[HN Gopher] After 20 Years as a Prosecutor in Illinois, I Quit
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       After 20 Years as a Prosecutor in Illinois, I Quit
        
       Author : baremetal
       Score  : 138 points
       Date   : 2023-05-12 11:59 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.realclearwire.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.realclearwire.com)
        
       | the_absurdist wrote:
       | Challenge:
       | 
       | Let's see if anyone with a username linked to their true identity
       | can figure out a way to speak honestly about this without tanking
       | their career.
        
         | plagiarist wrote:
         | What is the agreement or disagreement you are having with that
         | content which would get you fired?
        
         | saagarjha wrote:
         | Can't say what the effects will be on my career but I doubt
         | there will be any.
         | 
         | There's not much content here. The author is a prosecutor who
         | is upset that policies have been introduced that put fewer
         | people behind bars. They think that we need "tough on crime"
         | laws that keep their kids safe. I am not surprised in the
         | least.
        
           | P_I_Staker wrote:
           | They always say this and whine when they don't get their way.
        
         | tupshin wrote:
         | Challenge accepted. This article is an emotional rant (true or
         | false) is not well grounded in facts and causality. There
         | fundamental claim is that
         | 
         | > The simple fact is that this State and County have set
         | themselves on a course to disaster. And the worst part is that
         | the agency for whom I work has backed literally every policy
         | change that had the predictable, and predicted, outcome of more
         | crime and more people getting hurt.
         | 
         | So the claim is that his state, county, and agency are all
         | backing policies that predictably lead to more crime.
         | 
         | Those policies are then characterized as:
         | 
         | * bond/bail reform * reduced parole and sentences in some cases
         | * "malicious" prosecution of law officers * not prosecuting
         | some crimes that are on the books
         | 
         | Unfortunately the author makes zero references, citations, or
         | arguments for why these policies are harmful, as enacted, and
         | why they might have led to the negative experiences of their
         | family.
         | 
         | So it's an emotional content (nearly) free emotional rant that
         | doesn't move the discussion forward in any helpful way.
         | 
         | Analysis that showed even correlation would be
         | interesting/useful. This is not.
        
           | P_I_Staker wrote:
           | But he hears gun shots sometimes and saw a drug dealer. That
           | surely proves everything has gotten out of hand. Time to lock
           | people up before they're proven guilty of committing any
           | crimes, put non-violent criminals in cages, and permanently
           | ruin peoples lives, preventing them from gainful employment!
        
             | barbazoo wrote:
             | And don't forget about the
             | 
             | > malicious and unnecessary prosecution of law enforcement
             | officers
        
               | P_I_Staker wrote:
               | Oh no, the poor fascists that hurt the community, and
               | ruin innocent lives to protect their egos. Who will be
               | left to fire teargas at peaceful protestors and lock them
               | up on false charges?
        
         | the_absurd wrote:
         | [dead]
        
         | jeswin wrote:
         | Most people I know would bracket you as right-leaning if you
         | attack a left-wing position without balancing it by
         | simultaneously attacking a right-wing position. It is usually
         | acceptable to attack right-wing issues without a balancing act.
         | 
         | I find it quite troubling, but that's where we are. I don't
         | care about my reputation.
        
           | the_absurd wrote:
           | [dead]
        
       | SamoyedFurFluff wrote:
       | This is a strange letter. It claims specific policies have a
       | direct causal relationship with crime and gun prevalence, and
       | therefore the entire state of Illinois is unsafe. Do we actually
       | have evidence that proves this out? (Edited to add: I'm admitting
       | ignorance here, not trying to say the above is false! I am very
       | good faith behavior here.)
       | 
       | I am immediately questioning this depiction that public defenders
       | and prosecutors are on even footing. It's been well known public
       | defenders are forced to take up an unreasonable number of cases
       | where the prosecution decides to hand over the evidence to be
       | debated about-- the prosecution is supposed to hand over
       | everything, but there's been multiple cases of prosecutors
       | happenstancely not handing over evidence that would prove
       | innocence and then not losing their jobs for doing so!
        
         | crumpusBaggins wrote:
         | i think the obvious policy he the former attorney lists as
         | causing more crime:
         | 
         | "Bond reform so no one stays in jail"
         | 
         | if every american suspected of shooting someone is held in jail
         | rather than released, we have just removed the most likely
         | population of people who cause future shootings. from the
         | safety of the publics perspective, now the surviving
         | victims/witnesses are more likely to be victims of more crimes
         | because the suspected violent attackers are back on the street.
         | 
         | i dont really think there is room for debate on the
         | "truthyness" of his statement, as if we kept more people in
         | jail, less people would be out in public able to commit crime.
         | how much is a good question tho.
        
           | jasonhansel wrote:
           | The vast majority of people in jail before trial are not
           | suspected of shooting anyone. Many are low-level offenders
           | waiting in jail for months despite still having the
           | presumption of innocence. Often the time they spend in jail
           | before trial exceeds the length of the sentence they would
           | get if convicted. This can pressure people to falsely plead
           | guilty since it's actually the fastest way to get out of
           | jail.
        
             | pxmpxm wrote:
             | The policies implemented in Chicago weren't exactly
             | targeting jaywalkers - some 10 people get shot in Chicago
             | every weekend for about a decade now with a huge asymmetry
             | of how the justice system deals with people that shot and
             | missed.
        
           | boplicity wrote:
           | The bond reform statement really doesn't line up with the
           | facts. They're no longer requesting pre-trial detention of
           | those charged with low-level nonviolent offense. [1] That
           | just doesn't line up with the claims being presented.
           | 
           | [1] https://theappeal.org/bail-reform-embraced-by-cook-
           | county-st...
        
             | sct202 wrote:
             | So it's a little more complicated than that with the
             | electronic monitoring program where people charged with
             | violent crimes can be electronically monitored at home. For
             | example early last year, ~100 people charged with murder in
             | Cook Country (where the prosecutor in the letter worked)
             | were at home monitored.
             | https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/cook-county-sheriff-
             | tom...
        
               | crumpusBaggins wrote:
               | my understanding is most cities lack resources to
               | actually monitor the electronic things,
               | 
               | so usually its after a new crime is commited, the police
               | stories read like:
               | 
               | "X suspected of serious crime violated his electoronic
               | home monitoring Y amount of times, we rearrested him
               | during the act of a seperate crime"
        
               | rootusrootus wrote:
               | Is the cost of monitoring an inmate more, or less than
               | the cost to monitor the electronic things?
        
               | crumpusBaggins wrote:
               | i would assume tracking the electronic devices are
               | cheaper
               | 
               | if both options arent funded/run appropriatly public
               | safety is harmed either way
        
           | plagiarist wrote:
           | You have to consider the effects of allowing the state to
           | hold whomever they want without a trial. States will lock
           | kids up for years without trial on suspicion of stealing a
           | backpack. That should never happen.
        
         | fatnoah wrote:
         | > I am immediately questioning this depiction that public
         | defenders and prosecutors are on even footing.
         | 
         | I've always assumed, rightly or wrongly, that "the state" has
         | an overwhelming advantage in terms of resources and manpower.
         | 
         | From the letter:
         | 
         | > we live in a society with adversarial court and criminal
         | justice processes I've also assumed that our system of
         | government and burden of proof in criminal cases is also
         | designed to make it harder for the prosecution than for the
         | defendant.
         | 
         | Perhaps this is another case where I'm wrong, but I alway
         | assumed that this was by design. The prosecution has a much
         | higher burden of than the defense.
        
           | enkid wrote:
           | Yes, that's explicitly the purpose. It's intended to be much
           | more likely a guilty person is released than an innocent is
           | imprisoned.
        
             | DicIfTEx wrote:
             | This principle is known as Blackstone's ratio:
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_ratio
        
         | setgree wrote:
         | So I'm not the OP, but I found this letter interesting because
         | I think it's a nice illustration of ways in which so-called
         | 'liberal' policies drive some people to become more
         | conservative.
         | 
         | Politics is about perception, and whether or not a well-
         | identified paper finds a causal link from bond policies to
         | crime is kind of neither here nor there. His anecdotal evidence
         | (gunfire within earshot, drug-dealing behind his house)
         | suffices for him. It's really hard to argue with that kind of
         | reasoning by pointing to abstractions, i.e. a statistical
         | model.
         | 
         | Basically when I see even faint signs of folks' favoring more
         | authoritarian policies (e.g. being "tough on crime,") I want us
         | to notice those signs, and think hard about how to keep that
         | instinct from getting a full head of steam.
        
           | bradleyjg wrote:
           | _Basically when I see even faint signs of folks ' favoring
           | more authoritarian policies (e.g. being "tough on crime,") I
           | want us to notice those signs, and think hard about how to
           | keep that instinct from getting a full head of steam._
           | 
           | If there's a workable progressive solution to degraded
           | qualify of life due to crime, including nonviolent crime--
           | where is it working? SF? Portland? Chicago? DC? NYC?
           | 
           | It's not like there are republicans in any of these places,
           | so what's the issue?
           | 
           | The proof of the pudding is in the tasting.
        
