By Joanna Friesner
As a long time subscriber to the Davis Enterprise, I am very disappointed in their lack of analysis and due diligence in discussing the DA candidates. They have repeatedly endorsed Reisig in spite of the objective and legitimate criticisms raised by many in Yolo County.
What’s particularly inexcusable – and antithetical to any organization claiming to be a community newspaper – is their unwillingness to consider the facts and report objectively on them.
The Enterprise demonstrates bad reasoning in their endorsement – the ultimate disservice in their duty as a newspaper with the (supposed) objective to inform and reflect the values of its community.
To dismiss those that support challenger and public defender Dean Johansson with the trivial, cheap shot that “attacks on Reisig have been driven entirely by ideology” (Enterprise, Friday, 1 June) is unforgivable conduct by a “news” organization, ignores support for Johansson’s proposals, respect for Johansson’s integrity and character, and concerns about the current DA’s policies.
To be fair, everyone has an ideology; the phrasing they use is simply a dog whistle to imply that Johansson supporters are biased.
My ideology is justice and fairness and treating people equitably.
The Enterprise’s duty is to rigorously analyze and compare the statistics of the current Yolo County DA to all other California DAs with respect to acquittals, convictions, plea deals, number of jury trials, number and types of charges filed for similar offenses by defendant type (race, age, gender), comparable violent crime statistics, and public funds used to implement these actions.
The Enterprise’s endorsement, devoid of this critical analysis, is factually misleading and not value-neutral or benign in impact. An immediate outcome of their avoiding their responsibility to present a balanced assessment of facts and statistics is to leave people unchallenged in their beliefs that their own ideology supports fair and equitable treatment.
Especially for those in Davis that view themselves as progressive, fair, and unbiased, this allows them to vote for the incumbent who will continue the punitive, costly, and draconian practices that, in large part, will never affect them or their families directly. Long-term outcomes will be in lives lost, families destroyed, and money squandered, none of which will lead to a fairer, just, equitable, or safe, community.
Joanna Friesner is a Davis resident
Read…
My ideology is anti-law enforcement and pro-criminal because it allows me to strongly virtue signal irrespective of the social absurdity and the resulting harm to the victims of crime.
Johansson is an anti-law enforcement, pro-criminal, activist plant. Hopefully the community recognizes this and prevents yet another failed social justice experiment from those unable to compartmentalize their warm feelings for criminals.
You and the author are both extremist. Only difference in your posts is one appears to be self-righteous far left, the other appears to be self-righteous far right. A pox on both your houses. Not productive (neither) for rational discernment. Wish I had the choice in the DA race for “none of the above”, based on both of your rants.
I don’t have that choice, so voted for a form of “term limits”…
Both candidates should eschew (as in ‘shun’) your posts, in my opinion.
Less than 48 hours before polls open, and you folk are throwing spaghetti, and/or pi$$ing on the candidates… I reject both your “arguments”… neither are factual… both visceral… not logical/persuasive.
Sorry Howard, but this is too critical to take a chill pill. These people that support Johansson are truly a bit whacked. This is the same absurd cycle we get into. They seem to take a stupid pill.
They think… things are pretty safe in Yolo County so why is our DA such a mean guy to all these poor people that make mistakes and steal stuff and kill people?
Then they vote in the soft-of-crime DA and people get more of their stuff stolen, more people get harmed and more people are dead… and then they sing outrage about needing a tough on crime DA.
I would prefer we just skip the stupid pill step. Reisig isn’t a problem. He is as near perfect as we can expect keeping the balance of strong law enforcement and progressive law enforcement.
“These people that support Johansson are truly a bit whacked. This is the same absurd cycle we get into. They seem to take a stupid pill.”
