Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She wanted him charged as an adult, which isn’t unusual for vehicular homicide defendants two months shy of 18. Parisa refused, and now the wealthy spoiled killer will be a free man when he’s 19 and eventually have the conviction expunged from his record.

Thank you. Has Josh said publicly anywhere that he would have charged the criminal as an adult?

Actually, the opposite. He is on record saying he would have done the same thing.

But unlike the occupant, Josh would have WON that three-year sentence. Why? Because the judge LIKES Josh.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She wanted him charged as an adult, which isn’t unusual for vehicular homicide defendants two months shy of 18. Parisa refused, and now the wealthy spoiled killer will be a free man when he’s 19 and eventually have the conviction expunged from his record.

Thank you. Has Josh said publicly anywhere that he would have charged the criminal as an adult?

Actually, the opposite. He is on record saying he would have done the same thing.

I’m most disturbed with the incivility the occupying CA’s sock puppets are displaying towards Josh and his campaign. Josh answered the question about what he would have done, which is to charge the McLean kid as a juvenile and to seek the three year maximum.

But unlike the occupant, Josh would have WON that three-year sentence. Why? Because the judge LIKES Josh. So too do the other Arlington judges, the police, and all sorts of fine people who just want to be treated with the respect they deserved and to which they’re entitled based on their contributions to the livability of the County and the Arlington Way.

If Josh had known then what he knows now about what he needs to do to win this race, of course he would have supported charging the kid as an adult. But he hadn’t yet established his “reform better” bona fides, which was critical to peel off voters in a Democrat primary. Plus he couldn’t have imagined at the time that the victim’s mother would be so passionate in her hatred of the occupant. So he feared coming across as bloodthirsty. In November, coming off MMH candidates for County Board getting 70% of the vote, he had to figure there weren’t enough Libbytarians and crossover GOP to sneak out of the primary, that he had to throw a bone to people who want to lock down parts of the County but also appear progressive at cocktail parties.

But running a culture war campaign revolving around the mother’s rage at the interloper allows Josh to slam the occupying CA via proxy. While at the same time he reassures successful citizens and parents whose kids don’t run over other well-off kids that he’s not letting silly Soros concerns stop him from using the Arlington PD as the hammer they yearn to be. The occupant is so distracted with the attacks that Josh can reassure homeowners that they’ll be treated with respect. Neither homeowners nor judges nor prosecutors nor court clerks will be forced to confront alleged injustice in prosecutions and sentencing. The CA’s office will get back to using its discretion to cut breaks to the right people and nailing people who could be threats. That’s the kind of judicious CA I want, looking past “principle” to serve the way I know in my gut is best. Josh knows how to do that while being a 21st-century friendly CA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This race sets a record for the amount of political mailings I've received for one election. By far. Today's from Katcher is viscerally shocking, with a picture of the mother of the deceased boy on the front saying "When a drunk driver killed my son, Parisa didn't even listen to us."

I cannot begin to imagine this woman's pain and grief.

I have been undecided about who to vote for, but this kind of ad doesn't sit well with me.

The CA position serves the entire community. The election shouldn’t be centered around this one family.

And pushing this tragedy so prominently into campaign marketing materials feels slimy.

Yes, I'm the PP, and it makes me feel really uncomfortable, like he's using this woman's pain for his own advancement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She wanted him charged as an adult, which isn’t unusual for vehicular homicide defendants two months shy of 18. Parisa refused, and now the wealthy spoiled killer will be a free man when he’s 19 and eventually have the conviction expunged from his record.

Thank you. Has Josh said publicly anywhere that he would have charged the criminal as an adult?

Actually, the opposite. He is on record saying he would have done the same thing.

I’m most disturbed with the incivility the occupying CA’s sock puppets are displaying towards Josh and his campaign. Josh answered the question about what he would have done, which is to charge the McLean kid as a juvenile and to seek the three year maximum.

But unlike the occupant, Josh would have WON that three-year sentence. Why? Because the judge LIKES Josh. So too do the other Arlington judges, the police, and all sorts of fine people who just want to be treated with the respect they deserved and to which they’re entitled based on their contributions to the livability of the County and the Arlington Way.

