The newly anointed US Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, in his first major address has proclaimed a policy of “tough on crime” – particularly violent crime.
Here we go again – the “war on drugs” redux. How many prosecutors have been elected running on a “tough on crime” platform? I would say most, if not all.
So how do prosecutors “deliver” on their campaign promise of “tough on crime?” They arrest a lot of people, obtain a lot of indictments, secure a lot of convictions, and send a lot of people to prison. The only problem? A lot of these people may be actually innocent. But they’ve been scooped up into the frenzy of proving that law enforcement is “tough on crime.” People get convicted through intimidating and coercive plea bargains, phony evidence and false testimony, bad forensics, and police and prosecutor misconduct.
Criminal prosecution MUST rest upon the foundations of truth, logic, real evidence, and prosecutorial ethics – not upon hysteria hyped by politicians and the media.
You and see the CNN coverage of Mr. Sessions address here.
Here we go again… “tough on crime” for power and $$$’s. Phil Locke, you nailed it! The innocent are easy targets for the overzealous prosecutors/politicians’ campaign rhetoric turned into action. Innocent lives and families are destroyed in the sick political games that are being played on the people. The cycle continues….
During the Presidential campaign cycle of 2004, our daughter, Courtney Bisbee, Maricopa County, AZ became a victim, Feb. 11, 2004. An “easy” target that could be labeled “high-profile” for media attention and big $$$’s. An “easy-guilty-by-media” (case done), for a transfer of a family’s lifetime earned assets to the legal and criminal justice industry? 13 years later, churning $$$’s, languishing in the years-long appeals process – with a Habeas in the federal court waiting for a judge’s ruling.
A De Facto life sentence for an alleged non-violent crime that never happened! Under Arizona’s draconian mandatory minimum sentencing scheme. The prosecutors and special interests have fought against meaningful sentencing reform. Why? Would it end their gravy train of power and money?
Ahh! the power of the database.