             | jkestner wrote:
             | The issue is that the people in power are not progressives,
             | or have not gotten full support and the time needed to
             | enact change. Establishment Democrats are just as pro-
             | punishment as Republicans; take the President's history as
             | a legislator. NYC is literally run by a cop. Trolls started
             | blaming the progressive mayor of Chicago for crime before
             | he even took office. LAPD contains a literal gang. The
             | system progressives want to change is too deeply rooted to
             | change in just an election.
             | 
             | I don't know if progressive policies are the answer to
             | everything, but we've steadily been throwing money in the
             | other direction so consider whether that strategy is a
             | failure.
        
               | jkestner wrote:
               | Reply to sibling: lol, Lightfoot is not a progressive.
               | Toni Preckwinkle was the progressive candidate. Anyone
               | can claim the label, but if the teacher's union hates you
               | and you're a former prosecutor, you might not be a
               | progressive.
               | 
               | I specifically did not say to vote more, but that an
               | election is not enough. It takes constant public
               | pressure, and of course good strategy to effect change.
               | Even if Lightfoot really did want to reform the CPD, it's
               | too powerful to face without a collective effort focused
               | on small, achievable policy to start. I respect the
               | outsiders, but she was not very political. Maybe Johnson,
               | as a former organizer, will do better.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | bradleyjg wrote:
               | Was Lori Lightfoot not a progressive? How long are we
               | going to have to just vote harder before we start seeing
               | some results, somewhere?
        
             | user3939382 wrote:
             | > If there's a workable progressive solution to degraded
             | qualify of life due to crime, including nonviolent crime
             | 
             | Here's a workable solution: stop spending over 3x what
             | China does on "defense" and maintaining military bases all
             | over the world and spend that money on homelessness,
             | education, infrastructure, and jobs programs to get our
             | middle class back.
        
               | sharemywin wrote:
               | I always found this chart interesting:
               | 
               | https://www.longtermtrends.net/us-debt-to-gdp/
               | 
               | especially when you look at it from the perspective of
               | the drastically lower taxes rates of the 80s.
        
               | bradleyjg wrote:
               | So you're saying is that progressives mayors have no
               | ability to effect positive change and if we want livable
               | cities we shouldn't bother voting for them?
        
             | sharemywin wrote:
             | this pudding?
             | 
             | https://www.thirdway.org/report/the-two-decade-red-state-
             | mur...
        
               | bradleyjg wrote:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35915958
        
               | sharemywin wrote:
               | not saying things don't need fixing, but the idea there's
               | a blue solution or a red solution flies in the face of
               | history and data.
               | 
               | One problem is the richer you are the easier it is to
               | flee the problems and let someone else clean up the mess.
               | But it cant be government or cost any taxes...
        
           | disantlor wrote:
           | aka squeaky wheel gets the grease
        
           | bluescrn wrote:
           | We're stuck with a bad choice between authoritarian right and
           | authoritarian left these days.
           | 
           | One side is 'tough on crime', the other is 'tough on speech'.
           | As a disillusioned lefty, and thankfully not in the US, one
           | of these scares me more than the other.
        
         | quickthrower2 wrote:
         | I agree on the causation. During the same time hasn't the US
         | had a major drug crisis across the country? He might be right
         | but he is not showing much evidence (ironically) of it.
         | 
         | PS Very cute username!
        
           | pookha wrote:
           | Here's a data point...Harris county TX let a capital murder
           | suspect out on some ludicrously low bond (9K, which meant he
           | only spent 900 dollars to get out). Here's a description of
           | the suspects:
           | 
           | "They killed two people, and they also put a gun to a young
           | mother with a 2-month-old, they put a gun to her head as
           | well," said Andy Kahan with Crime Stoppers.
           | 
           | Here's a guy in Harris county that's committed multiple
           | capital murders and bonded out each time:
           | 
           | https://www.khou.com/article/news/crime/capital-murder-
           | suspe...
           | 
           | That is psychopathy in the justice system.
        
             | zimpenfish wrote:
             | > Here's a guy in Harris county that's committed multiple
             | capital murders and bonded out each time:
             | 
             | Your implied timeline is wrong here. The two (alleged)
             | murders happened in May and June 2021. He was arrested for
             | the first in October 2021 and posted bond in November 2021.
             | Then he was arrested for the second - which happened before
             | the first bond, remember - in December 2021 and posted the
             | bond for that in March 2022. At no time (that we know of)
             | did he commit murder whilst out on bond.
        
             | masklinn wrote:
             | This has nothing to do with bail though? The point of bail
             | is to ensure the suspect shows up to court appearances. The
             | use of bail as a way to force remanding is essentially a
             | multi-pronged tax on poorer defendants (as they either need
             | a loan to post bail, or have to suffer the loss of income
             | and psychological damage from detention).
             | 
             | If the prosecution believes the accused is a danger to
             | society, they should argue for remanding on those grounds,
             | not ask for bails which have no actual relation to the
             | accused's likelihood of showing up.
        
             | manquer wrote:
             | Your language assumes guilt first , He is a murder suspect
             | and alleged to have committed murders[1] until is proven
             | guilty that distinction is important .
             | 
             | The prosecution should have asked for higher bail if he was
             | further threat to society or a flight risk not because the
             | crimes were heinous, if they failed to prove it, that is on
             | them.
             | 
             | Far too easily we judge people as a society quickly and
             | usually with strong racial bias.
             | 
             | 1% of America is incarcerated far higher than any other
             | developed economy. I don't think we are predisposed to
             | crime more than others perhaps we need to think how we
             | ended up here ?
             | 
             | [1] he probably did I am not arguing the facts of the case,
             | keep in mind unlike civil cases where balance of
             | probabilities is the deciding factor in criminal cases
             | beyond reasonable doubt
        
               | iudqnolq wrote:
               | > The prosecution should have asked for higher bail if he
               | was further threat to society
               | 
               | If he is a risk to society that won't change however much
               | money he pays. A millionaire murderer isn't less
               | dangerous than a minimum wage one.
               | 
               | Judges are allowed to deny bail based on dangerousness.
               | That's the appropriate tool here, not setting a high
               | dollar number.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | dubcanada wrote:
         | Taking a look at the data up till 2019 it appears to be a bell
         | curve with a increase into the 1980s followed by a decrease
         | into 2019. I do wonder if this is more of a being involved in
         | it for 20 years has just mentally drained this person.
        
           | cm2187 wrote:
           | I think most of the rise is in the last few years. I don't
           | know about the whole of Illinois but Chicago (in which county
           | this prosecutor seemed to be based), crime rate seems to have
           | risen back to 1980s level.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Chicago
           | 
           | https://www.chicagobusiness.com/crains-forum-safer-
           | chicago/c...
        
             | thebooktocome wrote:
             | The Wikipedia numbers are reported by the CPD and are
             | therefore skewed by their political objectives.
        
         | pxmpxm wrote:
         | This may be relevant - stats for offenses while on electronic
         | monitoring: https://scontent-
         | lga3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/250436168...
        
           | tedivm wrote:
           | >stats for offenses while on electronic monitoring
           | 
           | That wording implies that these were crimes committed while
           | electronic monitoring was in place. However, you shared a
           | graphic that shows that more people who already committed
           | crimes were being given electronic monitoring. Nothing you
           | posted supports the idea that people on monitoring are
           | committing crimes.
        
             | pxmpxm wrote:
             | Apologies, that is indeed the distribution of offenses for
             | people on electronic monitoring.
        
         | chefandy wrote:
         | Crime is a complex problem. Blaming prosecutorial policy is an
         | odd, and likely deliberate choice. Talking about cities,
         | Chicago has a crime rate in between Jacksonville FL and
         | Oklahoma City OK, which are both very conservative cities.
         | Among the highest crime states, conservative ones are _very
         | well represented._
         | 
         | To me, this sounds like the precursor for a planned political
         | career wherever he's moving to. Chicago is the icon for
         | terrible awful no-good very bad liberal crime policies in
         | popular conservative politics and an Illinois prosecutor who's
         | moving because they _just can 't take it anymore_ would be
         | optimally positioned to capitalize on that. Ah, politics.
        
           | kevviiinn wrote:
           | This is an important point. Conservatives seem to _love_
           | ranting about how rampant crime is in blue cities but when
           | you do per capita comparisons of violent crime, especially
           | involving guns, you see that conservative areas are far more
           | crime ridden
        
             | rufus_foreman wrote:
             | At the city level? No.
             | 
             | You can look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unite
             | d_States_cities_b..., sort by the homicide rate and almost
             | all of the top 50 voted Democrat in the 2020 election. Not
             | Tulsa or Oklahoma City, not Mobile. Eyeballing it, I don't
             | see any other cities that voted Republican.
             | 
             | High homicide rates are a blue city thing, almost
             | exclusively.
        
