The Many Faces of US Politics...

[Gmac]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

[J70]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

That may well be true.

That doesn't mean that they're supposedly (a) getting a free pass (b) because they're black.

Of course if you have evidence to the contrary...

[whitey]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

That may well be true.

That doesn't mean that they're supposedly (a) getting a free pass (b) because they're black.

Of course if you have evidence to the contrary...

If 99.99% of people committing a specific crime are of one race, and the police announce they are not going to prosecute that particular crime, is it not a reasonable conclusion to reach?

[J70]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

That may well be true.

That doesn't mean that they're supposedly (a) getting a free pass (b) because they're black.

Of course if you have evidence to the contrary...

If 99.99% of people committing a specific crime are of one race, and the police announce they are not going to prosecute that particular crime, is it not a reasonable conclusion to reach?

1. Where have police announced they're not prosecuting these smash-and-grab robbery sprees?
2. If they have made such an announcement, where is the evidence that it is tied to race rather than some more mundane reason such as, say, resources?

[whitey]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

That may well be true.

That doesn't mean that they're supposedly (a) getting a free pass (b) because they're black.

Of course if you have evidence to the contrary...

If 99.99% of people committing a specific crime are of one race, and the police announce they are not going to prosecute that particular crime, is it not a reasonable conclusion to reach?

1. Where have police announced they're not prosecuting these smash-and-grab robbery sprees?
2. If they have made such an announcement, where is the evidence that it is tied to race rather than some more mundane reason such as, say, resources?

The DA in Massachusetts said shoplifting any larcen under $250 wouldn't be prosecuted

"Shoplifting (including offenses that are essentially shoplifting but charged as larceny)"

In other jurisdictions the number is different

https://rollins4da.com/policy/charges-to-be-declined/

[J70]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

That may well be true.

That doesn't mean that they're supposedly (a) getting a free pass (b) because they're black.

Of course if you have evidence to the contrary...

If 99.99% of people committing a specific crime are of one race, and the police announce they are not going to prosecute that particular crime, is it not a reasonable conclusion to reach?

1. Where have police announced they're not prosecuting these smash-and-grab robbery sprees?
2. If they have made such an announcement, where is the evidence that it is tied to race rather than some more mundane reason such as, say, resources?

The DA in Massachusetts said shoplifting any larcen under $250 wouldn't be prosecuted

"Shoplifting (including offenses that are essentially shoplifting but charged as larceny)"

In other jurisdictions the number is different

https://rollins4da.com/policy/charges-to-be-declined/

1. Clearly the law has to catch up to the crimes in some areas with these smash-and-grab gangs if there are no other applicable charges that can be applied.
2. What has petty larceny or any of the other stuff on that list got to do with being black?

[whitey]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

That may well be true.

That doesn't mean that they're supposedly (a) getting a free pass (b) because they're black.

Of course if you have evidence to the contrary...

If 99.99% of people committing a specific crime are of one race, and the police announce they are not going to prosecute that particular crime, is it not a reasonable conclusion to reach?

1. Where have police announced they're not prosecuting these smash-and-grab robbery sprees?
2. If they have made such an announcement, where is the evidence that it is tied to race rather than some more mundane reason such as, say, resources?

The DA in Massachusetts said shoplifting any larcen under $250 wouldn't be prosecuted

"Shoplifting (including offenses that are essentially shoplifting but charged as larceny)"

In other jurisdictions the number is different

https://rollins4da.com/policy/charges-to-be-declined/

1. Clearly the law has to catch up to the crimes in some areas with these smash-and-grab gangs if there are no other applicable charges that can be applied.
2. What has petty larceny or any of the other stuff on that list got to do with being black?

If the vast and overwhelming majority of defendants historically prosecuted for this list of crimes in Suffolk County are African American.....you can draw whatever conclusion you want as to the prosecutors motivation

She has also  made public comments that back up race as being her motivation

[J70]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

That may well be true.

That doesn't mean that they're supposedly (a) getting a free pass (b) because they're black.

Of course if you have evidence to the contrary...

If 99.99% of people committing a specific crime are of one race, and the police announce they are not going to prosecute that particular crime, is it not a reasonable conclusion to reach?

