Replies

Here's what the local liberals have to say about Dentes:

"Dentes's reign at the Tompkins County DA's office has been controversial. He is rumored to be highly ambitious, eager for any kind of conviction (looks good on the resume) and prosecutes minor cases of all sorts which are dropped in other areas. Time to boot the guy out." (from the Indymedia website)

"Contrary to Mr. Dentes' belief that increasing the severity of punishment is the only sensible way to respond to violations of the law, solid research and years of practice have demonstrated that holding non-violent offenders accountable for their behavior and providing them with the tools and opportunities to become productive members of the community are more effective in deterring future crime than relying so heavily on jail."(from a newspaper op-ed by someone who works for the Justice Policy Institute)

"Meanwhile, District Attorney George Dentes continues to howl about the costs of any alternatives to his prosecuting people and locking them up in expensive prisons paid for by our state taxes." (from a website that calls itself "One Democrat's perspective...")

"In his guest column of April 11, Tompkins County District Attorney George Dentes flippantly dismisses as "nonsense" several of the major criticisms that reformers aim at the Rockefeller Drug Laws. Regarding racial discrimination, Mr. Dentes states that "the reason we have so many minority males in prison is that so many minority males are selling drugs.""(from the Tompkins County Interfaith Campaign to Reform the Rockefeller Drug Laws)

"Protesters gathered in front of the Tompkins County courthouse Friday to rally against District Attorney George Dentes' decision to pull out of a drug rehabilitation project. The program, drug court, offers those found guilty of non-violent offenses intense rehabilitation instead of jail time." (from the Cornell Daily Sun)

With enemies like these, Dentes must be doing something right.

That's fine, but it all relates to non-violent offenses. The offense I am concerned with was one of unprovoked violence. Considering how similar the Ludacris beating was to the Morris beating, one cannot reasonably shrug off or explain away his asymmetrical handling of the two cases. In the absence of valid legal reasons, I conclude that the usual influence of human nature played a role. I've also heard that he's ambitious, and a political operator; that's exactly my point. I would suggest that racking up convictions, especially against minorities, is not the way to get ahead in Ithaca. Aware of this, it seems he allowed his estimation of the community reaction to unduly influence his judgment, unethically placing his political fortunes above seeing justice done.