               | iudqnolq wrote:
               | Remember that cities have limited autonomy in the
               | American system. A blue city in a red state has red laws.
        
           | boomersooner wrote:
           | Ah, statistics. Violent crime is 8.7 in Chicago, vs 6.3 and
           | 6.9 for the other two cities. Property crime is higher
           | though.
           | 
           | [https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/ok/oklahoma-city/crime]
        
           | dublinben wrote:
           | When you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
           | 
           | Of course a career prosecutor would see a 'crime problem' as
           | a result of insufficient prosecution.
           | 
           | Crime is complex, but largely related to poverty and economic
           | opportunity. The interventions that are likely to matter most
           | are so far outside this person's perspective, that they are
           | unable to see how modest judicial reform is merely the
           | nearest corner of the iceberg.
        
             | chefandy wrote:
             | Or, someone looking to get into hammer manufacturing might
             | try to convince everybody else that everything is a nail.
        
         | garbagecoder wrote:
         | He's going to run for office or try to parlay his experience
         | into a political role, that's obvious.
        
       | Convolutional wrote:
       | There is the war on drugs, locking people in prison due to
       | marijuana transactions.
       | 
       | With all the talk of China being a police state, the US has more
       | people incarcerated than China - and China's population is more
       | than four times that of the US.
       | 
       | European countries don't have these problems, like the rash of
       | mass shootings we have had in the past few weeks in just Texas.
       | 
       | Also these prisons are a sop to rural communities for money and
       | jobs, with prisoners from the cities. The prisoners also count
       | for congressional districts going to these areas but can not
       | vote.
       | 
       | Of course there is also the profit making of private prisons.
       | Judges have been found sending innocent people to jail for
       | kickbacks.
       | 
       | It is time to solve these problems like Europe does, and one step
       | is incarceration going down to three times the rate of China, as
       | opposed to over four times.
        
         | morning-coffee wrote:
         | > It is time to solve these problems like Europe does, and one
         | step is incarceration going down to three times the rate of
         | China, as opposed to over four times.
         | 
         | But correlation does not imply causation, right? I don't
         | understand how it follows from noting our incarceration rate
         | being higher than another place with less crime, and then
         | reaching the seeming conclusion that the answer, therefore, is
         | to stop putting people in jail.
        
         | mantas wrote:
         | ,,European" policy has caveats too. What you call ,,european"
         | policy is mostly West europe. That had pretty good cultural
         | hold on crimes. for a while. This method does work for it.
         | 
         | But when here in eastern europe got same policies forced down
         | our throats... Here culture is slightly different and many
         | criminals are career criminals and take pride their... line of
         | work. So we get routine re-offenses. Or people commit new
         | crimes while waiting for trial. West seems to have issues with
         | certain parts of their societies that ain't culturally trained
         | to behave too.
         | 
         | This doesn't work well if society accepts crime as a
         | respectable line of work. E.g. glorifying criminal
         | ,,subculture" and normalising that.
        
         | intrasight wrote:
         | > the US has more people incarcerated than China
         | 
         | Summary execution keeps incarceration rates down. It also
         | disincentivizes crime.
        
           | pseudalopex wrote:
           | Human rights groups estimates of Chinese executions are too
           | low to close the gap. Deterrence is not supported by sound
           | research.
        
       | wffurr wrote:
       | There was an earlier comment wondering where the letters author
       | might move to, since Illinois is an average state in terms of
       | violence and crime.
       | 
       | Ironically?, Massachusetts would be one of the safest states in
       | the country for him to move to if he's concerned about gun
       | violence, but we also tend to elect progressive reform minded
       | prosecutors that he thinks are the problem.
        
         | ap99 wrote:
         | Culture and wealth levels have a bigger impact on crime, in my
         | opinion, than progressive or conservative local politics.
        
         | robertlagrant wrote:
         | > Massachusetts would be one of the safest states in the
         | country for him to move to if he's concerned about gun
         | violence, but we also tend to elect progressive reform minded
         | prosecutors that he thinks are the problem.
         | 
         | Utah looks better [0]. Higher gun ownership %, but lower gun
         | death rate than Massachusetts.
         | 
         | [0]
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta...
        
           | seanmcdirmid wrote:
           | Strange, the CDC has Massachusetts as having lower gun death
           | than Utah. The lowest in fact: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/press
           | room/sosmap/firearm_mortality/...
           | 
           | Utah is ranked just ahead of Florida.
           | 
           | Oh, I see, your numbers don't include suicides, which is the
           | majority of gun deaths.
        
             | robertlagrant wrote:
             | > Massachusetts would be one of the safest states in the
             | country for him to move to if he's concerned about gun
             | violence
             | 
             | It would be very odd indeed to include suicides in stats of
             | how dangerous it is to live in a state.
        
         | plagiarist wrote:
         | If he goes to Texas it would confirm the impression I got from
         | reading that.
        
       | bedhead wrote:
       | Former Chicagoan here. Grew up there, lived there most of my
       | adult life, raised kids there, and finally, thankfully, moved to
       | another state three years ago. It's easy to pile on, but one of
       | the main things that did it for me was sorta this realization
       | that Chicago is more or less hopeless. There's no willingness to
       | even discuss Chicago's problems honestly, let alone do something
       | about them. The culture there is just too far gone - it's
       | depressing. Was I worried that violent crime was going to
       | imminently find its way to my doorstep? No, not really. But with
       | three kids in Chicago Public Schools (no more dysfunctional,
       | shameful organization exists in this country than CPS) I turned
       | to my wife one day and said, "You know, we don't have to live
       | like this." So we left.
        
         | HDThoreaun wrote:
         | CPS has all the best schools in the state. The education they
         | provide poor students is disgraceful, but if you can afford the
         | wealthy brown line neighborhoods your children will receive a
         | good education.
        
         | one_level_deep wrote:
         | ==no more dysfunctional, shameful organization exists in this
         | country than CPS==
         | 
         | Are you not familiar with the CPD (Chicago Police Department)?
         | The police probably have more of an impact on the topic at hand
         | (crime and violence) than CPS.
         | 
         | They are far more shameful, dysfunctional, and incompetent than
         | CPS. From forced confessions [1] to planting drugs [2] to
         | electing radical leaders [3]. They are on a Federal consent
         | decree because of their ineptitude and violations of civil
         | rights [4].
         | 
         | [1] https://news.wttw.com/2017/09/22/chicago-really-false-
         | confes...
         | 
         | [2] https://news.wttw.com/2021/11/04/judge-tosses-5-more-
         | convict...
         | 
         | [3] https://chicago.suntimes.com/2022/4/21/23036206/fop-
         | fraterna...
         | 
         | [4] http://chicagopoliceconsentdecree.org/
        
           | whatwhaaaaat wrote:
           | Just know that your limited examples are only fooling the
           | fools.
           | 
           | You have cried wolf too many times and now no one believes
           | you.
           | 
           | Normal people have completely soured on the idea that we can
           | hug our way out of these areas completely overrun with crime.
        
             | HDThoreaun wrote:
             | CPD's incompetence and malice is the reason tough on crime
             | policy is unpopular in Chicago. If voters had even a shred
             | of respect for police here no one would be proposing that
             | we "hug our way out" of the problem. Instead most people
             | are more scared of the police than the criminals.
        
             | one_level_deep wrote:
             | ==Normal people have completely soured on the idea that we
             | can hug our way out of these areas completely overrun with
             | crime.==
             | 
             | Complete strawman, arguing against a policy that nobody has
             | ever proposed. It seems you are the one crying wolf while
             | pointing at everyone else.
             | 
             | Limited examples? The consent decree alone comes from
             | decades of datapoints collected by the Federal government.
             | You should read it.
        
         | drewbug01 wrote:
         | I live in Chicago, I'm married to a teacher here, and we're
         | planning on having kids here soon.
         | 
         | There are certainly problems, but the good far outweighs the
         | bad. We discuss Chicago's problems openly all the time (and
         | certainly randos here on HN seem very excited to discuss it,
         | frequently).
         | 
         | What, exactly, do you think the problems and solutions are?
         | Let's discuss them openly.
        
         | bradleyjg wrote:
         | Read the comments on this post. No one here wants to hear it.
         | People in Europe, SV, god-knows-where have all kinds of facts
         | and figures they just spent two minutes googling that prove
         | there's nothing to see here and Chicago is fine.
        
           | one_level_deep wrote:
           | I live in Chicago and have no idea what you are talking
           | about. The local newspapers and tv are constantly talking
           | about these issues. Crime and CPS were by far the primary
           | discussions in the recent election. Who and where are these
           | people refusing to talk about them?
        
           | djfobbz wrote:
           | Love your comment. Being from the Midwest, I'm in complete
           | disbelief reading some of these comments. They seem to be
           | completely out of touch with reality!
        
