Progressive prosecutor Rachel Rollins lambasts public defenders for not fighting prosecutions hard enough

Progressive prosecutor Rachel Rollins lambasts public defenders for not fighting prosecutions hard enough

By Steve Pomper 

Suffolk County District Attorney Racheal Rollins has been on law enforcement’s radar ever since people saw fit to vote her into the prosecutor’s office. DA Rollins is one of those infamous “progressive” prosecutors, funded by socialist tycoon (I know… oxymoron) George Soros, who have taken control of district attorney’s and prosecutor’s offices across America.

DA Rollins came into office not announcing how she would prosecute criminals but with an emphasis on not enforcing certain laws. Not how she would fight to have those laws legislatively repealed but rather to establish a wholesale non-prosecution regime.

In December 2018, the National Police Association (NPA) filed a complaint against the then District Attorney-elect Rollins. Among other concerns, the NPA wondered how, as DA, her “‘default’ preference is not to prosecute them [criminals] for their unlawful conduct.”

One crime, among the 15 candidate Rollins said she would not prosecute, that chafed the cops was resisting arrest. Apparently, she seems to believe resisting arrest is a “low-level” non-violent crime. The NPA’s complaint highlights who will suffer most under DA Rollin’s disregard of some laws: “the men and women in law enforcement…”

In a recent interview on Boston Public Radio, before DA Rollins raised a dust devil over her view of defense attorneys, she discussed her “enlightened” perspective on law enforcement for the District Attorney’s Office. She said many places in the country were now basically following her lead by, “issuing summons or tickets rather than arresting for low-level crimes. They’re [police departments] only focusing on the most violent and most serious crimes when it comes to arrests.” San Francisco, Seattle, and Portland, Oregon are likely the cities she is referencing.

This is a neat trick, eh? Notice how DA Rollins talks about only two categories of crimes: “low-level” and “the most violent and most serious.” But isn’t there an awful lot of illegal behavior between minor and major crimes? There is, but this is how she and her ilk blur crime categories, right?

The inference is if you are “only focusing on the most violent and most serious crimes when it comes to arrests,” doesn’t that mean crimes above low-level but below “the most violent and most serious” also fall into a non-arrest category to be treated similarly to low-level crimes? Impressive sleight of hand, right there.

Well, she’s making a stir again, but this time, as I alluded to above, DA Rollins is doing something that shouldn’t be ironic for a prosecutor, but in her case it is. She’s going after public defenders. Not for something like overzealous defenses that cross ethical lines, but for not representing their clients (criminal defendants) zealously enough. reported DA Rollins, during the NPR interview, “launched into a tirade against public defenders.”

During her rant, DA Rollins, a black woman, said, “When you hear in my voice my disgust and outrage about [the agency] not calling people back — their overwhelmingly privileged staff that aren’t calling back poor, black, and brown people because they’re saying they’re overworked and busy. It’s my people who are losing no matter what. I’m not going to sit silently on this.” So, the implication is, even with defense attorneys, if they don’t live up to DA Rollins’ expectations, they are, wait for it… racists. Of course, they are.

Justice is supposedly blind, right? But did you catch DA Rollin’s use of “It’s my people…” when she mentions “poor, black, and brown people?” Isn’t she obligated to represent all people of Suffolk County? The rich, the poor, the middle-class of all races and ethnicities, and both genders must rely on a district attorney dedicated to the rule of law, not to ideological politics. Apparently, that is asking too much.

The Boston Globe reported staff at the Committee for Public Counsel Service (CPCS) said they are overworked and busy. Or, as DA Rollins interpreted, [the CPCS] “claims they are too overworked and busy to return calls from poor and minority clients.”

DA Rollins’ lack of sympathy for public defenders who are likely as swamped as many people working in the criminal justice system seemed particularly caustic. After all, public defenders likely endorsed her candidacy, which essentially took a defense attorney’s position rather than district attorney’s perspective on prosecutions.

In fact, the lead public defender at the CPCS, Anthony Benedetti, breathed some fire himself in a heated response letter to the DA. Benedetti wrote to Rollins, saying she “may have alienated some who believed in your campaign promises and then found themselves in the crosshairs of an off the cuff diatribe.”

DA Rollins also said, “I’m not going to let these defendants suffer in silence because their criminal defense lawyers, who are paid by our tax dollars, refuse to answer their calls.” So, the primary prosecutor of crimes in Suffolk County, which includes Boston, is now supposed to advocate not only for the commonwealth and crime victims but also for the defendants accused of committing those crimes? Well, she may as well give it a shot. She hasn’t been much of an advocate for crime victims.

Getting even stranger, DA Rollins continued her criticism of public defenders with an odd reference. Now, as a cop, and with a good nature, I’ve always thought of the prosecutors as the “heroes” and defense attorney’s as the “villains” (though, I understand how necessary defense attorneys are). I also believe that most law-abiding people see it this way.

But not DA Rollins, who has it exactly backward. “There’s this premise out here that somehow people who are public defenders are the heroes and the DA’s are the villains,” she said. “I am not going to allow that to continue any longer.”

The “premise out here?” Where is she standing, in the middle of an Antifa rally? But she’s not on the side of law and order and an advocate for crime victims. She’s bolstering her already lengthy credentials as an opponent of the rule of law and a vociferous advocate for criminals.

The adage that progressives eventually eat their own seems a cliché, but it sure seems appropriate in this situation. It wasn’t bad enough that she’s made an enemy of her constituents who respect and expect law and order and of the cops working the various beats in the cities that comprise Suffolk, County. But now she’s going after her fellow progressives, defense attorneys. Well, I suppose we can at least give her credit for being an equal opportunity hater.

Leave a Reply