The law, which requires district attorneys to look at every case for probable cause and prevents the blanket dismissal of cases, took effect on July 1. The law also set up a commission that has the power to discipline or remove prosecutors who don’t prosecutes crimes thoroughly and fairly.
Naturally, Democrat district attorneys leaped from their fainting couches in the highest of dudgeon over the new law, calling it “excessive and unnecessary” and even “racist” for suggesting that prosecutors should actually prosecute or face discipline. Now, a group of district attorneys has filed a challenge to the law, asking a judge to block it on the grounds that it undermines their ability to choose which cases to prosecute.
“The attack on Georgia’s Prosecuting Attorneys Qualifications Commission, filed Wednesday in Fulton County Superior Court in Atlanta, comes after Republicans pushed through a law creating the panel earlier this year,” reports Jeff Amy at the Associated Press. “Republican Gov. Brian Kemp pledged when he signed the law that it would curb ‘far-left prosecutors’ who are ‘making our communities less safe.”’
Spearheading the effort is DeKalb County District Attorney Sherry Boston, who has twice recused her office from prosecuting Antifa thugs who have targeted the future site of a public safety training center for the City of Atlanta. In typical Democrat fashion, Boston framed the case in the most dramatic terms, pointing out to the AP that it’s “bigger than Georgia.”
Here is my favorite quote from the piece:
“We are talking about prosecutorial discretion and prosecutorial independence, both of which have been solidly under assault the last few years,” Boston said. Have you noticed that when Democrats don’t like something, that means that the opposite of that thing is “under assault”?
"The lawsuit says the state law will force district attorneys to consider crimes such as adultery, sodomy, and fornication," AP reported. "The law could also require prosecution for possessing small amounts of marijuana, even though the state crime lab refuses to test marijuana seizure less than one ounce (28 grams)."
What I'm taking away from the prosecutors from Georgia's argument here is that the new criminal defence is to take away the state's potential offence by hiring those who don't want to prosecute criminals as state prosecutors.
I could very well be wrong here but it's that a gamed system?
You are likely correct. Also, remember that for years and years, prosecutors have been not doing their jobs by railroading defendants into plea bargains. They just became even lazier in recent years by giving up even those pretenses of doing anything worthy of a paycheck.
You can still choose not to prosecute. It's still very much an option.
Now instead of pretending that you looked at the docket, you'll actually have to.
And that's what upsets them. They have to do a tiny bit more work and decide on the merits of the case, instead of black = innocent and white = prosecute
And their favorite white + maga = double secret prosecute maximum overdrive might be in jeopardy if they find that white maga dude actually did nothing wrong.
And that just can't happen, so naturally they're upset.
That can be the result of a democratic feedback mechanism, though.
For instance, I have seen local communities that wanted to limit marijuana enforcement. Primarily because they have actually worrisome crimes happening and a limited amount of resources. It was proper there for the voters to direct the police.
Here is my favorite quote from the piece:
Oh, the sweet sweet irony.
Oh boo hoo. Get the laws changed
So if they actually get to prosecuting anything done in the past 3 years, that would be good. I'm not sure if this helps or hurts with that.
What I'm taking away from the prosecutors from Georgia's argument here is that the new criminal defence is to take away the state's potential offence by hiring those who don't want to prosecute criminals as state prosecutors.
I could very well be wrong here but it's that a gamed system?
You are likely correct. Also, remember that for years and years, prosecutors have been not doing their jobs by railroading defendants into plea bargains. They just became even lazier in recent years by giving up even those pretenses of doing anything worthy of a paycheck.
Prosecutorial misconduct is a huge problem in this country, and has been for decades. Even judicial misconduct isn't as bad.
We need to start putting a lot more prosecutors in prison.
They just have to fuck up as bad as Alex Murdaugh and his shitstain sons.
You can still choose not to prosecute. It's still very much an option.
Now instead of pretending that you looked at the docket, you'll actually have to.
And that's what upsets them. They have to do a tiny bit more work and decide on the merits of the case, instead of black = innocent and white = prosecute
And their favorite white + maga = double secret prosecute maximum overdrive might be in jeopardy if they find that white maga dude actually did nothing wrong.
And that just can't happen, so naturally they're upset.
Can we pass a law to eliminate requiring us to pay them and put money into their plush pensions?
Prosecutorial discretion was never meant for a DA to issue office-wide, blanket policies on non-prosecution of entire penal law sections.
That can be the result of a democratic feedback mechanism, though.
For instance, I have seen local communities that wanted to limit marijuana enforcement. Primarily because they have actually worrisome crimes happening and a limited amount of resources. It was proper there for the voters to direct the police.
Interesting point.