           | commandlinefan wrote:
           | There's a comment upstream that says "this person's opinions
           | are similar to those of Fox News and the NY Post, so it
           | should be ignored". That doesn't bode well for the actual
           | people who have to live in Chicago.
        
             | one_level_deep wrote:
             | Or maybe we can see through the national news' political
             | agenda and sensationalism.
             | 
             | The people who actually live in Chicago just elected a
             | progressive mayor who ran against a "tough-on-crime"
             | candidate. Maybe those people (the ones living in the city)
             | see things differently than you (someone not living in the
             | city).
        
               | Izkata wrote:
               | The vote was 49% to 51% when he conceded, and he really
               | shouldn't have - the uncounted mail-in ballots were 3x
               | the gap in the counted votes. Also that race was far
               | _far_ closer than normal with tough-on-crime-vs-
               | progressive usually is around here.
               | 
               | Sentiment here is definitely shifting in favor of tough-
               | on-crime.
        
         | sylens wrote:
         | You replace 'Chicago' with 'Philadelphia' in that comment and
         | it would be no less accurate. Culture and inertia is hard to
         | change
        
       | 2devnull wrote:
       | If public defenders had the same resources as the persecution,
       | Sam Bankman-Fried wouldn't need to spend a cent on his defense. I
       | am sure that's not what we want. We want defenders to have a
       | possibility of winning, not guaranteed success. Most of the
       | defendants are guilty after all.
        
         | lowmagnet wrote:
         | This is the "I paid for college so why should education be
         | free" argument.
        
       | yellow_lead wrote:
       | This reads like a political statement. No figures, facts, or
       | reasoning.
        
       | jjoonathan wrote:
       | > [Public Defenders'] work is as noble as ours. But we have an
       | obligation to fight like hell on behalf of the People. It should
       | go without saying that this must be done ethically and
       | evenhandedly.
       | 
       | I was on Jury Duty last year and every day I had to walk past a
       | tiny decrepit Public Defender office and then past sprawling,
       | spotless floors of Attorney General offices. I probably have the
       | wrong terms, the specifics are fading, but the general meaning of
       | the signs seemed clear enough. What a shameful disgrace. Society
       | doesn't have a thumb on the scale, it has a foot on the scale.
       | 
       | No, I don't think shifting the extreme imbalance even further
       | towards Prosecution is going to fix crime.
       | 
       | Maybe things are different in Chicago, but I'd want to hear from
       | Defense before just believing a rant from Prosecution.
        
         | cat_plus_plus wrote:
         | Then fund public defenders better, this has nothing to do with
         | abolishing bail or releasing people who need to be locked up
         | for a good reason. Free representation may be important for
         | individual justice, but impact on public safety is not huge.
         | Vast majority of those arrested are guilty of _something_ ,
         | what some deserve is reduced charges that indicate what they
         | have actually done, not what can be pinned on them without a
         | good lawyer.
        
         | soderfoo wrote:
         | Worked at the public defender's office prior to working as a
         | developer.
         | 
         | Despite the salary schedules being the same (or similar), the
         | State will always have more resources; they have forensic labs,
         | and an army of investigators. The multifaceted mission of a
         | prosecutor's office necessitates the resource disparity.
         | 
         | The Public Defender's priorities are much more focused; (1)
         | provide criminal defense services for those in need, mainly the
         | indigent, (2) influence criminal justice policy through by
         | identifying judiciable appellate matters; and, (3) working with
         | private defense attorneys to challenge prosecutorial policy on
         | a broader level.
         | 
         | With offers from various state attorneys general and public
         | defender offices, I selected the latter for the more focused
         | mission. Yes, resources were scarce, dollars had to be
         | selectively spent on experts to get the most bang for our buck.
         | But you would be surprised at what a feisty PD can do with a
         | handful of retired state police investigators to assist.
        
           | pseudalopex wrote:
           | > The Public Defender's priorities are much more focused; (1)
           | provide criminal defense services for those in need, mainly
           | the indigent, (2) influence criminal justice policy through
           | by identifying judiciable appellate matters; and, (3) working
           | with private defense attorneys to challenge prosecutorial
           | policy on a broader level.
           | 
           | I would call this broad. How is the prosecutor's mission more
           | multifaceted?
        
         | ddingus wrote:
         | Yup. Anyone charged with a crime would be well advised to do
         | whatever it takes to seek council directly, as in finding a way
         | to pay for it.
         | 
         | Public defenders are doing noble work. They are also denied the
         | resources necessary to perform that work with the same zeal
         | seen in the prosecution side of the justice system.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | iudqnolq wrote:
           | Not necessarily. A PD might well be much better than an
           | affordable private counsel. It's definitely better to go
           | private if you're rich, it depends on specifics if you
           | aren't.
        
           | Slava_Propanei wrote:
           | No, we are not. I've worked as a defense attorney. It is was
           | terrifying to see how much leeway and how many extra chances
           | were given to violent criminals. The DAs job is impossible.
        
             | hgomersall wrote:
             | Maybe you should try being a defendant to actually get a
             | balanced perspective (a good thing to try would be to get
             | yourself arrested for something that you didn't do but is
             | just your word against theirs). For extra experience try
             | doing that whilst being black.
             | 
             | For reference, I have being on the receiving end of an
             | entirely unwarranted accusation for a trivial crime in the
             | UK (which is often held up as being a good example of a
             | fair system). It occupied an unbelievable amount of
             | headspace and was hugely stressful. I'm educated,
             | reasonably well off and white. The system felt very very
             | powerful and unpredictable from my position and I was never
             | even arrested (just accused, which is enough for the police
             | to treat you as a perpetrator). If the prosecution had
             | happened and had gone anywhere (it didn't) and I'd been
             | convicted I would have got a small fine, but I was still
             | far too worried that my innocence was insufficient to
             | protect me. All the way through you're treated as though
             | you are guilty, and the accuser is the "victim". Honestly,
             | the only victim in the whole sorry affair was me.
             | 
             | I can't imagine what it must feel like if you're on the
             | receiving end of an unwarranted accusation for a more
             | serious crime. Especially if everyone thinks you're guilty
             | because your have priors and "look guilty".
        
             | 93po wrote:
             | People who commit violent crimes are almost always a victim
             | of a fucked up system themselves that led them to those
             | actions. Putting them in prison perpetuates and worsens the
             | cycle. It is still less harm on the whole to give them
             | leeway and extra chances.
             | 
             | The solution is fixing the social safety net for the poor
             | and disadvantaged. Not throwing people in prison for trying
             | to survive and making mistakes along the way.
        
               | DanHulton wrote:
               | I agree with this 100%, but the last paragraph is worded
               | poorly, and almost guaranteed to attract debate from both
               | honest and bad-faith dissenters.
               | 
               | Restated:
               | 
               | Throwing people in prison does not fix the problem. We
               | have tried it for a long time at various levels of
               | intensity and it has provably not worked, and no
               | additional level of intensity has improved things. We
               | can't _just keep doing this_ and expect that at some
               | point things will get better.
               | 
               | We need to address the root causes that lead so many
               | people into situations where they find it reasonable or
               | are desperate enough to commit those crimes. That's how
               | you make a dent in this problem, and that's what we
               | should work on transitioning to. Fix the top of the
               | funnel, and you won't have nearly as many concentrated
               | violent problems down at the bottom of it to deal with.
        
               | ggariepy wrote:
               | Some percentage of the population is comprised of violent
               | sociopaths. Those people need to be locked up for the
               | safety of the rest of us. People who have committed
               | victimless crimes, like minor drug use, should almost
               | never be incarcerated. People who have defrauded other
               | people in some way, including petty larceny, should be
               | punished by some means other than incarceration.
               | 
               | Pretty much what I'm saying is that jail time should be
               | reserved solely for the violent.
        
               | DanHulton wrote:
               | A very, very, very small percentage of the population is
               | "violent sociopaths", though, and optimizing your society
               | for solving that problem incurs huge amounts of waste.
               | 
               | Which isn't to say there should be _no_ answer to that
               | question, but more that the answer to that question
               | shouldn't also be the answer to all the other crime
               | encountered. Not even all the violent crime, which is
               | frequently a product not of the individual, but of the
               | situation that individual is placed in.
        
               | anthony_d wrote:
               | That looks a lot like satire but I can't quite tell.
               | 
               | So, to clarify: if someone is clearly a violent criminal,
               | are you really saying we should feel bad for them and
               | assume they are a victim of "the system"? Do we drop
               | charges? What's the actionable plan for reducing violent
               | crime?
        
               | kevviiinn wrote:
               | How about fixing the system.
               | 
               | Why do people have such a tiny, narrow view of life?
        
               | akhosravian wrote:
               | What does that mean, specifically? What policy changes
               | need to be enacted to fix the system, and how do we
               | verify they worked?
        
