Teen jailed for 3 years and then released with no charges committed suicide

[bucs90]

I will concede...it is more difficult for the system to work efficiently when its flooded and backlogged.

Which happens....when people KEEP COMMITTING SO MUCH ******* CRIME.

Inner city courts arent clogged by days of peace and calm behavior.

But Browder had entered the legal system through the Bronx criminal courts, which are chronically overwhelmed. Last year, the Times, in an extended exposé, described them as “crippled” and among the most backlogged in the country. One reason is budgetary. There are not nearly enough judges and court staff to handle the workload; in 2010, Browder’s case was one of five thousand six hundred and ninety-five felonies that the Bronx District Attorney’s office prosecuted.

Three Years on Rikers Without Trial - The New Yorker

Yes....the WORKLOAD caused by a mostly minority community committing so much ******* crime that it overwhelms the courts.

You want use crying unicorn tears over that? Sorry. I'll just choose to not commit crime...AND not live in a shit hole like that area.

 

[bucs90]

I will concede...it is more difficult for the system to work efficiently when its flooded and backlogged.

Which happens....when people KEEP COMMITTING SO MUCH ******* CRIME.

Inner city courts arent clogged by days of peace and calm behavior.

But Browder had entered the legal system through the Bronx criminal courts, which are chronically overwhelmed. Last year, the Times, in an extended exposé, described them as “crippled” and among the most backlogged in the country. One reason is budgetary. There are not nearly enough judges and court staff to handle the workload; in 2010, Browder’s case was one of five thousand six hundred and ninety-five felonies that the Bronx District Attorney’s office prosecuted.

Three Years on Rikers Without Trial - The New Yorker

There wouldn't be a need for a larger budget if so many people weren't committing crimes I mean you understand that I know.

Sounds like thats the whole reason they created the law that says if you are on probation and commit a new crime you get no bail.

They did it because HABITUAL offenders commit more and more crimes...even while awaiting other trials...and the system gets overwhelmed.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Here's the salient point Closed Caption

delays caused by court congestion don’t count toward the number of days that are officially held to have elapsed.

The prosecutors were not delaying this trial, court congestion was, therefor the people did nothing wrong, nor illegal. The New York law makes allowances for court congestion.

 

[Uncensored2008]

His experience broke him.

New York should be severely punished for this. Obviously due process was not followed.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

His experience broke him.

New York should be severely punished for this. Obviously due process was not followed.

Actually the law was completely followed.

You may not like the law, but the law was followed.

 

[bucs90]

Here's the salient point Closed Caption

delays caused by court congestion don’t count toward the number of days that are officially held to have elapsed.

The prosecutors were not delaying this trial, court congestion was, therefor the people did nothing wrong, nor illegal. The New York law makes allowances for court congestion.

Very true. His court hearings were delayed NOT because they didnt have a court....but because his shithead community members commit so much crime that the docket is flooded and overwhelmed.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually the law was completely followed.

You may not like the law, but the law was followed.

{In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence} - 6th Amendment to the Constitution.

The law was not followed.

Procedural law may not trump Constitutional law. New York followed procedure, but violated the law and the civil rights of the victim. They deserve to be nailed to the wall on this, and they will be.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Actually the law was completely followed.

You may not like the law, but the law was followed.

{In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence} - 6th Amendment to the Constitution.

The law was not followed.

Procedural law may not trump Constitutional law. New York followed procedure, but violated the law and the civil rights of the victim. They deserve to be nailed to the wall on this, and they will be.

You are wrong. Of course.
Federal law does NOT apply to state courts.

Many states have so-called speedy-trial laws, which require trials to start within a certain time frame. New York State’s version is slightly different, and is known as the “ready rule.” This rule stipulates that all felony cases (except homicides) must be ready for trial within six months of arraignment, or else the charges can be dismissed. In practice, however, this time limit is subject to technicalities. The clock stops for many reasons—for example, when defense attorneys submit motions before trial—so that the amount of time that is officially held to have elapsed can be wildly different from the amount of time that really has. In 2011, seventy-four per cent of felony cases in the Bronx were older than six months.

Each state does it differently, and in New York the law is clear. Court congestion does NOT count against the official time. Meaning if a DA says "I"m ready for trial in 1 week" and the courts can't get a trial date for 5 weeks, only 1 week counts against the time allotted.

As I said, you may not like the law, but you at least have to acknowledge that it exists.

