Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.

[mrjarrell]

You'd think that officers of the court would want integrity and ethics to rule. Not so much. They'd rather be seen as tough on "crime", even if it means lying and cheating to get a conviction. At least a few judges are starting to get behind holding them accountable.

Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.

 

[IndyDave1776]

It is encouraging to see a couple of judges who are taking a stand against the prosecutorial effort to put heads on pikes for political gain regardless of whether the heads in question are guilty or not.

 

[CathyInBlue]

I have first hand knowledge that judges and prosecutors have an utter disdain for the law, or citizens' rights.

 

[Rexmage]

High Court Weighs Prosecutors' Immunity : NPR

Its a bit older now, but even in 2009 'There is no “free-standing due process right not to be framed,” Deputy Solicitor General Neal K. Katyal. This mind you, is a man appointed by the current President.

I would have thought something like that would have been common sense.

 

[Draco]

You'd think that officers of the court would want integrity and ethics to rule. Not so much. They'd rather be seen as tough on "crime", even if it means lying and cheating to get a conviction. At least a few judges are starting to get behind holding them accountable.

Judge says prosecutors should follow the law. Prosecutors revolt.

“The court will no longer overlook unethical conduct, such as witness tampering, selective and retaliatory prosecutions, perjury and suppression of evidence. You better follow the rules or we are coming after you and will make an example. The pendulum has been swinging in the wrong direction for too long and now it’s going in the other direction. Your bar licenses will be in jeopardy. We will take your license.”

Why, I wonder, was it overlooking it to begin with?

Prosecutorial discretion is another snag, though I suppose that falls under the realm of “selective and retaliatory prosecutions;” I figure if they /had/ to prosecute each crime that crosses their desk, we might be rid of some of the stupider laws. It isn’t a great solution, I know, but this “go after only the people you feel like” mentality is pretty rubbish, seeing as opens the door to so many abuses.

High Court Weighs Prosecutors' Immunity : NPR

Its a bit older now, but even in 2009 'There is no “free-standing due process right not to be framed,” Deputy Solicitor General Neal K. Katyal. This mind you, is a man appointed by the current President.

I would have thought something like that would have been common sense.

I really thought, initially, it wasn’t as bad as that quote sounded. Yeah, I was wrong. It’s a sad day when the world is actually worse than I thought, you know.

Best part is, they never ruled on the case. A settlement was made prior to the ruling, so as far as the Supreme Court of the United States is concerned, the question touching upon whether or not prosecutors have absolute immunity for participating, if not personally generating the act, in a frame job.

I’m kind of tired of qualified immunity; I’m tired of it for police who abuse their powers in such profound ways that it boggles the mind that any rational person could honestly, with a straight face, say “Yeah, but they thought they were just doing their job;” and I’m tired of it for prosecutors who hide behind it while doing acts the parallel of which would get a defense attorney disbarred the first time through.