Posted on 10/27/2020 11:26:50 AM PDT by SJackson
SEATTLE — The Seattle City Council is considering new legislation that would create a legal loophole that would made substance addiction, mental illness or poverty a valid legal defense for nearly all misdemeanor crimes committed in the city.
The council's consideration of the plan has been largely shielded from public view and there has been virtually no public discussion about the proposal.
Scott Lindsay, the former public safety advisor for the city, said Seattle would be in a class of its own if it ultimately enacted the ordinance.
"I'm not aware of any legislation like this anywhere in the United States (or) even globally," he said Monday. "All cities have criminal codes to protect their citizens from criminal acts. This would essentially create a legal loophole that swallows all those codes and creates a green light for crime."
The legislation was proposed by Seattle City Councilwoman Lisa Herbold last Wednesday.
The proposal would allow for the dismissal of crimes of poverty and it would do so by revising the definition of duress as a defense against prosecution.
Seattle police currently make about 12,000 arrests every year that are not DUI offenses or related to domestic violence. In 2019, charges were filed for just over 5,400 misdemeanor cases, not including DUI charges or domestic abuse allegations.
If approved, the ordinance would excuse and dismiss -- essentially legalizing -- almost all misdemeanor crimes committed in Seattle by offenders who could show either:
Symptoms of addiction without being required to provide a medical diagnosis; Symptoms of a mental disorder; or Poverty and the crime was committed to meet an "immediate and basic need." For example, if a defendant argued they stole merchandise to sell for cash in order to purchase food, clothes or was trying to scrape together enough money for rent. The accused could not be convicted. "If you don't feel very protected right now, this would wipe out almost all remaining protections that we have," Lindsay said.
The offenses that would be covered by the Seattle ordinance would include just about any crime below the level of a felony while excluding charges of driving under the influence or domestic violence.
The Seattle City Council is considering legislation that could result in many misdemeanor charges being tossed.
"This would absolutely open the floodgates for crime in Seattle, even worse than what we often currently struggle with," Lindsay said. "It's basically a blank check for anybody committing theft, assault, harassment (and) trespass to continue without disruption from our criminal justice system."
Although the measure could radically alter the way Seattle levies charges in criminal court, there have been no public hearings about it and it has not been discussed so far by the council's Public Safety Committee.
It was proposed late in the third hour of a council Budget Committee meeting.
Said Lindsay: "This is a back door to get this legislation into the budget process (and) not through the normal democratic processes with transparency, dialogue, (or) public discussion."
If Councilwoman Theresa Mosqueda, chairperson of the council's Budget Committee, adds the legislative proposal to the budget, it would be considered by the full council as part of the entire budget.
But if Mosqueda opts to not add it to the budget, the legislation could still be approved if five Seattle City Council members agree to add it as an amendment to the budget.
Meaning it will pass - looking for more cops to leave.
Do it!
if there is no punishment for misdemeanor crimes, why even have laws against them ?
The definition of mental illness is repeating the same actions expecting a different outcome. So said Albert Einstein.
Seattle mulls making lawlessness legal
That’s the answer!
The entire municipality will turn into CHAZ.
These councilpeople need to be peaceably mugged. Good and hard.
Maybe THEN they would understand crime.
Of course those suffering from addiction, mental illness or poverty should be allowed to commit crimes. Why stop at misdemeanors. If you refuse to give up your car or wallet to an addict or mentally ill perp, who can blame you for stabbing him. The perp needed the wallet/car after all.
I don’t know why they built that Hadron Collider thing.
If they want to see a black hole, just go to a Seattle Council meeting.
Civil rights suit should be made then because white people would be the only ones fined under such selective dismissal.
So much for equal application of the law
Do they think every Jean Val Jean nicking that loaf of bread is feeding a child?
What about the loaf of bread nicked from a family one step from starvation? That ok too?
I see a vast retail exodus along with fleeing citizens in the future.
That’s nothing. Dallas is ahead of this curve. The Dallas (TX) County DA has already de-criminalized all theft under $750.
Silly.
No punishment for some. Read Blacks, Hispanics, Gays, Trannies etc.
But any White Boy will be nailed to the wall.
I dunno.
But the only guys I knew who avoided misdemeanor crimes as much as possible were gangsters. They didn’t want to attract attention and have a record based on anything that wasn’t going to make substantial money.
Obama’s sons’ area? They will commit a misdemeanor on the way to committing a felony.
Cracking down big on misdemeanors is how Rudy saved the day.
He also put a lot of the 5 families away before being mayor.
He hit everyone hard.
[These councilpeople need to be peaceably mugged. Good and hard.
Maybe THEN they would understand crime.]
So Rudy Guiliani cleaned up NYC using the “Broken Windows” theory, which states that if some hoodlums go break a window in a building, and you leave that window broken, it encourages others to break more windows, so you must catch the window-breakers and fix the window immediately. Otherwise, eventually the window-breaking escalates to other things.
Seattle, in all their brilliance, have decided to go with the “anti-Broken Window” theory, which states that if some hoodlums go break a window, you decriminalize window-breaking because to prosecute them would be fascist, or racist, or something. Besides, windows are patriarchal anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.