               | kevviiinn wrote:
               | Expand social safety nets including single payer
               | healthcare and remove laws targeting victimless crimes
               | such as drug possession
        
               | Kim_Bruning wrote:
               | That approach is obviously equally unproductive.
               | 
               | The approach is to try to reform them. Get them
               | psychiatric help if that's what's needed. Put them in a
               | prison that doesn't just punish them, but also teaches
               | them how to be useful members of society.
               | 
               | On the other end, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound
               | of cure.
               | 
               | Well before that point, make sure everyone has equal
               | opportunities while growing up. Ensure all citizens get
               | taught how to be responsible with money and how to make
               | intelligent life decisions in school. This helps a lot by
               | itself.
               | 
               | Despite the above, some people may still fail, due to bad
               | luck or due to actually not being great students. For
               | these, institute a "poverty floor" below which no one may
               | fall. People who are not desperately poor are less likely
               | to commit crimes.
               | 
               | Of course, yes some people are lazy. That's unfortunate.
               | Lazy people should still get some money, for the simple
               | reason that it's a lot cheaper than dealing with
               | criminals and crime. Obviously we shouldn't give them
               | _too_ much, since then they stay lazy and /or it just
               | drains our coffers dry.
               | 
               | Worse, some people are just plain bad. That's when you
               | put them in prison. But even there you can attempt to
               | reform them. Those who don't reform stay in prison or get
               | rearrested soon enough. Those who do reform can get out
               | and have a second chance.
               | 
               | If you think all the above is hypothetical, it's not.
               | Many western countries apply (at least some subset of)
               | the above policies. This is a of course a very short
               | summary of a very large and nuanced topic.
        
             | giantg2 wrote:
             | With conviction rates being about 75% depending on
             | jurisdiction and grading, I'd say it doesn't seem so
             | impossible.
        
         | masklinn wrote:
         | > Maybe things are different in Chicago, but I'd want to hear
         | from Defense before just believing a rant from Prosecution.
         | 
         | Given the contents of the rant, especially as it pertains to
         | bail reform, I don't think it is.
        
         | whartung wrote:
         | The applicable quote I heard once is "while you are presumed
         | innocent, the system is designed to convict you". I think I
         | heard that on some random YT video I've seen through the years.
        
           | listenallyall wrote:
           | Given that 90+% of criminal cases result in plea bargains
           | (exact number varies by source), I think the quote should be
           | "the system is designed to force you to accept a plea deal
           | and allow us to lock you up without actually having to
           | convict you, and without any avenues for appeal."
        
           | bradleyjg wrote:
           | As purely factual matter do you believe that most people
           | arrested have or haven't actually committed a crime?
        
             | giantg2 wrote:
             | How does that apply?
             | 
             | I don't think there's a good way to measure that. If you go
             | by conviction rate, it's something like 75% +/-10%
             | depending on jurisdiction and grading. Then you'd have to
             | adjust for the 2-10% of wrongful convictions for the
             | incarcerated. Then adjust for the people who commited a
             | crime but were not convicted, but I haven't seen stats on
             | that.
        
               | iudqnolq wrote:
               | You can't use the results of the system to validate the
               | system.
               | 
               | Your 2-10% wrongful conviction rate matches the rate
               | capital defendants are legally found to have been
               | wrongfully convicted[3]. They're a good subset to focus
               | on because they're the cases get the most resources and
               | attention, and are the only category of defendants who
               | regularly get volunteer lawyers for postconviction
               | review.
               | 
               | But that can't prove that the system doesn't wrongfully
               | convict at a higher rate. If public defenders are
               | underfunded that will reduce their ability to prove
               | wrongful convictions, for example. Note that a successful
               | postconviction petition is much harder without a good
               | record established by the original trial counsel. The
               | Glossip case is a good example of how "innocence is not
               | enough" to get exoneration.
               | 
               | (Your stats are also off by a bit. The average state
               | conviction rate is around 80%, but there's way more than
               | 10% variance. California is up at 94% while Florida is at
               | 55%. [1] Meanwhile the feds are all the way up at 99.6%.
               | [2]
               | 
               | [1]: Table B-1 on
               | https://www.paperprisons.org/statistics.html
               | 
               | [2]: https://www.doarlaw.com/blog/2021/04/what-you-
               | should-know-ab...
               | 
               | [3]: https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.1306417111
               | 
               | Edit: I forgot cite 3
        
               | bradleyjg wrote:
               | Innocence is not enough to get a conviction overturned
               | but it also isn't necessary to get a conviction
               | overturned. Procedural flaws are far and away the most
               | common reason. So the overturned rate, in capital cases
               | or elsewhere, doesn't tell us much about the true facts
               | of the matter---not even as a floor.
        
               | iudqnolq wrote:
               | Edit: I realized writing this response that I forgot to
               | link my citation 3. I also wasn't clear what it was
               | measuring. But to clarify that number is exonerations
               | only, which requires innocence. A legal finding of
               | significant procedural flaws might lead to a reduction to
               | life in prison or a new trial and wouldn't be counted as
               | an exoneration.
               | 
               | Getting a verdict overturned based on procedural issues
               | isn't as easy as popular culture makes out. You have to
               | show both that your rights were violated and that no
               | reasonable jury could have possibly found you guilty if
               | your rights weren't violated. Simply having signed
               | statements from your jurors that they wouldn't have found
               | you guilty if they knew what the prosecutors covered up
               | isn't sufficient, for example.
        
               | bradleyjg wrote:
               | _How does that apply?_
               | 
               | Even if we all agree that minimizing type I errors (false
               | positives) is of paramount importance, the optimal design
               | of the system depends heavily on the true positive rate
               | at the top of the funnel.
        
               | giantg2 wrote:
               | But then you need to go a step higher and look at how
               | many crimes have been cleared. Even if we have a high
               | true positive rate at the arrest stage, the system may
               | not be working well if the overall clearance rate is low.
        
             | akhosravian wrote:
             | Some related questions also worth considering: are most
             | people who have actually committed a crime arrested?
             | 
             | In what circumstances is arresting someone necessary or
             | even beneficial for society on the whole? There are costs
             | both to the people in terms of booking & housing someone in
             | jail, and to the individual as for most folks not regularly
             | dealing with law enforcement being arrested is at least
             | somewhat traumatic.
        
             | Imnimo wrote:
             | I would guess "haven't", based on how many arrests do not
             | even result in a case being referred to prosecutors.
             | Certainly there is some portion of those cases who did
             | commit the crime but the state lacks evidence, but my hunch
             | is that this is not enough to tip the scales in the other
             | direction.
        
         | djha-skin wrote:
         | I wouldn't call this well thought out letter a rant. Further he
         | is putting his money where his mouth is: he is leaving so that
         | his son can live in a safer situation.
         | 
         | Your experience about jury duty is important, but it was not in
         | Chicago. I grew up there. I get what he's talking about.
         | 
         | Depending on the neighborhood, things can get very unsafe very
         | quickly. No one talks about "what a disgrace" when they can
         | hear gunfire three blocks away.
        
           | rootusrootus wrote:
           | I would be interested to hear where he is moving to, and how
           | the safety of Chicago compares.
        
       | draw_down wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | anovikov wrote:
       | Real solution depends on increasing jail and prison capacity. Why
       | are massive, state-run, gulag-style camps are not in the books?
       | With spare capacity so that every would-be criminal knows there's
       | space for everyone, further deterring them? It must also instill
       | fear and terror in every criminal, including those born and
       | raised in most terrible conditions.
        
         | barbazoo wrote:
         | Doesn't the US already have the world biggest prison system and
         | the most people in jail/prison. I think the whole concept of it
         | being a deterrent has been debunked.
        
           | anovikov wrote:
           | Even if it's not a good deterrent, it may solve the problem
           | directly: incarcerate these people and make sure they are too
           | old and sick when they get out, to still be a big problem.
           | 
           | Sure US has an overly large prison population but no other
           | developed country is as diverse, it also doesn't have a wide
           | social safety net that works around the problem at the cost
           | of blocking development with insane taxes.
           | 
           | It's a country where you either win, or you lose, and the
           | system must ensure that those who lost don't get in the way
           | of those still running.
        
           | DerpyBaby123 wrote:
           | I think the comment you replied to was being facetious
        
       | giantg2 wrote:
       | Wow, bias much?
       | 
       | How does this lawyer, who is supposed to be trained in logic, not
       | see the doublespeak here. On one hand they say there are needless
       | prosecutions of police, but then laments the discretion to not
       | prosecute some crimes. Which do you want - to vigorously pursue
       | crimes, or to use discretion? It seems they want discretion, but
       | to only use it with police. It's laughable they think the
       | defenders have an fair chance and even resources (as implied in
       | their mention of the adversarial system and respect for them).
       | 
       | I agree that some of the policies listed are problematic. One
       | thing this guy completely misses is that crime is primarily
       | driven by socioeconomic issues. Did the policies in place
       | exacerbate crime? Many likely did. But the majority of the
       | increase in the past few years has been driven by the pandemic
       | and policies around that.
        
