Non-Presidential News Stories That Don't Deserve Their Own Thread Thread

[philleotardo]

When it comes to local law enforcement policy, absolutely.

EDIT: Also, just to bring the conversation back around to where it started, the DA in Milwaukee County is a democrat who early in his career was recognized by law enforcement as extremely effective at prosecuting gang and gun related crimes and should also be recognized for aggressively investigating and prosecuting numerous officials in Scott Walker's office, which of course was met with accusations of partisan motivations. He has more recently sellf-syled as a progressive touting numerous left-leaning reforms as it relates to hiss office.

In a quote that has not aged well, he stated many moons ago:

"Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into treatment program, who's going to go out and kill somebody?" he reportedly told the Milwaukee Sentinel-Journal in 2007. "You bet. Guaranteed. It's guaranteed to happen. It does not invalidate the overall approach."

There have been other complaints of criminals receiving leniency that have led to avoidable deaths over the years since then, but obviously none as noteworthy as this one.

He said the truthful part out loud. It’s not incorrect. Republicans love to do the chest puffing Constitutional bit until there is no self gain. There’s no political advantage in correctly pointing out that the entire basis is supposed to be the presumption of innocence. Even these cases that appear open and shut.

But, if you want to detain violent, or perceived violent, defendants indefinitely before trial (technically a punishment before conviction), consider why you have a backlog and who is handling that backlog. Do you have a lot of low level drug offenders in jail? Failures to appear? People who just couldn’t afford bail? And almost across the board, they are being handled by a public defender who is largely tasked with clearing the docket. And not paid nearly as much as he/she could in private practice-and they know it. So, not only do a lot of violent defendants go free, but alternatively, many who don’t know any better enter into bad plea deals because they can’t afford differently.

Tough on crime is a political win, but it makes no sense in practice and it is absolutely responsible for someone like this guy going free because you’re running out of places to put all of them.

[Yankee Tripper]

Yikes! That's some quote!!

Truth from an elected official must surprise you.

[Yankee Tripper]

When it comes to local law enforcement policy, absolutely.

EDIT: Also, just to bring the conversation back around to where it started, the DA in Milwaukee County is a democrat who early in his career was recognized by law enforcement as extremely effective at prosecuting gang and gun related crimes and should also be recognized for aggressively investigating and prosecuting numerous officials in Scott Walker's office, which of course was met with accusations of partisan motivations. He has more recently sellf-syled as a progressive touting numerous left-leaning reforms as it relates to hiss office.

In a quote that has not aged well, he stated many moons ago:

"Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into treatment program, who's going to go out and kill somebody?" he reportedly told the Milwaukee Sentinel-Journal in 2007. "You bet. Guaranteed. It's guaranteed to happen. It does not invalidate the overall approach."

There have been other complaints of criminals receiving leniency that have led to avoidable deaths over the years since then, but obviously none as noteworthy as this one.

so it took 14 years for it to happen? Out of how many?

[False1]

What’s the problem? He’s absolutely right. Parolees kill people, too, but we don’t invalidate the entire parole system because of it.

I disagree that he's right, but maybe not in the way you might assume. I think Texsahara said earlier in this thread or another that there shouldn't be cash bail; if you are a material danger to society you should be held and if you are not you should be released until your trial. I think there should always be a small cash bail amount that is pro-rated to your income to a) motivate people to appear for trial dates and b) offset some costs for those that do in fact go on the lamb. But I certainly agree that whether or not you are released should have a lot more to do with reasonable assumptions around your risks to others if you are released than it does how much cash you can assemble point in time.

So where do you set the line on a progressive bail reform to substantiate that quote? How many Brooks' should be released back into their communities to fulfill his progressive goals related to reform? See below for some of his history. I know Chisholm's office is now giving a sound bite that the bail was simply set too low and they're going to review it, and I haven't dug in at all, but I bet there are other cases where the dice were rolled with dangerous individuals who did harm that was reported, that did harm that wasn't reported, did harm that couldn't be attributed back to them or where so far the community has simply been fortunate. I don't know what an acceptable ratio of those types of scenarios would be to justify this tragedy. Would you set the bar at 10:1? 100:1? If you were at the parade and saw your grandmother run over or your daughter, would you be ok even if the ratio were 10,000:1?

Brooks has a decades-long criminal record that includes arrests for sexual abuse, drugs, battery and domestic abuse, records showed. He has two active cases in Milwaukee. In one, Brooks was charged in July 2020 with two counts of reckless endangerment and possession of a dangerous weapon as a convicted felon. He posted $500 bail in February. In the other matter, he was charged Nov. 5 with resisting or obstructing an officer, bail jumping, recklessly endangering safety, disorderly conduct and battery, court records showed. The last three charges were connected to domestic abuse, according to allegations in court records. The woman alleged to be the victim in that incident was the mother of Brooks’ child. Court records allege that Brooks punched her and later ran over her with his car in a gas station parking lot. The documents say police noticed dried blood on her face, a swollen lip and tire tracks on her left pants leg. Brooks posted a $1,000 cash bond to secure his freedom Nov. 11, the court records showed.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...onsin-rcna6328

I'm all for second chances and not locking up people prior to their day in court when they pose no reasonable threat to those they will be living amongst pending trial. I'd bet good money though that is not what is happening. Back to the point Texsahara made, Brooks should not have been offered bail at any amount. He was a clear and present danger.

