Who do you think is responsible for this? White supremacists? Mexican drug cartels?

2seaoat wrote:You can't lose your law license when you haven't been convicted of anything and you can't be convicted when you have immunity.


You are clueless on this subject. A person can lose their law license without being convicted of any crime......you can face a federal 1983 action which deals with malicious prosecution and the Supreme Court in the Albright decision set forth the very complex method to allow the same under the fourth amendment. The Supremes ruled that in Albright he did not meet the threshold, but the written decisions concur with common law malicious prosecution proofs......which can override an immunity under state law if it meets all the elements......Please talk about stuff you know about. I do not want to waste my time with you back tracking to cover your lack of knowledge in this area.

Yes, it is very difficult to punish prosecutors, but all through the land prosecutors are losing their law licenses and are facing malicious cause of action from wrongfully charged defendants, and the Supreme Court clearly has said a fourth amendment violation where the prosecutor meets all the tests can in fact face the cause of action. My daughter was trained with full knowledge that an attorney prosecutor lost his law license, and never was convicted of a crime. The Supreme Courts of each state set forth the ethical standards which each licensed attorney must comply.....it does not require a crime to lose that license........rather the damage to the victim, and the intent of the prosecutor. In some states like Texas they are using other statutory methods of taking law licenses away from prosecutors

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/04/nation/la-na-nn-texas-prosecutor-inquiry-20130204

However, a simple complaint in most states will lead to a hearing on the conduct of a prosecutor. My daughter knows that every action she takes in her official capacity could result in the loss of her law license. They are trained that they are there to do justice.....not simply get convictions. She sees laziness as the greatest cause of cover ups where prosecutors do not prepare their disclosures and subpoenas and then do not read their discovery.......in some instances I would agree it is very intentional, but I cannot think of any younger prosecutor not understanding the risk.

2seaoat wrote:You can't lose your law license when you haven't been convicted of anything and you can't be convicted when you have immunity.


You are clueless on this subject. A person can lose their law license without being convicted of any crime......you can face a federal 1983 action which deals with malicious prosecution and the Supreme Court in the Albright decision set forth the very complex method to allow the same under the fourth amendment. The Supremes ruled that in Albright he did not meet the threshold, but the written decisions concur with common law malicious prosecution proofs......which can override an immunity under state law if it meets all the elements......Please talk about stuff you know about. I do not want to waste my time with you back tracking to cover your lack of knowledge in this area.

Yes, it is very difficult to punish prosecutors, but all through the land prosecutors are losing their law licenses and are facing malicious cause of action from wrongfully charged defendants, and the Supreme Court clearly has said a fourth amendment violation where the prosecutor meets all the tests can in fact face the cause of action. My daughter was trained with full knowledge that an attorney prosecutor lost his law license, and never was convicted of a crime. The Supreme Courts of each state set forth the ethical standards which each licensed attorney must comply.....it does not require a crime to lose that license........rather the damage to the victim, and the intent of the prosecutor. In some states like Texas they are using other statutory methods of taking law licenses away from prosecutors

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/04/nation/la-na-nn-texas-prosecutor-inquiry-20130204

However, a simple complaint in most states will lead to a hearing on the conduct of a prosecutor. My daughter knows that every action she takes in her official capacity could result in the loss of her law license. They are trained that they are there to do justice.....not simply get convictions. She sees laziness as the greatest cause of cover ups where prosecutors do not prepare their disclosures and subpoenas and then do not read their discovery.......in some instances I would agree it is very intentional, but I cannot think of any younger prosecutor not understanding the risk.

Dreamsglore wrote:I'm surprised it hasn't happened more often. There are tons of prosecutors who withhold evidence in criminal cases, especially capital ones and are protected by immunity.

Markle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:I'm surprised it hasn't happened more often. There are tons of prosecutors who withhold evidence in criminal cases, especially capital ones and are protected by immunity.

That's an extremely serious accusation give you have nothing but your opinion, and perhaps prior convictions, to back you up.

Lurch wrote:It's a major waste of money to build a fence when they'll just dig a tunnel..
Decriminalize weed and let everybody grow their own and the market will crash..

Lurch wrote:

Markle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:I'm surprised it hasn't happened more often. There are tons of prosecutors who withhold evidence in criminal cases, especially capital ones and are protected by immunity.

That's an extremely serious accusation give you have nothing but your opinion, and perhaps prior convictions, to back you up.

Tons of prosecutors really isn't too many since most of them are overweight slobs..

2seaoat wrote:That's an extremely serious accusation give you have nothing but your opinion, and perhaps prior convictions, to back you up.


She simply does not know what she is talking about. There is no polite way to say it. She wrote in plain English that an attorney cannot lose their law license without being convicted of a crime.....her ignorance on this subject is so glaring it is not even worth the discussion. I have done this at least 10 times where she says something absurd about the law, and then argues for three days calling me names and then twisting her statements that she never said that.............Again.....she is very intelligent on some subjects, but on legal issues she goes half cocked into her imagination without a scintilla of understanding, and then tells me I am a know it all, and arrogant.....well she got that part right....she simply did not get the issue at hand correct.

