New York to Allow Accused Criminals to Look at Own Crime Scenes, Quickly Obtain Witness Names

 

If we thought the New York law that goes into effect on January 1 was just a get out of jail  free card, think again. Talk about giving the criminals the keys to the city and all its treasures this is sure one. Who is going to be willing to testify either as a victim or a witness? Here it is:

The state of New York will soon allow accused criminals to inspect their own crime scenes and will quickly provide them with a complete list of named witnesses testifying against them as part of a series of new jailbreak laws.

As Breitbart News reported, New York’s bail reforms, set to go into effect January 2020, will ensure that suspects accused of crimes deemed “non-violent” are not jailed before their trial dates and do not have to post bail. Instead, these suspects are released directly back into the public and expected to show up for their court dates. Roughly 125,000 accused criminals are expected to be released from prison every year in the state.

Those so-called non-violent crimes include second-degree manslaughter, aggravated vehicular assault, promoting an obscene sexual performance by a child, possessing an obscene sexual performance by a child, criminally negligent homicide, and aggravated vehicular homicide.

Another portion of the law will more quickly give defendants a full list of named witnesses testifying against them in the criminal trial. Starting in January, the prosecution will be forced to hand over to defendants a list of named witnesses within 15 days of the defendants’ arraignment.

In June, the Manhattan Institute’s Seth Barron and Ralf Mangual wrote that such a provision will make it impossible for prosecutors to ensure witnesses are protected through the criminal trial process:

Prosecutors will no longer be able to assure witnesses that their identity will be protected, even in the case of grand jury testimony, which the new law will now require be disclosed. (While there’s a provision to ask a judge for a protective order to shield a name, that would come after cops and prosecutors talk to witnesses to make an arrest and build a case.) [Emphasis added]

Read more at Breitbart

For the best in conservative news push the button.

First Step Act release of criminals include Rapists, Murderers

 

So much for the much heralded “Get out of jail early” bill, otherwise known as the “First Step Act.” Truthfully, I have little patience with criminals. Once one is a victim of a violent crime, that’s just the way it rolls. Forever.

But this was suppose to be different. Non-violent offenders. Just some fine folks who got into trouble in the hood who otherwise were on the way to Sainthood, so sure… let’s get them back on the street pronto.

Senator Kennedy straightens the reality of the situation out last night on Tucker Carlson’s program as only the fine Senator can. Rapists, Murderers, you name it are now out roaming our neighborhood. Once again.

This bill was sold to America as only affecting low-level, nonviolent criminals, and that’s just not accurate.

Signed into law in DecemberThe First Step Act – or the Formerly Incarcerated Reenter Society Transformed Safely Transitioning Every Person Act – is, at its core, a directive for the Justice Department to establish a system to assess the risk of a person to re-offend as well as to create housing or other incentives for offenders to participate in recidivism reduction programs.

In his interview with Tucker Carlson, Kennedy said he didn’t think the law would as intended, only release nonviolent criminals.

“I didn’t believe it,” he said.

“And, I didn’t believe it because I read the bill.”

Citing figures similar to what an administration official exclusively told Carlson’s team, Kennedy said hundreds of those released were imprisoned for weapons charges and sexual crimes, while several dozen were in jail for homicide.

“Those are not low-level, nonviolent criminals,” he said.

Read more at Fox

 

Other than that, all is well at the swamp. Thanks to Whatfinger for the link-

For the best aggregator of conservative news – click below.

 

 

Less than half of violent crimes are solved in America

 

How is our “Thin Blue Line” doing these days? Apparently in regard to solving major crimes, not so well. If your car has been stolen apparently the best you can hope for is a police report so you can collect from your insurance company.

When I had my car stolen years ago, I was told by the police that “it would be best if it were not found.” So not only would the offender not be caught apparently, but my car would be in a shape I wold prefer not to to get back.

I for one, commend those who are willing to face the dangers of this profession on a daily basis. How can we improve these statistics is a question that needs to be asked.

I caught this piece over at Mises Wire. An interesting post and worth a read:

One of the central arguments in favor of the government’s monopoly on police powers is that government police are essential in “keeping us safe.” Without this “thin blue line” between chaos and order, we are told, society will descend into chaos.

How exactly this order is maintained by police, however, is less clear. In recent years, police agencies have insisted they have no legal obligation to directly intervene to protect people from threats posed by criminals. The courts have agreed.

Having abandoned the “protect” part of “to serve and protect,” the police have retreated to the claim that their real role is simply to “enforce the law.” This “enforcement” presumably would include investigation of crimes and arrests of suspects.

