【Article/Observer Network Columnist Dai Yuxiao】
A few days ago, there was an appalling and terrible incident in New York City. An Asian woman was pushed off the platform by a black tramp while waiting for a train at Times Square Station, crashing into an oncoming train, killing her instantly.
According to a police report afterwards, the woman who was unfortunately victimized was Named Michelle Alyssa Go, a Chinese-American. The spelling of his surname Go comes from the pronunciation of "Wu" in southern dialects such as Teochew and Hokkien.
Michelle, who celebrated her 40th birthday just last month, belongs to the typical Asian-American elite, with excellent academic performance and a smooth career. She received her bachelor's degree from UCLA and her MBA from NYU Business School. He is currently responsible for M&A at Deloitte Consulting.
Michelle's LinkedIn Homepage (Linkedin)
According to reports such as the New York Times, Michelle loves the city of New York very much. Her neighbours and friends described her as friendly, humble and very helpful. In addition to her busy schedule, Michelle is actively involved in philanthropy. She volunteered for 10 years at the New York YMCA, a women's charity organization, helping homeless families and underprivileged children in their lives and careers.
The black man and Michelle who committed the murder were completely two worlds apart. Police confirmed that the suspect was Simon Martial, a 61-year-old homeless black man with a heavy history who had been arrested and jailed several times for robbing a taxi driver and other crimes. In 2019, Martial was charged with illegal drug possession, but the court dismissed the case as too precarious and "unfit to be tried" because of his mental condition.
Simon, the tramp who pushes Michelle into the railroad tracks. Martial (NY Post)
After his arrest, Martial showed no remorse for the crimes he had committed. He shouted to reporters on the way to the escort: "Yes, I did it." Because I am God, I can do this. "The preliminary police investigation concluded that Martial and Michelle did not know each other, and the incident was a random crime. Martial tried to push another non-Asian woman before attacking Michelle, but was evaded by the latter.
The good people who were eager to help the tramps were killed by the tramps, which was lamentable.
First, the homeless problem - the lights of the United States are dark
This subway push case is not an accidental incident.
Two months ago, on the same platform at the Times Square subway station, another Asian woman was snatched from her purse by a tramp and pushed off the platform. Fortunately, no train passed at that time, and she was saved with the help of passers-by.
Peter Gerber, 36, Asian woman, is pushed off the platform
According to the NYPD, there were 27 incidents of passengers being pushed off the tracks last year.
At least two people have died in the New York subway this year. The last incident occurred at the beginning of the new year, at the Fordham Road subway station in New York's Bronx, where a group of young men armed with knives attacked a 38-year-old passenger. During the fight, injured passengers were pushed off the platform. Roland, who was passing by at the time, Houston immediately rescued, and the passengers who were pushed off the platform survived, but Houston, who saved the people, was unfortunately killed by the train. Last week, two minors were arrested for their involvement in the attack.
On Jan. 5, a 38-year-old passenger was stabbed twice in the back at Rockway Avenue Station in Manhattan, New York. The victim's condition is critical, but it is not expected to be life-threatening. The suspect remains at large.
On January 9, a passenger was cut in the face on a Line 6 train running in Manhattan, New York. The suspect remains at large.
On Jan. 10, an 18-year-old man was shot in the abdomen and in the arm on a Line 2 train in the Bronx, New York. The suspect remains at large.
Although people who have lived in New York for a while know that there are some security problems in the subway, the recent series of vicious incidents against passengers has made many locals feel frightened.
NYPD statistics show an 81.5% increase in crimes committed in New York's public transportation system in the first week of the year compared to the first week of last year. The rate of felony attacks on the New York subway last year was three times higher than it was three years ago, and the rate of robbery per million passengers more than doubled.[2]
Some New Yorkers had to start waiting outside the gates to prevent themselves from being pushed off the tracks by a madman.
Due to the repeated occurrence of vicious crimes in the New York subway in the past few months, the New York City Government has repeatedly sent law enforcement officers to the subway. After the incident a few days ago, New York City police again sent up to 1,000 additional officers to maintain public transit security. More than 4,000 police officers are currently patrolling the subway system, and the number of officers on duty exceeds the highest level in history.