 

[bucs90]

Actually the law was completely followed.

You may not like the law, but the law was followed.

{In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence} - 6th Amendment to the Constitution.

The law was not followed.

Procedural law may not trump Constitutional law. New York followed procedure, but violated the law and the civil rights of the victim. They deserve to be nailed to the wall on this, and they will be.

You are wrong. Of course.
Federal law does NOT apply to state courts.

Many states have so-called speedy-trial laws, which require trials to start within a certain time frame. New York State’s version is slightly different, and is known as the “ready rule.” This rule stipulates that all felony cases (except homicides) must be ready for trial within six months of arraignment, or else the charges can be dismissed. In practice, however, this time limit is subject to technicalities. The clock stops for many reasons—for example, when defense attorneys submit motions before trial—so that the amount of time that is officially held to have elapsed can be wildly different from the amount of time that really has. In 2011, seventy-four per cent of felony cases in the Bronx were older than six months.

Each state does it differently, and in New York the law is clear. Court congestion does NOT count against the official time. Meaning if a DA says "I"m ready for trial in 1 week" and the courts can't get a trial date for 5 weeks, only 1 week counts against the time allotted.

As I said, you may not like the law, but you at least have to acknowledge that it exists.

Ah. Very interesting.

Criminals be like "why tha court so clogged" as his homeboys pass him in jail.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You are wrong. Of course.
Federal law does NOT apply to state courts.

Many states have so-called speedy-trial laws, which require trials to start within a certain time frame. New York State’s version is slightly different, and is known as the “ready rule.” This rule stipulates that all felony cases (except homicides) must be ready for trial within six months of arraignment, or else the charges can be dismissed. In practice, however, this time limit is subject to technicalities. The clock stops for many reasons—for example, when defense attorneys submit motions before trial—so that the amount of time that is officially held to have elapsed can be wildly different from the amount of time that really has. In 2011, seventy-four per cent of felony cases in the Bronx were older than six months.

Each state does it differently, and in New York the law is clear. Court congestion does NOT count against the official time. Meaning if a DA says "I"m ready for trial in 1 week" and the courts can't get a trial date for 5 weeks, only 1 week counts against the time allotted.

As I said, you may not like the law, but you at least have to acknowledge that it exists.

Interesting claim;

{Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.} - Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

In fact, state law must bend to federal law, via the supremacy clause;

{
Article VI
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.}

However, your claim cannot stand in a court of law.

New York is in deep shit. Los Angeles was so corrupt a last year that the federal government took control of it's jails. I would not be surprised if the same happens to New York.

LA Sheriff s Department Agrees To Federal Oversight To Settle Abuse Suit NPR

 

[bucs90]

You are wrong. Of course.
Federal law does NOT apply to state courts.

Many states have so-called speedy-trial laws, which require trials to start within a certain time frame. New York State’s version is slightly different, and is known as the “ready rule.” This rule stipulates that all felony cases (except homicides) must be ready for trial within six months of arraignment, or else the charges can be dismissed. In practice, however, this time limit is subject to technicalities. The clock stops for many reasons—for example, when defense attorneys submit motions before trial—so that the amount of time that is officially held to have elapsed can be wildly different from the amount of time that really has. In 2011, seventy-four per cent of felony cases in the Bronx were older than six months.

Each state does it differently, and in New York the law is clear. Court congestion does NOT count against the official time. Meaning if a DA says "I"m ready for trial in 1 week" and the courts can't get a trial date for 5 weeks, only 1 week counts against the time allotted.

As I said, you may not like the law, but you at least have to acknowledge that it exists.

Interesting claim;

{Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.} - Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

In fact, state law must bend to federal law, via the supremacy clause;

{
Article VI
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.}

However, your claim cannot stand in a court of law.

New York is in deep shit. Los Angeles was so corrupt a last year that the federal government took control of it's jails. I would not be surprised if the same happens to New York.

LA Sheriff s Department Agrees To Federal Oversight To Settle Abuse Suit NPR

Maybe it should. California and NY residents have committed so much crime it has overwhelmed local resources.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Here's the salient point Closed Caption

delays caused by court congestion don’t count toward the number of days that are officially held to have elapsed.

The prosecutors were not delaying this trial, court congestion was, therefor the people did nothing wrong, nor illegal. The New York law makes allowances for court congestion.

