suffolk county is heading to mob rule....

[Guinevere]

“instead of prosecuting, these cases should be (1) outright dismissed prior to arraignment or (2) where appropriate, diverted and treated as a civil infraction for which community service is satisfactory, restitution is satisfactory or engagement with appropriate community-based no-cost programming, job training or schooling is satisfactory. In the exceptional circumstances where prosecution of one of these charges is warranted, the line DA must first seek permission from his or her supervisor. If necessary, arraignment will be continued to allow for consultation with supervisor. Thus, there will be an avenue for prosecuting these misdemeanors when necessary but it will be appropriately overseen by experienced prosecutors.

Note: this is essentially already happening for drug possession cases in Roxbury and Dorchester District Court.”

[Sue U]

No matter how many times you post them, hon, wesw will not be deterred by facts.

[wesw]

well, I did apologize for my unintentional insult....

....at least there s that.

(insert smileyface here to avoid confusion)

[wesw]

here s a link for your side, in the interest of brotherly love......

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... eSX06P-ea9

[Burning Petard]

"that prosecution could certainly be defended." And that is why the policy includes consulting supervision.

snailgate.

[Guinevere]

No matter how many times you post them, hon, wesw will not be deterred by facts.

Oui, je sais. Ne calcule pas.

[wesw]

mmmmm, my French is pretty weak, could you switch to Spanish?

I took one year of French, from senora parker..., she was a lady from el Salvador....

je m'appelle wes. c'mon t'appelle tu?

une deux trois......

that s me finished....

[Big RR]

Again, wes, these are not offenses which would not be prosecuted, but offenses which have to be looked at more closely, including approval by a higher level of authority, before they are prosecuted. I would be pretty surprised if someone engaging in a significant fight with the cops, or selling fentanyl, or stealing something of significant value would not be prosecuted, but someone walking away from or arguing with the cops, caught with a couple of joints in his sock, or taking a pack of gum would get some sort of alternative treatment. Why would you imagine anything different?

[wesw]

because I listened to the candidate herself for quite a while last night and the idea that I got different was from what you presume.

me? I would not want to prsecute any amount of pot possession or manufacture

but I would want to prosecute the smallest amount of fentanyl.

my reasoning is the danger to society and to the offender (addict) themselves.

it is better to be locked up and suffer the horrible horrible withdrawals than to kill yourself, I think. and people will sell their very soul (and body) to get their fix of opium.

they are dropping like flies around here, and it doesn t even make the news...., sad.

the idea that I got from her is different than what you represent the implementation to be....

sure, she said that there would be discretion, and that cases could be prosecuted if approved, but she was pretty clear that she wanted to save money, above all it seemed to me.

and I just don t like a thief, unless they are hungry and steal food, I m for prosecution. if the thief is an addict, and that is why they are stealing, then, it helps everyone in my view

...and resisting arrest? lord jesus, can you imagine the position that that puts the average cop on his beat in?

....and will they stop enforcing the nanny state laws?

seatbelt violations? probably not, they make money.

....and littering? I hate a litterbug, they have caused some of my favorite fishing and crabbing places to be shut down. a night in jail would be juust fine in my view.

but I m something of an outlaw myself, so I m a bit of a hypocrite too, as we all are it hink....