Prosecutions by private attorneys pose dilemma ("Police-State" Update)

Prosecutions by private attorneys pose dilemma ("Police-State" Update)

www.poughkeepsiejournal.com

A bar fight involving a female Beacon police detective and another woman has raised an ongoing legal question about the authority of district attorneys to allow private attorneys to prosecute minor offenses in court.


The detective, Jennifer Piacente, was charged with harassment, a violation on the order of a speeding ticket, after she was involved in an altercation with another woman in a tavern in Beacon on Nov. 23, 2006. Dutchess County District Attorney William V. Grady said when the prosecutor assigned to the Piacente case, Assistant District Attorney Edward McLoughlin, decided no misdemeanor or felony charges were warranted, his office advised the alleged victim of the fight she would have to retain a private attorney to handle the prosecution.


Piacente's case was dismissed after Wappinger Town Justice Carl Wolfson ruled she could not be prosecuted by the private attorney hired by the woman who brought the complaint against her. Wolfson was assigned to hear the case after Beacon judges recused themselves because of Piacente's position in the city police department.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Video emerges of woman 911 caller forcefully strip searched in police custody
Is there any military or police members here who can answer this question?
Cops to be given flashlight that 'incapacitates' from Homeland security
www.abovepolitics.com...'

This happens to be local news for me, but it is symptomatic of the current state of affairs in this nation. The double-standard can not be any clearer. If you are a cop who gets into a bar-fight, you are immune from prosecution by the deliberate design of the system.

www.poughkeepsiejournal.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

The taxpayer funded job of the District Attorney's office is to prosecute crimes impartially. This is supposed to include anyone who commits a crime, not just civilians. This victim should not have had to hire her own lawyer to have a crime against her prosecuted in the first place. Her tax dollars are as good as anyone elses. But the fact that she cannot bring in an independent prosecutor clearly shows that the system no longer operates for the will of the people. It is a self-serving enterprise for profit, not justice.

I would also like to add that the Beacon police Department has been bogged down in controversey for years now. Everything from beating up suspects in handcuffs, to refusing to wear name tags. Even the Federal government has found irregularities, yet nothing of substance is done to rectify the injustices this department perpetrates. It seems the opposite is made abundantly clear by this article. The system will protect criminal cops.

Well JITB, I usually agree with you 100%...but Good Lord, either a case has merit to prosecute or it doesn't.

If every idiot who has a complaint was given the opportunity to pursue a private prosecution, the "Justice" system of this country would be even more jacked up than it already is. The citizens with the most money could wield threats of private justice over those less able to defend themselves.

If, however, there were no charges brought on a case that actually had merit, then the issue should be remanded to the U.S. Attorney's office in that jurisdiction, as the local D.A. could also face charges.

I see your point, but in this case it seems there was indeed some merit, but the DA chose not to prosecute because of the "level" of the offense. In reality, we all know the cop was being protected by the DA. From what I have heard, the officer should have been charged with assault, not harassment, on top of a bunch of other things for threats and abuse of authority and such.

The real point here is that this crime victim has no representation. What is the point of a criminal justice system that does not represent the people? The victim never should have had to secure independent counsel. If the DA felt it was a conflict of interest, he should have turned it over to be prosecuted by one of the adjoining counties, which has indeed been done before.

reply to post by jackinthebox


Well, in that sense it is similar to the case out of Chicago where a cop beat the crap out of an unfortunate waitress who refused to serve him because he was drunk. I believe there was some subterfuge there as well. It was not until a CCTV video was released that there were any formal charges brought.

Having worked both in District Court and for attorneys (as well as being intimately related to them) - I can say, unapologetically, that there are only shades of gray that distinguish between cops, criminals and those that both represent and prosecute them.

It's an ego driven condition no matter how you slice it. Okay ATS, flame away.

A couple points

1. Until relatively recently in Anglo-American jurisprudence, all criminal prosecutions were done by private prosecutors. The idea of a public district attorney is a new idea. This is not to say that using private prosecutors is a step backward in many respects, but it is not new.

2. Public district attorneys have always had discretion to choose what cases they would prosecute. They must use that discretion by choosing only to prosecute only a portion of all the possible cases they can prosecute. If they do not excercise discretion, they would not only have and unmanageable caseloads, but they would not be promoting the public good. For example, prosecutors should focus their limited resources fighting serious crimes as opposed to petty offenses.