So how is that going for them?

According to the most recent FBI “Crime in the United States” report, only 45 percent of violent crime lead to arrest and prosecution. That is less than half of violent crimes result in what is known as a “clearance” of the crime. Property crime clearances are much worse. Only 17 percent of burglaries, arsons, and car thefts are “cleared.”

Among violent crimes, homicides experience the highest clearance rate by far, at 61 percent. Aggravated assault comes in at 53 percent, and rape at 34 percent.

But these are just cases where arrests are made and prosecutions are initiated. A smaller number of cases actually lead to convictions. A crime may be cleared even when the suspect is later exonerated.

…..

According to the Vera Institute of Justice, “fewer than five percent” of arrests

are for serious violent crimes. Instead, the bulk of police work is in response to incidents that are not criminal in nature and the majority of arrests involve non-serious offenses like “drug abuse violations”—arrests for which increased more than 170 percent between 1980 and 2016—disorderly conduct, and a nondescript low-level offense category known as “all other non-traffic offenses.”

These offenses are behind 80 percent of all arrests.

Keep reading at Mises Org.

 

Other than that, all is well in the swamp.

Half of Detroit’s eight Mayoral candidates are felons

What to post on a Saturday. How about this one for a change of pace? Detroit is preparing to live up to their high standards of superb candidates for Mayor. I don’t seem to see any GOP candidates in the collection. For the previous Mayor’s agenda –What Do You Do With Detroit? Bulldoze It

Well, Detroit’s mayor has an idea: Bulldoze it.

Mayor Dave Bing is apparently working on a radical plan that would bulldoze a quarter of the city — some of the most desolate areas — and return it to farmland, the way it was before the automobile. Any residents still there would be relocated to stronger neighborhoods.

Detroit — Half of the eight mayoral hopefuls on Detroit’s primary ballot next week have been convicted of felony crimes involving drugs, assault or weapons, a Detroit News analysis shows.

Three were charged with gun crimes and two for assault with intent to commit murder. Some of the offenses date back decades, the earliest to 1977. The most recent was in 2008.

Political consultant Greg Bowens said there are candidates with past hardships in every election cycle. It’s not something unique to Detroit or the political arena in general, he said.

“Black marks on your record show you have lived a little and have overcome some challenges,” said Bowens, a former press secretary to Detroit Mayor Dennis Archer and NAACP activist. “They (candidates) deserve the opportunity to be heard, but they also deserve to have the kind of scrutiny that comes along with trying to get an important elected position.”

More at Detroit News with the candidates Curriculum Vitae

Obama tells landlords they must rent to criminals

First, employers are getting to the point they can no longer question criminal records of applicants. A Criminal Record May No Longer Be A Stumbling Block To …

So let’s get the bad guys into our work places without notice, and into our neighborhoods.

The Obama administration released a warning Monday telling the nation’s landlords that it may be discriminatory for them to refuse to rent to those with criminal records.

The Fair Housing Act doesn’t include criminals as a protected class, but the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) says refusing to rent based on a criminal record is a form of racial discrimination, due to racial imbalances in the U.S. justice system.

“Because of widespread racial and ethnic disparities in the U.S. criminal justice system, criminal history-based restrictions on access to housing are likely disproportionately to burden African-Americans and Hispanics.

H/T: Daily Caller:

E.E.O.C to rule on preventing criminal background checks

 

Be sure You are RIGHT then go ahead  has a post called “Fairness, Obama style”and includes this wonderful news in his good piece. Hearings by the EEOC have already occurred with “stake holders” so they say, so full steam ahead. Here we go:

If Charlie Mansonever gets out of jail, he won’t have much trouble landing a job. Thanks to Barack Obama and his left-wing wackos at the EEOC, ol’ Chuck won’t even have to explain the swastika he carved into his head—it just wouldn’t be “fair”:

In the next couple weeks, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is expected to pass guidance that will prevent employers from conducting criminal background and credit checks on employees ….this change would claim authority under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as if it’s discrimination not to want a deadbeat on the payroll or a serial killer at the water cooler. (Beware Lame-Duck Obama)

The Chamber also protested the economic consequences of EEOC action. “Employers are concerned that the anticipated guidance will remove or significantly limit the use of two important tools that employers use in hiring and related decisions,” the letter said. “The impact could be significant both in terms of costs but also in terms of increased exposure and risk to coworkers, customers and clients, and the public.” 

If you haven’t visited his blog, this is a good first start.Full post at Be sure you are RIGHT then go ahead

%d bloggers like this: