[pick_six]

according to DO article below, linked below.

wonder why that is? not interested? would it lead to prison overpopulation? when it's time for parole, to reduce overcrowded prison, would it look bad on the parole board? a michael dukakis / willey horton moment? guess it doesn't matter if there's a gun charge, as long as the get "them" for something. (inference from the article)

from the article, the career criminal had a few charges reduced from more severe charges, NO GUN CRIME, to small issues. then went on to more deadly ventures. for some earlier crimes got 8 years

But the Delaware Attorney General's Office cut a deal with him in 2012, agreeing to drop three weapon charges that carried a maximum of 41 years in prison in exchange for Pinkston admitting to second-degree robbery and terroristic threatening, which carried a maximum of eight years in prison.

Soon after being released from his 12-month prison sentence, Pinkston, police said, shot and killed 25-year-old Arteise Brown in Wilmington last year.

full article link

http://www.delawareonline.com/story/new ... /78428440/

it does seem that the articles coming from Delaware Online are getting lots of reference the thegunfeed.com lately.

[stephpd]

It's even worse then what the News Journal is reporting. The category with the highest conviction rate is simple possession of a concealed weapon (without a license). Possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony sits around 12%. I know I've seen the newer report but can't find it. Here's one from a couple years ago when we were fighting our politicians bend on further restrictions of our rights.

So, for the felons committing crimes with a weapon it's over 85% of the gun charges dropped.


http://fsffa.org/CJCSAC.pdf

[Owen]

The thing I don't get is if you are trying to get the "bad guys off the street" then why drop the charges with the longest jail time? And why not send them off to federal prison?

The tinfoil hat in me thinks that there has to be a conspiracy. Either money to be made with the local incarceration racket or they are not really interested in a safe community. Because in an "unsafe community" you need more state intervention.

[pick_six]

all this prefaced by maybe...

maybe it lowers stats for firearm involved crimes by dropping those in favor of others. robbery/burglary/assault/etc. someone/somehow always benefits from tweaking stats. who?

maybe prison overpopulation is the/an issue. the guy in the story had max term 40y crime dropped for max 8y. and served 1y. so, if they prosecuted 40y crime prosecution, he would have been there maybe... 5 years instead of 1? (1y of possible 8=.125... 40*.125..)

i do wonder if the folks at the parole board, or the DA, lawyer types will be slapped with a willy horton moment though. that never seems to happen, and the lack of accountability is interesting. returning to crime after the convictions the one guy had is all too common.

the a2a crew want to hold gun makes/sellers liable for things. but, a career criminal is put back on the street on the streets, after a slap on the wrist, and nothing happens as far as holding folks who approved the release to some kind of liability and accountability.

The thing I don't get is if you are trying to get the "bad guys off the street" then why drop the charges with the longest jail time? And why not send them off to federal prison?

The tinfoil hat in me thinks that there has to be a conspiracy. Either money to be made with the local incarceration racket or they are not really interested in a safe community. Because in an "unsafe community" you need more state intervention.

[Boots]

The thing I don't get is if you are trying to get the "bad guys off the street" then why drop the charges with the longest jail time? And why not send them off to federal prison?

Because that would require a trial. They throw the book at them and then offer to drop the most serious charges if they will plead guilty to the lesser charge(s), thereby avoiding a trial.

[Kuntryboy816]

The thing I don't get is if you are trying to get the "bad guys off the street" then why drop the charges with the longest jail time? And why not send them off to federal prison?

Because that would require a trial. They throw the book at them and then offer to drop the most serious charges if they will plead guilty to the lesser charge(s), thereby avoiding a trial.

....and assuring that the defendant will repeatedly be brought in and continue to pay court fees and keep the state DA's office plenty busy. Job Security? ....like they don't have enough of that already?

[GatorDude]

Court fees don't fund the AG's Office.

And one of the reasons to get plea agreements is that the State does not have enough prosecutors to take every case to trial. Moreover, the courts could not handle that overload either.

[Kuntryboy816]

Court fees don't fund the AG's Office.

And one of the reasons to get plea agreements is that the State does not have enough prosecutors to take every case to trial. Moreover, the courts could not handle that overload either.

Yes, but I see that as a self-created problem. Had they spent a little extra time putting these people in prison or sending them to Federal Prison (as required) then they would probably have less of a work load now... maybe a more manageable one. The run-n-gun fast track justice system these days seems more about quantity and how fast they can get them out more so than holding people accountable for their crimes. Criminals know this so they don't care enough to change their ways. If they can go commit crimes and get only a slap on the wrist then what punishment is there that they will not inflict upon them to deter their ways or make them think, "Hmmmm... probably not a good idea!" I don't have an answer and I'm sure in today's sue-happy PC world, we never will.

[Hawkeye]

It is all about moving the justice system along and not allowing the system to back up too badly in the short term. In other words, a quick fix to an overcrowded system. Simple. They plea bargain the gun charges and the suspects will plead guilty to the lesser charges avoiding the more serious gun charges. It works. I know, I am in a position to see and deal with the results of these cases every day. They trade off the public's safety to expedite the case load letting serious criminals out earlier. Getting tough on gun crimes is nothing more than an election year propaganda tool for politicians. The long term questioned here is what is harder on the legal system in the long run? Taking the time to try the case fully, gun charges and all, or having to have two or three more trials for the same guy for crimes committed, with new victims, all for what he did during the time he should have been locked up for the original offense. I know, we will worry about that during the next fiscal year.

[GatorDude]

We are talking about the State, not the Feds both in the article and in this thread. Where do you propose we house all these prisoners? Our prisons in Delaware are already overcrowded to the point that some populations are packed 2-4 in the space for 1.

No one wants to build a prison near where they live. And no one wants to pay the costs to build and fund the operations of additional prisons.

I'm not saying criminals should not go to jail, but it is absurd to repeat that mantra when there is simply nowhere to put them.