I'd like to know why you are bringing this up? Also, why'd you say he had a lawyer and he clearly had a PD?

 

[ClosedCaption]

By the way, THIS is the family attorney, so no this kid wasn't represented by a public defender

NYC Civil Rights Criminal Defense The Prestia Law Firm

Also why you said this untrue thing that caused Bucs to believe you without anything to back it up?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

By the way, THIS is the family attorney, so no this kid wasn't represented by a public defender

NYC Civil Rights Criminal Defense The Prestia Law Firm

Also why you said this untrue thing that caused Bucs to believe you without anything to back it up?

It isn't untrue CC, go read the article. He was NOT represented by a public defender, he was assigned outside council.

BUT, the Prestia law firm was not that outside council, I was wrong about that, they didn't come on the scene until much later, after he was released from Rikers even it looks like.

 

[ClosedCaption]

By the way, THIS is the family attorney, so no this kid wasn't represented by a public defender

NYC Civil Rights Criminal Defense The Prestia Law Firm

Also why you said this untrue thing that caused Bucs to believe you without anything to back it up?

It isn't untrue CC, go read the article. He was NOT represented by a public defender, he was assigned outside council.

BUT, the Prestia law firm was not that outside council, I was wrong about that, they didn't come on the scene until much later, after he was released from Rikers even it looks like.

Quote it then....like I did

 

[ClosedCaption]

You are wrong. Of course.
Federal law does NOT apply to state courts.

Many states have so-called speedy-trial laws, which require trials to start within a certain time frame. New York State’s version is slightly different, and is known as the “ready rule.” This rule stipulates that all felony cases (except homicides) must be ready for trial within six months of arraignment, or else the charges can be dismissed. In practice, however, this time limit is subject to technicalities. The clock stops for many reasons—for example, when defense attorneys submit motions before trial—so that the amount of time that is officially held to have elapsed can be wildly different from the amount of time that really has. In 2011, seventy-four per cent of felony cases in the Bronx were older than six months.

Each state does it differently, and in New York the law is clear. Court congestion does NOT count against the official time. Meaning if a DA says "I"m ready for trial in 1 week" and the courts can't get a trial date for 5 weeks, only 1 week counts against the time allotted.

As I said, you may not like the law, but you at least have to acknowledge that it exists.

Interesting claim;

{Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.} - Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

In fact, state law must bend to federal law, via the supremacy clause;

{
Article VI
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.}

However, your claim cannot stand in a court of law.

New York is in deep shit. Los Angeles was so corrupt a last year that the federal government took control of it's jails. I would not be surprised if the same happens to New York.

LA Sheriff s Department Agrees To Federal Oversight To Settle Abuse Suit NPR

Maybe it should. California and NY residents have committed so much crime it has overwhelmed local resources.

Your statement is an unproven assumption, just so you know. But no matter the facts you feel no shame in pivoting to the next "truth" despite being wrong several times

 

[Uncensored2008]

Maybe it should. California and NY residents have committed so much crime it has overwhelmed local resources.

Are you joining the democrats in seeking to end the United States Constitution?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

By the way, THIS is the family attorney, so no this kid wasn't represented by a public defender

NYC Civil Rights Criminal Defense The Prestia Law Firm

Also why you said this untrue thing that caused Bucs to believe you without anything to back it up?

It isn't untrue CC, go read the article. He was NOT represented by a public defender, he was assigned outside council.

BUT, the Prestia law firm was not that outside council, I was wrong about that, they didn't come on the scene until much later, after he was released from Rikers even it looks like.

Quote it then....like I did

Browder’s family could not afford to hire an attorney, so the judge appointed a lawyer named Brendan O’Meara to represent him. Browder told O’Meara that he was innocent and assumed that his case would conclude quickly.

http://www.manta.com/c/mm3y4dx/brendan-o-meara

Most certainly not a public defender. He was paid $75 an hour for this case, and in fact there was quite a bit of comments about he possibly phoned it in.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

To me, his family should sue the powers that be especially if that boy wasn't given any compensation in return for the time that was taken from him.

God bless you and his family always!!!

Holly

 

[EverCurious]

I read in the original article that he was suing the city over it, but I didn't see what came of it. Maybe I'll look into it more after my nap.


I'm usually a supporter of our system, but this seems pretty messed. To extend what should have been 6mos, into 3yrs awaiting trial, is hard for me to accept as "just" or "right."