home

Worst Prosecutor Comment of the Week

By Jeralyn, Section Constitution
Posted on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:48:13 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The backdrop to this outrageous comment by a prosecutor post is an Aspen Daily News article about how the budget for the DA's office in the four county district that includes Aspen (Pitkin County) is five times bigger than that for the Public Defender's office. (2/3 of the defendants charged in the district qualify for court-appointed counsel. There are 14 DA's and 4 public defenders.) The Pitkin County Commissioners asked Martin Beeson, the elected District Attorney, to cut 5% off his $3 million budget. Instead, he asked for a $600,000. increase.

When asked about the funding disparity, Beeson responded with:

“Public defenders are not defenders of the public,” Beeson said. “They are not serving the public good. They are taxpayer-funded attorneys for criminals.”

Not serving the public good? Someone needs to clue Beeson in to the purpose of the Bill of Rights. It was designed to protect the rights of the individual accused against the power of the government, by restraining the government's power. [More...]

Put another way, "the Bill of Rights was designed to protect personal liberties from governmental infringement, not to protect private individuals from each other." The framers of the Constitution understood mistakes happen, and it is better that a guilty person go free than an innocent person be convicted.

According to Beeson, the public defender's office:

...abus[es] the 6th Amendment right to a defense counsel by needlessly frustrating the DA’s efforts and using legal loopholes to suppress incriminating evidence against their clients.

Beeson needs to re-read Gideon v. Waignwright, the 1963 case guaranteeing counsel to those who can't afford a lawyer:

The right of one charged with crime to counsel may not be deemed fundamental and essential to fair trials in some countries, but it is in ours. From the very beginning, our state and national constitutions and laws have laid great emphasis on procedural and substantive safeguards designed to assure fair trials before impartial tribunals in which every defendant stands equal before the law. This noble ideal cannot be realized if the poor man charged with crime has to face his accusers without a lawyer to assist him.

Our system is based on the presumption of innocence. When the Government charges an individual with a crime, an innocent person is at risk. Preventing a wrongful conviction should be the first pri