Yes prosecutors get disbarred for ethical violations and may never be charged with a crime, and do in fact lose their law licenses.

newswatcher wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Again.....she is very intelligent on some subjects,

Intelligent on some subjects'???

2seaoat wrote:That's an extremely serious accusation give you have nothing but your opinion, and perhaps prior convictions, to back you up.


She simply does not know what she is talking about. There is no polite way to say it. She wrote in plain English that an attorney cannot lose their law license without being convicted of a crime.....her ignorance on this subject is so glaring it is not even worth the discussion. I have done this at least 10 times where she says something absurd about the law, and then argues for three days calling me names and then twisting her statements that she never said that.............Again.....she is very intelligent on some subjects, but on legal issues she goes half cocked into her imagination without a scintilla of understanding, and then tells me I am a know it all, and arrogant.....well she got that part right....she simply did not get the issue at hand correct.

Yes prosecutors get disbarred for ethical violations and may never be charged with a crime, and do in fact lose their law licenses.

2seaoat wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Nifong

Can you say Mike Nifong Dreams........how can I be a know it all and arrogant when any freshman in college understands what you do not understand. I try to be polite when you are wrong, but you simply refuse to say......gee Seaoat, I was mistaken......rather you attack the person who clearly shows that you are clueless on a subject. Today Bob corrected me on my recollection of the queen's stairs in the Bahamas as having a Colombus memorial.......he was right, and I was wrong........I was happy he corrected me......my memory was incorrect, and he took the time to correct me.....I did not call him arrogant.....he is not....he was right and I was wrong. I did not call him a know it all .......because he knew just enough to correct my mistake. You ought to try it. You do not melt when you admit a mistake.

2seaoat wrote:No, Seaoat-you attacked me. You didn't merely point out it was incorrect and were polite. You were condescending and insulting.

If you think that was an attack, well you are thin skinned and incorrect. I simply said you were wrong, and when you persisted to compound your wrong statements, I was firm. I was not mean spirited, and yes you do have my number.....I am arrogant......I often am condescending, but you have never seen me attack or be vulgar with anybody since I have participated on forums.....never. People get uncomfortable if I become direct which is usually not my method....I try to use humor and irony to sway a person in discussions, but when somebody is simply wrong by any objective standard....tell me how I could have corrected you without you taking it as an attack. This has happened before, and I hold no grudges being called names because I respect your stubborness.......but you have no idea what a Seaoat attack is......I would never do it on these forums. I think one member on the forum who I respect and challenged finally communicated to me my comments were hurtful, and I realized that my intent was never to hurt, but I was touching buttons which I really had no business, and I have been very careful in discussions with that forum member out of respect, but really.......you are tougher than nails, and I certainly do not think I should adjust my comments, but if you really think I am attacking you and you are sensitive to the same, I can easily be much softer when discussing issues with you.......but I suspect you would simply say FU seaoat....and that is what I enjoy about you.

2seaoat wrote:Wrongful prosecutions do not have any consequences for the prosecutors. They have immunity. There are tons of prosecutors who withhold evidence. You just are not familiar w/ it.



Once again you overstate your position.....a little knowledge can get most people in trouble. If you think losing your law license is not having consequences.....well we are all entitled to our opinions.

I was not dismissive, rather I suggested you did not have sufficient knowledge on this subject

You can't lose your law license when you haven't been convicted of anything and you can't be convicted when you have immunity.

You now have corrected me with something which was completely untrue

I responded and did use the word clueless. I did this because you completely misunderstood that prosecutors all over the country were losing their jobs and their licenses because of unethical conduct in prosecutions, and early you told me I was not familiar..........You would not have said that if you had gotten a clue from my earlier comments, and were familiar with what is happening EVERYWHERE with prosecutors who have breached their ethical duty. I certainly only wanted to correct you, and in the future I will try to avoid the word clueless because that is too broad of a term and it is dismissive, and will try to narrow our discussion to the facts and simply say you are wrong in my opinion.

2seaoat wrote:Do you really think losing your law license equates to someone sitting on death row for 25 years? Really?

Gee, I thought you understood false equivalencies.....why would you use one now? Why am I now defending prosecutors who have done something wrong when I have suggested that they should be punished and are being punished. I am not going to be your trained seal, but I will say this......prosecutors losing their ticket for unethical behavior is nothing new, and two of my high school classmates lost their law license for a year when the State Supreme Court disbarred them for unethical conduct by prosecutors......and this was in 1978. They reapplied after the discipline period to reinstate their license, but they did not break the law and I coached soccer with one of the individuals.......He F'd up and lied and altered documents which was not a criminal offense, but it was found to be unethical, lost his job and his profession for over a year.

I guess I can say far more misconduct by prosecutors goes unpunished, but it really has become a nightmare for some folks since DNA evidence. Groups advocating justice are opening old case files and going after those for malicious prosecution......to the extent a civil judgment can partially repay a person for malicious prosecution.....I think the trend is good.....where before the late sixties Sovereign Immunity was almost an absolute bar to recovery, almost all immunity statues now have exceptions for willful behavior.