Progressive prosecutors making their mark

And it's not just telling us how mistreated those poor, beleaguered criminals are.

Progressive prosecutors, quite a few of them backed by Soros money, came to office in deep blue districts mainly on one platform: That the country is “overincarcerated,” that the system is racist, and that what criminals need isn’t accountability or (God forbid) punishment, but “restorative justice” and “therapy” (to be paid for by you). By contrast, if you want your stolen purse back, or the return of your carjacked BMW, well, hey, look, take a number and, while you’re waiting, try to do something about your white supremacy.

There was one other thing in the progressive prosecutor platform as well: Openness and accessibility. No more of this “thin blue line” stuff, hiding police and prosecutorial abuses. Full disclosure from now on.

Thus today’s story from Oakland caught my attention. It’s from KRON4, that right-wing kook network in San Francisco.

Less than 24 hours after Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price held a news conference and lectured reporters about the importance of the First Amendment, Price was hit with a lawsuit accusing her office of violating the First Amendment.

The lawsuit, released publicly on Wednesday, was filed on behalf of former KTVU reporter Patricia “Patti” Lee. Lee worked as a Public Information Officer for the District Attorney’s Office in 2023 until she was abruptly fired.

The lawsuit claims Lee discovered that the DA’s office was “hiding, deleting, and/or altering records” requested by journalists through the California Public Records Act. Days after Lee raised concerns, she was unceremoniously fired as PIO in December, attorneys said.

“Sunshine is the best disinfectant,” we frequently hear. And often that’s true……….until it finds its way to a progressive prosecutor’s office, in which case the disinfectant can go back in the janitor’s closer.

“I had to speak out,” Lee said. “I have been a serious and dedicated journalist for more than two decades. I believe in transparency and the public’s right to know. This case is about more than just one individual; it’s about maintaining the integrity and transparency of our public institutions.”

A prosecutor’s office in particular has tremendous power. The lead prosecutor can turn your life upside down based pretty much solely on what he thinks his job is — or wants to think it is — and his honesty and fair-mindedness or lack thereof. Donald Trump would know something about that, as would Ray Donovan. Three former Duke lacrosse players could fill in the details.

KRON4 asked the District Attorney’s Office about the lawsuit on Wednesday. The current PIO for the DA’s Office responded by writing, “The District Attorney’s office cannot comment on litigation on personnel matters.”

Translation: We’re stonewalling but we’d rather call it something more dignified. (N.B. It’s true that DA’s offices should not comment about ongoing criminal cases, but the decision about refusing comment on civil matters about public transparency is a different question).

Lee’s attorney, Nicholas Roxborough said, “Pamela Price, the top cop at the DA’s office, is attempting to silence her own people for refusing to participate in a cover-up. That Ms. Price often spends more time worrying about her appearance and her image than fighting serious and complex crimes in the Bay Area is astounding.”

None of this comes as a surprise. Ten months ago, Politico was on the case:

The top prosecutor for a San Francisco Bay Area county was playing defense as she absorbed criticism from furious residents of its largest city — a tense meeting that felt like a proxy for a mounting recall fight.

People packed a church in an affluent Oakland neighborhood in late July to demand progressive Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price answer for disturbingly pervasive carjackings and assaults, often shouting questions over her answers.

“I voted for you, but I don’t feel safe here,” said a woman who described being pulled out of her car, at gunpoint, on a recent morning.

But Ms. Price had her reinforcements ready:

Price had some backup, supporters — some summoned by a social media post urging them to “show up in force” and challenge “opponents of criminal justice reform.”

Translation: We might not be doing much about crime, other than watching it spike, but we’re johnny-on-the-spot in putting up social media posts to be sure we turn out people for a political rally.

The burgeoning recall effort against [Price] is following a familiar script. A candidate opposed by law enforcement wins a DA race in a deep-blue county.

Which is the only place they can win. “Progressive prosecutor” candidates are toast in any jurisdiction with normally diverse political outlooks, so they don’t bother. Slickly choosing a Left-skewed electorate is a close relative to staging the recent Trump prosecution in the second-most Democratic district in the country, complete with a bench full of MAGA-hating judges.

They change sentencing policy to lessen time in prison and investigate peace officers who have killed or used force on suspects. Then comes the pushback: Old-guard deputy prosecutors who quit or are pushed out…

Translation: Career prosecutors who think the job is public safety rather than a political crusade.

…describe a dysfunctional office that favors defendants over victims; shocking crimes spur outrage and fear; social media blazes with criticism; and recall whispers turn to petitions.

Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce President Carl Chan, one of the recall proponents, said in an interview that Price was emboldening criminals by signaling a lack of consequences.

“Six months in, you’re already pretty much destroying the legal system,” said Chan, who was assaulted last year — before Price took office — as a wave of attacks rattled the Asian-American community. “Justice reform doesn’t mean we have to go the wrong direction. We cannot use justice reform to allow people to commit crimes against innocent people.”

Still, you have to wonder whether Mr. Chan might be biased. For all we know, he’s just fuming because his son had an encounter with a Harvard Admissions officer who took displeased note of the son’s boring personality.

But I digress. To return to the current lawsuit:

First Amendment violation allegations against Price stem from a Nov. 29, 2023 news conference held by the district attorney.

When reporter Emilie Raguso of The Berkeley Scanner showed up to cover it, she was refused entrance and escorted away by DA’s Office employees. Raguso’s experience raised alarms that Price may have a “blacklist” banning certain reporters who printed negative news stories. To find out if the DA’s Office had violated Raguso’s First Amendment rights, multiple media outlets filed CPRA requests.

“Reporters, press freedom groups, and First Amendment organizations were understandably troubled by this cartoonish violation of the First Amendment, content-based restriction of reporting, and the arbitrary exclusion of a reporter,” the lawsuit states.

Anyone want to hazard a guess about what the NYT headline would be if Sarah Huckabee Sanders had pulled this stunt? Not that that was the end of it, either:

“Ms. Lee was tasked with responding to CPRA requests that were aimed at uncovering a media list meant to blacklist certain reporters who are critical of the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office,” the lawsuit states.

Lee began seeking to obtain information for responding to CPRA requests, in compliance with the law. But instead of producing records, the DA’s Office decided to “hide, delete, and change the records,” the suit claims.

Lee claims that she spoke up and refused to participate in illegally withholding records that the public was entitled to see. On Dec. 12, 2023, she was handed a termination notice and told to clear out her office within eight minutes.

This all sounds pretty bad, but I don’t think we should draw conclusions only by looking a one case from the Bay Area. Why, across the country we have well-known progressive prosecutor………………………………………………..Marilyn Mosby.