KaiDaiz t1_jdxh665 wrote
Bail reform is not the major issue. Speedy trial and discovery reform is what's really driving the work load and priority of cases at DA offices to work on and abandon for eventually dismissal by 30.30. Which contributes to the appearance of revolving door of perps and lack of priority to resolve the issue by police, courts, govt
Also Gov needs to revisit the Grieving Families Act that she veto due to special interest lobby - another massive failure that no one is talking about nor much in news
ephemeraljelly t1_jdxnisn wrote
the solution is paying city employees to do their jobs. a paralegal in the FOIL unit makes $38,000 in new york city, thats fucking absurd in 2023
[deleted] t1_je0ao79 wrote
[deleted]
ephemeraljelly t1_je1gb43 wrote
plus if you ask to be comped for subway fares they just take it out of your paycheck at a “slightly reduced” rate lol
Oslopa t1_jdxkbwz wrote
So… we shouldn’t ensure that defendants get the evidence against them in a timely manner, or get a speedy trial?
There may be some truth in noting that 30.30 is getting a lot of cases dismissed. But the solution to that is more resources for handling the process, not subjecting people to unjust processes as a form of extra-legal punishment. It’s the same thing with cashless bail. So much of the criticism isn’t about the law, it’s about how an overwhelmed prosecutorial system is dealing with the law. We need to find a better response than to just unwind the reforms so that our prosecutors can have the upper hand again to railroad defendants.
MeVersusShark t1_jdxnxa8 wrote
If a judge was allowed to make a determination as to the proper sanction against the state for a missing item of discovery instead of immediately imposing the draconian remedy of 30.30 dismissals, maybe we could have a fair process that doesn't require doubling the workforce of DA's offices. For example, preclude the state from calling a witness if they failed to provide discovery related to that witness.
CPL 245.80 actually appears to provide that framework, but hasn't been effectively utilized because 30.30 accrual has become the default remedy.
mowotlarx t1_jdxms43 wrote
No. Discovery is the correct, legal and ETHICAL thing to do. If it's an issue, fund the courts and more staff. Everyone on trial is entitled to ALL of the evidence against them. Period
"Grieving families" don't take priority over a fair trial. That could be your or any one of us railroaded at trial with an immoral prosecutor withholding evidence.
JayemmbeeEsq t1_jdxvys0 wrote
This is the problem that DAs have been screaming about. The legislature burdened the offices with discovery reforms that required significant staff and technology improvements and offered 0 dollars in assistance to implement it.
mowotlarx t1_jdy1z2u wrote
They should get the staff and funds. And keep discovery regardless because it's the right thing to do.
JayemmbeeEsq t1_jdy2sd7 wrote
I put my larger thoughts in a comment below. I’m not saying get rid of it, tweak it and make money available for it.
mowotlarx t1_jdy37yz wrote
I totally agree. Discovery needs to be kept, but it was a massive oversight to not provide the staffing and funding to make it feasible. Our court system has always been understaffed and underfunded and that alone has caused most of the delays and backlogs in the system. It's a shame.
BakedBread65 t1_jdya8k7 wrote
The system will always be flawed with this law. When you give a defendant the chance to dismiss a case because the prosecution didn’t turn over the memobook for the 6th officer who responded to a scene, the defense is going to file a motion to dismiss. Then that takes months to resolve, slowing down the case, and clogging the courts further. Now prosecutors are so busy all cases are being plead down, and nobody has time for trial, so tons of discovery is being shared so nobody goes to trial.
In the same way the bail law gives judges no discretion, the discovery law gives judges no discretion to weigh the importance/prejudice of any items not turned over.
Nobody is saying NY should go back to the old ways for discovery, but there are other states that have balanced criminal discovery in a way that doesn’t result in the dismissals NY has.
mowotlarx t1_jdyf5fb wrote
If a system required defendants to have one hand tied behind their backs for everything to work properly, it was always a broken justice system.
Discovery laws are just. The issue is funding the court system. We need to pump way more $$ for staffing to handle the work they always should have been doing
BakedBread65 t1_jdyhmya wrote
I don’t think you actually read what I wrote because you’re not responding to it.
Again, the problem is not requiring more discovery, but imposing a penalty completely disproportionate to the items not turned over, especially when those items aren’t in the people’s possession.