       | fnord77 wrote:
       | activist DA campaigns are being funded by unaccountable
       | billionaires, and while their intent seems good the results are
       | disastrous, at least in my area:
       | 
       | Chesa Boudin and Priscilla Price
        
       | nness wrote:
       | So, I know nothing of Illinois or State Attorney Kim Foxx, but I
       | do have a litmus test where I search the author/person in focus
       | and note the top results who are sharing the story -- New York
       | Post, Daily Mail, Fox News, etc.
       | 
       | Does such things invalidate the points made in the article? No.
       | But it helps me judge the level of scrutiny I need to apply.
        
         | gadders wrote:
         | "Does it fit the narrative?"
        
           | jen20 wrote:
           | "Is it sensationalised trash designed for boomers who are not
           | capable of reading on a topic unless there are intensifiers
           | before every keyword?" is generally the hallmark of those
           | publications.
           | 
           | If it were the WSJ, Telegraph or Times (London) publishing it
           | too, your concern would be more justified.
        
           | amanaplanacanal wrote:
           | The Murdoch narrative? It certainly appears to.
        
         | WarOnPrivacy wrote:
         | You (or any user) posting that sort of detail helps me figure
         | out how to frame loaded commentary. I want take a thoughtful
         | step back if I run into a challenge to my worldview but I don't
         | have limitless energy to do so. I need to pick healthy and
         | worthwhile challenges.
        
         | ap99 wrote:
         | Both sides have a narrative.
         | 
         | The news CNN or NYTimes night carry is often ignored by NYPost
         | or Fox and vice versa because it doesn't fit their narratives.
         | 
         | Having a narrative on either side doesn't mean the things being
         | reported on are incorrect or even embellished.
         | 
         | But yes, you do need to be aware of the narrative so you can
         | place different weights on news items.
         | 
         | Or... Find better news sources.
        
           | iudqnolq wrote:
           | Not on this subject. The NYTimes is heavily conservative when
           | it comes to the criminal judicial system. They've written
           | articles espousing essentially the same positions as this
           | one. They've led the charge to kill bail reform in New York.
        
           | japhib wrote:
           | Where are these legendary non-political news sources you
           | speak of? If such news sources exist, I would love to hear
           | what they are.
        
       | Slava_Propanei wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
       | My estimation of the typical prosecutor or DA was quite low. Then
       | I sat on the grand jury.
       | 
       | Before we ever started, he told us that if our hearts saw no
       | crime, we had the discretion to not indict. This was strange, I
       | was of the opinion they wanted to keep such things secret, after
       | all. But he told us the story of a little old grandma, 90 years
       | old, going to the airport and forgetting a Derringer in her
       | purse.
       | 
       | They were so fucking lazy. I know what you see on TV, but our
       | grand jury consisted of another on the DA team coming in, giving
       | a 30 second summary of the crimes of the accused, showing us no
       | evidence whatsoever, and then moving on to the next. Probably 25
       | or 30 of these minimum, before lunch rolled around. We were
       | allowed to ask questions, for which there was always a smarmy
       | answer.
       | 
       | "Oh, if you can't make it in, just call, a quorum's 9 so we
       | probably won't even need to bring in an alternate".
       | 
       | They did discover a need to bring in an alternate, the morning
       | only 9 of us showed up. I had veto power. Every drug case that
       | they made no claim of violence or gross negligence... no bill.
       | Then I heard the "This isn't justice! You're all temporarily
       | dismissed, until we can get an alternate in here later this
       | afternoon"
       | 
       | All because they had a hard-on for some college-aged kids selling
       | weed. I think there was a sizable cash confiscation, but my
       | understanding is that they got to keep the free money anyway.
       | Even if not, I think the legal term is collateral estoppel, that
       | is if they managed to "find" some new evidence they just
       | introduced the case to a new grand jury when our term was up. I
       | didn't really save anyone from anything, unless the prosecutors
       | were truly as lazy as I believed them to be.
       | 
       | On another day where it was slow, he sat there bragging about (at
       | least before covid) they'd have 4000 cases a year... and do 30
       | trials. "We like the trials, they're so fun, it breaks up the
       | monotony". They didn't like trials enough to give them to the
       | other 3970 defendants they charged. Nor were they even clever
       | enough to recognize that the nature of plea deals coerces those
       | defendants to waive their rights to a trial. None of people on
       | his team ever scored 99th percentile on a standardized test while
       | in elementary school, I'd bet money on it.
       | 
       | Though there was never an opportunity to ask, I often wondered if
       | it clicked for him that his excuses for prosecuting crimes that
       | shouldn't be crimes sounds an awful lot like the defense of those
       | at Nuremberg.
       | 
       | It may be impossible to find justice in our world, but if it is
       | to be found, it must be in the opposite direction of where these
       | people live and work. Deep space, the edge of the visible
       | universe, it's probably not feasible to go far enough away from
       | them to find it.
       | 
       | Despite all of this, I have little doubt that if one of them were
       | to quit, they could easily have written an article just like this
       | one. Self-righteous, blind to the fact that they were if not the
       | cause of these problems, then the biggest factor aggravating
       | them. Remember, at the end of the day these assholes won't even
       | do their job, they actively avoid trying to take each case to
       | trial. If pleas aren't forthcoming and a two year stint in county
       | waiting on a date won't cause the accused to budge, they're just
       | as likely to drop it than push forward. They regularly pervert
       | the bail process. They're complicit in turning it into a system
       | of pre-conviction fines.
       | 
       | Fuck'em all.
        
       | jjtheblunt wrote:
       | I'm from the distant suburbs of Chicago, in a different county,
       | and I believe the author is alluding to frustration about crime
       | and corruption possibly correlated with this person below.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Foxx
        
         | Izkata wrote:
         | Specifically see under "Reduction in incarceration rates": She
         | just lets criminals go free.
        
           | lesuorac wrote:
           | Sure, lets take a look at that section.
           | 
           | > Foxx has directed her office to not prosecute shoplifting
           | cases under $1,000 as felonies.
           | 
           | I mean you can still prosecute them as anything else i.e.
           | misdemeanor. Personally, I'm not sure that stealing a
           | backpack with a laptop should count as a felony.
           | 
           | If not getting to put somebody away for a decades for
           | stealing an iPhone makes you quit your job; maybe you're not
           | in it to protect and to serve.
           | 
           | > declining to prosecute low-level shoplifting and drug
           | offenses and by diverting more cases to alternative treatment
           | programs.
           | 
           | So instead of sending people to jail she's sending them to
           | rehab. I'd personally say a very short prison sentence
           | followed by rehab is probably most effective (I mean look at
           | how hard white collar criminals try to avoid prison; it has a
           | powerful effect even if its for <7d). But unless he's going
           | to show that the people in rehab instead of prison are
           | committing these crimes (which it almost always isn't; plenty
           | of fresh criminals available) it's an argument without any
           | evidence.
           | 
           | I also don't think firing gunshots in a playground (his
           | actual complain) counts as "low-level shoplifting" as well as
           | crime is increasing everywhere including non-democratic
           | states/counties. She'd never get elected in the bible belt so
           | many he should consider employment there. (note: bible belt
           | has the highest homicide rate [1]).
           | 
           | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_te
           | rrit...
        
             | jjtheblunt wrote:
             | I'm not sure you are aware of the other famous / infamous
             | case that relates to the person, but it was national level
             | news for months in the US.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jussie_Smollett_hate_crime_ho
             | a...
        
               | lesuorac wrote:
               | I mean thats the "Jussie Smollett case" section and not
               | the "Reduction in incarceration rates" section (which is
               | what Izkata said to look at).
               | 
               | His primary reason (as given by him) is gunshots in the
               | playground and Smollett's case involves neither non-drawn
               | firearms nor sounds of gunshots. As well as Smollett did
               | not commit any more crimes while before the trial
               | ultimately found him guilty (so bail-reform probably
               | doesn't apply).
        
         | zdragnar wrote:
         | I'm from much farther away, and thought it was rather blatant,
         | given that she is the State's Attorney.
        
       | vonwoodson wrote:
       | Bye Felicia.
       | 
       | I'll never understand these kinds of letters, especially from
       | public servants. If you don't support your elected oversight, too
       | bad! Nobody cares what you think, and letters like this show
       | exactly why these policies are being enacted.
       | 
       | So, please, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
        
         | Empact wrote:
         | > I'll never understand
         | 
         | In activism, people have the capacity for voice and exit. He
         | apparently is exercising both.
         | 
         | > Nobody cares what you think
         | 
         | The letter being discussed here seems rather to confirm that
         | people do care.
        
       | almost_usual wrote:
       | How is this tech related?
        
         | timbit42 wrote:
         | Not all hackers hack tech.
        
