Harris to defend record as prosecutor in major S.C. address

[brooklynite]

Politico

Kamala Harris will use a Saturday night address in South Carolina to mount a forceful defense of her prosecutorial record, which has been under scrutiny since she entered the race for president.

The Democratic senator from California, speaking at an event organized by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in Columbia, S.C., will pitch her law enforcement career as her greatest strength in a contest against President Donald Trump, focusing on the victims of crime she’s stood up for, the perpetrators and powerful interests she worked to hold accountable, and how she’s made the system fairer, according to a senior Harris campaign official who outlined the speech.

“She will reject the labels that some commentators and pundits have placed on her record during the campaign, and articulate not only why she became a prosecutor but what her vision was in the job,” the Harris official told POLITICO.

Harris has faced near-constant questions about her record as a line prosecutor, her time as district attorney of San Francisco and her years as attorney general of California — amid the black-lives-matter era and with a Democratic electorate that has moved left on criminal justice reform. Harris has shown sensitivity to how her record is playing, backtracking to varying degrees on investigations over officer-involved shootings and school truancy.

[EveHammond13]

1. I don't understand why she has to defend doing her job

Don't we want Dems as AGs not Republicans?? Why slam them for it.

[PoliticAverse]

2. Because many people think working to keep an innocent person in jail is indefensible...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html

[Kaleva]

3. Do you have anything besides an opinion piece to support your position?

And what is "many"?

[Jake Stern]

4. Here is a news piece (not just an opinion)

His conviction was overturned in 2009 when a federal judge ruled that his constitutional rights had been violated.

The court found that Larsen had shown he was "actually innocent," that the police officers at Larsen’s trial were not credible, and that his trial attorney was constitutionally ineffective for failing to call witnesses on his behalf.

But before he was released, California Attorney General Kamala Harris is challenging Larsen's release, saying he hadn't presented proof that he was innocent quickly enough, the Innocence Project said.

[link:https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Daniel-Larsen-Murder-Conviction-Overturned-Innocence-Project-198996291.html|]

On Edit: She didn't challenge the fact that he might be innocent but that he didn't present proof quickly enough. That's shameful.

[uawchild]

6. Does this mean the Bidden-Harris Ticket is off? n/t

[Jake Stern]

7. I'll vote for whomever is the nominee

Doesn't mean I'll do it with pleasure.

[Kaleva]

8. Looks like Harris was following the law according to this article

"A 1995 U.S. Supreme Court decision said that prisoners found to be "actually innocent" should be released even if they had not followed all legal technical requirements. The next year, Congress passed a new law with stringent time limits on when inmates could file habeas corpus cases in federal court. But the nation's highest court has never ruled on whether those deadlines apply in cases in which there is evidence of "actual innocence." Appellate courts across the nation disagree on whether they do.

The attorney general's office, in its court filing, cited Congress' action in arguing that Larsen missed his chance to seek federal relief. Prosecutors strongly disagreed with the federal judges, saying Larsen's case did not meet the standard of "actual innocence.""

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2012-aug-21-la-me-innocent-20120821-story.html

[uawchild]

9. for the record THAT law was passed by a Republican controlled congress.

The republicans just took control of both houses.

But, a law is a law. We should lay the blame at Congress, not the justice system that is compelled to enforce it.

[Kaleva]

14. It would be nice to have someone in the WH who follows the law.

[Jake Stern]

11. She could have dropped the appeal

Instead she chose to push on despite his being cleared by a federal judge. That put this case on her, not the courts or congress.

[Kaleva]

17. U.S. District Judge Christina A. Snyder could have released Larson but she chose not to.

Instead she ordered that Larson remain in jail pending the outcome of appeal before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

[EveHammond13]

10. You are not going to convince me that Harris gets her jollies keeping innocent ppl locked up

Absurd. Ridiculous. On its face.

[Jake Stern]

12. Nobody said she "got her jollies"

But it sure does call into question whether she was in it to seek justice or to simply rack up a win count at any cost.

Technicalities don’t provide comfort for those imprisoned who are innocent.

[MrsCoffee]

5. Oh Politico.

Thanks for the concern. Harris will be alright.

[NastyRiffraff]

13. Suddenly being a prosecutor is somehow wrong?

I get that some prosecutors may use their positions to unfairly target some, including POC, LGBQ, etc, although they have to have judges on their side. But a good prosecutor's concern is for justice, not putting people in prison as prizes. Justice means justice for a criminal's victims, and scrupulously defending the rights of the accused. Some do that; I understand Kamala was one of them, and I think that's indeed a main part of her strength.

[Hortensis]

15. Defend? What a hostile spin of a word.

How about discuss?

[JI7]

16. exactly, and correct the lies from Putin trolls and those who love

that trolling of Democrats.

[Hortensis]

18. Exactly! :)