|
|
Ken Buck on Crime |
The story goes like this: In 2008, Stephanie Drobny and her two young children fled their home in Montana after her abusive husband threatened to murder her and put her in the forest "where the bears would eat" her. But Ken Buck, in his capacity as District Attorney, helped her "get through a rough time in my life," Drobny says during the video.
In the process of helping Drobny, Buck discovered a major loophole in the law that allowed perpetrators like her husband to continue contacting the children. Buck, Drobny, and even her daughter went to the state legislature so that they could help close the loophole. The bill was signed into law in 2011.
Buck says he is taking proactive measures to undermine the "war on women" meme that hurt him last time.
BUCK: The rape was reviewed by a prosecutor with 30 years prosecutorial experience. He declined to prosecute. Two female chief deputies reviewed the case, talked to witnesses; they declined to prosecute. The Boulder County district attorney's office declined to prosecute and told me that the case couldn't be prosecuted.
Q: But do you regret the way you talked to her?
BUCK: I don't regret the way I talked to her. It is important that a prosecutor approach a victim with a certain amount of reality, and that's what I tried to do with this victim. I didn't blame her at all.
A: I had a disagreement with [then-US Attorney] Tom Strickland on a particular case. I contacted [the opposing party's] defense attorneys to suggest that they come in & plead out that case because I thought that--every career prosecutor in that office agreed--that it would be unethical to prosecute that case. Strickland filed an Office of Professional Responsibility Complaint against me, which was resolved by a letter detailing that I had unintentionally violated an ethical rule. After that I left the office.
Q: What was the violation?
A: Disclosing confidential information of a client. It's the first time I had ever seen that rule applied in that way.
Q: There was dissension in the office about the case?
A: Yes, I thought the case was weak. There's even [a colleague's] memo out there detailing why this case is weak--that Strickland has seen--[saying that the defense] should just get in & plead this case out.
The Christian Coalition voter guide [is] one of the most powerful tools Christians have ever had to impact our society during elections. This simple tool has helped educate tens of millions of citizens across this nation as to where candidates for public office stand on key faith and family issues.
The CC survey summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: "Capital punishment for certain crimes, such as first degree murder & terrorism"
Congressional Summary: To make an attack on a police officer a hate crime.
Congressional Summary:
Opposing press release from Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA-1):: The reform sentencing laws in this bill may compromise the safety of our communities. Criminals convicted of violent crimes would have the opportunity to achieve 'low risk' status and become eligible for early release. California already has similar laws in place--Propositions 47 and 57--which have hamstrung law enforcement and caused a significant uptick in crime.
Supporting press release from Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY-10):: S. 756 establishes a new system to reduce the risk that [federal prisoners] will commit crimes once they are released. Critically, S. 756 would not only implement these reforms to our prison system, but it also takes a crucial first step toward addressing grave concerns about our sentencing laws, which have for years fed a national crisis of mass incarceration. The bill is a 'first step' that demonstrates that we can work together to make the system fairer in ways that will also reduce crime and victimization.
Legislative outcome: Concurrence Passed Senate, 87-12-1, on Dec. 18, 2018; Concurrence Passed House 358-36-28, Dec. 20, 2018; President Trump signed, Dec. 21, 2018