       | thebooktocome wrote:
       | > Bond reform designed to make sure no one stays in jail while
       | their cases are pending with no safety net to handle more
       | criminals on the streets,
       | 
       | At the time you make bond, you have merely been charged with a
       | crime--you are not a criminal. I'm sure a prosecutor does get
       | tired of having to argue cases against defendants who were able,
       | by virtue of habeas corpus, to prepare a defense.
       | 
       | > shorter parole periods, lower sentences for repeat offenders,
       | 
       | Things that mitigate real inequities present when the justice
       | system interacts with poor people.
       | 
       | > the malicious and unnecessary prosecution of law enforcement
       | officers,
       | 
       | This is a terrible thing to say in a world where police officers
       | have no obligation to serve and extraordinary legal defenses that
       | protect them from almost every form of wrongdoing.
       | 
       | > overuse of diversion programs,
       | 
       | The United States already incarcerates a relatively large
       | fraction of the world's children. He would prefer incarcerating
       | more.
       | 
       | > intentionally not pursuing prosecutions for crimes lawfully on
       | the books after being passed by our legislature and signed by a
       | governor,
       | 
       | This prosecutor has had this power for twenty years, and I'm
       | certain he's used it freely. He's likely used it to protect
       | people he feels sympathy toward, and refrained from using it to
       | protect people he feels no sympathy toward. He's likely used it
       | because he feels overworked or under-appreciated.
       | 
       | > all of these so-called reforms have had a direct negative
       | impact, with consequences that will last for a generation.
       | 
       | As a prosecutor, he had wide-reaching legal power to make his
       | community a better place. What did he do instead? To hear him
       | tell it, he was the one in prison for twenty years.
        
         | DebtDeflation wrote:
         | >This is a terrible thing to say in a world where police
         | officers have no obligation to serve and extraordinary legal
         | defenses that protect them from almost every form of
         | wrongdoing.
         | 
         | Yeah, the author lost me here. I'm all for law and order when
         | it comes to catching and prosecuting murderers, rapists,
         | kidnappers, armed robbers, etc. However, I've seen FAR too many
         | videos of situations where there was no crime that had been
         | committed and no threat to public safety when a police officer
         | showed up and escalated a non-issue into a serious situation
         | that resulted in someone being killed, beaten, and/or arrested
         | for no real reason. There has to be some sort of middle ground.
        
           | plagiarist wrote:
           | There is no malicious or unnecessary prosecution of police in
           | the entire country that I am aware of. There's some grudging
           | prosecution when they do something so egregious and so public
           | that it horrifies the nation.
        
         | P_I_Staker wrote:
         | Agree on every one of your points. This is a truly sickening
         | thing to read on HN.
        
       | jfengel wrote:
       | _It should go without saying that this must be done ethically and
       | evenhandedly._
       | 
       | I don't think it "goes without saying" at all. We have an
       | adversarial system. They make it very explicit that neither
       | ethics nor honesty are required.
       | 
       | Every lawyer will be very clear that you absolutely, positively
       | need a lawyer for any interaction with the legal system. You
       | cannot assume that the other people will be "evenhanded". It's
       | your lawyer's job to force ethics on them. Without that, it goes
       | without saying that they can get away with behaving unethically.
       | 
       | To have it "go without saying that this must be done ethically
       | and evenhandedly" would require a completely different legal
       | system than the one we have. Our current one says exactly the
       | opposite, by design.
       | 
       | I spoke to a prosecutor recently that in his office, it _was_
       | spoken out loud that they were to be ethical and evenhanded. But
       | that was not a requirement, and other prosecutor 's offices did
       | not follow it. Their job was to be zealous in prosecution, just
       | as the defense's job was to be zealous in defense, and everybody
       | hoped that "justice" would emerge from that somehow.
        
       | JustSomeNobody wrote:
       | You don't fix this at the jail level. You don't fix this at the
       | court level. You don't fix this at the police level.
       | 
       | This is a society problem. You want gun toting thugs shooting
       | shit up? Treat people like gun toting thugs!
       | 
       | Fix society. Give people a way out of this shit.
       | 
       | But no. That's too hard. That takes empathy. And empathy is
       | "woke".
        
       | ab_goat wrote:
       | The key issue here is the difficult choice between:
       | 
       | a. Incorrectly and significantly disrupting people's lives by
       | locking them up pre-trial when many cases up getting acquitted.
       | This can often sink folk into much worse situations than they
       | were before, creating an endless cycle
       | 
       | b. Potentially releasing some dangerous criminals back into
       | society while they wait their trials
       | 
       | edit: to be clear, I think the likelihood * impact of false
       | positives is way worse than the false negatives
        
         | dfxm12 wrote:
         | Don't fall into the trap of already thinking of the accused is
         | guilty. Also, framing this as an a or b choice is a false
         | dichotomy. There are other outcomes, and they largely depend on
         | the factors involved - prosecutors have the option to prove the
         | accused is a danger to society, and if they can, they won't go
         | back.
        
         | steveBK123 wrote:
         | One thing with the bail reform movement is that the voters who
         | are asked whether they support it don't necessarily understand
         | the seemingly obvious, but technically non-obvious terms being
         | used.
         | 
         | For example in NY, it was sold as only applying to non-violent
         | crimes. So one might say - sure this sound great, obviously we
         | don't need to pre-trial hold non-violent criminals!
         | 
         | However technically, as defined in law, theres a lot of things
         | that "sound violent" but are considered non-violent felonies.
         | Second degree manslaughter (125.15) is, for the purposes of NY
         | State law, a non-violent felony.
         | 
         | So the next question - what might get a person charged with
         | second degree manslaughter? * Well, a guy recently chocked an
         | erratic mentally ill homeless man to death on the subway was
         | charged with second degree manslaughter only
         | 
         | Other historical examples just to name a few-
         | 
         | * Speeding 55mph in a 25mph local road (Delancey), killing a
         | pedestrian and fleeing the scene
         | 
         | * Guy accidentally shooting a friend with an unregistered gun
         | while playing video games
         | 
         | * DUI with kids in the car so badly you flip the car, killing
         | one child
         | 
         | * Drunken stealing a truck, driving up 7th Ave and hitting a
         | Bus so fast they killed the driver
         | 
         | * Guy overdosing his 10 month old on fentanyl somehow
         | 
         | * Cop accidentally shoots a guy in the stairway of a housing
         | project, proceeds to leave and call union rep rather than
         | render assistance, while arguing with his partner not to report
         | the shooting
         | 
         | * Drunk driving 90mph in a 25mph, crashing into another drunk
         | driver who was on a suspended license, killing a passenger in
         | the back, and the most either of them got charged with was
         | again, second degree manslaughter
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | Izkata wrote:
           | > * Well, a guy recently chocked an erratic mentally ill
           | homeless man to death on the subway was charged with second
           | degree manslaughter only
           | 
           | He and two others were subduing the homeless man to protect
           | other passengers (there were _five_ 911 calls), then tried to
           | help the homeless man after he went unconscious.
        
           | oerpli wrote:
           | I don't see how any of these cases prove your point. None of
           | these offenders seem to fit a profile of someone that is a
           | threat to public safety.
        
             | steveBK123 wrote:
             | Recklessly driving 90mph drunk in a 25mph zone / owning an
             | illegal firearm and waving it around such that it kills
             | someone, these aren't like.. random fluke "they just did it
             | once" kind of things.
             | 
             | Did they intend to kill? No.
             | 
             | But what did they think was going to happen when they drove
             | drunk 90mph / acquired an illegal firearm and used it
             | recklessly?
        
             | pseudalopex wrote:
             | Fatal reckless driving is not a threat to public safety?
        
             | steveBK123 wrote:
             | I'll add that the #1 thing we heard over and over for bail
             | reform advocates was - it's all these nonviolent drug
             | offenders being locked up for using or selling a little bit
             | of drugs!
             | 
             | But there are clearly many classes of "non violent" crimes
             | which seem violent enough, and/or result in death. And as a
             | lay person it's a bit opaque.
             | 
             | Given prosecutorial discretion in charging, there are
             | things that could be murder or manslaughter, and therefore
             | the same crime can be "violent" or "nonviolent" depending
             | on some 50/50 charging choices by the DA... sometimes those
             | choices being driven by what they think they can get a
             | conviction on with a jury, not what they think the crime
             | actually merits.
        
         | masklinn wrote:
         | It is not a choice, (b) is not and has never been what bail was
         | _supposed_ to be about. If your prosecutors were using it that
         | way, it was very much a misuse, at the very least out of sheer
         | laziness (because getting insane bail amounts was easier than
         | actually demonstrating a need for remanding) and most likely
         | racist and  / or classist.
        
           | masklinn wrote:
           | Probably corrupt as well now that I think about it, how many
           | have financial interest in bonds through kickbacks, campaign
           | contributions, etc...?
        
       | djha-skin wrote:
       | > I will not raise my son here.
       | 
       | Whenever we look at these situations as HNers there is often
       | armchair reasoning about the situation. The author is not
       | reasoning from an armchair. This is visceral to him. Whether he
       | is right or wrong, we should do him the courtesy of acknowledging
       | his feelings and believing him when he is there and we are not.
        
