No DEALS
“ No Deals”
District Attorney Kathleen Rice proposed the “No Deal” policy in hopes of giving less chances to people who were arrested for drunken driving and that have had previous convictions for the same offense. The punishment for endangering another human being should without a doubt fit the crime. The question is what is the difference between the casual drink and the people who over do it with their alcoholic beverages? Most people would argue that Kathleen Rice is single handedly attacking those who don't have the money to defend themselves. Personally, I do not stand for drinking and driving or being under the influence in anyway ; however the line needs to be drawn to make aware what IS and what is NOT acceptable. I want to say that if you commit a crime, you should have the full responsibility for your actions but there are other things to take into consideration.
After an arrest, the arrest report is sent to the Prosecutor. Their job is to initiate the criminal case. They will decide if the case should be charged as felony or misdemeanor and file a complaint with the trial court. For example: an office may decide that an arrest for drinking under the influence with be taken to trial and “plea bargained” down to a lesser offense. As a Defense Attorney they are there to represent the person being accused of committing a crime. They will make an effort to to have their client to be found guilty of the charges whether the client is or is not actually guilty of the charges. Even if the client admits to a defense lawyer that he or she is guilty there are always ways to plea bargain or be found guilty.
As a District Attorney Kathleen Rice is not responsible for controlling a problem. She is responsible for seeing it through the court and allowing a judge to determine how to deal with it via law. Only a Judge has the authority and power to interpret the laws; it’s not really a big surprise that there is controversy between the authority and motives
District Attorney Kathleen Rice proposed the “No Deal” policy in hopes of giving less chances to people who were arrested for drunken driving and that have had previous convictions for the same offense. The punishment for endangering another human being should without a doubt fit the crime. The question is what is the difference between the casual drink and the people who over do it with their alcoholic beverages? Most people would argue that Kathleen Rice is single handedly attacking those who don't have the money to defend themselves. Personally, I do not stand for drinking and driving or being under the influence in anyway ; however the line needs to be drawn to make aware what IS and what is NOT acceptable. I want to say that if you commit a crime, you should have the full responsibility for your actions but there are other things to take into consideration.
After an arrest, the arrest report is sent to the Prosecutor. Their job is to initiate the criminal case. They will decide if the case should be charged as felony or misdemeanor and file a complaint with the trial court. For example: an office may decide that an arrest for drinking under the influence with be taken to trial and “plea bargained” down to a lesser offense. As a Defense Attorney they are there to represent the person being accused of committing a crime. They will make an effort to to have their client to be found guilty of the charges whether the client is or is not actually guilty of the charges. Even if the client admits to a defense lawyer that he or she is guilty there are always ways to plea bargain or be found guilty.
As a District Attorney Kathleen Rice is not responsible for controlling a problem. She is responsible for seeing it through the court and allowing a judge to determine how to deal with it via law. Only a Judge has the authority and power to interpret the laws; it’s not really a big surprise that there is controversy between the authority and motives