Manahttan DA Alvin Bragg, the elected prosecutor, delivers as promised. The promise: "These policy changes ... will, in and of themselves, make us safer." This is what the people voted for, whether they knew it or not. Here are Bragg's Day One Policies and Procedures. 1/
Principles: "Reserving incarceration for matters involving significant harm will make us safer."
"Invest in diversion [not prosecution] and alternatives to incarceration."
"Actively support those reentering" 2/
Decriminalization/non prosecution for marijuana, turnstile jumping, trespass, driving without a license, traffic violation, resisting arrest, interfering with an arrest (unless "significantly physically"), prostitution, all desk appearance tickets (non assault crimes) 3/
If you commit an armed robbery in a commercial setting, and you display a dangerous instrument that does not create a genuine risk of physical harm [think no bullets or replica gun], the charge will not be armed robbery be petit larceny [theft, think shoplifting]. 4/
Presumption of pre-trial non-incarceration (generally ROR, released on recognizance) for all cases except homicide, violent felony w/ deadly weapon, sex offense, public corruption.
Defendant fails to appear in court? No change: "recommend release upon the original conditions." 5/
Non-incarceration. "The Office will not seek carceral sentence other than for homicide" or "class B violent felony in which a deadly weapon causes serious injury, domestic violence felonies," and some others.
"The rule may be excepted only in extraordinary circumstances." 6/
If you violent terms of non-incarceration, "office will seek carceral 'alternative' only as a matter of last resort." "When seeking a carceral sentence... for a determinate sentence, The Office will request a maximum Maximum of 20 years." 7/
Consideration and lesser charges for adults under 25.
"The Office will reserve carceral recommendations for repeated violations of the terms of a mandate." Expanded restorative justice. 8/
"In exceptionally serious cases such as homicides where lengthy periods of incarceration are justified, ADAs shall consider the use of restorative justice as a mitigating factor in determining the length of the sentence, only when victims or their loved ones consent." 9/fin
No charges for resisting arrest counts for all the crimes on this list, to be clear. That is how you ensure no-police enforcement for everything on this list.
But hindering an arrest (for any crime) by getting in somebody's face as yelling is also a non-prosecute offense.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Zohran: "It's not simply to raise consciousness, but to win socialism… There are other issues we firmly believe in… the end goal of seizing the means of production, where we do not have the same level of support, at this very moment."
He's very honest. Don't vote for this!
It's interesting to me that in the (fading?) age of intersectionality, rich DSA socialists don't see the irony of "speaking for the working class." (A group that speaks and votes for itself quite well.) Flip this to race or gender or sex and it's not OK.
I mean, they're stuck with the Marxist language they have, but it's so demeaning to be told by an outsider than you lack "consciousness." My problem is I don't understand my problem? And YOU are my savior?
Domestic violence is the Achilles heel of the abolition/reform movement. Often DV is strangely exempt from "reform" (eg: bail reform) because it would highlight how pro-criminal reforms are. But "discovery reform" covered everything. And DV victims' advocates are pushing back.
So whose side are you on? (I'm surprised that DA Bragg supports this change.) And can we stop using the word "reform" to mean only those who advocate for less prosecution and jail? I mean, this proposed change is reform. And for the better. cityandstateny.com/policy/2025/03…
The thing is there's nothing about Discovery Reform that uniquely affects Domestic Violence victims. It's just that with DV, there are advocates who push back on the harm from abolitionist "reformers". Good. But the same problems affects all crime victims. We should care more.
Does nobody have a calculate? Or common sense? Or a olfactory sensor to do a sniff test?
A "new study" finds that 2% of US Adults have been injured at a mass shooting.
No.
"7% reported having been present."
7% of US adults = 18,346,00 people
Are you effing kidding me?
Mass shooting, defined as "where 4 or more people are shot." OK. Since 2014, says the study, "there have been nearly 5,000 mass shootings documented nationwide, with more than 500 occurring annually since 2020."
This would mean, if there were no repeat viewers, there would be 3,670 witnesses at every mass shooting in America over the past 10 years. Let's make in 30 years. I don't know. That still means over 1,000 unique witnesses at every mass shooting.
I'm tweeting this thread about mental health with permission, it's is from a DM. This isn't about me, but somebody else. But I think more people need to tell their stories. The system is working as designed. it's is poorly designed. Society fails.
(1/7)
"My mom has been sick for ten years. The system is terrible. She’s been on in a psych ward for 4 times. When she is on her medication she is great. But when she’s off, she’s dangerously delusional…
"Most people cannot imagine what it’s like. I’ve begged hospitals for outpatient support but nothing. Kendra’s law is hard because you have to be clearly suicidal or homicidal but...
I called this a month ago. But let's focus on the newspaper coverage. There are three big NYC newspapers. The different coverage is revealing. The Post tells you why the jury acquitted, the Daily News basically lays out the prosecutor's case. The NYT does "the context" thing.
Both the Times and News mention how Penny was supported by right-wing groups, which is true, but does seem irrelevant to the jury's decision. The NYT compares this case to Bernie Goetz, who shot and wanted to kill. Daily News mentions Goetz in a Sharpton quote. The Post does not.
The Times and News lay out the big picture but don't mention the key facts of the case that led to acquittal. NYT: "Neely strode through the subway car that afternoon, yelling at passengers and frightening them, according to witnesses." Just "frightened"? Doesn't sound soooo bad.
Violence and murders are way down in Baltimore. My first thought is, "I wonder how much arrests have gone up?" No, not _if_, but "how much". Because violence won't go down without police getting back in the crime-fighting game (community organizations notwithstanding). (thread)
So I go to Baltimore Open Data and download arrest data. Easy peasy. This is almost too easy because I know what I'm going to find before I crunch the numbers. data.baltimorecity.gov/datasets/619ec…
Now I no longer have my ear close to the ground in Baltimore, but I say new police leadership, a supportive mayor, plus a newly elected competent prosecutor who doesn't hold a grudge against police (a low bar, but so it is) can make all the difference in the world. Leadership.