Perhaps there are more serious crimes going on in this neighborhood than bar fights, so the prosecutor was justified in not pursuing the case. Perhaps there are other mechanisms in place to discipline and punish the cop like the police department's internal affairs board, so it would be more efficient to let the internal affairs board discipline the cop than to have the prosecuotr waste his limited resources going after the cop.

Originally posted by jackinthebox

The real point here is that this crime victim has no representation. .

While the crime victim cannot initiate a criminal prosecution, the victim can sue the cop for tortious battery, tortious assault. If the victim does not have money to hire a lawyer, he can probably get one on a contingency fee basis. (Contingency fee basis is when a lawyer agrees to work for a client in exchange for a fraction (usually 1/3) of whatever award the client gets)

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


There is no Internal Affairs board in this department.

Many people have been arrested and prosecuted in this town for bar fights. In fact, bars are an important part of the economy in this city. If they are going to prosecute civilians, they should prosecute the cops too.

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


I was beaten and tased repetedly on my own front porch by officers of another local department. Despite having several impartial witnesses and documented injuries, I am being prosecuted criminally, and no lawyer will touch a civil case on my behalf. Cops have literally gotten away with murder around here, and political corruption is rampant.


[edit on 2/18/0808 by jackinthebox]

reply to post by jackinthebox


I thought I read this correctly. Yeah, a police officer (started?) gets in a fight and nothing happens to her/him.

This is not new though. Police have been given a double standard for some time now. Its unfortunate, but true.

They are above the law, even though they're supposed to 'protect and serve.'

So what else is new? Cop's treated with a special category that ignores the law and common sense, victims unable to get help or justice..nothing new. It is set up this way to give the government as much power as possible and us as little as possible. If a person cannot file a complaint and have it acted upon, then the only recourse is to sue or take maters into your own hands and dispense yourself the ' justice ' that the state will not.

Otherwise you simply lose out and are screwed. The cop's have their pal's on the disttrict atty's crew and they do not want a thug cop mad at them, so they bend over ( really, they demand that WE bend over) to give the thug cop all the benefits and allow him or her to escape justice. Sickening. Just appalling.

I believe that there should be ways for the public to extract justice from a system that denies it this blatantly. It is not right that a cop, of all people, should get special treatment ion society. The cop's today are little more than unthinking drones who have fewer morals than an alley cat when it comes to abuse and power trips and trying to bully and boss the public. It is a sin that cop's are allowed to speak the way they do to us..it is disgusting to allow civil servants to demand and bully and lie.

If cop's followed the law, were polite and professional, like in Switzerland and other civilized nations, where cop's are watched closely and no crap is tolerated from them against the public, we would see much better results...lower crime and great savings of money and lives. But NO...the cop's think they are our masters and that they have authority over us...they do not. They have what we allow them, and that is all. A friend just told me about an encounter he had with a typical thug cop: He had a neighbor that didn't like him tell a cop a lie..that he was growing pot in his house. The cop asked him outside, which the guy mistakenly did, and asked about it. The guy denied it and explained about the neighbor and the problem with him.

The cop asked to search his tiny apartment, which coulod not have housed any kind of real grow, and he refused and told him to get a warrant. The cop then got angry and threatening and said " If you don't allow the search, I will handcuff you right now and hold you here for a few hours while I go get a warrant". The guy, like most, was intimidated anbd afraid of the bastards and told them to go ahead. Nothing was there, and instead of apologizing, the scumbag cop said" Why didn't you just cooperate to begin with? We don't want to hear all that legal crap".

Unreal..just unreal..and MOST, the VAST majority, of cop's are JUST like that..they will ALL lie like dog's, intimidate and cajole to get their way and avoid the protections we still have. Cop's are ENEMIES of the people and the Constitution as long as they see themselves as more than servants who have an obligation to be truthful with the public and to NOT use intimidation and bullying as common tools. What other ' profession' and I use the term extremely loosely, uses intimidation, lies, coercion, threats, violence and abuse of the law as common traits of their jobs? Can you think of ONE honorable profession or trade of job that has those qualifications?

Want to be a cop? If you excel in treachery, lying, deceptive use of the truth, intimidation and beatings of the innocent and subdued then this is the carer for you!! IQ above 100 not wanted. Need not apply if a conscience is a part of your makeup. Bullies and liars especially wanted.Sound like a great way to have the system that protects us? Dear God, how much worse can it get? The courts have been trashed by the Bush cabal and turned into right wing radical freak shows where justice is denied commonly, and the cop's are now our masters, allowed to bully and talk trash to us...pathetic. If this is the best we can do...

Thanks for sharing the truth. We cannot trust judges or lawyers, who use their fiat-justice system against us.