You did. Right here
What I posted is not the interpretation you posted HERE Stop misrepresenting what I actually have posted.
What I posted is accurate. And you never answered the question: Is the New York Post article, which I quoted above, making stuff up? The article states:
“Prosecutors were also instructed to downgrade felonies to misdemeanors in certain cases. For instance, suspects initially charged with armed robbery of a store would get hit with petit larceny instead, a misdemeanor, provided no victims were seriously injured and there was no “genuine risk of physical harm,” the memo states.”
And what the article indicates, is exactly what I have been posting for quite some time.
Why are you so intent on misconstruing and mischaracterizing what I have been posting about Bragg’s policy which coddles these criminals?
JWK
This is the part that is wrong.
That is what I have been trying to tell you
Reducing the charge of using a weapon during a burglary is a separate charge from the burglary
The Burglary is still a Felony so someone charged with that would not be issued a desk appearance and go on to crime again… as what was written here.
Nothing I wrote in in error. And you still did not answer the following question.
Is the New York Post article, which I quoted above, making stuff up? The article states:
“Prosecutors were also instructed to downgrade felonies to misdemeanors in certain cases. For instance, suspects initially charged with armed robbery of a store would get hit with petit larceny instead, a misdemeanor, provided no victims were seriously injured and there was no “genuine risk of physical harm,” the memo states.”
I’ll bite…
What is wrong with not overcharging? That change seems very reasonable to me.
What don’t you like about it?
Overcharging? Bragg’s policy reduces felony robbery to Petit Larceny, a misdemeanor, and will allow these thugs to walk after given a DESK APPEARANCE TICKET.
Aside from that, this kind of crap has already proven to not be in the public’s best interests.
DAT Arrests
Bail reform expanded Desk Appearance Ticket criteria where arrestees are released pre-arraignment from the station house,
Looking at those who received DAT’s in 2020:
14.2% have been re-arrests at least once since their DAT vs 9.9% in 2019. (2,314 re-arrestees vs 1,482 re-arrestees in 2019.)
27% of those re-arrests were for 7 majors vs. 11.9% in 2019. (1,339 7 majors arrests vs 296 in 2019.)
Some of the new felony Desk Appearance Categories have higher failure to appear rates for court:
From January 1-April 30, 22% of Grand Larceny Auto arrestees that received a DAT failed to appear for arraignment.
For the same time period, 19.8% of felony drug arrestees that received a DAT failed to appear for arraignment.
So far this year, the Department has issued desk appearance tickets to 130 arrestees who committed Grand Larceny Auto versus none last year.
JWK
Yes it was. The scenario that was put forth would not happen.
An armed robbery would not result in a desk appearance since burglary is a felony.
The person that is telling you that it would be knocked down to petit larceny is either simply misunderstanding the policy or is lying to you.
How can burglary be a felony but armed robbery be a misdemeanor?
The answer … it isn’t.
People are charged with Burglary which is a Felony and the weapons charge is a misdemeanor if the weapon did not pose a credible threat during the robbery.
It is fine to disagree with the policy…. But one doesn’t have to make it more than it is.
This is confusing… why downgrade the weapons charge if there’s already a felony as a result of the burglary? I thought this policy was designed to rehabilitate and give them a second chance… if there’s already a felony charge it wouldn’t make much sense to downgrade since there will always be a felony charge on their record.
I see you still have not answered the question:
Is the New York Post article, which I quoted above, making stuff up? The article states:
“Prosecutors were also instructed to downgrade felonies to misdemeanors in certain cases. For instance, suspects initially charged with armed robbery of a store would get hit with petit larceny instead, a misdemeanor, provided no victims were seriously injured and there was no “genuine risk of physical harm,” the memo states.”
Here is exactly what Bragg’s new policy states:
a) An act that could be charged under PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4), 160.10(2b), or 160.05 that occurs in a commercial setting should be charged under PL § 155.25 if the force or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.
Now, note that PL § 155.25 is Petit larceny and is a class A misdemeanor for which a Desk Appearance Ticket is issued, and the perp is out and about in a few hours.
Also note that PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4) and 160.10(2b), or 160.05 are felonies.
JWK
Well if you look at it, the downgrade only applies to circumstances where the weapon was not used in anyway that could be a threat.
I personally think that it is a silly standard… but it doesn’t mean that armed robbers are only going to get desk appearances.
As I have said… it is more than okay to disagree with the policy change.
There is no need to make ■■■■ up to so though.
The New York Post article is wrong.
Read the memo for yourself.
You will see why.
And I suppose, according to you, the NYCPBA is also disseminating false information?
See: NYC PBA - Manhattan DA to stop seeking prison sentences in slew of criminal cases
Bragg’s memo also detailed the following instructions for prosecutors to reduce charges filed by cops in various cases:
Armed robbers who use guns or other deadly weapons to stick up stores and other businesses will be prosecuted only for petty larceny, a misdemeanor, provided no victims were seriously injured and there’s no “genuine risk of physical harm” to anyone. Armed robbery, a class B felony, would typically be punishable by a maximum of 25 years in prison, while petty larceny subjects offenders to up to 364 days in jail and a $1,000 fine.
Convicted criminals caught with weapons other than guns will have those felony charges downgraded to misdemeanors unless they’re also charged with more serious offenses. Criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, a class D felony, is punishable by up to 7 years behind bars.
*Burglars who steal from residential storage areas, parts of homes that aren’t “accessible to a living area” and businesses located in mixed-use buildings will be prosecuted for a low-level class D felony that only covers break-ins instead of for more serious crimes. Those more serious crimes, class B and class C felonies, would be punishable by up to 25 and up to 15 years in prison respectively. *
Drug dealers believed to be “acting as a low-level agent of a seller” will be prosecuted only for misdemeanor possession. Also, suspected dealers will only be prosecuted on felony charges if they’re also accused of more serious crimes or are actually caught in the act of selling drugs. That felony would mean facing up to seven years behind bars.
Yup. According to you everyone is wrong except you.
JWK
Today’s Democrat Party Leadership is infested with Socialist Revolutionaries, the same kind that took over Cuba and now rule over the people with an iron fist!
Yeah. They are. I don’t trust them as far as I can Throw them.
Read the memo for yourself.
Burglary is still a felony.
How can one place a weapons charge on top of a Burglary charge without the Burglary charge?
I’m not trying to make anything up… it can either be read that the burglary charge itself will be downgraded along with the weapons charge - which is how I read it - since that would make sense if they’re trying to reduce the impact on first time offenders. It’s just stupid to only downgrade one charge on a multiple charge situation, when the other is a felony.
And I suppose, according to you, the City Journal is also lying and putting out false information?
“Bragg’s policies for major crimes will have even more serious consequences. Bragg has directed that armed robberies of businesses no longer be charged as robberies, but only as larcenies. If a gun-wielding robber gets away with less than $1,000, which is typically the case in a store robbery, the defendant will be charged solely with petty larceny, a misdemeanor”.
Yup. According to you everyone is wrong except you.
1 Like
The burglary charge is downgraded from a class C to a Class D
The weapons charge downgrade is dependent on if the weapon was never used in a way that could be perceived in causing harm.
So… violent offenders with weapons will remain at the historic rates of being charged.
Non violent offenders will still face felony burglary charges but the weapons charge will be a misdemeanor, not an additional felony.
Stop reading opinion pieces and read the damn memo for yourself.
We have been talking about armed robbery
