Janice’s Journal: Judge Rejects DA’s “Because We Can” Argument

Just a few months ago, I wrote a column about a deputy District Attorney (DA) who stated that he was objecting to a registrant’s petition “because we can.”  At the time of writing that column, I stated that I was shaken to my core due to this flippant response which was not based in law, but instead was based in hubris. 

Today that deputy DA and hopefully his boss learned an important lesson.  That is, DA’s who object to a petition “because they can” will lose in court. 

The hearing today started out well when the judge announced that it is the DA and not the petitioner who bears the burden of proof when a DA objects to a petition.  Specifically, a DA must prove that community safety will be significantly enhanced if the judge requires the petitioner to continue their registration. 

That is a huge win for the registrant community!  Because it signals that judges are going to look beyond the box the DA has checked on the DA’s response form.  It also signals that judges are going to look beyond the handwaving of DA’s who cry “public safety” and require them instead to present solid evidence that the petitioner poses a current danger.

During today’s hearing, the judge noted that the only evidence presented by the DA consisted of police reports and a psychological evaluation that were more than 30 years old.  The judge compared that evidence to the evidence presented by the petitioner including a psychological evaluation that was less than 3 months old stating that the petitioner poses a low risk of re-offense as well as letters of support from family members and friends.

Also during today’s hearing, the judge acknowledged that the petitioner has been law abiding for more than 30 years.  The judge further noted that the petitioner has a stable residence, is married and a university student. 

I believe that the judge’s decision today to grant the registrant’s petition, despite the DA’s objection, is a good decision that is soundly based in law.  I can only hope that the DA who objected to this petition as well as DA’s throughout the state have learned an important lesson.  If they do not learn that important lesson, however, then the DA’s must be held accountable in court and in public opinion.

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

34 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Congrats and great on the judge re-emphasizing the burden to continue registration is on the DA.

That DA and his office should be directly reprimanded for their actions. Stuff like this is one of many reasons why communities have no trust in the system and hate law enforcement agents.

This is very encouraging news. 2023 seems to be off to a very good start for all of us.
Thank you, Janice, and EVERYONE at ACSOL for being there for us!!!

This is excellent for those eligible to petition for removal from the registry! The deputy DA who made such a flippant comment should be reprimanded by the court in which he made it.

Simply put DA’s and Prosecutor’s are for the most part born assclowns!!! Great job Janice

The beauty of this is that it took the hubris of the DA to open the door for justice. Some have taken their oath for granted, while some are absolutely dedicated to upholding that same oath. The DA must be investigated to prevent future injustices. Let’s all be unified in holding those who violate their oath accountable. It’s our duty to make sure that NO ONE’S “pride” and arrogance supersedes the law. Thank you. #thelawwins

Last edited 1 year ago by HRL

I LOVE IT!! 😃😃😃
….it is the DA and not the petitioner who bears the burden of proof when a DA objects to a petition.”
Awesome!! 🤗👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
God bless that Judge for not listening to the deputy DA’s B*SH*T!!

So hard to chose the right words…so I will just say, thank you Janice and to all the others at your side, my thanks to them as well.

I do have one request from you all however. Please, someday very soon…find someway….to feel…as blessed, as I do right now. However you find it, whatever the source…please have a moment like I am having right now.

You’ll know you’re coming close, when the tears start to roll down both cheeks…and you can’t stop smiling.

That’s great. Thank you Janice for defending people who are no longer and most likely never were a risk to the public. Best wishes to those eligible and who are already off the Registry. I hope those who can will attend Lobby Day March 21. Unjust Tier assignments need to be fixed.

Thank you for the journal report Janice.

My petition was granted, the judge commenting that the DAs last minute verbal objection was unacceptable

DA’s are accustomed to registrants being easy targets I assume

Last edited 1 year ago by BreakFree

Because they can? Wow I’ve seen it all now. Hey the last 30 years the judges went the the because we can bit we’ll try it again and head to lunch. Wrong!!!.
judges are smartening up on this whole fear mongering ignorance bs. Not going to be easy street now the cat/data is out of the bag and judges will fallow the law.

lets all move there! 🙂 Jk What a fair judge. Not just because it was favorable but rather he took the meaning of the law rather than the fear of public opinion.

Praise and thanks be to God, and thank you also, Janice!!

Thanks for this update ACSOL. Yes not only an important win but a sign, a case which shows the arrogant attitude which DA’s and lawyers can display in a court of law. What happen to Facts and nothing but the Facts. Thanks you for setting the standards of law straight. ” Because we can “, attitude can not be acceptable behavior from said professionals. It is vitally important that inappropriate conduct, responses inlaw be challenged with process and procedures. There is a standard to be expected by all professionals in the field of law. Thanks for fighting for change, for defending what is right. Thank you Janice.

This is great news, and we’re making strides. However, how long is it going to take for other judges and courts to do the right thing? I’ve been in this fight for over 20 years and in some ways it just gets worse for some.

WOW! Novel concept someone thought long ago of putting the onus on the DA’s office to do their job and prove beyond a reasonable doubt the danger still exists. Where did that idea come from?!

This is refreshing given some courts are now going with less than beyond a reasonable doubt to prove guilt in court cases.

As I have said, the DA’s office should do their job properly because they are supposed to with information that backs it. (You’d want that if the DA was pursuing a case on your behalf.) However, when you say because “we can” object in a court, then they have lost all credibility. That is like a LE officer pulling you over because they can without any justification to do so.

Thank you

DAs never learn anything. They are fascist, bootlicking dogs who get off on exercising power and using the system to abuse others. Finally a judge with some integrity pulled this ones leash. Bad dog!

Unbelievably great news! Applause and gratitude for Janice and team!

YES! Thank you ACSOL for all your hard work in changing opinions and preventing the destruction of citizens’ lives and the lives of their families.

DA must be a fox viewer and a dumb ***** as i read Janice’s article i learned a new word HUBRIS and will replace #hithead the one i used thank you Janice for storming ahead driving the nail in the coffin my guess it was orange county or riverside bias coming to a court house near you

This is good news for all registrants, Including people placed in tier 3, now that we officially know that the DA has to provide solid proof that your threat to society, that’s gonna cost the state alot of time and alot of money.
Second what would be the point of having a tiered registry if the DA is gonna reject every petition causing a hearing and wasting all that time and money

I wondering what County this DA is in? I live in a rural “redneck” county and the DA never took issues with my petition and it sailed through pretty fast.

hmm! try posting again the repubs da”s i think watch to much fox snooz and are opiniated and not open to the constitution which the register is unconstitutional anyone with a 6th grade education knows that, yet i did learn a new word today HUBRIS it replaces the word i use to frame the Da”s in this state and repub county’s i use #hithead, i believe in freedom of speech how about you

Sadly this is not the case in New York. Both the judge and DA for my hearing put the burden of proof on me and my lawyer. Being productive, crime free, and no where near to ever returning to the country were not enough and was implied that it made me more of a risk.