Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Prosecutors Feel the Heat, Want Protection
Law.com ^ | 5 August, 2008 | Julie Kay

Posted on 08/05/2008 6:16:40 AM PDT by marktwain

In the wake of three murders and the recent attack on a federal prosecutor in a New York courtroom, a group representing the nation's federal prosecutors is calling for stepped-up security, including home alarms, self-defense training and the right to carry firearms.

Additionally, the National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys, which represents the country's 5,400 federal prosecutors, wants secure parking for prosecutors, particularly those who handle dangerous criminal cases.

"Statistically, we are threatened more than judges," said Steve Cook, chairman of the NAAUSA security committee and a Tennessee federal prosecutor. "Security is a very important issue for us."

In a recent NAAUSA survey (.pdf) on security issues answered by 1,257 federal prosecutors -- or 23 percent of the total work force -- 46 percent said they had been threatened or assaulted due to their job, and 81 percent said someone in their office had been threatened.

The survey showed that 78 percent rated secure parking as very important, and 42 percent rated home alarms very important. Eighty-one percent of respondents believe Assistant U.S. Attorneys should be authorized by the Department of Justice to carry firearms if they so choose.

NAAUSA officials last month met with Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip about security concerns for prosecutors and shared the survey results with him.

Additionally, the group plans to step up lobbying efforts next year for a bill to fund some of their proposals. Heavy lobbying last year led to prosecutors being partially included in the Court Security Act of 2007, which was originally intended only for judges.

Under the legislation, prosecutors will not get the same security measures as judges, such as home alarms; however they will now be protected from having their driver's license information made public.

"Prosecutors are on the front lines like federal agents; they are the face of federal law enforcement," said Peter Prieto, a former Miami federal prosecutor and chairman of Holland & Knight's litigation practice. "They are dealing with pretty dangerous people and have a legitimate gripe. For the job they do, they deserve more protection."

In 2001, prominent Seattle prosecutor Tom Wales was gunned down in his basement. The case is still unsolved.

Later that year, Chicago federal prosecutor Michael Messer was shot and killed after leaving a training program put on by the Justice Department's National Advocacy Center at the University of South Carolina. Four teens were later convicted of killing Messer as part of a robbery spree.

Then in 2003, Baltimore prosecutor Jonathan Luna was murdered after leaving his office late at night, his body found face down in a creek with 36 stab wounds.

In March, another federal prosecutor was the victim of violence -- this time in a courtroom. Carolyn Pokorny, 38, chief of narcotics for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York, in Brooklyn, was attacked by a drug defendant facing a life sentence who had somehow smuggled a razor into the courtroom. Pokorny was bruised but not seriously hurt. Both Pokorny and the office spokesman in Brooklyn declined comment, citing the pending case.

Secure parking is the most vital issue for prosecutors, according to survey results. In some areas such as New York, prosecutors have secured parking. But in other areas, like Miami -- a district known for prosecuting some of the most dangerous criminals -- prosecutors must walk to public parking lots, often late at night.

"It may sound like a small thing, but it's a big deal," said Kendall Coffey, a former Miami U.S. Attorney who is now a partner at Coffey Burlington in Miami. "I would endorse the concept of secured parking. Going to a public lot is an unnecessary risk. You're a sitting duck."

Coffey was less enthused about prosecutors carrying firearms.

Currently, prosecutors can apply to the Justice Department in individual situations to be deputized and get a firearm. The problem with that, according to the NAAUSA, is that the process, usually, takes two weeks, and time is of the essence when a threat is made.

The NAAUSA says the Department of Justice has not been supportive on security issues in past years.

In a statement, Ken Melson, director of the Department of Justice's Executive Office for United States Attorneys, said the DOJ has already begun addressing some of the issues in the survey.

"We have modified policy to allow AUSAs who hold state carry permits to carry those weapons between offices while on government duty or when using a government vehicle," he said. He added that secure parking is provided on a case-by-case basis. "AUSA safety is an important priority to [the Executive Office] and the Department," he said.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: banglist; federalgovernment; heller; prosecutors
This could be taken as a positive, a wedge in the door to show that everyone has the right to bear arms for self defense.
1 posted on 08/05/2008 6:16:41 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Prosecutors are in no way entitled to ANY protection not afforded the rest of the country.


2 posted on 08/05/2008 6:18:16 AM PDT by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Or it could be more of the old "some animals are more equal than others" routine.

L

3 posted on 08/05/2008 6:18:47 AM PDT by Lurker (Islam is an insane death cult. Any other aspects are PR to get them within throat-cutting range.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Ahhh America, becoming more like Columbia/Mexico every day.


4 posted on 08/05/2008 6:24:55 AM PDT by redstateconfidential (If you are the smartest person in the room,you are hanging out with the wrong people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I have no problem with prosecutors wanting to be armed for self-protection, that is their right as an American.

However, they should follow the same laws regarding firearms as a regular Joe-Sixpack.

If the prosecutor’s city or state prohibits concealed carry or handguns for average citizens, then tough shit.

Lawyers have to realize that their are not two different classes of American’s and thus two different sets of rules.

