8

2 comments

[–] PhunkyPlatypus 3 points (+3|-0) Edited

Despite the tone this author shades it with. I think it's more to the case that there's insufficient evidence to prosecute. Mass arrests with the intent of intimidation doesn't hold up well in court. Meanwhile, those 10% or so who can be convicted of their crimes based on evidence are being pursued.

Thats not to say I'm dismissing the fact that due to covid, they're trying to minimize jail population. But despite that, a lot of these crimes are simple misdemeanors. That require very little to no jail time.

[–] jobes [OP] 1 points (+1|-0)

Actually the DA said it would refuse to prosecute specific crimes related to the protests.

The crimes that won't be prosecuted include:

  • Interfering with a peace officer or parole and probation officer (ORS 162.247)
  • Disorderly conduct in the second degree (ORS 166.025)
  • Criminal trespass in the first and second degree (ORS 164.245 & ORS 164.255)
  • Escape in the third degree (ORS 162.145)
  • Harassment (ORS 166.065)
  • Riot (166.015) – Unless accompanied by a charge outside of this list.

"The office added that the charges of “Resisting arrest” (ORS 162.315) and “Assaulting a public safety officer” (ORS 163.208) will be subjected to the highest level of scrutiny by the deputy district attorney reviewing the arrest. Interfering with a peace officer or parole and probation officer (ORS 162.247)"

It then goes on to say that theft under $1000 would be dismissed if when the thief is caught they just give it back.

Clown fucking world.