[False1]

so it took 14 years for it to happen? Out of how many?

It took one NYYF server outage worth of time to between when I first tried to post the reply above to do a simple google search. I found this.

https://archive.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/overdose-death-highlights-deferred-prosecutions-in-milwaukee-county-b99101314z1-224745852.html/

"Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into treatment program, who's going to go out and kill somebody?" Chisholm said in a 2007 interview with the Journal Sentinel. "You bet. Guaranteed. It's guaranteed to happen. It does not invalidate the overall approach."

His prediction may now have come true.

Jeremiah Schroeder — a 35-year-old heroin addict and dealer — has been charged with first-degree reckless homicide for his role in the overdose of a 26-year-old woman while Schroeder was out of custody under a deferred prosecution agreement with Chisholm's office.

Schroeder is accused of helping obtain a $20 "dub" of heroin and then cooking it and "tying off" Cassandra Lutz at a New Berlin apartment shortly after attending a concert at the Rave on March 6. The next morning, a janitor confronted Schroeder as he was carrying Lutz's lifeless body over his shoulder at the apartment complex.

So this was six years. But I'd bet dollars to donuts that there are many additional violent crimes that haven't been reported to the police, or that don't receive media coverage, or couldn't be attributed back to individuals that should not have offered incremental leniency, etc.

There are roughly 150 violent crimes a year in Waukesha. I don't have the stats and I don't think they're available, but let's just assume that 25% of those would have resulted in release on bond with the prior policy and 75% would be released on the new policy. We'd be talking about an incremental 75 people a year that would be released on bail over the 14 years since he made that comment. I posed the question in my prior post, and your question kind of leans into it... what is an acceptable number or rate of tragedies? We have 6 deaths in this one incident, and a scar that will hang over this community for generations... what is the point of inflection for you where releasing violent offenders back into the community is worth the cost?

[jlw1980]

No such thing as inappropriately low bail. Either you are not believed to be a risk and should be released without cash bail or you are deemed a risk and should remain held.

I agree. He should never have been released. He was a violent abuser of women on more than one occasion.

[jlw1980]

Also worth noting that the District of Columbia has a higher murder rate than any state.

Strict laws don't mean much if you can go to neighboring states with lax laws. That's why laws need to be universal across the country.

[RhodyYanksFan]

For when someone at Thanksgiving says BBB costs too much or we don't have the money...

FE6jW_aXoAYrLFC?format=jpg&name=large.jpg

[YankeePride1967]

For when someone at Thanksgiving says BBB costs too much or we don't have the money...

FE6jW_aXoAYrLFC?format=jpg&name=large.jpg

watching Morning Joe this morning they talked about the escalating tensions between the US and China and Russia. Joe questioned if we are prepared for any kind of military conflict. Why? We outspend the next 30 highest spending countries combined, if we aren’t more than ready then somewhat needs to go in and find out why we are wasting so much money

[RhodyYanksFan]

watching Morning Joe this morning they talked about the escalating tensions between the US and China and Russia. Joe questioned if we are prepared for any kind of military conflict. Why? We outspend the next 30 highest spending countries combined, if we aren’t more than ready then somewhat needs to go in and find out why we are wasting so much money

Here's a start.

FDYdazvWUAIsw2I?format=jpg&name=small.jpg


USA - great at spending money. Terrible at any sort of return for that money.

Spend the most in defense - haven't won a war since the 1940s.
Spend the most on healthcare - by every metric we're in the bottom third of the world
Spend the most on education - by every metric we're in the bottom third of the world

[HfxBob]

I agree. He should never have been released. He was a violent abuser of women on more than one occasion.

They absolutely need to start placing much more focus on domestic violence and stiffen the penalties severely.

[HfxBob]

USA - great at spending money. Terrible at any sort of return for that money.

Spend the most in defense - haven't won a war since the 1940s.
Spend the most on healthcare - by every metric we're in the bottom third of the world
Spend the most on education - by every metric we're in the bottom third of the world

"Haven't won a war since the 1940s" is a grotesquely wrong argument. There hasn't been a global conflict since the 1940s. Tensions between the US and the other two superpowers have remained nothing but that. The US's sustained military might has a lot to do with it.

[HfxBob]

watching Morning Joe this morning they talked about the escalating tensions between the US and China and Russia. Joe questioned if we are prepared for any kind of military conflict. Why? We outspend the next 30 highest spending countries combined, if we aren’t more than ready then somewhat needs to go in and find out why we are wasting so much money

Is it possible that China and Russia get much better prices on their labor and other internal costs because they're iron-fisted regimes?

[JL25and3]

"Haven't won a war since the 1940s" is a grotesquely wrong argument. There hasn't been a global conflict since the 1940s. Tensions between the US and the other two superpowers have remained nothing but that. The US's sustained military might has a lot to do with it.

Besides, we won Grenada.

[YankeePride1967]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...8aIs7QGA%3D%3D

Trump meets with Rittenhouse. Pathetic. Even if the verdict was right it is sick to make a hero out of this