Make My Day BS

[def90]

Politically in the Front Range pretty much any prosecutor is going to ask for charges add on the fact that he shot was in the back which makes for good public opinion polling numbers.

[DireWolf]

Politically in the Front Range pretty much any prosecutor is going to ask for charges add on the fact that he shot was in the back which makes for good public opinion polling numbers.

Would it be unreasonable to suggest that if any prosecutor can be proven to be actively persuing charges for political reasons, particularly when the evidence makes it clear that no charges should be filed, or where there is absolutely no possible way that beyond a resonable doubt of guilt can be obtained without lying or altering/witholding evidence, that said prosecutor should be hit with an ethics violation so hard that their license to practice law evaporates in a cloud of dust?

I've known a few attorneys that have stated that the law means whatever you can successfully argue it means, but given the power to destroy lives through malicious prosecution and the costs/impact likely associated, it just seems like it's something that should be an instant career ender for a prosecutor if it can be proven to be happening and that notches on their belt take precedence over impartial application of the law in the public interest.....

Just a thought.....

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

[spqrzilla]

Ethics in CO is a joke. I've advocated CO to lose its immunity when it fails to investigate and discipline attorneys (to motivate attorney regulation). It really needs to be out of the hands of the state altogether. Our registered attorneys of course disagree and like the present system. The only cases that get investigated are financial (e.g. attorney steals client money) because they look at an invoice, say "yup, should have refunded" and that's it.

Conflicts of interest, criminal allegations, forging documents, any of the other rules... no investigation.

Also don't forget, there is prosecutor immunity, a prosecutor is immune for every action he undertakes. Every. He can literally knowingly forge documents and knowingly hire paid witnesses to lie about you, and risk no criminal, no civil penalty whatsoever even if caught red handed. The only thing he risks is his law license, and guess what.

Attorney regulation probably isn't going to investigate it unless he's been stealing money from the D.A.'s office or something. Even if a prosecutor is knowingly forging documents. Welcome to 99 problem's lesson #10 on how there is no check nor balance of any kind on the judicial system.

Actually there are registered attorneys who do and don't agree with you. Frankly, I've seen attorney regulation that was more lenient than Colorado's. While prosecutor immunity is quite broad, you exaggerate it a bit. Certainly no prosecutor is going to be investigated for a charging decision where there was an indictment by grand jury.

Certainly, attorney regulation is most comfortable investigating attorneys who steal money because its easiest to prove.