Who is the federal prosecutor who tried to use his position to get out of a DUI arrest?

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2020/07/23/who-is-the-federal-prosecutor.html


Has to be Republican who believes he is above the law, hates gays, and can get a pardon from his boss. If it we you or me?

1 Like

Prosecutors typically try to disavow political positions. But it’s true that the GOP is having a bad week:


Why should they name him? Is there a legal requirement to do that?

1 Like

Sorry, but how does having a breath test machine attached to their car and been under court supervision an actual sentence for the life endangering offence of drink driving in a country that calls itself civilised and likes to see itself as an example for other countries?

Ban the fucker from driving for life. If he can’t do his job as a result boo-fucking-hoo.

Call me totally wrong, but if said prosecutor was arrested shouldn’t there be a mug shot of his arrest? If so, it should be relatively easy to pinpoint him down?

“…displayed conduct unbecoming a federal employee when he was intermittently verbally abusive…”

That is shocking behaviour from a federal employee; we expect more physical abuse from them.


Even when a “cop” abuses one of their own, to the extent that s/he’s actuallt fired for cause, cop institutions still protect shitheal cops from public scrutiny or, possibly, allowing him/her to find like employment with a different agency.

Defund the police!!


Sunshine laws vary from state to state, but he was a public employee, so … maybe. It’s obviously the right thing to do.

Secrecy abourt police disciplinary records is a good analogy. Freedom of information laws generally say they should be public. Police union contracts specifically say they should not be. Who wins?


I think the term „sunshine laws“ is more about governments and administrative bodies opening their work to the public. Publishing information about prosecution of individuals is not part of this.

And what would you publish? Allegations, indictments, or convictions? There‘s good reasons for and against each one.

That is not to say that there shouldn’t be a record that can be made available to future employers (not directly, of course), or to lawyers in new cases against that individual, and laws that prevent individuals indicted for certain crimes from holding certain positions. That‘s pretty much how it’s done in Germany, and it appears to work ok.

On the contrary, that’s the whole point of FOI laws. You wouldn’t want secret arrests, prosecutions or punishments, would you?

And what would you publish? Allegations, indictments, or convictions? There‘s good reasons for and against each one.

Convictions are public record, at least in the US. Not only that, you can go the courtroom and watch the magic happen yourself! :woman_judge:t2: Indictments are public record, too, though they may be sealed until an arrest is made. Allegations are not public record, per se, but end up there when detailed in police reports, charges, arrests, etc. Anonymity is available to (some? all?) victims of crime but not to alleged criminals, in the U.S.

Exemptions to Freedom of Information Acts are supposedly narrow: information about internal agency rules and practices; unlawful to disclose the information; would compromise national security or an ongoing case; maybe one or two others, “wrong target” exemptions such as “would compromise a trade secret” or “can’t disclose another agency’s secrets”

The DOJ trying to keep its criminal AUSA a secret is simply an effort to avoid the detailed scrutiny that will result when police, court and other public records about him are identifiable.


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.