Prosecutors care about victims

George Gascón and Rachel Rossi, both running against Jackie Lacey for district attorney of Los Angeles, oppose gang allegations. They want diversion for drunk drivers. They discount the impact of property crimes on communities. (Gascón was the principle proponent of the disingenuously titled "Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act," or Proposition 47, which had nothing to do with safe neighborhoods or schools, quite the contrary. What it did was decriminalize theft and drugs.) They would rather criminalize those who they believe cause homelessness, and openly state that they will decline to prosecute the homeless who actually commit crimes. They do not want to charge crimes that could result in the deportation of undocumented immigrants, but instead will give the undocumented sweeter deals than they would give to actual U.S. citizens for the exact same offense. They are opposed to the death penalty.

Gascón quit being district attorney of San Francisco a year early to run for the position of chief prosecutor of Los Angeles. Long before that he was LAPD, quit, became a used carsalesman, quit, returned to LAPD, quit, went to Arizona, quit, went to San Francisco, quit, and now he is returning to Los Angeles. Maybe he has toured a courtroom on a whim, but he's never tried or prosecuted a case in his life. He has never done the actual work of a real in-the-trenches prosecutor.

Rossi was a Los Angeles deputy public defender, quit, became a federal public defender, quit, went to Washington D.C. for a while, quit, and now wants to be district attorney of Los Angeles. She, too, has never set a foot in a court as a prosecutor.

I was a deputy public defender for four years before I became a career (31-year) deputy district attorney. I believe in the value of defense attorneys. They make certain that prosecutors dot their i's and cross their t's. They scrutinize us and keep us honest. They assert and protect the rights of the accused. They oppose excessive governmental invasion into our sacrosanct privacy rights. They do an essential and important job, and I honor them.

I don't want to get rid of them. I just don't want them to act as prosecutors.

It is clear that Rossi and Gascón don't feel the same. They would eliminate the adversarial relationship. Under their leadership, there would be only one role. The role that protects defendants. They are misguided. They presume so much, yet do not have the authority to convince any legitimate prosecutor that there is any substance behind their policies. Neither Rossi nor Gascón have ever lived the number one experience that ultimately becomes the single driving force behind the life of every dedicated prosecutor I know: On a daily basis, we come face-to-face with actual victims of crimes.

Our compassion for humanity does not begin with the sadness that has shaped or led some misguided individual to commit a felony. It begins with the sadness that has disrupted, if not irreversibly hurt, the life of someone who did not deserve what the felon chose to do. If on our right shoulder there is a victim crying, and on our left shoulder there is the family of the defendant crying, we turn and listen to the voice on the right first and foremost. That is why there are two roles, prosecutor and defense attorney; but there won't be under Gascón or Rossi.

Rossi and Gascón chant mantras of "decarceration," urging that the jails open their doors and let everyone out, and support diversion instead of prosecution for crimes, choosing not to prosecute property crimes and auto theft.

They never mention victims. They have no compassion for the victims of crimes, and that is because they have never had contact with victims in the day-in day-out grind of being a prosecutor.

Consider property crime. These two have never met, as have real prosecutors, someone who has had their car stolen. They do not think that car theft amounts to a crime worthy of prosecution because it isn't a so-called crime of violence with blood pooling on the ground. They must assume that victims of auto theft can afford to just go out and buy a new car or otherwise have insurance that will immediately replace the car. But not all can afford to just go out and replace their car. Their lives can be greatly disrupted. The car theft can cause them unbearable anxiety; they can't get to work; they can't earn a living; they lose their job. Maybe they end up homeless.

Today, too many people are forced to live in their car. If their car is stolen, they are beyond despair. When a car is recovered after being stolen it is placed in impound. Some victims cannot afford to pay to get their car, often times their actual home, out of the impound yard. You want to prosecute those who cause homelessness? Prosecute anyone who devalues the true impact of car theft and won't prosecute car thieves to the full extent of the law. Ever had your car broken into? Just like having your home invaded, you don't really feel safe in it anymore. You feel vulnerable and exposed. You look at it twice when you approach making sure no one is in the back seat. This anxiety disrupt your fundamental right to "the pursuit of happiness."

Ever walk past a homeless encampment, no doubt filled with plenty of substance abusers and intoxicated felons released from jail because of the decarceration movement? (Gascón's disingenuous Prop. 47 virtually eliminated the ability to address substance abuse issues, a fairly common problem among the homeless population.) These potential candidates have declared that they would not prosecute the homeless who commit crimes. What must it be like to live in that neighborhood where you are forced to walk past people who you are legitimately afraid of to get to your vandalized car to go to work? How will you feel if you get assaulted by someone who is homeless and prosecutors won't do anything because they have more compassion for the criminal than the victim?

Ever met someone who has been injured by a drunk driver and their life will never be the same? Meet a wheelchair-bound victim and then come and tell me that you will divert DUIs from the system and not prosecute drunk drivers by applying a law that has saved countless lives. Their policies are not about saving the lives of decent law-abiding citizens. Their policies are all about reducing the consequence of crimes and easing up on criminals, and not making the community safer for the victims.

I'm just talking about what one might assume, if you didn't know better, are lesser crimes. I wasn't talking about gang crimes, or murders, or robberies where it is undeniably horrific what felons do to their victims. I'm talking about the crimes where you might assume the impact is minor. Of course, you would only assume this if you never met a victim of those crimes. I'm talking about the crimes that Gascón and Rossi have openly declared that they won't prosecute. The only reason I can come up for such a ridiculous position is that Rossi and Gascón have never met a victim and have no clue what it is we do and who it is we represent.

Vote for Gascón or Rossi only if you don't care about victims. Please, please, please! Vote for someone who is an actual prosecutor, someone who has actually talked to victims during her career. 

This opinion is entirely the author's own and not the position of the district attorney's office, although it is probably embraced by every single one of the dedicated prosecutors who work in this county.