         | zimpenfish wrote:
         | > This is visceral to him.
         | 
         | It may also just be that, as his LinkedIn shows him now working
         | for a fancy law firm in Wisconsin, the amount of money dangled
         | in front of him was "visceral" and this letter is just an easy
         | cheap shot when he's already out the door.
        
         | HDThoreaun wrote:
         | 5 million people happily live in Cook county. His feelings are
         | misguided and his opinions largely irrelevant.
        
       | noodlesUK wrote:
       | What I don't understand about the opponents of things like bail
       | reform is that very few other countries have a similar system to
       | the USA at all. A determination is made about whether the person
       | charged is a flight risk, a danger to the public, etc. If they
       | are determined to meet those criteria, they are remanded. If they
       | don't, they are bailed. Why does money have to have anything to
       | do with it?
        
         | jason-phillips wrote:
         | Unfortunately everything in the USA is underlain with financial
         | cost and incentive. It is a hardscrabble life for those who
         | live hand-to-mouth and extremely easy to game for those with
         | means.
        
         | pixl97 wrote:
         | >Why does money have to have anything to do with it?
         | 
         | Short answer: Bounty hunters.
         | 
         | If you jump bail, they get part of the bail payment for
         | capturing you. It's a long standing privatization of law
         | enforcement in the US.
        
           | nervousvarun wrote:
           | Also bail bondsman. They provide the bail bond for people who
           | can't afford to pay (which surprise is the majority of
           | people). For a % of course.
           | 
           | It's all a bit...predatory.
        
             | noodlesUK wrote:
             | I think this is the part of the system that I find the most
             | distasteful. If you're charged with a crime, you do
             | everything right, you get bailed, you get found not guilty
             | or the charges are dropped, you don't get the money you
             | paid the bondsman back. It's horrifying.
        
               | ddingus wrote:
               | What one can do is pay for their own representation and
               | when acquitted, file a tort to recover financial damages
               | from the entity who picked the fight.
               | 
               | That is what I did when I faced this scenario.
               | 
               | Takes a long time. Speedy trials suddenly slow down.
               | Pressure to get a person on more charges goes up. Offers
               | get better. Requests for court appearances increase in
               | frequency and more.
        
               | plagiarist wrote:
               | And for Americans living paycheck to paycheck they don't
               | have the option to wait it out. They have to get back to
               | work or be homeless.
        
             | eschulz wrote:
             | Illinois, and several other states, do not allow bail
             | bondsmen. I understand why people would want to prevent
             | this predatory business, but then there's also the concern
             | that a larger percentage of felony defendants fail to
             | appear in court after being released on bond.
        
           | revscat wrote:
           | This isn't entirely correct. Generally American policy tends
           | towards increasing financial suffering on the poor and middle
           | classes. Paid bail is another in a long line of such.
        
         | dfxm12 wrote:
         | _Why does money have to have anything to do with it?_
         | 
         | There are two justice systems in the US, one for the rich and
         | one for the others. In effect, this is one cog in the machine
         | of systemic racism, as minorities tend to not be part of the
         | rich class.
        
           | hikawaii wrote:
           | It's the same justice system.
           | 
           | The unfortunate fact is that as the prosecutor in the OP lays
           | out, it is not State's job to make sure every single legal
           | advantage is pressed to the fullest.
           | 
           | Acquiring solid legal representation is a big financial
           | barrier, but that's something we do help with as a society -
           | there's public defenders, then there are civil programs for
           | people up to 400% of the poverty line.
        
           | bloomingeek wrote:
           | Not to mention most jurors have very little understanding of
           | the law, even if the law is explained to them, then bias
           | kicks in. Yes, we are all human, but the rules of evidence
           | must be followed, not the rule of bias.
        
         | cat_plus_plus wrote:
         | Bail lets you out if can get _anyone_ , relative or a bail
         | bondsman, to vouch for you in a material way. Under other
         | systems, same guys who are prosecuting you decide if they feel
         | like letting you out. In US, you can still be released on your
         | own recognizance if the system believes you are not a flight
         | risk. But even for substantial crimes like robbery, where there
         | are reasons to believe you a flight risk, you still can be let
         | out if someone trusts you enough to lend bail money.
        
           | HDThoreaun wrote:
           | No, defendants who are deemed a flight risk or danger are not
           | offered bail.
        
             | cat_plus_plus wrote:
             | Danger yes, flight risk no. If you have a pending drunk
             | driving charge, you might skip state. But if your brother
             | puts up a bond, it's less likely that you will let him down
             | to escape relatively minor penalties. Or a bail bondsman
             | can verify that you have a job / sufficient local ties to
             | take a risk on you.
        
       | aqme28 wrote:
       | I don't know where exactly in Illinois they live, but violent
       | crime has generally fallen in the state, and is almost certainly
       | much lower than when they moved there. Some local exceptions
       | exist in Chicago, but they keep calling themselves an "Illinois"
       | prosecutor and do not mention the city.
        
         | nervousvarun wrote:
         | Agreed he could have been more specific but a Google search
         | confirms his territory is Chicago.
         | 
         | https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/longtime-chicago-prosec...
        
         | 1123581321 wrote:
         | In parts of IL the violent crime trend has reversed since
         | 2019-2020, including parts of Chicago (city where the author
         | practiced.)
        
         | kyrra wrote:
         | Chicago is Illinois, you should know that if you live there.
         | The rest of the state doesn't really exist.
        
           | aqme28 wrote:
           | Then that kind of reinforces my point that Illinois crime
           | statistics are way down
        
         | unregistereddev wrote:
         | From an editor's note, the author is a Cook County prosecutor.
         | As a former Illinois resident, I can tell you Cook County means
         | Chicago and a cluster of close suburbs.
        
       | mchannon wrote:
       | After being railroaded by a dirty prosecutor, I'd like to dispel
       | one trope:
       | 
       | Brandolini's law, also known as the bullshit asymmetry principle,
       | states that it takes 10x the effort to dispel bullshit as it
       | takes to make it. Therefore, every set of bullshit charges takes
       | a public defender 10x the resources to counteract. Any fair
       | system, every fair system, would have public defenders
       | substantially _better_ funded than prosecutors.
       | 
       | I think I speak for a good number of Cook county residents when I
       | say: Bye Felicia.
        
         | MichaelZuo wrote:
         | Aren't you reinforcing the trope instead of dispelling it?
        
           | mchannon wrote:
           | The trope is that public defenders _should be_ and _are_
           | funded equivalent to prosecutors' offices. It's less untrue
           | in IL than in, say, Louisiana, but it's still untrue.
           | 
           | Prosecutors suffer a self-serving delusion: they're born on
           | third base thinking they hit a triple.
        
             | 2devnull wrote:
             | Literally nobody thinks that. This whole thread is evidence
             | that this is well known disparity, and one which many
             | people feel strongly about but are unable to correct. I'd
             | argue it's not correctable: we can't as a society with lots
             | of crime devote as much money to thwarting prosecutions as
             | we do on apprehension, detention, prosecution etc... The
             | focus should be on crime prevention which can include
             | better education, less restrictive laws, improved policing
             | and crime research.
        
             | masklinn wrote:
             | Does anyone except crazy prosecutor believe public
             | defenders are funded to any sort of suitable level?
        
       | just3ws wrote:
       | This has been so deeply politicized in Illinois the last
       | gubernatorial candidates for the Republicans have propagandized
       | the subject so fiercely in Illinois that nuanced debate is nearly
       | impossible. I say this as a person who lives outside Chicago in
       | the same region as one of those rightwing candidates and between
       | McHenry Times rag and the absurd signage leading up to the
       | election it was exhausting and consistenly done in bad faith.
       | This article is an opinion on a right wing bias site that is
       | promoting a key right wing political talking point, so no I do
       | not trust that OP is even working in good faith. This isn't HN,
       | this is something else.
        
       | just3ws wrote:
       | This has been so deeply politicized in Illinois the last
       | gubernatorial candidates for the Republicans have propagandized
       | the subject so fiercely in Illinois that nuanced debate is nearly
       | impossible. I say this as a person who lives outside Chicago in
       | the same region as one of those rightwing candidates and between
       | McHenry Times rag and the absurd signage leading up to the
       | election it was exhausting and consistenly done in bad faith.
       | This article is an opinion on a right wing bias site that is
       | promoting a key right wing political talking point, so no I do
       | not trust that OP is even working in good faith. This isn't HN,
       | this is something else.
        
       | lowmagnet wrote:
       | Real Clear Politics is a project of The Federalist, funded by
       | Donor's Trust and Richard Uihlein. Do not believe everything they
       | publish.
        
         | ProAm wrote:
         | This has been posted all over. [1]
         | 
         | [1] https://www.chicagocontrarian.com/blog/departing-cook-
         | county...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-12 23:02 UTC)