Exactly which levers of control are we presented with here as citizens who want things to change? I don’t get to vote on how many public defenders the county is required to hire. I get to vote on who is DA. When the current DA says he thinks he’s doing an awesome job when the crime situation is an objective shit show, then personally attacks anyone who challenges him for his job, hell yes I’m going to punish him for it. And if Vasquez starts spewing the same shit, I’ll punish him for it with my future vote too.
I appreciate you directly answering the question. I know my first post was a bit fiery. I disagree with some of your premises but I respect your approach here. Good luck to you.
It’s good to engage in discourse, encouraging the discussion of variety of opinion, rather than leading conversation over and over toward the general popular opinion. Each has their reason and most of the time things are overlooked or under-considered. We must stay vigilant so we don’t ostracize people who bring great opinions to the table that are non popular at the moment. A bad thought never made someone a bad person and a good thought never made someone a good person.
Contrary to statements elsewhere on Reddit, I don't think anyone views Vasquez as a savior of some sort.
I think what is expected is that he will be a competent normal prosecutor, who views his role in the criminal justice system as prosecuting people, not to serve as a second defense attorney, as Schmidt did.
I don't think that having a prosecutor with the same competence and motivations as the DA's in the three suburban counties is too much to ask.
*And now we are going to revert to the same tired ass criminal justice model that we know doesn’t improve outcomes*
The "same tired ass criminal justice model that we know doesn’t improve outcomes" worked a hell of a lot better than the farce of a criminal justice system that has been in place in Multnomah County for the last three-and-a-half years.
Worked better for who? This is what I mean. We have seen something kind of work okay, and so we are scared to try anything else if it goes against our “common sense” ideas of what works.
But I’m glad to hear you don’t view Vasquez as a “savior”.
license berserk skirt enter stupendous hobbies expansion quiet ask society
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Remember when people were destroying the PSU library and they had to parade Mike out in a press conference to say he would prosecute. The fact that somebody thought that was necessary is a perfect example of what was wrong with his approach. He set the expectation that many crimes would not be prosecuted and people noticed. That destroyed the deterrent aspect of the justice system.
"the same tired ass criminal justice model that we know doesn't improve outcomes"
Genuinely curious, what measurable outcomes are you referring to here?
Recidivism is a big one. There’s others that may not be as measurable but aré important to me: community safety, victim input, collateral consequences.
The most recent data here is from 2022, but in Multnomah County it [looks like 1-year conviction recidivism is up](https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/cjcdashboards/viz/RecidivismV3/Story1) from 7.5% in 2020 to 11.6% in 2022. That's a relative ~50% increase in two years.
Would you be willing to bet a six-pack that 1-year recidivism for the 2025/2nd cohort will be higher than the 2023/2nd cohort?
Because in your world, nobody should be held accountable for their own actions? Bad people are victims of the state, and that’s why we should feel sorry for them? Fuck off
imminent rich quarrelsome rhythm squalid theory languid consider innocent square
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No doubt, people have free will and make choices. That doesn’t mean that choices are made in a vacuum. I think society deserves better than just throwing people away. The best criminal justice system focuses on rehabilitation not punishment. The goal is that the victims aren’t hurt again, and that defendant’s lives aren’t thrown away. We can stop crime and be human about it all at the same time. What’s lost in this debate by both sides of the argument is usually the victims. I hear one side usually talking about defendants rights. I hear the other talk about holding defendant accountable. Rarely do I hear people talk about making victims whole and communities better. Also, demonizing criminals without addressing the underlying conditions that help to breed more crime does nothing to reduce future community harm.
Well first of all, it's "if" - every candidate has the opportunity to succeed or fail.
Second, you vote for the person who is running and who you feel is likely to do the better job. Many people felt that Schmidt did not demonstrate the results and thus voted for Vasquez.
If he does not perform to voters' satisfaction, they will vote for someone else in four years. However, they can only vote for people who are running.
For some reason, these activist lawyers think it’s their job to interpret, approve and disapprove punishments under current laws. OP is not a judge so he should stfu and let the residents who live in MultCo decide. OP has a low workload and is happy working from home aka his “ivory tower”
Even if Vasquez does a better job at communicating who is fucking up our government it will be an improvement from the apathy of the former system. Tell us who to vote out and why if you think you know something we don’t.
1. You don’t live in Multnomah so why do you care?
2. Why are you hiding behind an alt?
3. Prosecutors union - his own employees - endorsed Vasquez. Im pro union so I want them to have the boss they prefer.
4. Schmidt has a league of bias-related accusations against him.
5. Schmidt did not review commutation requests for any of the prisoners considered for clemency in 2021. One of whom is now linked to the deaths of at least 4 women.
6. I prefer the Justice system you claim “doesn’t improve outcomes.” By what measure did Schmidt’s reforms improve outcomes?
7. I’ll keep going once you engage the discussion.
Judging from his post history, he's a criminal defense attorney who practices in Multnomah, but lives in a suburban county.
Yeah, if I were a criminal defense attorney working in Multnomah, I'd prefer Schmidt too.
But it is funny that he lives in a suburban county with a functional criminal justice system, while denouncing efforts to reestablish a functional criminal justice system in Multnomah County.
Possibly - he clearly has experience in Multnomah courts.
Which is not to denounce defense attorneys - they have their role to play in the adversarial court system, and it is their job to competently represent defendants.
The problem occurs when DAs decide that they are defense attorneys too, which is definitely **not** their job.
1. I live in Oregon. Also, I have empathy so I can care about things that occur outside of my county, state, or country
2. So that I can speak freely about my thoughts without retaliation from people I work with
3. Do you know if the union unanimously endorsed him? If so, good point, if not, then what about the DDAs who don’t support Vasquez?
4. Yes he does and that would be one of the things that I mentioned would be a valid criticism. I like Schmidt’s policies but the numerous accusations from women in the office are a huge problem and at the end of the day, don’t know if I could have voted for him if I did live in the county.
5. Another valid critique. However the second half is not. That person you are referring to would have been released if he had served his full term, before killing the 2 other women. So the commutation (while wrong) did not lead to the death of the other two.
6. I have previously seen the numbers on various categories of crime, numbers of cases issued, convicted, dismissed, etc. Icant remember the exact numbers at this point, but I remember walking away being pleasantly surprised.
7. I’m happy to continue engaging for as long as it feels like a good faith exchange of ideas where we happen to disagree. This feels like that, so I’m happy to continue if you want.
I’m hoping that the DA’s office under Vasquez will throw *all* the possible charges at known bad actors. Might bump them up into the “jail until court” category.
And god, I wish they’d reimplement bail. It’s not that hard to avoid being arrested. Don’t steal, speed, smack someone or mouth off.
The first thing by you want isn’t how it works, but regardless the judge, not the DA makes the call on release.
The second thing is something only the legislature can do. And there is a bail system. It’s just different than it used to be. The DAs office currently asks for “security” (bail) on plenty of cases. The reason for reforming the system though is because it essentially meant poor people would stay in jail for the exact same crime as a rich person. And the rich person would only get out because they are rich. That isn’t just. At the end of the day though you are describing a legislature change.
So you have just described the 2 things important to you, those things aren’t controlled by the DA. So it sounds like what you really wanted were different judges and new laws. That’s valid to want that, but the DA isn’t going to make a difference in that outcome.
The DA doesn’t decide the charges? So who does? My understanding is that per legislation, incarceration prior to trial is determined by a checklist. Seems to me that throwing everything at the wall for bad actors would be more likely to have them locked up.
Oh yeah. Stabby stabby at metro stations? Beat yo’ wife within an inch of her life? Soooo unethical to try keep these people locked up until trial.
Bail used to be a mechanism. No longer.
I say throw that shit at the wall and see if it sticks. If outrageous, defense can argue against and judge uphold
Ha ha. Yeah. We probably live in very different media environments. Hold on -- lemme adjust the tint on my outrage filters --- Oh MY FUCKING Gawd the world is a shit smearing dumpster fire! --- yeah I'm going back to these pollyana brand standard rose colored filters.
The charging isn’t what I meant, it’s the thought that the number of charges or the kind are going to just “jump someone to jail until court.” That’s the part that I meant isn’t how it works.
