Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

elleng

(128,852 posts)
Fri Feb 1, 2019, 07:51 PM Feb 2019

No 'good' time for this, but here it is: Kamala Harris Was Not a 'Progressive Prosecutor' [View all]

'The senator was often on the wrong side of history when she served as California’s attorney general.

Jan. 17, 2019

With the growing recognition that prosecutors hold the keys to a fairer criminal justice system, the term “progressive prosecutor” has almost become trendy. This is how Senator Kamala Harris of California, a likely presidential candidate and a former prosecutor, describes herself.

But she’s not.

Time after time, when progressives urged her to embrace criminal justice reforms as a district attorney and then the state’s attorney general, Ms. Harris opposed them or stayed silent. Most troubling, Ms. Harris fought tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that had been secured through official misconduct that included evidence tampering, false testimony and the suppression of crucial information by prosecutors.

Consider her record as San Francisco’s district attorney from 2004 to 2011. Ms. Harris was criticized in 2010 for withholding information about a police laboratory technician who had been accused of “intentionally sabotaging” her work and stealing drugs from the lab. After a memo surfaced showing that Ms. Harris’s deputies knew about the technician’s wrongdoing and recent conviction, but failed to alert defense lawyers, a judge condemned Ms. Harris’s indifference to the systemic violation of the defendants’ constitutional rights.

Ms. Harris contested the ruling by arguing that the judge, whose husband was a defense attorney and had spoken publicly about the importance of disclosing evidence, had a conflict of interest. Ms. Harris lost. More than 600 cases handled by the corrupt technician were dismissed.'>>>

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html?

74 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
An interesting article, and recommended for visibility. guillaumeb Feb 2019 #1
It's an opinion piece. N/T lapucelle Feb 2019 #12
I'll stick to politifact's overview JHan Feb 2019 #2
More nuanced, but it still identifies the same trouble spots for me. n/t Ms. Toad Feb 2019 #6
Personally, JHan Feb 2019 #8
From that perspective, Ms. Toad Feb 2019 #9
zero parents went to jail. JHan Feb 2019 #37
Zero parents went to jail while she was a prosecutor - Ms. Toad Feb 2019 #46
This is very weak sauce. She's still my number one choice. For now anyway. manor321 Feb 2019 #3
Yawn. ismnotwasm Feb 2019 #4
yawn? And what do you want in a prosecutor and our legal system? Harris may be JCanete Feb 2019 #67
Thank you. This adds to the concern that came to my attention yesterday - Ms. Toad Feb 2019 #5
Post removed Post removed Feb 2019 #7
I agree with your reforms except.. MicaelS Feb 2019 #10
There are. She claims to be one - but her record says otherwise. n/t Ms. Toad Feb 2019 #11
... lapucelle Feb 2019 #13
Those are legislative votes in the US House - Ms. Toad Feb 2019 #14
It sounds like you're saying that you heard that Harris knowingly imprisoned lapucelle Feb 2019 #15
I'm not sure whether it was imprisoning them or not disclosing evidence that would release them. Ms. Toad Feb 2019 #16
I suggest that people read the actual news reports, rather than the spin. lapucelle Feb 2019 #20
The article made that claim. eom guillaumeb Feb 2019 #17
That was an opinion piece. N/T lapucelle Feb 2019 #18
An opinion piece that referenced specific cases. guillaumeb Feb 2019 #19
That's why I went to the actual sources cited. Not only do they tell a more objective story, lapucelle Feb 2019 #21
Feel free to post an article referencing these sources. eom guillaumeb Feb 2019 #23
Here are the news stories that the op-ed writer links to. lapucelle Feb 2019 #24
Thank you. guillaumeb Feb 2019 #25
All candidates should be queried at length about their records and votes lapucelle Feb 2019 #40
Agreed. guillaumeb Feb 2019 #49
Hopefully, facts and voting records heretofore glossed over lapucelle Feb 2019 #50
Well said. Nothing to add to that. eom guillaumeb Feb 2019 #51
No, she wasn't. None of them are, really. (Prosecutors, I mean.) They're cops. Iggo Feb 2019 #22
I'm also concerned about the cases she didn't prosecute. shanny Feb 2019 #26
You do seem obnoxiousdrunk Feb 2019 #55
thank you for yours shanny Feb 2019 #56
If what the article says here is true, it's very concerning Quixote1818 Feb 2019 #27
You should read the actual news stories concerning the events. lapucelle Feb 2019 #41
**** WHAT ARE HER STANCES NOW !?!?!? **** tia uponit7771 Feb 2019 #28
A San Francisco resident, I've been seeing very serious allegations in Harris hit pieces & critiques NBachers Feb 2019 #29
She will be torn to pieces by the Republican propaganda machine delisen Feb 2019 #36
Yes, pretty sure we're seeing it already. Obviously. Hortensis Feb 2019 #66
"Hit pieces"? lapucelle Feb 2019 #45
Bookmarking. Duppers Feb 2019 #30
Noted. Iggo Feb 2019 #60
Here is one reason she is a nonstarter. The Truth Is Here Feb 2019 #31
Voters care about the present BannonsLiver Feb 2019 #34
Oh really? *stares at Northam* The Truth Is Here Feb 2019 #62
Specifics? George II Feb 2019 #61
There's no such thing as a "progressive prosecutor." Just ask the people prosecuted by pnwmom Feb 2019 #32
+1 grantcart Feb 2019 #38
this JHan Feb 2019 #48
+100. obnoxiousdrunk Feb 2019 #57
I don't know. You are right and that still makes my skin crawl. Does that mean you are willing to JCanete Feb 2019 #68
I'm not interested in judging every case a prosecutor handled treestar Feb 2019 #33
I guess Harris may as well end her campaign. she won't be able to overcome delisen Feb 2019 #35
Lol. MrsCoffee Feb 2019 #42
Handle what? N/T lapucelle Feb 2019 #47
LOL. The Velveteen Ocelot Feb 2019 #52
Like who? There is no perfect candidate...and the purity test is likely to make us choose an Demsrule86 Feb 2019 #58
Any time is a good time for enlarging one's understanding Hortensis Feb 2019 #39
Great response lillypaddle Feb 2019 #44
+1. yonder Feb 2019 #59
Its always good to recognize that just about every piece is an opinion piece. Assuming neutrality in JCanete Feb 2019 #69
Selected facts. Other observers explain it significantly differently, Hortensis Feb 2019 #70
It is not true that the DA can't decide which cases to prosecute, nor which cases to captiulate on.. JCanete Feb 2019 #71
I did NOT say that. What's the term for claiming Hortensis Feb 2019 #73
I didn't say you claimed anything. I should have phrased differently, but my point was that the DA JCanete Feb 2019 #74
Most prosecutors are not progressives lillypaddle Feb 2019 #43
Kamala marehare Feb 2019 #53
I like your spirit. Cha Feb 2019 #65
As the Presidential Campaign Progresses, Harris Record as a Prosecutor Will Become More Public dlk Feb 2019 #54
Here is the most troubling sentence in the entire story: Stuart G Feb 2019 #63
That is light years the most troubling aspect Awsi Dooger Feb 2019 #64
I am bored with this stuff Apollyonus Feb 2019 #72
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»No 'good' time for this, ...