KaiDaiz t1_je0apag wrote
their mindset already set...if a paper is missing a dotted i -therefore entire paper must be tossed and failed
KaiDaiz t1_jdyb2wz wrote
Discovery of relevant information to the case is the right and ethnical thing to do vs right now chasing and bogging down the system chasing irrelevant info that don't matter/change the case but subject entire case to dismissal on a short arbitrary deadline that was setup to fail is insane
You telling me its important to cases to collect the log books and officer complaints/work history of cops that show up and left never saw anything/interacted with victim/perp/witness/anyone is relevant details to waste resources on? and the people not even calling them as a witness. All you creating is mindless paperwork for nothing. No staff/resource in the world can cover that waste of time
mowotlarx t1_jdyesbf wrote
Who gets to decide what is relevant? And why should it be the prosecution? Everyone deserves to see EVERY DETAIL in a case against them.
KaiDaiz t1_jdyfb0n wrote
judge, the jury....then let it go to trial....we arent even reaching that phase. we stuck arguing x is missing out of umpteen docs and want to toss entire case pretrial. you think that's fair? we are literally arguing at the pregame phase over someone the team don't even plan to put in the game
mowotlarx t1_jdyisxn wrote
>you think that's fair
Yes. Because defendants have a right to see evidence in a case against them. The courts shouldn't be a trial mill. These are people's lives we are judging. And I certainly don't think we should trust a prosecutor to judge what evidence is valuable or not to the defense.
KaiDaiz t1_jdyl1k5 wrote
what evidence used against them? said missing piece not even called as a witness/evidence against the accused....there's a reason why it wasn't collected the first place and presented to court in timely manner...no one care for it...it was not important to case and not plan to use against accused
mowotlarx t1_jdzklsh wrote
It was not important to the prosecution. That doesn't mean it's not important to the defense. Given the track record of prosecutors withholding evidence from the defense, I would never trust the word of a prosecutor on what is relevant or not.
KaiDaiz t1_je014a1 wrote
how is it important for the defense for statements for someone not even present at the crime/incident? seriously running circles...its only important bc they can claim failure to dot the I to toss entire case.
again...something like this shouldn't toss the entire case since entire prosecution not based on it. let it go to trial, let the jury decide? whats the fear? you get your day in court same with the people vs tossing things on technicality. just don't allow it as evidence against the accused...that's the fair approach. but nope...dolts like you think otherwise
ephemeraljelly t1_jdyj0nq wrote
the defense team should still have the opportunity to view it. again, as someone whose responsibility it was to collect logbooks, its not difficult. it takes like a minute at most to send
KaiDaiz t1_je03aon wrote
defense don't even use it. they only care its missing. its minutes x other cases and things folks have to do. its mindless busywork for nothing and simple things like this missed shouldn't tank the entire case since entire case not built on this one piece.
ephemeraljelly t1_je03q6q wrote
its not up for you to decide whether the information is useful or not. i now work in defense and every piece of information is important, even if you dont think so
KaiDaiz t1_je04i61 wrote
then let the jury and judge decide when case goes to trial...you as defense using it as a excuse to toss entire case before trial over things you know is useless
you simply afraid of it going to trial and using any excuse to prevent it. go to trial argue how important x was not turn over...go ahead lets see if you do
ephemeraljelly t1_jdycmze wrote
arent logbooks digital now? they were starting to be done digitally when i worked for the DA so im not seeing how that’s difficult. really the only difficult thing in my experience was repeatedly having to remind officers to email me their logbooks
Bma1500 t1_jdxpk5r wrote
Grieving families act was a horribly written bill and deserved to fail. It literally let anyone and their mother come out of nowhere and claim the death of their long lost aunt has irreparably harmed them and each of them deserve millions. It didn’t even have a cap on damages.
It would make every business operating in New York uninsurable for no reason.
KaiDaiz t1_jdynlc3 wrote
Yes bc every business carries the same risks causing untimely death to others. We aren't talking about suing any random innocent business for no reason....we are talking about a specific entities that caused the unjust death of someone
Bma1500 t1_jdz0fh9 wrote
We already have statues that compensate families for wrongful death. It’s a horribly written law that would let random cousins, uncles, nephews sue without limitation. And would dramatically increase the costs of litigation for every lawsuit, no matter how frivolous. We’re suddenly going to monetize grief for extended family when someone dies? The only people that would get rich from this are plaintiff’s attorneys.
Who is asking for this exactly?
KaiDaiz t1_je01wwc wrote
>We already have statues that compensate families for wrongful
Not enough especially since the laws written over 100 yrs ago
>Who is asking for this exactly? victim who are kids and elderly for one since current financial compensation reflects on their earning potential...which they have none
_oksure_ t1_jdyfnp8 wrote
Said like a true plaintiff’s lawyer! Maybe we throw a bunch of the no-fault mills and PI attorneys in jail that are clogging the courts with soft tissue BS cases.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments