5 Comments

Misdemeanor prosecutors are usually thrust into litigation with little to no guidance or supervision. They are often intimidated by seasoned defense attorneys, and feel pressure to plead out even good cases because they lack the confidence to take on the defense bar. Compounding the situation, the courts in some jurisdictions are overly-friendly to the defense bar, so a young prosecutor may often feel that the deck is stacked against him and that going to trial is merely an exercise in frustration.

So, yeah, I can see why they did this, although it does give the appearance of seeking sport rather than justice.

“courts in some jurisdictions are overly-friendly to the defense bar”. Which jurisdictions? I wanna go work there.

The French government used to finance the pension system of Customs inspectors from the fines and seizures that they made. Sort of like funding the pensions of IRS workers directly from any extra taxes that they are able to wring out of citizens.

One more thought – this is a real problem for govt agencies with large numbers of inspectors. I think it would be fair to say that at least some inspectors are “ambitious”, and if you want to be promoted, you have to show results. Therefore, inspectors (and, I guess, police officers and similar positions) need to be closely supervised by a management that knows how to get the best out of its people without angering the regulatees/citizenry too much.

[…] ban on contingency fees for lawyers in most Western legal systems. [Tim Lynch, Cato; WSJ Law Blog; related earlier (Harris County, […]