And yet… It seems you have been rendered unable to put together a coherent argument
Jeff (and others on the far right) need to understand that few of those on the far left wake up in the morning and say “I’m going to virtue signal today” they truly want to make things “fair” and the “virtue signaling” is mostly subconscious. Since few on the far left come from a math and engineering background statistical analysis is rarely a strong point in their decision making that heavily relies on “feelings”. Few of the wealthy well educated Johansson supporters own retail stores or live in areas where they will get shot so they really don’t care if more cheese is stolen or more poor people of color are shot like most wealthy well educated ACLU supporters in Chicago still pat themselves on the back for (pretty much) ending “stop and frisk” and don’t really care about the hundreds of poor people they don’t know in neighborhoods that they will never visit who are now dead since they decided they needed to “do something” about poor young men of color going to jail for illegally packing loaded guns…
https://reason.com/volokh/2018/03/26/the-2016-chicago-homicide-spike-explaine
Like Howard I’m a “none of the above” supporter and think we will have a better chance of getting a new DA that more people like if those on the far left and far right take a step toward the middle and stop calling each other names.
That, ladies and gentleman was a SINGLE SENTENCE, like a long speghetti. A single, long stem of pasta twisted on a plate and covered in cr*p sauce.
And, due to focus on the run-on, a point was ignored (typ., on the VG)…
That was a “take-away”, that I agree with…
Ken
I have had a long economic journey in my lifetime. I grew up rural poor. Lived urban poor in quite a bad neighbor hood for 6 years. Then to middle class suburbia for about 5 years. Lived in my car for six months, then Back to the a dorm for a year. Middle class ever since.
During all of that time, I would have been able to tell the difference in danger between a cheese thief and an armed gang member. I could have told the difference between a legally operating cannabis business man and a methamphetamine dealer. I could have determined that not every one who is wearing red belongs to a gang. I could have determined than when two parents have sworn to take equal care of an infant that turns up dead, that both are equally culpable. Reisig decided it best to let the more dangerous of the two walk free in order to charge murder on the mother. Unfortunately Reisig does not appear to be able to make these differentiations. This is not according to me. This is according to his own words and actions. This is not emotion. It is how his DAs office operates.
I get it Jeff. A “near perfect” DA is one whose ideology is injustice and unfairness and treating people inequitably, which is to be read pro-law enforcement and anti-criminal. By the way, I’m all for “activist plants” as long as they’re drought resistant.
There is absolutely no evidence that Resig is treating anyone with injustice or unfairness or inequitably. He is very much a consistent DA… treating every case as important with respect to what the law says. He is simply complying with the law… not picking a choosing which laws he will support and which he will ignore… something I expect the anti-law enforcement activist plant of Johansson to do.
Have you ever been ripped off Eric? Ever been mugged? Ever had people you know killed by gang members? Ever had your children threatened by thugs knowing that the cops would not do a thing because the DA would treat the thugs like social justice victim cases?
It seems that there is a screw loose in some people failing to understand what the criminal element really is and the harm we would face in this community failing to have strong law enforcement. Frankly, Davis is surrounded by a significant criminal and gang element.
“He is very much a consistent DA”
Mostly I agree with that.
What I don’t agree with is that “he is simply complying with the law.” He has at times contorted the law to increase the charges often in cases that do not warrant it. By way of example, not only does he have a low rate for settling cases, he also has a low conviction rate.
We have been through this before. A low rate for settling cases and a low conviction rate are indications of a DA that does not plea bargain and gives criminals a chance to have their day in court. You should like that.
Have you, Jeff? Or just theorizing? Spit-balling?
Jeff
I gave you multiple actual cases. I asked you your opinion on the individual judgements. You chose to respond to none of them. When you made your emotion driven claim that Reisig was “near perfect”, I requested your specific examples of why you felt that way. Silence on your part.
I responded to your examples as really meaningless with respect to your claim of what they support. You point out one mistake… an honest mistake… and others where the DA was simply following the laws consistently which is what all DAs should do… but you don’t like that he follows the law. That is your problem not his.