1. Where have police announced they're not prosecuting these smash-and-grab robbery sprees?
2. If they have made such an announcement, where is the evidence that it is tied to race rather than some more mundane reason such as, say, resources?

The DA in Massachusetts said shoplifting any larcen under $250 wouldn't be prosecuted

"Shoplifting (including offenses that are essentially shoplifting but charged as larceny)"

In other jurisdictions the number is different

https://rollins4da.com/policy/charges-to-be-declined/

1. Clearly the law has to catch up to the crimes in some areas with these smash-and-grab gangs if there are no other applicable charges that can be applied.
2. What has petty larceny or any of the other stuff on that list got to do with being black?

If the vast and overwhelming majority of defendants historically prosecuted for this list of crimes in Suffolk County are African American.....you can draw whatever conclusion you want as to the prosecutors motivation

She has also  made public comments that back up race as being her motivation

She said she doesn't want to prosecute people for these crimes solely because they're much more likely to be black? She is biased towards black people?

[whitey]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

That may well be true.

That doesn't mean that they're supposedly (a) getting a free pass (b) because they're black.

Of course if you have evidence to the contrary...

If 99.99% of people committing a specific crime are of one race, and the police announce they are not going to prosecute that particular crime, is it not a reasonable conclusion to reach?

1. Where have police announced they're not prosecuting these smash-and-grab robbery sprees?
2. If they have made such an announcement, where is the evidence that it is tied to race rather than some more mundane reason such as, say, resources?

The DA in Massachusetts said shoplifting any larcen under $250 wouldn't be prosecuted

"Shoplifting (including offenses that are essentially shoplifting but charged as larceny)"

In other jurisdictions the number is different

https://rollins4da.com/policy/charges-to-be-declined/

1. Clearly the law has to catch up to the crimes in some areas with these smash-and-grab gangs if there are no other applicable charges that can be applied.
2. What has petty larceny or any of the other stuff on that list got to do with being black?

If the vast and overwhelming majority of defendants historically prosecuted for this list of crimes in Suffolk County are African American.....you can draw whatever conclusion you want as to the prosecutors motivation

She has also  made public comments that back up race as being her motivation

She said she doesn't want to prosecute people for these crimes solely because they're much more likely to be black? She is biased towards black people?

Yes

That is essentially what she said

[J70]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

That may well be true.

That doesn't mean that they're supposedly (a) getting a free pass (b) because they're black.

Of course if you have evidence to the contrary...

If 99.99% of people committing a specific crime are of one race, and the police announce they are not going to prosecute that particular crime, is it not a reasonable conclusion to reach?

1. Where have police announced they're not prosecuting these smash-and-grab robbery sprees?
2. If they have made such an announcement, where is the evidence that it is tied to race rather than some more mundane reason such as, say, resources?

The DA in Massachusetts said shoplifting any larcen under $250 wouldn't be prosecuted

"Shoplifting (including offenses that are essentially shoplifting but charged as larceny)"

In other jurisdictions the number is different

https://rollins4da.com/policy/charges-to-be-declined/

1. Clearly the law has to catch up to the crimes in some areas with these smash-and-grab gangs if there are no other applicable charges that can be applied.
2. What has petty larceny or any of the other stuff on that list got to do with being black?

If the vast and overwhelming majority of defendants historically prosecuted for this list of crimes in Suffolk County are African American.....you can draw whatever conclusion you want as to the prosecutors motivation

She has also  made public comments that back up race as being her motivation

She said she doesn't want to prosecute people for these crimes solely because they're much more likely to be black? She is biased towards black people?

Yes

That is essentially what she said

I guess we'll have to take your word for it.

[whitey]

I think every video I've seen of smash and grab the culprits have all been black youths you might not like it but it's true and the couple I've witnessed personally the same applies

That may well be true.

That doesn't mean that they're supposedly (a) getting a free pass (b) because they're black.

Of course if you have evidence to the contrary...

If 99.99% of people committing a specific crime are of one race, and the police announce they are not going to prosecute that particular crime, is it not a reasonable conclusion to reach?

