The District Attorney has tremendous discretion in the way the
business of the office is conducted. An excellent example of the
abuse of that discretion can be seen by the recent decision of
Kamala Harris, district attorney of San Francisco.
Dear Editor:
The District Attorney has tremendous discretion in the way the business of the office is conducted. An excellent example of the abuse of that discretion can be seen by the recent decision of Kamala Harris, district attorney of San Francisco. A street punk with an AK-47 gunned down a police officer in the line of duty. Just blew him away. District Attorney Harris said that is not special, that it is not worth the death penalty.
John Sarsfield and Harry Damkar exercised their own discretion as district attorneys.
Neither was wrong, just different. The three amigos who constantly complain in the Citizens Voice about every action by Sarsfield need to move on with their lives. If he wants to rearrange the furniture, get over it.
If he does not want to make life easy for defense attorneys, good for him. If he sends assistants to court, that is their job. If he wants to save San Benito County money on Public Defenders, go for it John.
Then there are the county Supervisors. They have their own legal counsel plus assistants. The legal staff’s salaries, benefits, and taxes must cost $250,000 a year. And on top of that, the county has spent $2 million on outside legal fees the last several years. That is close to $50 for every man, woman, and child in San Benito County. That is discretion run amuck.
Pat Loe said the legal issues are complicated. If the county Supervisors and their legal staff had performed their job properly in the first place, the legal issues would have been minimal.
Marvin L. Jones,
Hollister