And I also pointed out that if you are going to ignore the thousands of transactions completed by this DA and only focus on the few de minimis irritants of Tia Will to claim that he sucks as a DA and should be replaced, well then most of the medical professions must suck and need to be replaced because they make many more mistakes that needlessly kill people.
First of all, I have compiled a list of more than 100 overcharged cases. These are not “mistakes” as you characterize them, they are charging decisions.
I have also compiled a list of 14 likely wrongful convictions under the watch of Jeff Reisig either as Deputy DA or DA.
These are just known cases.
Most research on wrongful convictions put them at a small percentage of overall cases, but over time they add and create a devastating impact on people’s lives. I don’t view them as “mistakes” which imply that there were errors. Instead, I view them as a systematic problem that is part and parcel to the system. The only way to fix them is to correct the system.
I still don’t really understand why it is so bad that there be ideology driving opposition to a DA. If you fundamentally believe that the DA is overcharging defendants and that there is a better way, what is wrong with that?
What is the better way? You have never made the case for a better way. You just have an anti-law enforcement bias. Your fairness filter is raging and it clouds your objectivity about other harms.
I’ve made plenty of case – I’ve cited stats, provided examples, etc. You’re summarily rejected anything other than the status quo.
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
It ain’t broke.
Definitely broke
Not is is not. That is the basis of our disagreement. It is not broke, it is just not carrying your anti-law enforcement, pro-criminal water.
For most white middle to upper class residents of Davis, you are probably right. Fortunately, many voters and progressives who run for public office consider societal issues more broadly and less parochially.
DG, you write that you “have compiled a list of more than 100 overcharged cases” and “have also compiled a list of 14 likely wrongful convictions under the watch of Jeff Reisig either as Deputy DA or DA. These are just known cases.”
What do you plan to do with this compilation? Can you at least publish a running list? Send it to the California State Attorney General’s Office or US Attorney General’s Office…?
Excellent questions…
“Send it to the California State Attorney General’s Office or US Attorney General’s Office”
Good idea, you can then find out that “overcharging” is a term made up by David rather than a real “thing”. There is a problem of “overcharging” to coerce defendants into plea bargains however if the DA is going to court it’s up to the judge and jury to determine the proper charges.
Somewhat paradoxically David accuses Reisig of both overcharging and NOT plea bargaining.
As far as “14 likely wrongful convictions” I’d like to see that too.
“Somewhat paradoxically David accuses Reisig of both overcharging and NOT plea bargaining.”
That’s not in the least bit paradoxical. It’s the EXACT same issue. The reason people are not accepting as many plea agreements in Yolo is that the cases are being overcharged and the DA is not making reasonable offers.
David, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what “overcharging” means. I have links below that may clarify for you. People have a right to a trial, and a jury trial if the penalty meets a certain threshold. “Overcharging” is an attempt by DAs to deprive people of their rights to a trial by adding on charges they know they cannot prove in order to coerce a plea deal.
It is not possible to “overcharge” someone if you actually go to trial. See the widely cited article below.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2379810?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
https://www.theulelaw.com/blog/prosecutorial-tactics-the-practice-of-overcharging-defendants
I apologize if my comment came across as facetious, as it was an honest question. I appreciate the valuable work you do in the courts, essentially opening up a closed system. I wanted to know what you plan to do with this compilation, or what can be done to make it more public…?
Honestly not sure at this point. Thanks.
Thanks Jim. I knew David and the anti-law enforcement cohort supporting Johansson were off on their claims, but could not put my finger on it.
It seems they found a fake criticism and ran with it. Their real criticism is that he actually prosecutes criminals for theft.
Jim’s point is questionable at best. It assumes one purpose for overcharging. That’s not what’s happening here. What’s happening here is that the DA is charging crimes more harshly than the objective facts would subjectively seem to warrant. He is also not offering reasonable plea agreements which leads Yolo to having a much higher trial rate than other locales. This is a subjective point of course. But there is evidence to back it up: (1) high trial rate and (2) low conviction rate for trials. Neither of which Dean nor his supporters are making up.