Is there any excuse for Loudon not caring about misdemeanors anymore?

[Anonymous]

Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney Buta Biberaj says her office will stop prosecuting some misdemeanor cases, claiming the office is "inundated" and prosecutors need to focus on violent and felony crimes.

FOX 5 has obtained a memo Biberaj sent to judges on Dec. 30 outlining the impacted offenses. They include reckless driving (under 90 mph), hit-and-run (property damage), eluding, trespass, petty larceny, and drunk in public.

https://www.fox5dc.com/news/loudoun-county-to-stop-prosecuting-some-misdemeanor-cases

Also, the new effective 89 mph speed limit on Loudon roads seems like a bad idea, but who know

[Anonymous]

There may not be an excuse, except that we can't expect to cut public funds to government entities and then expect them to carry on as usual.

[jsteele]

You are misrepresenting or not understanding what the article says. The office doesn't have enough staff to prosecute everything, so they are prioritizing. That doesn't mean that nothing will happen in regard to the crimes that they won't prosecute. Those charged will still go to court and the police will present evidence. I don't think it will require a prosecutor to explain to a judge that police radar shows you going 88 mph because you lacked reading comprehension and didn't think that you would end up in court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There may not be an excuse, except that we can't expect to cut public funds to government entities and then expect them to carry on as usual.

The budget doesn't matter if you are too toxic to hire or retain staff. She can't even approach her funded staffing levels

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:You are misrepresenting or not understanding what the article says. The office doesn't have enough staff to prosecute everything, so they are prioritizing. That doesn't mean that nothing will happen in regard to the crimes that they won't prosecute. Those charged will still go to court and the police will present evidence. I don't think it will require a prosecutor to explain to a judge that police radar shows you going 88 mph because you lacked reading comprehension and didn't think that you would end up in court.

That's how traffic cases in fairfax works. You're asking the cops to do heavy lifting in less clear cases that may require witnesses other than the arresting officer

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:You are misrepresenting or not understanding what the article says. The office doesn't have enough staff to prosecute everything, so they are prioritizing. That doesn't mean that nothing will happen in regard to the crimes that they won't prosecute. Those charged will still go to court and the police will present evidence. I don't think it will require a prosecutor to explain to a judge that police radar shows you going 88 mph because you lacked reading comprehension and didn't think that you would end up in court.

The article also seems to indicate that the staffing issues are of Biberaj’s making, as everyone that was there when she started left and she has been unable to retain the new staff she hired. It is also not the responsibility of the police to act as prosecutors. There is a difference between officers presenting evidence for civil traffic offenses and being responsible for presenting the evidence needed to prosecute the criminal offenses Loudoun County is now refusing to prosecute. Who responds to the motions that defense counsel files in these criminal matters, who deals with the discovery requests?

[Anonymous]

This action in the first step of a banana republic. When the local executive branch begins to pick and choose the "serious" crimes it will pursue, there can never be fair outcomes. Any such selection process is not transparent to the public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney Buta Biberaj says her office will stop prosecuting some misdemeanor cases, claiming the office is "inundated" and prosecutors need to focus on violent and felony crimes.

FOX 5 has obtained a memo Biberaj sent to judges on Dec. 30 outlining the impacted offenses. They include reckless driving (under 90 mph), hit-and-run (property damage), eluding, trespass, petty larceny, and drunk in public.

https://www.fox5dc.com/news/loudoun-county-to-stop-prosecuting-some-misdemeanor-cases

Also, the new effective 89 mph speed limit on Loudon roads seems like a bad idea, but who know

It would be helpful if you are going to have an opinion about this if you would spell the name of the county correctly.

It’s almost like you aren’t from around here?

This also doesn’t sound like a big deal to me. Sheriff’s deputies still present charges to judges.

If you want more prosecutorial coverage, fund the DA’s office better. Under resourcing this leads to this sort of triage. Seems reasonable to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:You are misrepresenting or not understanding what the article says. The office doesn't have enough staff to prosecute everything, so they are prioritizing. That doesn't mean that nothing will happen in regard to the crimes that they won't prosecute. Those charged will still go to court and the police will present evidence. I don't think it will require a prosecutor to explain to a judge that police radar shows you going 88 mph because you lacked reading comprehension and didn't think that you would end up in court.

The article also seems to indicate that the staffing issues are of Biberaj’s making, as everyone that was there when she started left and she has been unable to retain the new staff she hired. It is also not the responsibility of the police to act as prosecutors. There is a difference between officers presenting evidence for civil traffic offenses and being responsible for presenting the evidence needed to prosecute the criminal offenses Loudoun County is now refusing to prosecute. Who responds to the motions that defense counsel files in these criminal matters, who deals with the discovery requests?

