When public accountability gets in the way of mistakes and political favors, it is the public who are cheated of their rights to a fair and unbiased hearing before their peers.
We are a country built upon honesty and fairness, but somewhere in the past 235 years the voice of We The People has been muzzled by special interests and those who would silence the public voice.
- Lawyer blasts DA on drug ring evidence (bostonherald.com)
- Sheriff hands off results of Racine Co. election probe to DA (jsonline.com)
- S Korean president’s brother jailed in bribe case (thehimalayantimes.com)
Public prosecutors exercise a significant amount of discretion in the criminal justice system. In the U.S. the dominant form of accountability is that prosecutors must be re-elected by the voters. Recent empirical work illustrates that election concerns open up the potential for distortion in the decisionmaking of prosecutors. Specifically, it has been shown that prosecutors take more cases to trial and plea bargain less when running for re-election. This effect is magnified when the incumbent is challenged. Does this hawkish behavior of prosecutors lead to inaccuracies in the criminal justice system? A panel data set of appellate decisions in western New York is analyzed. It is shown that if the initial felony conviction takes place in the six months prior to a re-election and is appealed, then the probability the appellate court upholds the lower…
View original post 18 more words