Thread by @DanielRAlonso

Based on this tweet, I thought a short thread on the issue of discretionary decisions by #prosecutors, particularly in terms of charging/plea bargaining/sentencing, might be useful. /1

https://twitter.com/AMDanQuart/status/1088515561674493952

New York State is #42 in the United States in terms of incarceration of its citizens. DAs in New York City, particularly @ManhattanDA , @BrooklynDA , and @BronxDAClark, have made great strides in the past few years to reduce that even further. This is a very good thing. /2

In Manhattan, for example, more than 100,000 cases per year were filed in the criminal courts the year I returned to the DA's office, 2010. In 2018, the number was below 50,000. /3

You can agree or disagree on which cases aren't being prosecuted, but the reduction is undeniable. @ManhattanDA has gotten criticism both for being too lenient and too harsh. That is part of the job; different groups have different priorities. /4

The practice of singling out one of those 50,000 cases on Twitter, tossing out a few facts, & expressing outrage, has become somewhat common. They often recite the facts of the case without the history of the offender. /5

These commentators also have no idea what other information the police or the DA know about the offender (eg. other crimes where victims won't testify). In my view, they sometimes do a disservice to dedicated #prosecutors and to the whole crim justice system. /6

This case - People v. Mitchell - is a case in point. @AMDanQuart writes, correctly, "53 year old homeless man with longstanding substance abuse and medical problems whose been free of any convictions for 9 years." /7

But also correct would be: "Five-time convicted felon, with 30 total criminal convictions, caught with multiple counterfeit banknotes, & DA had evidence he was in a money-laundering scheme, is sentenced to only one year more than mandatory statutory minimum." /8

To clarify: court was required by NY law to give him at *least* an indeterminate 3-6 year term. The *most* NY law authorized was 7 1/2 - 15. The judge gave him 4-8 after trial. /9

You can agree (as 4 judges did) or disagree (as 2 judges + DA did), but outrage over this discretionary call is misplaced. /10

Another piece that almost never surfaces in these criticisms of DAs is all the cases where they exercise their discretion *not* to charge, or otherwise to be lenient. /11

It is highly likely that in many similar cases, but where the defendant did not have such an extensive record, the DA reduced to a misdemeanor or declined prosecution. /12

DAs don't, or at least shouldn't, exhibit leniency for the purpose of taking credit or gaining praise. But they certainly don't deserve to be criticized so harshly in cases that are presented to the public in a vacuum, without context. /13

In the current race for Queens DA, and in the next race for Manhattan DA, these issues will be front and center. Looking forward to productive dialogue on these issues with @AMDanQuart, @ZephyrTeachout, and others. /14