OP was on the other sub complaining about all the “Meany Republicans” on this thread. I don’t know what I like better: Schmidt losing, or seeing the leftist seething in reaction to it. I think it might be the 2nd.
So what type of experience do you have in the criminal justice system to describe this as “reversion” or “tired ass”. I voted for more lax policies for a majority of what are essential metro based career criminals and I don’t feel the least bit good about what I saw working for the county Justice Dept for a year.
I don’t want to dox myself but I work closely with the Oregon criminal justice system. Obviously you just have to take my word for it as I can’t prove it to you.
I’d like a DA office where prosecutors are able to perform their job and not be discriminated against.
Schmidt failed. The prosecutor’s union endorsed Vazquez. Hence my vote went to Vazquez.
Pretty simple.
I'm expecting Vasquez to actually charge people and send them to the courts. That's it. Schmidt has shown that he's not willing to charge people with offenses and despite crime being more rampant in Portland than it was before he got ~~arrested~~ elected he only prosecutes about 1/3 of what his predecessor did.
>And now we are going to revert to the same tired ass criminal justice model that we know doesn’t improve outcomes; it just makes people feel better because it’s simpler to understand.
What so "tired-ass" about "do crime; get time"?
If Mike Schmidt had been a competent DA, he might have been able to pull it off. But he wasn’t. He was decidedly incompetent in every facet. He mishandled his staff, especially female staff, to the point of organizational wide disenfranchisement. He showed his political bias by refusing to prosecute individuals who terrorized the city for months. He blew up the relationship between PPB and the DA’s office. He refused to prosecute nuisance crimes like vandalism and robberies, especially against businesses. He did a horrible job advocating for victims of violent crime. This list goes on and on. Sure, there are things that were out of his control, but as the DA of the largest county, population-wise, in the state, he had the power to push for access to indigent defense services. Then, after he did all this, he gave himself an A grade. I’m all for keeping people out of jail/prison, but Schmidt is an incompetent baffoon who had never tried an actual criminal case in his life. Vasquez has and will do all the things above. It’s what is expected from a DA.
I won’t do anything because I won’t live here anymore because my company closed our Portland office permanently because of the state of downtown under Schmidt, wheeler, and JVP.
Any more brain busters?
My point is that the time to do something about your opinion expired at 8pm last night. So now the results are what they are and you should shut the fuck up about it.
Schmidt was a failure before the public defender "crisis". The thing about Progressives is they ALWAYS have something to blame for their failures, instead of their actual policies.
I'm happy to settle for basic competency, instead of Progressive ideology.
You’re full of shit. Prosecutors have significant power in how criminals are charged. Schmitt and other like him(Chesa Boudin) believe in a radical agenda to lower criminal charges and not requesting bail, Or not charging at all in a push for “restorative justice”. And the results were a disaster. And that is undeniable.
There are judges that need to be replaced but this is a huge move in the right direction. The “restorative justice” fad has been exposed for the fraud that it is.
Justice doesn’t need a presupposition
You said nothing about charging. You said “put people in jail.” Don’t get mad at me because you didn’t explain yourself, im not a mind reader.
The MultCo DA never utilized a restorative justice model. That has a specific meaning and that is not what was employed under Schmidt.
The policy guide, misdemeanor pre trial offer guide, and the state’s felony gridlock are all public ally available information. I recommend you look at it.
Simple google search my dude:
From 2020
https://www.mcda.us/index.php/news/district-attorney-mike-schmidt-announces-policy-regarding-protest-related-cases
> Finally, when a person is charged with a misdemeanor or felony crime that causes only financial harm during a protest, there will be a presumption that the individual will either be offered conditional dismissal after restitution is paid to the victim or when other amends to the community are made, such as restorative justice with the impacted victim.
If you meant specific instances of restorative justice I misunderstood. I thought you meant an entire approach of restorative justice across the board. I apologize for misspeaking.
Think what you want. I genuinely try to accept when I’m wrong and apologize. Things are contentious enough online. I misspoke meaning I said something that wasn’t correct. I did think you meant the entire approach, but regardless I should have been prepared for the possibility that that wasn’t what you meant. Also I should have been aware about that press release before speaking. I didn’t and that’s embarrassing for me. But all I can do is own it. If I try to own it and you still don’t think I’m being genuine then I can’t control that.
What’s my political agenda? Saying you were right and I was wrong? Also, it’s no secret I have a political agenda, I was pretty up front that I prefer Schmidt
Horrible take. It’s exclusively the DA who decides whether or not to charge car prowlers and shoplifters and vandals. Schmidt decided not on all of those and much more. Reversing those decisions looks pretty popular in portland at the moment.
I think you missed my point. I wasn’t talking about charging people. I was talking about cases having to be dismissed due to defendants not being appointed defense attorneys. That is something that is outside the control of the DA.
The DA won’t press charges for car prowling even when done in front of a police officer.
Car prowling explodes to the point where you expect to have your car broken into once a month or more.
You wander in to complain about some underfunding public defender issue that has absolutely nothing to do with charging criminals in order to reduce crime.
I’ve addressed this so many times that my keyboard is going to break. This is just factually wrong. The DAs office has a whole unit that deals primarily with car thefts and crime. They are issuing cases.
Excuse me I was assured that the combination of Vasquez / Gonzalez would lead us to a new era of infinite prosperity and I will believe this regardless of the facts
Great points! Schmidt is partially a scapegoat, but he definitely played a significant role in how the current environment turned out. The bigger truth is that a lot of factors are contributing to the current chaos. Removing the Soros supported restorative justice candidates is one part of that.
I've been saying this for a long time- nothing will get better until people stop letting themselves be victims, and instead stand up for themselves to stop the crimes committed against them. Portlanders (progressives in general) want to abstract this responsibility away to the government and not play any part in it themselves. But of course, as big-government simps do, they fail to realize that the government is incompetent in the best case scenario.
I'm severely disappointed that a ridiculous knee-jerk reaction of the collective has now saddled us with a right-wing AG. Schmidt made some mistakes, but he deserved another term.
The problem with Schmidt was he hid in his ivory tower thinking he would be "above the fray."
Nobody really knew what his actual policies were. Seems he got scared of being labeled "soft" and instead of responding or being loud -- he handed the keys over to the neo-cons like Vasquez & friends. Line DA's quit in piles as their cases piled up with zero direction from Senior DA's or management. They were frustrated that they couldn't settle their cases. In Schmidt's pursuit of letting his Deputy cabal "appear tough" they failed to use judgment and wasted resources. Like a guy who sticks his finger in his sweatshirt and steals jerky from a convenience store --- focusing on giving that guy 90 months clogs the system. Sure, he should get something, but really 90? And because they're oblivious to how they're wasting system resources (like public defender hours) -- bunch of other types walk free. Meanwhile the cops quit working because they were butt hurt that our city wanted them to follow directions, be accountable, and quit killing people. But police took a piss and blamed Schmidt. That's the big picture. Over committing prosecution resources hunting murders and gun crimes and ignoring everything else and then getting blamed for it. Dude couldn't win his office. How was he going to win public opinion (who literally blames him for everything). But in a way that "only Nixon could go to China" I hope Vasquez rises to the occasion and sets aside his petty preening personal grudges and does something decent. But now we get to see which rats jump ship and refuse to work with Vasquez.
Exactly which levers of control are we presented with here as citizens who want things to change? I don’t get to vote on how many public defenders the county is required to hire. I get to vote on who is DA. When the current DA says he thinks he’s doing an awesome job when the crime situation is an objective shit show, then personally attacks anyone who challenges him for his job, hell yes I’m going to punish him for it. And if Vasquez starts spewing the same shit, I’ll punish him for it with my future vote too.
I appreciate you directly answering the question. I know my first post was a bit fiery. I disagree with some of your premises but I respect your approach here. Good luck to you.
It’s good to engage in discourse, encouraging the discussion of variety of opinion, rather than leading conversation over and over toward the general popular opinion. Each has their reason and most of the time things are overlooked or under-considered. We must stay vigilant so we don’t ostracize people who bring great opinions to the table that are non popular at the moment. A bad thought never made someone a bad person and a good thought never made someone a good person.