Yeah, she gave a live press conference where she was pretty clear that misdemeanors were not a priority for her and that she thought it was perfectly fine for them to be treated akin to traffic stops. The outcome is that either the police act as prosecutor, which is constitutionally inappropriate in our system were so much power and discretion is awarded to prosecutors or more likely, you will get two scenarios. One: police up charge every offense to a felony and let the commonwealths attorney deal with the indictment, which would only increase her office’s case load. Other, where defendants get charged with misdemeanors to can afford lawyers to won’t waive their right to a jury trial which would probably meant that they won’t get prosecuted at all while those that cannot afford an attorney will. None of these outcomes serve justice.

[Anonymous]

Putting aside exactly what the memo means, the county executive in Loudoun, who is also a Democrat, has said she will not support Biberaj if she runs for another term as the commonwealth’s attorney in Loudoun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Putting aside exactly what the memo means, the county executive in Loudoun, who is also a Democrat, has said she will not support Biberaj if she runs for another term as the commonwealth’s attorney in Loudoun.

I fully expect that all 3 progressive prosecutors in VA, Descano, Biberaj, and Deghani-Tafti, are not going to garner a lot of support and will end up out of office after the next election. They may not even get out of the primaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting aside exactly what the memo means, the county executive in Loudoun, who is also a Democrat, has said she will not support Biberaj if she runs for another term as the commonwealth’s attorney in Loudoun.

I fully expect that all 3 progressive prosecutors in VA, Descano, Biberaj, and Deghani-Tafti, are not going to garner a lot of support and will end up out of office after the next election. They may not even get out of the primaries.

I’m not aware of Descano being disavowed by leading Democrats in Fairfax like Jeff McKay the way that Biberaj has gotten a “vote of no confidenc from Phyllis Randall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting aside exactly what the memo means, the county executive in Loudoun, who is also a Democrat, has said she will not support Biberaj if she runs for another term as the commonwealth’s attorney in Loudoun.

I fully expect that all 3 progressive prosecutors in VA, Descano, Biberaj, and Deghani-Tafti, are not going to garner a lot of support and will end up out of office after the next election. They may not even get out of the primaries.

I’m not aware of Descano being disavowed by leading Democrats in Fairfax like Jeff McKay the way that Biberaj has gotten a “vote of no confidenc from Phyllis Randall.

That's because Descano will actually prosecute some crimes if he sees Fairfax Democrats support it on Twitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting aside exactly what the memo means, the county executive in Loudoun, who is also a Democrat, has said she will not support Biberaj if she runs for another term as the commonwealth’s attorney in Loudoun.

I fully expect that all 3 progressive prosecutors in VA, Descano, Biberaj, and Deghani-Tafti, are not going to garner a lot of support and will end up out of office after the next election. They may not even get out of the primaries.

I’m not aware of Descano being disavowed by leading Democrats in Fairfax like Jeff McKay the way that Biberaj has gotten a “vote of no confidenc from Phyllis Randall.

That's because Descano will actually prosecute some crimes if he sees Fairfax Democrats support it on Twitter.

I would think it depends on where the crime is. Tysons, McLean, Reston Town Center, Great Falls and Langley I expect to continue to be strongly prosecuted. Bailey Crossroads, Merrifield, Dunn Loring, etc probably not so much. People know where the bread is buttered.

What I don’t get about Biberaj is deciding to decline to prosecute. How much effort would it be to offer lenient plea deals instead?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:You are misrepresenting or not understanding what the article says. The office doesn't have enough staff to prosecute everything, so they are prioritizing. That doesn't mean that nothing will happen in regard to the crimes that they won't prosecute. Those charged will still go to court and the police will present evidence. I don't think it will require a prosecutor to explain to a judge that police radar shows you going 88 mph because you lacked reading comprehension and didn't think that you would end up in court.

That's how traffic cases in fairfax works. You're asking the cops to do heavy lifting in less clear cases that may require witnesses other than the arresting officer

+1
In Fairfax the police officers prosecute certain crimes like drunk in public. It's kind of a kangaroo court, but it's very basic and usually results in a small fine. The judge will hear maybe 10 public intoxication cases in a row and it can be quite entertaining. The downside is that someone arrested is basically screwed because there is no opportunity for a defense lawyer to meet with the prosecutor to have the charges dropped. And usually the police officer doesn't go into detail when presenting evidence to the judge.