AG Graves: DC Appeals Court reversing 75% of gun possession cases

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Graves is US Attorney for the District of Columbia, the AG for DC is Schwab. Their different roles are set out in the Home Rule Act. Graves is a fed appointee, Schwab is elected.

Maybe we shouldn’t have this ludicrously complicated structure for the local justice system that works at odds against itself every step of the way?

These politically minded justices reinterpreting 4A are literally allowing gang bangers back on the street

[Anonymous]

This is really unfortunate and discouraging (and a very well-reported article). It highlights the need for MPD to be absolutely on point with its training and procedures so they can adjust quickly to the new legal precedent and take all the steps to document probable cause.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is really unfortunate and discouraging ([b]and a very well-reported article). It highlights the need for MPD to be absolutely on point with its training and procedures so they can adjust quickly to the new legal precedent and take all the steps to document probable cause.

Yes it was a really good article. I learned a lot of nuance about the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really unfortunate and discouraging ([b]and a very well-reported article). It highlights the need for MPD to be absolutely on point with its training and procedures so they can adjust quickly to the new legal precedent and take all the steps to document probable cause.

Yes it was a really good article. I learned a lot of nuance about the process.

Nathan Baca. He even linked to the opinions!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting wrinkle to the crime issue - the DC Court of Appeals isn’t allowing illegal gun possession cases to get prosecuted.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/investigations/matthew-graves-us-attorney-4th-amendment-cases-lost/65-93c2162b-41f2-4caf-b37f-30d95c4a4cdf

The photo of the illegal guns seized in DC is absolutely sickening. It’s wrong that these weapons are manufactured and advertised for civilians, and sold all over the country, it’s wrong that they are obviously not truly a crime to be carried anywhere and everywhere, since nothing is successfully persecuted, it’s all wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Equity demands these cases be dismissed.

Stop, you fckwad. Anyone who thinks we should look the other way on a violent armed robbery just because of the color of someone's skin is a complete moron and 90% of Americans would agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is really unfortunate and discouraging (and a very well-reported article). It highlights the need for MPD to be absolutely on point with its training and procedures so they can adjust quickly to the new legal precedent and take all the steps to document probable cause.

Probably some of the issue is that police have had a long and sordid history of planting drugs, guns, et cetera.

We need to clean up our streets and take violent offenders and gun thugs off of our streets but we ALSO need a law enforcement institution that can be trusted. Clean up your act, cops. And goddammit when in the hell are we going to have a certified forensic lab? Talk about horrendous city mismanagement!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity demands these cases be dismissed.

Stop, you fckwad. Anyone who thinks we should look the other way on a violent armed robbery just because of the color of someone's skin is a complete moron and 90% of Americans would agree.

More like 50%.

Take a wild guess who doesn't want the police to put the smack down on bad guys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really unfortunate and discouraging (and a very well-reported article). It highlights the need for MPD to be absolutely on point with its training and procedures so they can adjust quickly to the new legal precedent and take all the steps to document probable cause.

Probably some of the issue is that police have had a long and sordid history of planting drugs, guns, et cetera.

We need to clean up our streets and take violent offenders and gun thugs off of our streets but we ALSO need a law enforcement institution that can be trusted. Clean up your act, cops. And goddammit when in the hell are we going to have a certified forensic lab? Talk about horrendous city mismanagement!

agree. although in this case - the DC Court of Appeals does seem to be a legal outlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity demands these cases be dismissed.

Stop, you fckwad. Anyone who thinks we should look the other way on a violent armed robbery just because of the color of someone's skin is a complete moron and 90% of Americans would agree.

More like 50%.

Take a wild guess who doesn't want the police to put the smack down on bad guys.

Tell me you've never talked to a black person in DC without telling me.

[Anonymous]

It's useful to look at individual case to see what's going on. For instance, look at this case:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/08/25/dc-murder-gun-case-dropped/

Police find a group of men huddled around a parking lot in a dangerous area at 1 am. They approach them, asking if they're armed. When they reach them, they see they were playing a dice gambling game on the ground of the parking lot. They search the men, one is found with an illegal gun, and goes to court.