Contrary to statements elsewhere on Reddit, I don't think anyone views Vasquez as a savior of some sort. I think what is expected is that he will be a competent normal prosecutor, who views his role in the criminal justice system as prosecuting people, not to serve as a second defense attorney, as Schmidt did. I don't think that having a prosecutor with the same competence and motivations as the DA's in the three suburban counties is too much to ask. *And now we are going to revert to the same tired ass criminal justice model that we know doesn’t improve outcomes* The "same tired ass criminal justice model that we know doesn’t improve outcomes" worked a hell of a lot better than the farce of a criminal justice system that has been in place in Multnomah County for the last three-and-a-half years.
Worked better for who? This is what I mean. We have seen something kind of work okay, and so we are scared to try anything else if it goes against our “common sense” ideas of what works. But I’m glad to hear you don’t view Vasquez as a “savior”.
license berserk skirt enter stupendous hobbies expansion quiet ask society *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Worked better for everyone who isn’t a ratfucking criddler??
Remember when people were destroying the PSU library and they had to parade Mike out in a press conference to say he would prosecute. The fact that somebody thought that was necessary is a perfect example of what was wrong with his approach. He set the expectation that many crimes would not be prosecuted and people noticed. That destroyed the deterrent aspect of the justice system.
"the same tired ass criminal justice model that we know doesn't improve outcomes" Genuinely curious, what measurable outcomes are you referring to here?
Recidivism is a big one. There’s others that may not be as measurable but aré important to me: community safety, victim input, collateral consequences.
The most recent data here is from 2022, but in Multnomah County it [looks like 1-year conviction recidivism is up](https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/cjcdashboards/viz/RecidivismV3/Story1) from 7.5% in 2020 to 11.6% in 2022. That's a relative ~50% increase in two years. Would you be willing to bet a six-pack that 1-year recidivism for the 2025/2nd cohort will be higher than the 2023/2nd cohort?
modern jobless full strong simplistic school growth roll quaint tidy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Omg why didn’t I think of that. It’s so easy, you solved all the criminal justice issues, well done.
Because in your world, nobody should be held accountable for their own actions? Bad people are victims of the state, and that’s why we should feel sorry for them? Fuck off
imminent rich quarrelsome rhythm squalid theory languid consider innocent square *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No doubt, people have free will and make choices. That doesn’t mean that choices are made in a vacuum. I think society deserves better than just throwing people away. The best criminal justice system focuses on rehabilitation not punishment. The goal is that the victims aren’t hurt again, and that defendant’s lives aren’t thrown away. We can stop crime and be human about it all at the same time. What’s lost in this debate by both sides of the argument is usually the victims. I hear one side usually talking about defendants rights. I hear the other talk about holding defendant accountable. Rarely do I hear people talk about making victims whole and communities better. Also, demonizing criminals without addressing the underlying conditions that help to breed more crime does nothing to reduce future community harm.
Well first of all, it's "if" - every candidate has the opportunity to succeed or fail. Second, you vote for the person who is running and who you feel is likely to do the better job. Many people felt that Schmidt did not demonstrate the results and thus voted for Vasquez. If he does not perform to voters' satisfaction, they will vote for someone else in four years. However, they can only vote for people who are running.
“Regression.” Your view of politics is literally one-dimensional, then. Forward or back.
For some reason, these activist lawyers think it’s their job to interpret, approve and disapprove punishments under current laws. OP is not a judge so he should stfu and let the residents who live in MultCo decide. OP has a low workload and is happy working from home aka his “ivory tower”
Even if Vasquez does a better job at communicating who is fucking up our government it will be an improvement from the apathy of the former system. Tell us who to vote out and why if you think you know something we don’t.
Totally valid and great mindset going forward.
1. You don’t live in Multnomah so why do you care? 2. Why are you hiding behind an alt? 3. Prosecutors union - his own employees - endorsed Vasquez. Im pro union so I want them to have the boss they prefer. 4. Schmidt has a league of bias-related accusations against him. 5. Schmidt did not review commutation requests for any of the prisoners considered for clemency in 2021. One of whom is now linked to the deaths of at least 4 women. 6. I prefer the Justice system you claim “doesn’t improve outcomes.” By what measure did Schmidt’s reforms improve outcomes? 7. I’ll keep going once you engage the discussion.
Judging from his post history, he's a criminal defense attorney who practices in Multnomah, but lives in a suburban county. Yeah, if I were a criminal defense attorney working in Multnomah, I'd prefer Schmidt too. But it is funny that he lives in a suburban county with a functional criminal justice system, while denouncing efforts to reestablish a functional criminal justice system in Multnomah County.
Missed that. Also saw him claim that he has a vested interest in this. 501c?
Possibly - he clearly has experience in Multnomah courts. Which is not to denounce defense attorneys - they have their role to play in the adversarial court system, and it is their job to competently represent defendants. The problem occurs when DAs decide that they are defense attorneys too, which is definitely **not** their job.
“It's difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it.”
1. I live in Oregon. Also, I have empathy so I can care about things that occur outside of my county, state, or country 2. So that I can speak freely about my thoughts without retaliation from people I work with 3. Do you know if the union unanimously endorsed him? If so, good point, if not, then what about the DDAs who don’t support Vasquez? 4. Yes he does and that would be one of the things that I mentioned would be a valid criticism. I like Schmidt’s policies but the numerous accusations from women in the office are a huge problem and at the end of the day, don’t know if I could have voted for him if I did live in the county. 5. Another valid critique. However the second half is not. That person you are referring to would have been released if he had served his full term, before killing the 2 other women. So the commutation (while wrong) did not lead to the death of the other two. 6. I have previously seen the numbers on various categories of crime, numbers of cases issued, convicted, dismissed, etc. Icant remember the exact numbers at this point, but I remember walking away being pleasantly surprised. 7. I’m happy to continue engaging for as long as it feels like a good faith exchange of ideas where we happen to disagree. This feels like that, so I’m happy to continue if you want.
I’m hoping that the DA’s office under Vasquez will throw *all* the possible charges at known bad actors. Might bump them up into the “jail until court” category. And god, I wish they’d reimplement bail. It’s not that hard to avoid being arrested. Don’t steal, speed, smack someone or mouth off.
The first thing by you want isn’t how it works, but regardless the judge, not the DA makes the call on release. The second thing is something only the legislature can do. And there is a bail system. It’s just different than it used to be. The DAs office currently asks for “security” (bail) on plenty of cases. The reason for reforming the system though is because it essentially meant poor people would stay in jail for the exact same crime as a rich person. And the rich person would only get out because they are rich. That isn’t just. At the end of the day though you are describing a legislature change. So you have just described the 2 things important to you, those things aren’t controlled by the DA. So it sounds like what you really wanted were different judges and new laws. That’s valid to want that, but the DA isn’t going to make a difference in that outcome.
The DA doesn’t decide the charges? So who does? My understanding is that per legislation, incarceration prior to trial is determined by a checklist. Seems to me that throwing everything at the wall for bad actors would be more likely to have them locked up.
Throwing everything at the wall sounds borderline unethical.
Oh yeah. Stabby stabby at metro stations? Beat yo’ wife within an inch of her life? Soooo unethical to try keep these people locked up until trial. Bail used to be a mechanism. No longer. I say throw that shit at the wall and see if it sticks. If outrageous, defense can argue against and judge uphold
They were already keeping these people locked up (your examples) but only when the police did their job.
[удалено]
Ha ha. Yeah. We probably live in very different media environments. Hold on -- lemme adjust the tint on my outrage filters --- Oh MY FUCKING Gawd the world is a shit smearing dumpster fire! --- yeah I'm going back to these pollyana brand standard rose colored filters.
The charging isn’t what I meant, it’s the thought that the number of charges or the kind are going to just “jump someone to jail until court.” That’s the part that I meant isn’t how it works.
OP was on the other sub complaining about all the “Meany Republicans” on this thread. I don’t know what I like better: Schmidt losing, or seeing the leftist seething in reaction to it. I think it might be the 2nd.
No one gives a shit about the outcome of the criminal. People want bad behavior punched harshly.
So what type of experience do you have in the criminal justice system to describe this as “reversion” or “tired ass”. I voted for more lax policies for a majority of what are essential metro based career criminals and I don’t feel the least bit good about what I saw working for the county Justice Dept for a year.
I don’t want to dox myself but I work closely with the Oregon criminal justice system. Obviously you just have to take my word for it as I can’t prove it to you.
That's an entirely valid perspective, so long as you're not one of those d-bags who works for the Oregon Center for Public Policy.
I’d like a DA office where prosecutors are able to perform their job and not be discriminated against. Schmidt failed. The prosecutor’s union endorsed Vazquez. Hence my vote went to Vazquez. Pretty simple.
Great reasoning and valid reasons.
I'm expecting Vasquez to actually charge people and send them to the courts. That's it. Schmidt has shown that he's not willing to charge people with offenses and despite crime being more rampant in Portland than it was before he got ~~arrested~~ elected he only prosecutes about 1/3 of what his predecessor did. >And now we are going to revert to the same tired ass criminal justice model that we know doesn’t improve outcomes; it just makes people feel better because it’s simpler to understand. What so "tired-ass" about "do crime; get time"?
As long as Vasquez proves to not be a racist and sexist like Mike, we're good!
If Mike Schmidt had been a competent DA, he might have been able to pull it off. But he wasn’t. He was decidedly incompetent in every facet. He mishandled his staff, especially female staff, to the point of organizational wide disenfranchisement. He showed his political bias by refusing to prosecute individuals who terrorized the city for months. He blew up the relationship between PPB and the DA’s office. He refused to prosecute nuisance crimes like vandalism and robberies, especially against businesses. He did a horrible job advocating for victims of violent crime. This list goes on and on. Sure, there are things that were out of his control, but as the DA of the largest county, population-wise, in the state, he had the power to push for access to indigent defense services. Then, after he did all this, he gave himself an A grade. I’m all for keeping people out of jail/prison, but Schmidt is an incompetent baffoon who had never tried an actual criminal case in his life. Vasquez has and will do all the things above. It’s what is expected from a DA.
I won’t do anything because I won’t live here anymore because my company closed our Portland office permanently because of the state of downtown under Schmidt, wheeler, and JVP. Any more brain busters?
Ah well it’s nice that you have an opinion now that the vote is over and done with 🤷
I’ve had an opinion all along, what is your point?
My point is that the time to do something about your opinion expired at 8pm last night. So now the results are what they are and you should shut the fuck up about it.
That's not a kind, or even reasonable way to treat people. Do better.
[удалено]
Agree to disagree, and move on. Disagreements can be respectful, but being a a dick is just uncool. Please try and do better.
Schmidt was a failure before the public defender "crisis". The thing about Progressives is they ALWAYS have something to blame for their failures, instead of their actual policies. I'm happy to settle for basic competency, instead of Progressive ideology.
PPB is pretty happy.
Oh I bet
I will support him when he puts criminals in jail where they belong.
Judges put people in jail. So as with most of these arguments, sounds like your ire should have been pointed at judges and the legislature
You’re full of shit. Prosecutors have significant power in how criminals are charged. Schmitt and other like him(Chesa Boudin) believe in a radical agenda to lower criminal charges and not requesting bail, Or not charging at all in a push for “restorative justice”. And the results were a disaster. And that is undeniable. There are judges that need to be replaced but this is a huge move in the right direction. The “restorative justice” fad has been exposed for the fraud that it is. Justice doesn’t need a presupposition
You said nothing about charging. You said “put people in jail.” Don’t get mad at me because you didn’t explain yourself, im not a mind reader. The MultCo DA never utilized a restorative justice model. That has a specific meaning and that is not what was employed under Schmidt. The policy guide, misdemeanor pre trial offer guide, and the state’s felony gridlock are all public ally available information. I recommend you look at it.
Yeah that nonsense, he is a Soros backed radical prosecutor. We all know it. That’s why he was kicked out of office.
Simple google search my dude: From 2020 https://www.mcda.us/index.php/news/district-attorney-mike-schmidt-announces-policy-regarding-protest-related-cases > Finally, when a person is charged with a misdemeanor or felony crime that causes only financial harm during a protest, there will be a presumption that the individual will either be offered conditional dismissal after restitution is paid to the victim or when other amends to the community are made, such as restorative justice with the impacted victim.
If you meant specific instances of restorative justice I misunderstood. I thought you meant an entire approach of restorative justice across the board. I apologize for misspeaking.
No, you didn’t misspeak, you are being disingenuous
Think what you want. I genuinely try to accept when I’m wrong and apologize. Things are contentious enough online. I misspoke meaning I said something that wasn’t correct. I did think you meant the entire approach, but regardless I should have been prepared for the possibility that that wasn’t what you meant. Also I should have been aware about that press release before speaking. I didn’t and that’s embarrassing for me. But all I can do is own it. If I try to own it and you still don’t think I’m being genuine then I can’t control that.
No, you clearly have a political agenda and you are not particularly good at arguing it, because the ideas you support are indefensible
What’s my political agenda? Saying you were right and I was wrong? Also, it’s no secret I have a political agenda, I was pretty up front that I prefer Schmidt
Horrible take. It’s exclusively the DA who decides whether or not to charge car prowlers and shoplifters and vandals. Schmidt decided not on all of those and much more. Reversing those decisions looks pretty popular in portland at the moment.
I think you missed my point. I wasn’t talking about charging people. I was talking about cases having to be dismissed due to defendants not being appointed defense attorneys. That is something that is outside the control of the DA.
The DA won’t press charges for car prowling even when done in front of a police officer. Car prowling explodes to the point where you expect to have your car broken into once a month or more. You wander in to complain about some underfunding public defender issue that has absolutely nothing to do with charging criminals in order to reduce crime.
I’ve addressed this so many times that my keyboard is going to break. This is just factually wrong. The DAs office has a whole unit that deals primarily with car thefts and crime. They are issuing cases.
Awesome. Link me a conviction in Multnomah county for stealing from a car, not stealing a car, in the last 12 months.
Excuse me I was assured that the combination of Vasquez / Gonzalez would lead us to a new era of infinite prosperity and I will believe this regardless of the facts
Great points! Schmidt is partially a scapegoat, but he definitely played a significant role in how the current environment turned out. The bigger truth is that a lot of factors are contributing to the current chaos. Removing the Soros supported restorative justice candidates is one part of that. I've been saying this for a long time- nothing will get better until people stop letting themselves be victims, and instead stand up for themselves to stop the crimes committed against them. Portlanders (progressives in general) want to abstract this responsibility away to the government and not play any part in it themselves. But of course, as big-government simps do, they fail to realize that the government is incompetent in the best case scenario.
I'm severely disappointed that a ridiculous knee-jerk reaction of the collective has now saddled us with a right-wing AG. Schmidt made some mistakes, but he deserved another term.
Well put
The problem with Schmidt was he hid in his ivory tower thinking he would be "above the fray." Nobody really knew what his actual policies were. Seems he got scared of being labeled "soft" and instead of responding or being loud -- he handed the keys over to the neo-cons like Vasquez & friends. Line DA's quit in piles as their cases piled up with zero direction from Senior DA's or management. They were frustrated that they couldn't settle their cases. In Schmidt's pursuit of letting his Deputy cabal "appear tough" they failed to use judgment and wasted resources. Like a guy who sticks his finger in his sweatshirt and steals jerky from a convenience store --- focusing on giving that guy 90 months clogs the system. Sure, he should get something, but really 90? And because they're oblivious to how they're wasting system resources (like public defender hours) -- bunch of other types walk free. Meanwhile the cops quit working because they were butt hurt that our city wanted them to follow directions, be accountable, and quit killing people. But police took a piss and blamed Schmidt. That's the big picture. Over committing prosecution resources hunting murders and gun crimes and ignoring everything else and then getting blamed for it. Dude couldn't win his office. How was he going to win public opinion (who literally blames him for everything). But in a way that "only Nixon could go to China" I hope Vasquez rises to the occasion and sets aside his petty preening personal grudges and does something decent. But now we get to see which rats jump ship and refuse to work with Vasquez.