If Josh had known then what he knows now about what he needs to do to win this race, of course he would have supported charging the kid as an adult. But he hadn’t yet established his “reform better” bona fides, which was critical to peel off voters in a Democrat primary. Plus he couldn’t have imagined at the time that the victim’s mother would be so passionate in her hatred of the occupant. So he feared coming across as bloodthirsty. In November, coming off MMH candidates for County Board getting 70% of the vote, he had to figure there weren’t enough Libbytarians and crossover GOP to sneak out of the primary, that he had to throw a bone to people who want to lock down parts of the County but also appear progressive at cocktail parties.

But running a culture war campaign revolving around the mother’s rage at the interloper allows Josh to slam the occupying CA via proxy. While at the same time he reassures successful citizens and parents whose kids don’t run over other well-off kids that he’s not letting silly Soros concerns stop him from using the Arlington PD as the hammer they yearn to be. The occupant is so distracted with the attacks that Josh can reassure homeowners that they’ll be treated with respect. Neither homeowners nor judges nor prosecutors nor court clerks will be forced to confront alleged injustice in prosecutions and sentencing. The CA’s office will get back to using its discretion to cut breaks to the right people and nailing people who could be threats. That’s the kind of judicious CA I want, looking past “principle” to serve the way I know in my gut is best. Josh knows how to do that while being a 21st-century friendly CA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She wanted him charged as an adult, which isn’t unusual for vehicular homicide defendants two months shy of 18. Parisa refused, and now the wealthy spoiled killer will be a free man when he’s 19 and eventually have the conviction expunged from his record.

Thank you. Has Josh said publicly anywhere that he would have charged the criminal as an adult?

Actually, the opposite. He is on record saying he would have done the same thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Paris is stuck trying to explain why the judge wouldn’t follow her recommendation for a heavier sentence and why she wouldn’t pander to the victim’s family. And when you’re explaining, you’re losing.

Checkmate !!!

Anonymous wrote:It’s getting attention because the outcome seems fundamentally wrong—a rich kid shouldn’t get such a light punishment for killing someone while driving drunk at 95 mph. As far as I can tell, neither Parisa nor her supporters take issue with the ultimate result, even if it’s not the sentence she asked for initially.

Anonymous wrote:She wanted him charged as an adult, which isn’t unusual for vehicular homicide defendants two months shy of 18. Parisa refused, and now the wealthy spoiled killer will be a free man when he’s 19 and eventually have the conviction expunged from his record.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She wanted him charged as an adult, which isn’t unusual for vehicular homicide defendants two months shy of 18. Parisa refused, and now the wealthy spoiled killer will be a free man when he’s 19 and eventually have the conviction expunged from his record.

Thank you. Has Josh said publicly anywhere that he would have charged the criminal as an adult?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She wanted him charged as an adult, which isn’t unusual for vehicular homicide defendants two months shy of 18. Parisa refused, and now the wealthy spoiled killer will be a free man when he’s 19 and eventually have the conviction expunged from his record.

Are there examples of this happening in Virginia? I understand there are not.

Also, Parisa's office asked for 3 years confinement and the judge only gave 1 year. That tells us there's no way that judge would've approved a transfer from juvenile to adult court for that defendant.

Josh knows this yet he's willing to use a grieving family's pain to score political points. That's not the kind of person I want as our county attorney.

Anonymous wrote:She wanted him charged as an adult, which isn’t unusual for vehicular homicide defendants two months shy of 18. Parisa refused, and now the wealthy spoiled killer will be a free man when he’s 19 and eventually have the conviction expunged from his record.

Anonymous wrote:She wanted him charged as an adult, which isn’t unusual for vehicular homicide defendants two months shy of 18. Parisa refused, and now the wealthy spoiled killer will be a free man when he’s 19 and eventually have the conviction expunged from his record.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her son’s wealthy killer essentially received a year of house arrest. She has every right to be upset at Parisa.

That said, it seems the judge was the bigger problem.

Why? Josh said he would've done the same thing and not have charged him as an adult, because that's the law in Virginia. And Parisa's office asked for the maximum punishment of 3 years detention, it was the judge who downgraded it.

Watch the video. She never talked about the sentence, she talked about how she was treated by the CA’s office.

So it's a personal grudge?

No it’s not a “grudge.” She wasn’t treated well by the CA and is sharing her experience. You can evaluate it however you like - it’s a free country. She can speak up and you can choose to ignore her. That’s how America works, remember?