However, a large number of police officers does not necessarily mean that crime can be effectively controlled. The role of the police on duty in these subways is mainly to remove or dissuade homeless people who have stayed on the platform for a long time and to stop the crime that is happening. However, surveillance records in the subway show that the murderer of the Chinese woman, Martial, only entered the subway station 9 minutes before the crime, and the attack process occurred very suddenly, and even if there were police officers in the station at that time, they may not be able to prevent the tragedy in time.
The crux of the matter is why repeat offenders like Martial can be caught and released repeatedly, and then continue to appear in public spaces to threaten the safety of citizens. As Patrick Lynch, president of the Police Charitable Association, New York City's largest police union, put it: "Those who pose a danger to themselves and others should not be left on the subway and on the streets." We know there are some common-sense solutions on the table – we need to get them up and running as quickly as possible. ”
The common-sense solution he said was naturally to put these dangerous people in jail, but unfortunately the criminal justice system in New York was not currently very interested in the matter.
II. "Awakening" prosecutors condone crime
At the same time as various attacks in New York at the beginning of the year, alvin Bragg, the newly inaugurated attorney general for the New York County (i.e., Manhattan) district, sent a memorandum to all subordinate prosecutors and staff announcing that his prosecutor's office would cease prosecuting fare evasion on public transportation, possession of marijuana in New York State (which has not yet been legalized), obstruction of official duties, refusal to arrest, and prostitution.
Many homeless people in america's big cities are as addicted as Marshall, the murderer of Michelle, and in the winter they will enter the platform to warm up by evading tickets or asking others to swipe their subway cards. That said, the new policy announced by Prague has made it easier for the Martials to commit crimes in the subway.
In particular, Bragg stated that the Public Prosecutor's Office would not seek a prison sentence for "crimes less serious than murder or fatal assaults". For suspects who have not caused death or serious injury, the Public Prosecutor's Office will try not to seek pre-trial detention of the suspect, depending on his or her previous convictions. This means that they can be freed after up to 48 hours of police detention.
The new New York County District Attorney General, Alvin M. G.N. Miller
He also announced that the prosecutor's office would lower charges for multiple felonies. Examples include robbery using firearms or other lethal weapons. As long as there is no actual harm to the person, it is prosecuted as petty larceny. Gun robbery is a Class B felony under current New York State law and should have been sentenced to 12 to 25 years in prison. Petty theft is a Grade A misdemeanor and carries a maximum sentence of one year in prison.
In addition, under current New York State law, ordinary burglary is a Class D felony (3 to 7 years in prison), theft into a residential home is a Class C felony (sentenced to 7 years and 15 years in prison), and theft in possession of explosives or dangerous weapons, or the threat or pretending to be in possession of a dangerous weapon, or causing injury to a person is a Class B felony (sentenced to 12 to 25 years in prison).
Prague instructed that as long as the place where the theft occurred was the storage space of a residential building or other area that was not directly connected to the living space, the public prosecutor's office would prosecute the thief as the lightest ordinary burglary, regardless of whether the thief was in possession of a dangerous weapon.
These complex judicial languages translate into adult words to open up the "zero yuan purchase" network. For example, if a rioter enters a commercial and residential building with a gun and robs a shop, he could have been sentenced to up to 25 years in accordance with the literal meaning of the law. But now the New York prosecutors encounter these two situations are prosecuted according to the most common burglary crime, the maximum sentence will only be 7 years, and even directly ignore the circumstances of the burglary according to the petty theft prosecution, the maximum sentence will only be 1 year.
In addition, the Prosecutor General of Prague requested that for offences for which life imprisonment was not applicable, the prosecutor sought only a sentence not exceeding 20 years. He also asked the Public Prosecutor's Office not to seek a sentence of "life imprisonment without parole" for any suspect, no matter how heinous the crime he committed. His memo did not mention "not seeking a death sentence" because the death penalty had long been substantially abolished by New York State (the last execution in New York State had been carried out in 1963, and the New York State Court of Final Appeal declared the death penalty "unconstitutional" in 2004).
Bragg's own rationale for the policy of fewer catches and fewer catches and lenient sentences is that he believes that New York's prosecutorial system should help the mentally ill, the homeless, the impoverished, drug abusers and minorities as much as possible, rather than spending resources on prosecuting and imprisoning them. Putting them in jail would deprive them of housing and employment opportunities and create tensions in family relationships. Going to jail doesn't help prisoners change, it only makes them more depraved.[4]
The Prague Attorney General's policy of being soft on criminal activities has made many New York police officers who are fighting on the front line of crime feel stunned and angry. New York City Police Chief Kishant Shuyer, upon learning of the new policy, argued that misdemeanors such as arrests were no longer prosecuted by the Prosecutor's Office, which directly endangered the safety of law enforcement officers. In an email to police across the city, she wrote: "I am very concerned about your safety as police, the safety of the public, and the justice of the victims. ”
All three major police unions in New York City have now made their protests against Prague clear.
Patrick Lynch, president of the NYPD Charitable Association, believes Prague sends the wrong message to criminals and police officers. He told the media: "Our police don't want to be sent to enforce laws that prosecutors won't prosecute. And too many people now believe that they do not have to bear any consequences for committing crimes, arresting people, and interfering with law enforcement. ”[5]
The New York City Detective Endowment Association sent a direct letter to the governor, hoping that the other party could appoint another willing special prosecutor to replace Prague. "The local attorney general's accusation is to enforce the law rather than create new ones. The Prague Prosecutor's refusal to enforce the cantonal law has violated his oath of office," the Police Detective Association criticized in the letter.
The Detective Endowment Association, a new York City police union, sent a letter to the governor expressing his dissatisfaction with the Prague Attorney General and asking the governor to re-appoint a detectives' Endowment Association.
Just five days after Prague sent the memo to prosecutors' office subordinates, there was a head-on clash between the police and prosecutors in New York City. Last week, New York police arrested a 30-year-old inmate in Manhattan's Chelsea area. The man has been arrested as many as 21 times and now carries with him nine cases still pending, including robberies and assaults with lethal weapons.
His arrest was preceded by a robbery at a department store. When the store security guard tried to stop him, he took out a large pair of scissors and threatened the latter, "Don't touch me xxx", and then left the store with a big wave. After the police arrested him, he was handed over to the procuratorate in accordance with the normal judicial process.
However, the officers who carried out the arrest found that the written testimony provided by the prosecutor only said that "the defendant stole something" and did not mention anything about threatening the security guard with scissors. The officer therefore refused to sign the testimony. Eventually, after the police department leaders intervened, the testimony was corrected. Even so, according to the memorandum from the Prosecutor General of Prague, the prosecution would only prosecute the case for misdemeanors. Hall was then immediately released by prosecutors.
Vincent Valeron, president of the Police Charity Association, New York City's second-largest police union, accused the prosecutor's office of deliberately omitting details of the case in search of a misdemeanor verdict. Valerón warned fellow police officers: "We remind you to be vigilant when reviewing the indictment documents prepared by the prosecutor's office. Make sure that the signed content is true. If you sign up on any false material prepared by the public prosecutor's office, they will most likely use it to prosecute you. ”[6]
It's not just the New York Police who have an opinion on Prague. It has been less than three weeks since Prague became Manhattan's attorney general, and nine of his prosecutors have left, including veteran prosecutor Joan Iluzi Obon. The man has been with the Manhattan Prosecutor's Office for 34 years and has successfully prosecuted renowned Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein.
As an important pillar for maintaining grass-roots order and social order in a county or city, local procurators decide how to initiate public prosecutions not in accordance with the express provisions of the law but in accordance with their own political positions. At the same time, prosecutors with different views on internal affairs in the procuratorate were excluded and eliminated, resulting in a sword-rattling between the prosecution and the police. It is inconceivable that such a thing should happen in a modern country known as the "rule of law".
What's even more absurd, however, is that it didn't just happen at the Manhattan Prosecutor's Office in New York, where the Prague attorney general was just one of the whirlwinds of judicial reform in the Democratic Party.
Third, the Democratic Party's radical criminal justice reform
On the West Coast of the United States, California, long dominated by Democrats, voted to approve the infamous Proposition 47 in a 2014 referendum. The proposal reduces theft, robbery, use of counterfeit money and financial fraud from felonies to misdemeanors involving less than $950. Since local law enforcement agencies are unable or unwilling to catch misdemeanors in most cases, misdemeanorization largely means de-criminalization or even legalization. The recent frequent outbreak of "zero-dollar purchases" and rail express thefts in California are the direct consequences of this proposal.
Thieves frantically grab packages delivered by vans in Los Angeles, throwing packages and unwanted goods on railroad tracks (CNN)
The proposal's main drafter and supporter, George Gascon, spoke in the same way as Prague. He argues that prosecuting and imprisoning "mentally ill, addicted and homeless" is a waste of too many government resources. Putting these "poor people" in jail will only make their situation worse. He also criticized the current criminal justice system for racial discrimination, which led to black people being "disproportionately" imprisoned.
In 2020, Gascon ran for Attorney General of Los Angeles County, California. Local police in Los Angeles feared that Gascon's arrival would jeopardize law and order in Los Angeles, and several major police unions raised more than $3 million to support Gascon's opponents. Gascon's campaign money came heavily from Silicon Valley elites and liberal billionaires in the Bay Area and across the country. Among them, George Soros, a prominent Jewish businessman and a democratic super donor, single-handedly funded his election by $2.25 million.
In the end, Gascon was elected with more strong campaign money and popular resentment caused by Floyd's death. After taking office, he insisted on the "appeasement" proposition, not prosecuting a number of misdemeanors, and reducing the prosecution of multiple felonies on the grounds of insufficient evidence. He also promised that the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office would never seek the death penalty for any criminal. It also called on the public prosecutorial system to re-examine the cases of prisoners who had been held for more than 15 years, seeking the release of some. Most of these people were imprisoned for violent crimes such as murder, and many of them celebrated Gascone's arrival.
Murdered 40 years in prison, Philip Dorset takes a video from his cell phone in his cell to celebrate Gascon's new order that could set him free sooner (Orange County Register)
It is worth mentioning that the above-mentioned prosecutor general of Prague, New York, also received a political contribution of $1 million from Soros at the time of the election. The Prosecutor General, who received Soros' funding, also included the following.
In 2016, Kim Fox was elected Attorney General for Cook County, Illinois. Soros donated $2 million to his campaign. The county attorney general office is the second largest district attorney general office in the United States, with more than 700 prosecutors. The famous "crime capital" of Chicago belongs to Cook County. Fox took a similar position to Gascon in favour of prosecuting lesser misdemeanors and minimizing jail time. She also supports more active oversight of the issue of violent law enforcement by local police.
In 2017, Kimberly Gardner was elected Attorney General for St. Luce, Missouri. Soros donated $67,000 to his campaign. After her election, the city's prosecutor's office dropped dramatically for felonies. As many as three-quarters of the serious crimes referred by local police were refused by Gardner-led prosecutors on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence. Gardner has refused to prosecute a large number of misdemeanors and has completely terminated the prosecution of a small number of marijuana owners (marijuana in Missouri has not yet been legalized). During Gardner's tenure, the St. Luce Municipal Prosecutor's Office had a turnover rate of more than 100 percent, and more people resigned than the Prosecutor's Office.
In 2018, Larry Krasner was elected Attorney General for Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Soros donated nearly $1.7 million to his campaign. Krasner fired 31 prosecutors in his first week in office. He immediately announced that the Philadelphia Prosecutor's Office would refuse to prosecute marijuana users (Pennsylvania marijuana has not yet been legalized) and directed prosecutors to remove bail for misdemeanors and nonviolent felony offenders. He refused to prosecute a large number of misdemeanor cases and instructed prosecutors to shorten the sentence sought against the defendants while declaring the pennsylvania death penalty contrary to the state constitution.
The liberal Jewish billionaire George W. Bush Soros and several district attorneys generals (NY Post) who have been funded by him
These are just a few key prosecutorial positions, but in fact Soros and the Democratic radicals have installed far more prosecutors across the country than these—procuratorates in San Francisco County, California, Suffolk County, Massachusetts (Boston), Independent City of Baltimore, Maryland, Fairfax County, Virginia, and Louden County (a suburb of Washington, D.C.) have all been run by "awakeningists" in recent years. In the past two years alone, Soros has spent more than $20 million on the election of attorney generals across the United States. These elected district attorneys form the backbone of the Democratic Party's criminal justice reforms in recent years.
Soros and the Democratic radicals chose to buy these district attorney general positions through money as a result of careful calculation. First of all, many districts, counties and cities have more relaxed control over political contributions than the federal government, and it is easier to cover up when it comes to spending money on officials at the local level. Second, it is more cost-effective and efficient to buy local attorneys general than to buy members of federal and local councils. Local attorneys generals in the United States wield enormous discretion in the criminal justice system, through which radicals can pursue "criminal justice reform" policies that they are difficult to achieve through law amendments and referendums.
They refuse to prosecute misdemeanors such as illegal possession of drugs, illegal possession of firearms, theft and prostitution, which essentially legitimize; prosecute multiple felonies for misdemeanors as a way to reduce sentences; drastically reduce or revoke bail for suspects so that they can still go unpunished after committing crimes; and refuse to seek the death penalty for the most vicious offenders in states where the death penalty has not been abolished, and the death penalty is essentially abolished.
These radical prosecutors-general are not responsible for punishing crimes according to law and safeguarding the public interest, as the procuratorial organs of other normal countries in the world, but are doing whatever it takes to reduce the prison population.
Fourth, the political calculation behind the reform
One of the important reasons for the division's reform to support the leniency of the sentence of less arrest and less arrest is "elimination of racial discrimination". They criticized the U.S. criminal justice system for systematically discriminating against blacks, placing blacks "disproportionately" in prison. One set of data that these people often cite is that more than 2,300 people are in prison per 100,000 blacks, compared to only 450 per 100,000 whites—black Americans are incarcerated more than five times as fast as whites.
But they rarely mention another set of data, blacks make up 14 percent of the U.S. population, but blacks make up 56 percent of murderers. Blacks have about eight times the homicide rate as whites. After comparing the two sets of data, it is not difficult to find that the high incarceration rate of blacks is directly proportional to the crime rate. Democrats do not start from the root of the problem to reduce the black crime rate, but directly and crudely artificially reduce the black population in prisons and release criminals back into society. This will not only not help alleviate the discrimination of black ethnic groups, but will also endanger the safety of other law-abiding black citizens.
In fact, the more essential reason behind the Democrats' reduction in the prison population is electoral considerations. Currently, the number of black inmates is comparable to the total number of white inmates in U.S. prisons at all levels. But there are more black inmates who support the Democratic Party than white prisoners who support the Republican Party — democrats have a higher overall support rate among prisoners than republicans. Even in some red states that traditionally supported the Republican Party, more prisoners supported the Democratic Party than the Republican Party.
54.6% of Felons in North Carolina are registered Democrats and 10.2% are Republicans.[15]
Most U.S. states provide that felons serving sentences do not have the right to vote, and many petty offenders have difficulty voting due to prison restrictions. That is to say, the fewer criminals arrested and the more criminals are released, the more votes the Democratic Party will have.
Last March, President Joe Biden signed an executive order relaxing voter registration for eligible Americans and restoring voting rights for former felons. Democrats in several states are pushing for legislation to have the government send letters reminding felons who have served sentences to vote. Also Bernie · A handful of Democratic radicals such as Sanders are working to give felons who are serving sentences the right to vote as well. [17] Three Democratic-held areas of Vermont, Maine, and Washington, D.C., where Sanders has been active, have passed bills allowing felons serving prison sentences to vote. The intention of these policies of the Democratic Party is clear, that is, to let more criminals vote for themselves.
According to a paper published in the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, about 6 million people in the United States are prohibited from voting because they are serving or have served a sentence, which is 2.5% of the total voter population in the United States. If the Democrats continue to adhere to the current line of change and successfully mobilize more and more criminals to participate in the election, it will certainly have a significant impact on the election campaign.
epilogue
The United States has the highest number of offenders and per capita incarceration rate in the world, with 1 in 140 Americans serving a prison sentence. From this perspective, the United States is the least free country in the world. The root cause of this problem lies in the systematic abandonment of the bottom by the American political system and the ruling class, allowing them to degenerate into poverty, drugs and crime.
The US Democratic Party has always regarded itself as "left" and claims to pursue social equality and support the rights and interests of the bottom. However, in the actual political operation in recent years, the Democratic Party has not focused its governance on the core issues of improving the grass-roots construction and improving the living conditions and education level of the poor, as the real leftists. Instead, it focuses on small favors such as catching fewer criminals of colored ethnic groups and catching less, reducing the scores of colored ethnic students, and admitting colored ethnic applicants.
These seemingly "politically correct" policies do not contribute to the fundamental elimination of cross-racial and class inequality in the United States. To this day, the situation of black Americans is still very bad. According to statistics, the median property of black families in the United States is one-tenth of that of white families, and the poverty rate of blacks is twice that of whites. Nearly 70 percent of black children are raised by single parents, and blacks have lower secondary school and college graduation rates than other ethnic groups, while blacks have several times the crime and victimization rates of other ethnic groups.
The Fundamental Reason for the Democratic Party's inaction in actually improving the social status of blacks is due to the lack of vote pressure. Democratic elections are "the one out of two rotten apples that are not too bad." Under a two-party system in the United States, Democrats only need to take a political stance to show that they are not as racist as Republicans. Even if these gestures were only verbal or formal, they could sustain the black vote.
For Western voting-party democracies, making people feel like they're in charge is far more important than improving their actual living standards. Under this system, the people seem to have the power to "choose freely", but the candidates will always be the incompetent politicians. In the end, society can only fall into the dead cycle of elections - regrets - re-elections - and regrets.
Reference Notes:
[1] https://compstat.nypdonline.org/2e5c3f4b-85c1-4635-83c6-22b27fe7c75c/view/89
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/16/nyregion/michelle-go-man-pushes-woman-subway.html
[3] N.Y. Penal Law § 155.25.
[4] https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Day-One-Letter-Policies-1.03.2022.pdf
[5] https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/06/us/alvin-bragg-manhattan-district-attorney-crimes-prosecution/index.html
[6] https://nypost.com/2022/01/08/alvin-bragg-underplayed-shoplifting-arrest-says-nypd-sergeants-union/
[7] https://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-proposition-47-falsehoods-arrest-20151027-story.html
[8] https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-district-attorney-race-top-donors/
[9] https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/years-of-experience-gone-kimberly-m-gardner-has-lost-more/article_c5b70e30-d3c3-551c-8a90-d1f03b47c1e3.html
[10] https://www.inquirer.com/politics/clout/philadelphia-district-attorney-larry-krasner-george-soros-retired-cops-20200807.html
[11] https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/rates.html
[12] https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls
[13] https://github.com/themarshallproject/incarcerated_survey
[14] Burch, Traci. "Turnout and party registration among criminal offenders in the 2008 general election." Law & Society Review 45.3 (2011): 699-730.
[15] Meredith, Marc, and Michael Morse. "Do voting rights notification laws increase ex-felon turnout?." The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 651.1 (2014): 220-249.
[16] https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2021/07/16/many-in-jail-can-vote-but-exercising-that-right-isnt-easy
[17] https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/jail_voting.html
[18] Stetser, Marie C., and Robert Stillwell. "Public High School Four-Year On-Time Graduation Rates and Event Dropout Rates: School Years 2010-11 and 2011-12. First Look. NCES 2014-391." National Center for Education Statistics (2014).
[19] https://edtrust.org/resource/graduation-rates-dont-tell-the-full-story-racial-gaps-in-college-success-are-larger-than-we-think/
This article is the exclusive manuscript of the observer network, the content of the article is purely the author's personal views, does not represent the platform views, unauthorized, may not be reproduced, otherwise will be investigated for legal responsibility. Pay attention to the observer network WeChat guanchacn, read interesting articles every day.