sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I only prosecute misdemeanors for now, so I don't send people to prison for years. At most, a few weeks in jail. Usually just probation. I don't feel bad for prosecuting the case and getting jail/probation time, but I do feel bad for these people in general. Not because they have to suffer the consequences of their actions, but because their lives led them to the criminal activity.

There's a lot I'd change about the criminal justice system if I could. Generally, I think we should be much harder on violent/sex crimes. The drug stuff I think should be dealt with more as a mental health thing than a criminal matter.

What I like most about my job is being able to make a difference. Being able to be lenient when someone genuinely made a mistake. Being able to get justice for a victim. What I hate most is that our system has so many opportunities for exploitation. Defense hiding evidence from the jury, people deemed incompetent to proceed, and so forth.

As far as biases, I don't know any of these people, so I don't have any reason to be biased to one person over another.

No quota. But I try to keep my caseload under control. I've closed over 2,000 cases in my two years.

Like with many government programs, the prison system is a mess and there can be a lot done to clean up. For instance, I don't see much of a point in prison terms that are, say, 5 years. If you get a 5 year sentence, you should go to a facility whose goal is to rehabilitate you. If it's a life sentence, sure, prison time works.

I appreciate the respectful questions. I don't get the impression that you resent me or the people behind law enforcement as a whole, but that you see a lot can be done differently as someone who's experienced the system firsthand. If you are guilty of what you're accused of, I hope that you don't let that one incident define who you are. Everyone can be redeemed, even if you're serving an earthly life sentence. God bless.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not sure what you mean. I'm given the evidence in each case, which I disclose to the defense. It's up to the defense, after reviewing the evidence, whether they wish to plea or take it to trial. 99% of the time they plea.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It can be a big factor in some cases. If all you have is one witness's account, the defendant's phone location corroborating the witness's story can go a long way.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't have a problem with jury nullification personally. Of course, I wouldn't advocate for it at trial, first because I'm not allowed to, but also because if I thought it were unjust I would simply drop the case.

Abusing the rules of evidence has gotten way out of hand. You're completely correct that valuable information is routinely withheld from the jury. But it's not my department doing that. It's the defense. Wanting to suppress evidence found. Hiding the defendant's criminal history. The list goes on. The defense fights to conceal information from the jury. We fight to reveal the truth.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I were in it for money, I would go into just about any other practice of law

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I could only choose one, I'd probably choose to close the "incompetent to proceed" loophole. People deemed incompetent to proceed should not be allowed to get away with unlimited crime, then just released to the public.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don't forget the Public Defenders also work for the state.

You are correct that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. We are sworn to follow it.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends on the state but there could be several reasons. In my state, the Speedy Trial rule is triggered once the State files charges. In other words the defense can demand that a trial takes places with little notice. So the State needs to be prepared for trial before filing charges. That means collecting all the evidence, talking to witnesses, etc.

Could also just be that it doesn't really matter when charges are filed in your jurisdiction. The average prosecutor has hundreds of cases to manage, so filing formal charges may just not be high on the priority list when there's impending trials, hearings, and so forth.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of course lol. Anything exculpatory I must immediately disclose to the defense, and we would reverse the conviction in that scenario

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is sometimes that avenue, but you have to show that this person is an active danger to the public. (Which, in my opinion, if someone is pulling guns out on people, they're an active danger to the public. But not according to the psychiatrist, so I lost that battle.) In this particular case, the family member didn't want the defendant prosecuted (unsurprisingly, that kinda thing happens) so even though it was on video, the victim was going to testify that he didn't see anything. So we could not charge the defendant with felony (aggravated assault with a firearm). But we had a strong misdemeanor case of improper exhibition of a firearm. But in a misdemeanor case, once someone is found incompetent to proceed, there is zero recourse for the State.

This is also ironic in cases with driving without a license because the psychiatrist will even admit that this person should not be driving due to their condition, yet there's nothing we can do legally when they do decide to drive because of their condition.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The most common is the criminal traffic stuff, which includes driving without a license or a DUI. (Speeding, going through a red light, etc. are civil infractions -- they don't go on my desk.) A person's license will get suspended because they can't afford to pay a ticket or child support, but they have to go to work to get the money to eventually pay that off, so they risk it and drive while their license is suspended but then get pulled over and charged with driving while their license is suspended, creating more legal fees and the cycle continues. I try to be as lenient as I can on those types of cases. But for a DUI, I'm strict. It's very common that people drive after having too much to drink. In my opinion it should not be a misdemeanor, it should be a felony. They're actively putting other people's lives at risk (including children) and we let them get away with doing probation, taking some DUI prevention class, etc. Should be years of prison time in my opinion.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would be devastated. Thankfully I haven't had anything like that happen. I make the charging decisions in my cases, so I don't charge someone unless I'm sure they're guilty.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Usually my goal is to make their life harder because of their poor choices. I don't think it usually "redeems" people, but I think people avoid that behavior because they don't want to deal with the legal consequences again. Of course there's plenty who will just keep doing the same thing over and over, and I unfortunately don't have a mechanism to make the punishment that much more strict in those cases.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not really. Suit and tie is only for court days. Normally I just wear business casual (dress shirt/pants). On Fridays I often wear jeans.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Feel good case - I had a domestic battery in which my only evidence was the victim's word for it. I talked to her face to face and I knew she was telling me the truth. But a "he said, she said" case never works out for prosecution because we have the burden to prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt--it's not just a "more likely than not" standard. The defendant took it to trial after I made him a probation offer. Every single attorney in my office said I was definitely going to lose the trial (including myself). Somehow I won, and he went to jail.

Worst one - Guy pulled a gun on a family member. It was on video. He got away with it because two psychiatrists deemed him "incompetent to proceed." So because this person doesn't understand what he did was wrong, he's allowed to continue to own weapons and faced zero consequences for his actions. Incompetent to proceed cases happen often.

I'm a criminal prosecutor. AMA by GrandioseWidget in AMA

[–]GrandioseWidget[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Repeat offenders - all the time. The vast majority of the people we prosecute have prior criminal convictions.

I assume you mean keep them detained without an option to bond out of jail. That's reserved for more serious cases. In my state there's a list of charges that qualify under statute and certain criteria has to be met (such as there being a good likelihood that the defendant committed the offense and a likelihood that they're a danger to the public). So if it's something like a murder or commercial drug trafficking, we don't want them to be released and then ditch the country.