It sounds like she is the opposite of a progressive prosecutor, when she wants to prosecute people for murdering a relative without evidence of whether they actually pulled the trigger. She sounds like someone who puts vengeance ahead of justice. She was right to quit.
-
-
There have been over 50 that quit under Boudin. Stop covering up.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Good. I hope he was able to replace them with people who care about justice, not stealing the lives and freedom of the poor and dispossessed.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Yes, your sympathy for drug dealers and rampant theft is duly noted. Boudin is perfect for you then.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
You mean drug dealers like Big Pharma, which worked to get millions addicted to opiates? And thefts like the corporations who steal wages from their employees? I care very much, and I very much hope
@chesaboudin will be going after the crimes committed by the wealthy.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @margal @cmarinucci and
FDA (federal) should go after Big Pharma. Absolutely. And corporations that steal, should be liable. They are different things. Why can’t Boudin prosecute drug dealers also? The damage done to individuals and spike in crime is sad.pic.twitter.com/PB2dXJ77ke
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GenusGreta @cmarinucci and
All DAs need to prioritize who they prosecute. In the past, they prioritize prosecuting small time criminals because they are easy. Instead, they should prioritize prosecuting those who cause the most harm, and those are the powerful. Police included.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @margal @cmarinucci and
That’s your rationale.pic.twitter.com/lyeyxiYSbM
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GenusGreta @cmarinucci and
So less than 25% of cases presented in Alameda result in convictions. It sounds like they are prosecuting lots of innocent people. It sounds like you support false arrests and prosecutions.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @margal @cmarinucci and
. Prosecution and convictions are different, you understand that, right? If only 25% led to convictions , your claim of false prosecutions make no sense! Sounds like huge leeway given. Alameda dismissed 11% of their cases, SF dismissed 40%. That's the takeaway.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
The takeaway is that more than 3/4 th of the cases prosecuted by Alameda did not lead to a conviction, which suggests they are over prosecuting people. This is a very bad thing. Prosecutors should dismiss charges when they can’t prove guilt.
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.