Posted on 11/27/2021 3:40:20 AM PST by Kaslin
The criminal trial against Kyle Rittenhouse is over. He has been found Not Guilty of all charges by a jury. Although Rittenhouse has not confirmed or denied filing defamation suits against news outlets which defamed him, many speculate he will. However, some of the people Rittenhouse will not be suing are Michael Graveley, Kenosha District Attorney, or Thomas Binger, the Prosecutor who tried him. Binger was admonished in court by Judge Schroeder for what was characterized as grave constitutional violations. Binger accused Rittenhouse of staying silent to match his story with that of other witnesses, implying there was something criminal about Rittenhouse exercising his 5th amendment rights. Binger has also been accused of acting in bad faith and withholding evidence, which was bought up during a motion for a mistrial during jury deliberations. Despite all of this, Rittenhouse cannot sue his Prosecutors. They are protected by Prosecutorial Immunity, a type of Absolute Immunity that protects Prosecutors from civil liability for prosecutorial abuses, no matter how severe. Perhaps it is time for that to change.
When the 2020 riots started, one of the rioters' demands was that police lose their Qualified Immunity. Qualified Immunity is a legal doctrine that protects government officials from civil suits related to their performance of discretionary functions of their jobs. So long as the official was following statutory norms and not violating anyone's constitutional rights, they are immune from civil suits. So, in other words, if a police officer is doing his job in good faith and following department policy and the law, he cannot be sued for doing his job. However, this level of protection pales in comparison to a Prosecutor's much more thorough Immunity, in which they cannot be sued no matter how egregiously they may have violated someone's rights. The legal justification for this policy comes from the 1976 case Imbler v Patchman, a Supreme Court case in which a Prosecutor was sued based on accusations of withholding evidence during a murder trial. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Prosecutors were shielded from civil liability. Giving someone this level of Immunity from liability appears reckless or ill-thought-out at first glance, but it does serve a purpose. Prosecutors would be in civil proceedings constantly if every single defendant could sue them. The civil courts would be clogged, and it would be nearly impossible for Prosecutors to do their job. However, when the Supreme Court handed down this ruling in 1976, there was an assumption on their part that the vast majority of Prosecutors were good-faith actors working in the interest of justice. With the rise of far-left Prosecutors in America who are more interested in Critical Race Theory than justice, this assumption of good faith cannot be relied on.
Let's be clear about what Kenosha was trying to do by prosecuting Rittenhouse. They wanted to send a message that ordinary people have no right to stand up to far-left progressives. They also wanted to offer Rittenhouse up as a human sacrifice to appease the woke mob. Anyone who watched the video evidence or heard the initial accounts of what happened from witnesses like Richie McGinniss or Drew Hernandez saw what happened as a clear case of self-defense. None of that mattered to the Prosecutors, though. They were content to bring life sentence carrying charges against a teenage boy. They happily violated his civil rights in court by implying he was guilty of something by exercising his 5th amendment rights and staying silent. Perhaps most unnerving is that there is a possibility they withheld evidence from the defense, given some of the claims about video footage that were raised during closing arguments. They attempted to ruin someone's life to win points with the far left. The Rittenhouse trial is just one example of a DA's office being weaponized to pursue a far-left anti-American agenda.
There are examples of far-left prosecutors abusing their offices all over the country. In a growing number of instances, this has led to innocent people being hurt and even killed. The next example to gain national attention again came from Wisconsin. On November 21, 2021, a man alleged to be Darrel Brooks drove an SUV through a parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin, killing six and wounding close to 50 other people. Brooks had been arrested on serious felony charges before the attack in Waukesha but was out on bond awaiting trial. Those charges are a painful foreshadowing of what happened in Waukesha, given that they stem from Brooks using a vehicle to run someone over during a domestic dispute. Brooks' bail was set at a preposterously low $1,000 based on a Milwaukee District Attorney John Chisholm's office's recommendation. Brooks also has an active warrant in Nevada.
Since the beginning of the 'defund the police' movement, we have seen spikes in crime all over America. Much of that crime can be directly attributed to prosecutorial negligence or outright misconduct. Obviously, we cannot hold these elected officials accountable for not predicting the future, but one does not need a crystal ball to know that letting violent criminals out of jail will lead to more violence. Furthermore, I am not suggesting prosecutors should be punished just for getting a case wrong, as that is bound to happen. There is a big difference, though, between an honest Prosecutor doing their job who made a mistake and a Prosecutor who is abusing his office to advance a Marxist agenda. Whether it be Prosecutors in Milwaukee letting a violent felon out of jail for a negligible amount of money or Prosecutors in Kenosha attempting to railroad a kid to appease the fashionable sensibilities of CNN viewers or one of the countless Prosecutors across America in major cities who are refusing to prosecute quality of life crimes or hold criminals accountable, there should be a mechanism to hold these political operatives civilly responsible for the damage they are doing and for that we need to end Prosecutorial Absolute Immunity.
