What happens when a prosecutor goes over to the dark side?
Democrats/socialists reflexively support that which harms America, and that which provides them with greater power while diminishing individual rights. One persistent example is their embrace of criminals, mostly minority criminals, and particularly Black criminals. They do this not because they love Black people, or Hispanics for that matter. Recall what happened when President Trump called their bluff? They were all for sanctuary cities and states, declaring such virtue signaling truly American, but when they might have to actually accept and pay for those illegal immigrants, when illegals could be living in their neighborhoods, they went berserk, calling President Trump un-American for adopting their policy. Their policies are for everyone else, not them.
They are the champions of immigrants only because without immigrants voting as monolithic blocks for Democrats, they will never again win a presidential election. Once they win, they ignore them, until it’s election time again, when promises of free stuff and cries of racism and nativism against their opponents might once again do the trick. There is some evidence this—minority voters being fooled by Democrat lies–may be changing, but it’s still the dominant reality.
Just that sort of cynical, socialist calculation is now on display in Dallas, TX, as The Blaze.com reports:
Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot has stolen some of the political oxygen in the city, and the state in general, with his new reform measures, even with all the national news going on. But that small theft wouldn’t be prosecuted by his office these days: They don’t do that anymore.
Creuzot, a Democrat, has angered local and state officials, and importantly police unions, with his decree that his office will no longer be prosecuting what he has non-technically referred to as ‘low-level’ crimes. As a recent Dallas Morning News op-ed put it, ‘shook’ the people tasked with law enforcement and government. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say he hasthem ‘shook.’
Creuzot is determined to end ‘mass incarceration,’ and won’t prosecute “technical violations” that aren’t a threat to public safety:
‘…he’s already dismissed more than 1,000 drug possession cases since taking office this year.’
Here’s some of his reasoning, if it can be so classified:
First-Offense Marijuana Although African Americans and people of other races use marijuana at similar rates, in Dallas County African Americans are three times more likely to be prosecuted for misdemeanor marijuana possession than are people of other races. After arrest, African Americans are assessed money bond at a higher rate for marijuana possession, and are assessed higher bond amounts than other races. African Americans are more likely to be convicted of marijuana possession once charged and are more likely to serve a jail sentence.
What’s going on is the old and dishonest Democrat reliance on unexamined statistical disparity to justify their preferred, but indefensible, policies. Black people in major cities like Dallas commit most of the crimes, but aren’t most of the population. This can only mean that Dallas is systemically racist, so to address this racism, and reduce incarceration rates, black people must be made immune from arrest. The facts of the offenses they actually commit, and the damage done their victims, matter not at all when social justice is involved. Even Democrats can’t magically stop criminals from committing crimes, so the next best thing is to allow them to commit crimes unpunished, which produces the desired statistics and vindicates their circular, can-never-be-wrong, policies.
The District Attorney must take action to end that disparity. To that end, I have declined prosecution on misdemeanor possession of marijuana cases for first-time offenders whose offenses do not occur in a drug-free zone, involve the use or exhibition of a deadly weapon, or involve evidence of delivery. After the first offense, people will be offered a program that, if successfully completed, will keep their record clear. I am also in the process of dismissing all pending misdemeanor marijuana cases filed before I took office, according to the new policy stated above. To date, I have dismissed over a thousand misdemeanor marijuana cases.
Only a thousand?
Also on the no-prosecution docket are some petty theft cases of less than $750, except in cases where the object was financial gain.
Theft of Necessary Items Study after study shows that when we arrest, jail, and convict people for non-violent crimes committed out of necessity, we only prevent that person from gaining the stability necessary to lead a law-abiding life. Criminalizing poverty is counter-productive for our community’s health and safety. For that reason, this office will not prosecute theft of personal items less than $750 unless the evidence shows that the alleged theft was for economic gain.
Other items include not prosecuting criminal trespass or driving with a suspended license, and no jail time for “technical” violations of probation.
Well, if “study after study” says so, it must be true! Correct me if I’m lacking in the kind of sophistication Creuzot so obviously possesses, but don’t criminals leave victims in their wake? In all my years in law enforcement, I came across a mere handful that stole out of necessity, and when we found such people, we did everything we could to help them. Cigarettes, consumer electronics and booze are hardly the necessities of life, yet they were among the most commonly stolen items. It seems obvious stealing the property of others is an economic loss for them, and an economic gain for the crook.