1. Where have police announced they're not prosecuting these smash-and-grab robbery sprees?
2. If they have made such an announcement, where is the evidence that it is tied to race rather than some more mundane reason such as, say, resources?

The DA in Massachusetts said shoplifting any larcen under $250 wouldn't be prosecuted

"Shoplifting (including offenses that are essentially shoplifting but charged as larceny)"

In other jurisdictions the number is different

https://rollins4da.com/policy/charges-to-be-declined/

1. Clearly the law has to catch up to the crimes in some areas with these smash-and-grab gangs if there are no other applicable charges that can be applied.
2. What has petty larceny or any of the other stuff on that list got to do with being black?

If the vast and overwhelming majority of defendants historically prosecuted for this list of crimes in Suffolk County are African American.....you can draw whatever conclusion you want as to the prosecutors motivation

She has also  made public comments that back up race as being her motivation

She said she doesn't want to prosecute people for these crimes solely because they're much more likely to be black? She is biased towards black people?

Yes

That is essentially what she said

I guess we'll have to take your word for it.

Believe what you want

"Rollins characterized the letter from Executive Office of Public Safety and Security Secretary Thomas A. Turco warning against Rollins' recent policy memo as an attempt to interfere with her pledge to tackle the mass incarceration of people of color in Suffolk County."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.masslive.com/boston/2019/04/this-is-precisely-what-suffolk-county-wants-da-rachael-rollins-stands-behind-pledge-not-to-prosecute-low-level-crimes.html%3foutputType=amp

[J70]

She is trying to redress the proportionately harsh treatment black people receive from the justice system compared to white people. That doesn't mean that they're getting more favourable treatment or getting away with shit just because they're black. Some white lad who gets in a bar fight will get the same leniency, whereas previously, he'd probably get off while the black guy in a similar fight gets arrested, prosecuted and a record.
And the directive is for default. Which means it can be waived if the circumstances warrant it. You can argue the merits of which charges are included and whether the threshold should be higher in some or all cases, but is that any worse than some lad ended up in prison for decades or life for piddly shit due to repeat offenses or harsh minimum sentences?

[whitey]

She is trying to redress the proportionately harsh treatment black people receive from the justice system compared to white people. That doesn't mean that they're getting more favourable treatment or getting away with shit just because they're black. Some white lad who gets in a bar fight will get the same leniency, whereas previously, he'd probably get off while the black guy in a similar fight gets arrested, prosecuted and a record.
And the directive is for default. Which means it can be waived if the circumstances warrant it. You can argue the merits of which charges are included and whether the threshold should be higher in some or all cases, but is that any worse than some lad ended up in prison for decades or life for piddly shit due to repeat offenses or harsh minimum sentences?

Doesn't matter what her motivation is

The FACT is that the policy is  directly and intentionally designed to NOT prosecute persons of color in an effort to right prior wrongs

(I don't necessarily disagree with her reasoning, but it is what it is)

[screenexile]

Just noticing a lot of Republicans crying about Democrats spending driving up inflation. . .

Are Democrats in charge of the other hundred or so countries experiencing inflation at the minute as well?

[Main Street]

She is trying to redress the proportionately harsh treatment black people receive from the justice system compared to white people. That doesn't mean that they're getting more favourable treatment or getting away with shit just because they're black. Some white lad who gets in a bar fight will get the same leniency, whereas previously, he'd probably get off while the black guy in a similar fight gets arrested, prosecuted and a record.
And the directive is for default. Which means it can be waived if the circumstances warrant it. You can argue the merits of which charges are included and whether the threshold should be higher in some or all cases, but is that any worse than some lad ended up in prison for decades or life for piddly shit due to repeat offenses or harsh minimum sentences?

Doesn't matter what her motivation is

The FACT is that the policy is  directly and intentionally designed to NOT prosecute persons of color in an effort to right prior wrongs

(I don't necessarily disagree with her reasoning, but it is what it is)

That's your ugly racially biased (unsupported) interpretation.
This DA sounds like a breath of fresh air, she has the support of the vast majority in her area, I hope she makes good on her progressive promises.  The USA make Turkey look like a liberal nirvana for criminals.