "Hey, are you sure you didn't mean the fire started in the corners?" or "I missed that, you said he was 6'2, right?" But even the worst offenders, such as Ex-DA Nifong in the Duke lacrosse case, face reprimand rarely, true sanctions seldom, disbarment nearly never, indictment infrequently, and conviction under no circumstances. It's sad, because its the type of event where everyone involved can convince themselves they're doing the right thing, and it's only in those very few circumstances where evidence is brought forth where outside observers, untainted by the culture, can see the naked abuse of power plain as day. The question that I ponder often is the extent of Western-style law enforcement corruption. Do most police officers and DAs skirt the law in this manner, or is it a low but non-negligible percentage? More importantly, how do we detect and measure it?