The judge says that because the police asked if the men were armed when they approached them, they have to throw the whole case out, so the man walks free. Two days later, he murders someone.

The judge in the case is Sean Staples. Like many (all?) judges that end up on the bunch in D.C., he's nominated by the D.C. Judicial Nomination Commission. Here's where the members of the commission come from:

- President of the United States (1 lawyer member)
- Mayor of the District of Columbia (2 members, one must be a non-lawyer)
- District of Columbia Council (1 non-lawyer member)
- Chief Judge, US District Court for the District of Columbia (federal judge)
- DC Bar (2 lawyer members)

So most members are coming from D.C. itself, with almost half from D.C. elected officials. After the recommendation, the President makes a decision about which of the nominees to officially nominate (from my understanding, at least), and it goes to the Senate for approval.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's useful to look at individual case to see what's going on. For instance, look at this case:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/08/25/dc-murder-gun-case-dropped/

Police find a group of men huddled around a parking lot in a dangerous area at 1 am. They approach them, asking if they're armed. When they reach them, they see they were playing a dice gambling game on the ground of the parking lot. They search the men, one is found with an illegal gun, and goes to court.

The judge says that because the police asked if the men were armed when they approached them, they have to throw the whole case out, so the man walks free. Two days later, he murders someone.

The judge in the case is Sean Staples. Like many (all?) judges that end up on the bunch in D.C., he's nominated by the D.C. Judicial Nomination Commission. Here's where the members of the commission come from:

- President of the United States (1 lawyer member)
- Mayor of the District of Columbia (2 members, one must be a non-lawyer)
- District of Columbia Council (1 non-lawyer member)
- Chief Judge, US District Court for the District of Columbia (federal judge)
- DC Bar (2 lawyer members)

So most members are coming from D.C. itself, with almost half from D.C. elected officials. After the recommendation, the President makes a decision about which of the nominees to officially nominate (from my understanding, at least), and it goes to the Senate for approval.

Take another step back.

Judge Sean Staples ruled that way because the DC Court of Appeals - composed of judges appointed by Trump, Obama, and GW Bush - have made the burden of proof higher on cops under 4A for illegal gun possession. Judge Sean Staples HAD to rule that way in August 2023, per instruction of the higher court discussed in the WUSA9 article.

Here’s the relevant text:

Because D.C. is not a state, its Court of Appeals has judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents for lifetime appointments. In the case of TV v US, Judge Easterly, an Obama appointee, and Judge Deahl, a Trump appointee, and Senior Judge Thompson, a GW Bush appointee wrote the dissenting opinion. In the case of Mayo v. US, Judges Easterly and Deahl wrote the opinions while Obama appointee Judge McLeese wrote the dissenting opinion. The current makeup of the DC Court of Appeals, including senior judges, is 9 appointed by Democratic presidents and 5 appointed by Republican presidents.
….
"If you look at these opinions, most of them are what we call a split opinion and in the Court of Appeals, there’s usually multiple judges that hear it," Graves said. "In the DC Court of Appeals, it’s three and these opinions are two in favor of the new rule and one defending the actions of the government. When you look at those dissent opinions, something you will consistently see is the dissent noting they are not aware of a case in another jurisdiction that requires the outcome that the DC Court of Appeals is reaching."

Judge Staples has to follow the US Court of Appeals rulings from early 2023 and 2022. That’s why he let the gang banging defendant go free.

[Anonymous]

where’s Hogg & moms demand??? Wear orange!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:where’s Hogg & moms demand??? Wear orange!

Today is bank deposit day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Equity demands these cases be dismissed.

Stop, you fckwad. Anyone who thinks we should look the other way on a violent armed robbery just because of the color of someone's skin is a complete moron and 90% of Americans would agree.

More like 50%.

Take a wild guess who doesn't want the police to put the smack down on bad guys.

No wild guess needed.

Elected democrats alone are responsible for keeping violent criminals on the streets, eliminating cash bail due to “equity,” and stopping the police from arresting criminals. Only democrat prosecutors refuse to prosecute criminals and drop nearly every case.