Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

LikesBallsDeep t1_jb1vvsq wrote

Reply to comment by NetQuarterLatte in Woman Followed Into Manhattan Building, Dragged Out of Elevator in Late-Night Rape: Cops by NetQuarterLatte

Wait wtf is this for real? Barely 1 in 20 people arrested on a felony charge are convicted? What the fuck is this? Either the police are making a shit ton of unjustified arrests or our entire judiciary needs to be fired and start from scratch.

14

Brolic_Broccoli t1_jb280dm wrote

Hey LikesBallsDeep,

I practice in the field. The main cause of dismissals is CPL Article 245, the sheer volume of irrelevant paperwork is impossible to receive before the statutory deadline on each and every case. "Discovery" occurs after the defendant is arrested, charged and formally arraigned before a Judge. 245 stipulates that everything that is "discoverable" must be provided within 90 days for misdeamanors and 6 months for felonies, with zero extensions allowed by law. Meaning most cases are usually dismissed without getting to the merits aka without ever going to trial.

Because discovery stops the prosecutors from getting to the trial phase, victims never get to testify, and perpetrators have all charges against that dismissed and sealed, meaning that it's like they never did the crime to begin with.

19

theuncleiroh t1_jb2cvrn wrote

Glad to have your input, as someone working in the field. I'll offer some other relevant input, as someone who's been fucked over by the laws amended therein.

As a college student arrested for a protest charge, I didn't hear a thing for months. I finally show up for my first hearing, and my charges are elevated from misdemeanor to felony. No evidence presented, judge accepts. Now wait a few more months. I'm now at another university hours away. I start having to take monthly trips to go to hearing after hearing. Discovery went on for nearly 1.5 years, meaning I kept having to show up, sick or in health, impacted by school or not, etc, and make my dates. Trial pushed back the entire time, until it's finally time for it, and they drop all charges during pre-trial.

I'm sure having limited time for discovery limits prosecutors. I also know that prosecutors have something near a 10-1 material advantages over public defenders (there's a logic to this: PD defend only poor, prosecutors go after public and privately represented clients; this doesn't eliminate the impact on poor clients with even more overworked and under-resourced representation), not to mention structural advantages and inherently (& ideologically) better relations with police and judges. Sometimes a disadvantage on one side, as important and often benevolent that side may be, serves to right the balance-- so that innocent people don't have their lives ruined by endless court dates and unequal quality of representation.

11

Brolic_Broccoli t1_jb2gbaq wrote

Hey,

I completely understand where you are coming from and thank you for listening.

Your experience is exactly why reform was desperately needed in 2019, with the tragedy of Kalief Browder's case demonstrating that the "blind fold" law that NY previously had in terms of discovery needed to be completely overhauled.

I agree with each and every principal of the legislative intent behind enacting the changes. My critique from working in the field is that their built in enforcement mechanisms, aka having discovery tied into the speedy trial statutes, essentially doesn't work for the reasons I mentioned, putting victims in further harms way.

I might make a whole separate post for bail and discovery for non-practioners if there's interest.

4

ChrisFromLongIsland t1_jb2dg7n wrote

So procecutors don't have a system to get the defentants attorney the docs within 6 months. My industry Iwork in has an absurd amount of government regulation that keeps changing and date after date to comply with and the industry changes with the changes. Speculilized Software is used and other techniques. Why can't supper smart attorneys figure it out?

0

Brolic_Broccoli t1_jb2fhfd wrote

It's not just a "system", there is already an electronic discovery system in place that gets the documents and various other discovery, surveillance, lab reports, video metadata, intoxilyzer/PBT calibrations etc etc. 99/100 a prosecutor receives all of the paperwork that they need to actually be able to prosecute the case, that's not an issue.

There are numerous factors and variables at play that lead to absurdly high dismissal rates. First, prosecutors don't only acquire need to acquire all of the discovery material..There aren't enough prosecutors to review hundreds of hours of police body cam footage, police and paperwork and redact witness home addresses so they are protected. Just look at the Bronx DA walkout. You would need to hire about 5X the amount of prosecutors in each borough to be able to get through all of the paperwork and that's not feasible. The new executive budget bill barely allocates any more funds for discovery. This work can't be pawned off on paralegals either, because each prosecutor must do this themselves on each and every case. Second, what is "all paperwork/discovery relating to an arrest"? This opens the door to an infinite number of arguments. Do weather reports count? How about the names and contact information of 20+ unidentified passerbys who are impossible to get because of how populous NYC is? And these people aren't being called in to testify either. Regardless, because a random person may or may not have seen something, then it's a question of is it discoverable? If a Judge rules that it is, the case is automatically tossed, and this is after 20+ hours were already put into the case and thousands of files and all video files known to exist have been turned over. These are just some of the issues and it's a non-exhaustive list, the reforms create an endless rabbit hole which leads to an inordinate rate of dismissals.

7

frenchiefanatique t1_jb29x55 wrote

Paperwork? Because of the time it takes to complete the paperwork? That is absurd. This will lead to more vigilante and extra-judicial violence.

−6

Brolic_Broccoli t1_jb2bhtd wrote

Hey Frenchie,

Defendants are entitled to a fair trial and to any and all evidence that exculpatory. But the reforms lump in every single irrelevant piece of paper that must be provided within the statutory period. I agree with you. It's extremely frustrating having to console a victims and tell them that there is nothing that I can do because it's the law. And I am worried about their safety because their abusers and assailants are still out there.

A justice system where you don't reach the merits of a case isn't functional. It will lead to vigilante violence.

10

NetQuarterLatte OP t1_jb23ry3 wrote

While I understand the anti-police sentiment, convictions rate is not really a measure of the quality of police arrests.

A better measure of the quality of the arrests is whether prosecutors are charging the case (assuming the prosecution doesn’t change, obviously).

Arrests that are not justified will have their prosecution declined, and that statistic is also available in the linked sheet.

7

columbo928s4 t1_jb2amnp wrote

The NYPD? Arrest someone who hadn't committed any crime? They would never do that!

−3

LikesBallsDeep t1_jb2blkm wrote

Yeah.. that it happens isn't surprising. That it's 20x more than convicted is shocking.

−2

columbo928s4 t1_jb2bwof wrote

I think a much more valuable statistic would be comparing cases brought by prosecutors to number of convictions

4