Karma is real and will bite them in their gluteus maximus.
Government apologists will claim that agents are held “to a higher standard”, but, if prosecutors can do anything without sanction, then actually they are being held to the lowest standard possible, which is no standard at all. While having every defendant bring lawsuits against prosecutors would indeed impede the system, on the other hand the Rittenhouse prosecutors committed multiple egregious violations, including violation of Rittenhouse’s right to remain silent, the right to compel witnesses (by withholding Jump Kick Man’s identity), withholding exculpatory evidence (the high-res drone footage), evidence tampering (production of the low-res drone footage), suborning of perjury (the testimony of the “friends” who denied talking to Rittenhouse before the shootings), point a gun at members of the jury, with chamber closed and finger on trigger, and outright lying before the court (claiming that no one had ever been killed by a person wielding a skateboard before). Not to mention overcharging, malicious prosecution in obvious cases of self-defense, and selective prosecution (considering e.g. that Grosskreutz was a felon in possession, and they dropped charges).
If this sort of behavior is tolerated, there is nothing to stop all future prosecutions from sinking to this ethical level. It’s a sickening abuse of public trust.
Interesting article.
.....one does not need a crystal ball to know that letting violent criminals out of jail will lead to more violence.....
Where are all the penologists? They have extensively researched elements of the criminal mind, recidivism, and so on.
Woke, I’d guess.
Studentshare.org
Penology report link - the author will discuss issues, such as, crime and punishment, correctional system, crime prevention and criminal justice system in order to get a deep understanding of penology.
George Soros-backed district attorneys are ruining America
Wash TImes ^ | Nov 23, 2021 | Kelly Sadler
Posted on 11/26/2021, 7:09:05 PM by upchuck
Career criminal Darrell E. Brooks Jr. has emerged as the top suspect accused of plowing his red SUV through Waukesha, Wisconsin’s annual Christmas parade on Sunday, killing at least five people and injuring dozens of others, including children.
But just last week, Mr. Brooks was released from Milwaukee County jail on $1,000 bail for charges including battery, domestic abuse, reckless endangerment, resisting arrest and bail-jumping. In July of last year, Mr. Brooks was charged with reckless endangerment and possessing a firearm as a felon. In addition, he’s a registered sex offender in Nevada.
“A background check from Wisconsin’s Department of Justice came back with over 50 pages of charges against Brooks stretching back decades,” Fox News reported this week.
Should he be found culpable in Sunday’s atrocities, Mr. Brooks clearly didn’t deserve to be back on the streets of Waukesha. And yet there he was, mainly due to an approach pushed by district attorneys across the country backed by liberal billionaire financier George Soros, an approach that champions such so-called “criminal justice reforms” as abolishing bail for hardened criminals.
Milwaukee’s District Attorney John Chisholm, one of a number of DAs around the country whose campaigns Mr. Soros has helped bankroll, has worked for the last 15 years to change the city’s approach to incarceration. In 2018, he tweeted how Milwaukee was making a commitment not to keep individuals held on cash bail in jail. When the pandemic hit, Milwaukee’s “woke” Community Justice Council recommended criminals needed to be let out of jail immediately. The city obliged, reducing its jail population by about 40%.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Started at the top with the DOJ IIRC. First I had heard of prosecutors withholding Brady evidence in a trial. If everyday America knew..but most of us don’t.
Oh yes, the department of injustice. She names the names.
They were not "far-left progressives."
Theodore Rooseveldt and William Jennings Bryan were progressives.
Stalin and Mao were far-left.
The people who prosecuted Rittenhouse were simply anti-white racists. Their political philosophy is no more complicated than that.
Did I hear someone claim that the Soviets lost the Cold War?
Civil lawsuits. Nah……
Aggressive prosecutors. No problem
Withholding Brady material, making up evidence and pictures, lying to the jury, hiding identified witnesses from the defense…..
THAT CAN’T BE TOLERATED!!
Simple fix, new law. Prosecutor team does the TIME of the defendant if he was convicted.
Watch how fast it stops.
The abuses are worse at federal level. Prosecutors can be involved in tampering with witnesses, withholding evidence, tampering with evidence, excessive charges, assert forfeiture.
After asset forfeiture, the dense is only theoretical, a public defender is worthless and they’re paid by the same people as the prosecution.
It’s a game for them and there is no downside to cheating, acting in bad faith.
They are too busy locking up Trump supporters and parents so they have to make room. Therefore they are releasing criminals.
.
If you wanted to destroy The USA, what would you do differently?
Good point.
Couldn’t the Judge have charged that prosecutor with something somewhere along the line? If not we’ve got one hell of a system here that someone can go that far out of bounds.
I am surprised that the existing tolerance for prosecutorial misbehavior has not resulted in extreme violence.
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.