Criminals do not trespass with angelic intent, and ignoring people whose driving is so dangerous their licenses are suspended is the very definition of a threat to the health and safety of the community. It’s also worthwhile to recall that people on probation are usually known and prolific criminals, and the rules set for their probation are designed not only to try to keep them straight, but to reduce the number of people they victimize. That too sounds like a health and safety issue, but what do I know? I’m surely not nearly as woke as Creuzot.
‘Criminalizing poverty is counter-productive for our community’s health and safety.”?! Normal Americans are so unsophisticated as to believe it is crime, including theft, which is damaging to a community’s health and safety. They also believe, as Creuzot so obviously does not, that the primary benefit of incarcerating criminals is they are not damaging the health and safety of honest people—even the poor, most of whom are not criminals—when they’re behind bars. To victims of crimes, the race of the criminals is decidedly secondary to the damage criminals do them.
Letting criminals commit crimes unpunished will enable them to gain “the stability necessary to lead a law-abiding life”?! On the contrary, it will confirm in them the certainty that crime pays, and non-criminals are suckers for living a law-abiding life. Hasn’t Creuzot ever actually talked with criminals? I mean, other than his deputies and supporters?
As rational people might imagine, the police, being sworn to enforce the law and all, aren’t supportive of Creuzot. Unsophisticated too, they actually think Creuzot’s non prosecution of theft will badly damage small business—particularly that in minority neighborhoods—will decrease health and safety, and will encourage more, and more serious, crime. My experience certainly bears that out. To his credit, Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings is not supportive of Creuzot, but not in strong terms. Governor Abbott, however, is on track with reality:
Gov. Greg Abbott, too, has joined in the condemnation, telling Dallas NBC affiliate KXAS that the plan is “reckless and irresponsible.”
‘That is legalizing stealing for property less than $750. What kind of message does that send for one, but for another, listen if your district attorney wants to change the law he is in the wrong job. He needs to run for the legislature and come here to try and change the law,’ said the governor. ‘His job, his oath, is to enforce the law that exists and he should prosecute anybody for stealing anything.
This is a very important point. It is impossible to enforce every law, which is why Democrats love to make more and more of them (OK, so some Republicans arethat stupid too). The police and prosecutors must allocate their resources, use professional discretion, but Abbott is right. By invalidating entire classes of law vitally important to public order, and by refusing to protect private property, he acts as a dishonestly elected super legislature rather than a prosecutor. He represents not the people of Dallas, but the criminals of Dallas.
As one might expect, The Dallas Morning News gave Creuzot a tongue bath:
Creuzot is also leading the state in addressing problems in our probation system in a way that will reduce probation officer caseloads and free scant resources to help those that need it the most. He is addressing the disparity in enforcement of marijuana possession by declining to prosecute first-time offenses and by offering alternative programs for subsequent cases. As his statement notes, despite similar rates of use with their white peers, African-Americans are more likely to be prosecuted, assessed bail, convicted and given a jail sentence for marijuana possession. Creuzot’s policy will help more people avoid senseless, stigmatizing criminal convictions.
Which they can most effectively do by not committing crimes. Being poor is also not a cause of criminal behavior. People are often poor because of their own bad choices, crime among them. The police don’t know who’s poor. Criminals don’t wear flashing neon signs advertising their net worth so that the police may more easily discriminate by arresting the less well off. Senselessness derives from people’s foolish, self-defeating actions, not the actions of the police in enforcing the law. Criminals should be stigmatized. Doesn’t Creuzot know anything about human nature?
Even in a state like Texas, which is mostly governed by sane people, the larger cities like Houston, Austin, and Dallas are infected with social justice. It’s not quite as virulent as in other portions of the country, but it’s not for a lack of socialist effort. It will be interesting to see if this idiocy will be corrected by rational citizens of Dallas, including the poor, who bear the inequity of being the primary, and most numerous, victims of the criminals living among them, criminals usually of the same race.