If an average citizen can protect him/herself with a conceal carry so should the prosecutor — no special favors.


5 posted on 08/05/2008 6:54:54 AM PDT by ktime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
This could be taken as a positive, a wedge in the door to show that everyone has the right to bear arms for self defense.

I have a bridge in Brooklyn you want to buy.

The only change I support would be a Federal law providing concealed carry for all. Oh, if they wanted to make it shall-issue for long-term taxpayers, and may issue for others I would probably support that as a way to keep criminals disarmed.

6 posted on 08/05/2008 6:58:55 AM PDT by CurlyDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Federal prosecutors work in federal courthouses which are in urban areas where parking is expensive. The judges and GSA guys hog the inside free parking. These prosecutors are lobbying for free parking somewhere near the courthouse by using the fear factor.


7 posted on 08/05/2008 7:00:30 AM PDT by RicocheT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

That’ll show ‘em!


8 posted on 08/05/2008 7:32:07 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

So we should subsidize their weapons training and special parking? Jeez, what’s next, buy their home for them, and make them available for tax free status?


9 posted on 08/05/2008 7:34:45 AM PDT by Core_Conservative (Proud to be "The self-righteous, gun-totin, military lovin, abortion-hatin, gay-loathin'...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd; Lurker
You guys are absolutely correct about special privileges for prosecutors. Still, articles such as this can be useful in that they acknowledge the utility of firearms for self defense.

The *major* plank of the anti-freedom types is that guns are useless for self defense.

10 posted on 08/05/2008 8:26:10 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd
thats silly. how often do you put away hardened criminals while staring them and their families square in the face? they are on the front lines of a very dangerous endeavor and deserve protection.

no, this is not a 2A issue. anyone who says so has an agenda.

11 posted on 08/05/2008 8:30:17 AM PDT by thefactor (contributing nothing of value to threads since 2001...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RicocheT

Wrong. Most US Attorneys offices are at an off-site from the federal courthouses and AUSAs routinely walk or drive to and from court proceedings.

This is a legitimate concern. Threats are definately on the rise and as we saw in the Northern District of Illinois, Judge Lefcow ignoring warnings from federal marshals and requesting that protective services end for her and her family after a threats were made led to her mother’s and husband’s death.

There is no end to the insane level of threats rendered against the judiciary in this day and age.

This isn’t even all about “major drug dealers” being sentenced and the like. There is an equal amount of violence in federal civil court proceedings due to the volatile and very personal nature of bankruptcy and civil actions.

RLTW


12 posted on 08/05/2008 9:40:00 AM PDT by military cop (military cop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

So what’s the problem? Why can’t the prosecutors go get alarms, training, and carry permits? Other than the premium parking spots, it looks like everything they want is freely available to anyone in most states and I think gov’t employees can get carry permits even in places like NYC that generally infringe on that right for the average peon.


13 posted on 08/05/2008 11:07:31 AM PDT by Turbopilot (iumop ap!sdn w,I 'aw dlaH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: military cop; thefactor
To both of you. When the legal system provides protection for every young woman with a restraining order against a stalker or an ex, and every child who has been abused in their current setting.

After these people receive taxpayer armed protection you might come up with justification for providing justice department people of various stripes (most of whom are full grown adult males) with some level of protection. Until that time they deserve zip, zero, nada.

If they want to be safe, they are absolutely in a position to make everyone in society much safer than they are now.

I don't care one whit how much prosecutors or you whine. Grow TF up.

14 posted on 08/05/2008 11:14:31 AM PDT by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lurker; marktwain

Exactly that, Lurker

“One set of rules for thee, another set for me.”


15 posted on 08/05/2008 1:16:13 PM PDT by wastedyears (Show me your precious darlings, and I will crush them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CurlyDave

Why is it always “I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you?”

Leave the Verrazano alone.


16 posted on 08/05/2008 1:18:31 PM PDT by wastedyears (Show me your precious darlings, and I will crush them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd
i understand and respect your zeal. i see all too many battered women who disregard their own order of protection and take the man back. that is their choice.

if they do not choose to take him back, there are many mechanisms available to these women. if a man violates the stipulations in the OOP, it's an automatic felony. he doesn't have to take any violent action to be arrested.

and i am not talking about armed escorts for these prosecutors. protect their identity on DMV records, make it easier for them to get a carry permit.

i realize they have chosen the job, but it is one wrought with threats against them and their family. jeez, they should be able to park within their compound or be escorted to their vehicles.

17 posted on 08/05/2008 2:41:32 PM PDT by thefactor (contributing nothing of value to threads since 2001...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: military cop

Teach them to dial 911. For bonus points they can learn to speed dial.


18 posted on 08/05/2008 3:39:13 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Vote against the dem party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Just so I understand.

The 2nd Amendment supposedly applies only to the Federal Government as it's not "incorporated" and these are federal employee's asking for permission from the federal government?

/s

19 posted on 08/06/2008 8:42:59 AM PDT by beltfed308 (Heller: The defining moment of our Republic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

If you knew what I know about this, you’d take your own advice.

RLTW


20 posted on 08/08/2008 12:51:02 PM PDT by military cop (military cop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson