NEW YORK, NY— New York City District Attorney Alvin Bragg has reportedly been aggressive in charging New Yorkers who purchased fake COVID-19 vaccine cards with felonies while letting serious offenders walk free with soft sentences.
The controversy surrounding this prosecutorial behavior has even attracted the attention of New York State Supreme Court Justice Brendan T. Lantry who dismissed two of the charges, calling the cases "overkill."
As reported by The New York Post, the pair of people whose case was dismissed were not publicly identified, but they were just two of 16 people that Bragg's office "cherry-picked," according to Judge Lantry. Fourteen of the people plead guilty to misdemeanor charges, but the two in question moved for dismissal, forcing Bragg before the bench, which backfired badly for the "progressive" DA.
In a scathing opinion, Lantry wrote “This Court is astonished to see the People make such an argument when the People routinely — nearly daily — move to dismiss significantly more serious counts or entire indictments in the interests of justice simply to negate the consequences of New York's predicate felon sentencing statutes or to avoid immigration.
"These motions submitted by the People are made months or even years after the 45-day period has expired to dismiss counts of indictments such as sexual assaults, drug sales, robbery, burglary, and other violent and non-violent serious felony offenses. To say now that such a motion is untimely is wholly inconsistent with the practice of the Office of the New York District Attorney."
As previously reported by Law Enforcement Today, Bragg's office didn't seek any bail conditions in the case of two NYPD officers who were brutally beaten by a mob of illegal immigrants. The embattled radical-left Democrat even attempted to defend this decision, claiming that it was based on evidence available at the time.
He told The Daily Mail, "While the video is shocking and disturbing, in order to secure convictions in the court of law, it is essential that we conclusively identify each defendant. In Manhattan, we don’t tolerate or accept assaults on police officers. I watched the tape this week. Despicable behavior. It sickened me and outraged me."
The move brought wide criticism online. Commentator Buck Sexton observed in a post to X, "In Bragg’s version of America, hoodlums who steal rape and murder deserve the most leniency possible, but people who refused to go along with the moronic vaxx card tyranny deserve to have their lives ruined."
Byron York, Chief political correspondent at the Washington Examiner noted, "It's pretty amazing what Alvin Bragg, the first to indict Trump, has the time to prosecute and what he doesn't."
Justice Lantry wrote in footnotes, "The People aver that they did not 'cherry-pick' the sixteen defendants but, instead, 'vett[ed] the individuals...look[ing] for individuals who [they] felt were in positions where the vaccine mandate, the vaccine cards were particularly relevant.'"
The controversy surrounding this prosecutorial behavior has even attracted the attention of New York State Supreme Court Justice Brendan T. Lantry who dismissed two of the charges, calling the cases "overkill."
As reported by The New York Post, the pair of people whose case was dismissed were not publicly identified, but they were just two of 16 people that Bragg's office "cherry-picked," according to Judge Lantry. Fourteen of the people plead guilty to misdemeanor charges, but the two in question moved for dismissal, forcing Bragg before the bench, which backfired badly for the "progressive" DA.
In a scathing opinion, Lantry wrote “This Court is astonished to see the People make such an argument when the People routinely — nearly daily — move to dismiss significantly more serious counts or entire indictments in the interests of justice simply to negate the consequences of New York's predicate felon sentencing statutes or to avoid immigration.
"These motions submitted by the People are made months or even years after the 45-day period has expired to dismiss counts of indictments such as sexual assaults, drug sales, robbery, burglary, and other violent and non-violent serious felony offenses. To say now that such a motion is untimely is wholly inconsistent with the practice of the Office of the New York District Attorney."
As previously reported by Law Enforcement Today, Bragg's office didn't seek any bail conditions in the case of two NYPD officers who were brutally beaten by a mob of illegal immigrants. The embattled radical-left Democrat even attempted to defend this decision, claiming that it was based on evidence available at the time.
He told The Daily Mail, "While the video is shocking and disturbing, in order to secure convictions in the court of law, it is essential that we conclusively identify each defendant. In Manhattan, we don’t tolerate or accept assaults on police officers. I watched the tape this week. Despicable behavior. It sickened me and outraged me."
The move brought wide criticism online. Commentator Buck Sexton observed in a post to X, "In Bragg’s version of America, hoodlums who steal rape and murder deserve the most leniency possible, but people who refused to go along with the moronic vaxx card tyranny deserve to have their lives ruined."
Byron York, Chief political correspondent at the Washington Examiner noted, "It's pretty amazing what Alvin Bragg, the first to indict Trump, has the time to prosecute and what he doesn't."
Justice Lantry wrote in footnotes, "The People aver that they did not 'cherry-pick' the sixteen defendants but, instead, 'vett[ed] the individuals...look[ing] for individuals who [they] felt were in positions where the vaccine mandate, the vaccine cards were particularly relevant.'"
For corrections or revisions, click here.
The opinions reflected in this article are not necessarily the opinions of LET
Comments
2024-02-08T07:52-0600 | Comment by: Judy
Bragg and his confidants are using their professional positions to bully and punish those they disagree with, not to enforce laws.