Jeff Rosen spent a lot of time talking about doing the right thing during his campaign to be Santa Clara County District Attorney. A year and a half after replacing his former boss, Dolores Carr, Rosen doesn’t appear to have wavered from that stance.
On Monday, Rosen announced that more than 60 people in Santa Clara County have been sentenced to too harsh of sentences under the Three Strikes law, and his office intends to scale back punishments or even free some of these individuals.
Three Strikes intends to deter people who have already committed two violent or other serious felonies from committing a third. But California has the strictest interpretation of any of the 24 states with similar laws, because only here can the third strike be any felony—regardless of whether or not the crime shows the person to be a serious threat to society.
Rosen’s announcement comes just a several months before voters in November will have a chance to scale back the law if a ballot initiative passes. Rosen reportedly said he would continue as planned regardless of the election outcome.
> On Monday, Rosen announced that more than 60 people in Santa Clara County have been sentenced to too harsh of sentences under the Three Strikes law, and his office intends to scale back punishments or even free some of these individuals.
I suspect the real problem is simply jail overcrowding and not enough money to take care of the jailbirds.
So, a rational thing to do would be to grant release to the least despicable jailbirds, or ones that have shown some inclination toward “good behavior”.
So why didn’t Rosen just say that.
Instead, he has to couch it in some high-minded social justice gobbeldy-gook just to let the iggerant masses sample his exhibitionism and know he’s a one man ethical flying saucer hovering above antique concepts of “rule of law”.
Ask the Victims of those 60 people! Bet they would disagree.
What Mr. Rosen wants us to forget is that California’s Three Strikes Law is currently the most accurate representation of the will of the people (as expressed at the ballot box). The law, as written, always allowed each county (and thus, each elected DA) the right to express its particular values and address its unique needs in how applied, and that is exactly what has occurred. Conservative counties, those more concerned with the safety of the public than the personal plight of the criminal, have wielded the Three Strikes law with an iron hand (and in doing so made themselves unpopular destinations for ex-convicts), while our most populous and liberal counties, those more willing to put the public at risk, have used the law sparingly (and become the preferred destinations for prison alum).
What Mr. Rosen is doing with this bit of political theater is to rebuff the people’s will in two ways: first, by scoffing at the law they passed, and second, by undoing the effect of decisions made by a DA they once elected.
Arrogance squared.
Now imagine the reverse, that Mr. Rosen is succeeded by someone who actually respects the will of the people, someone who is, rightfully, disturbed by some of Rosen’s decisions. Will that new DA be able to undo the big breaks Rosen gave to second and third strikers, and subject them to his perception of just punishment? Of course not. The law doesn’t allow for such things. It also does not offer relief for any of the innocent citizens who will be injured at the hands of criminals prematurely set free. In other words, the only chance that Mr. Rosen has of having his prosecutorial decisions overturned by a successor is if this county elects someone even more liberal than he, a prospect unlikely given that the majority of Bay Area voters that stupid are already settled in one of the counties to the north.