Academic analysis of prosecutorial bias and under‑enforcement in U.S. criminal justice
Summary
The passage discusses scholarly perspectives on conflicts of interest, racial bias, and under‑enforcement in police and prosecutorial contexts. It does not provide concrete new allegations, names, tra Highlights conflict‑of‑interest concerns when prosecutors evaluate police misconduct. Notes historical patterns of bias against minorities, undocumented immigrants, sex workers, and LGBT Cites propos
This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (2)
“...); David A. Harris, The Interaction and Relationship Between Prosecutors and Police Officers in the United States, and How This Affects Police Reform Efforts, in The Prosecutor in Transnational Perspective 54, 55,...”
Paul Cassell“...Ann Thompson, Blood in the Water: The Attica Prison Uprising of 1971 and Its Legacy (2016). 41 Cf. Paul Cassell, Who Prosecutes the Police? Perceptions of Bias in Police Misconduct Investigations and a Possible...”
Tags
Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureRelated Documents (6)
Law Review Article Discusses Enforcement Redundancy and Under‑enforcement in U.S. Criminal Justice
The passage is a scholarly analysis of prosecutorial discretion, under‑enforcement, and the role of federal‑state redundancy. It contains no specific allegations, transactions, dates, or names of indi Identifies ‘enforcement redundancy’ (federal‑state overlap, private prosecution, judicial review) as Notes that federal prosecutors often step in when state prosecutors decline to charge, especially
Proposal to Require Victim Input on Nolo Contendere Pleas Cited in CVRA Subcommittee Discussion
The passage outlines a procedural reform suggestion for federal criminal sentencing and notes an apparent oversight by the Advisory Committee. While it mentions Senator Feinstein, it does not provide Advocates amending Rule 11(a)(3) to require courts to consider victims' views before accepting a nol Senator Dianne Feinstein is quoted supporting broader victim rights under the Crime Victims' Right
Subjec
Fr • < > Subjec :Deliberative t Process ec aratton rom am Justice - equest or wo ee xtension Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 17:59:47 +0000 Importance: Normal We have no objection, provided we get the following accommodation, which you already anticipated. We would request that your motion for extension of time give us an extension on our reply document, such that our reply would be due 10 days after the main Justice Department declaration that will be coming in two weeks. If you would include such language as well in any proposed order, saving us (and the court) drafting time, that would be very much appreciated. Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 Paul G Cassell CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message along with any/all attachments is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message
Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing,
Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos £t Lehrman, P.L. 'Ovid Pam ftoisl pet WWW.PATITTOJUSTKE.COM 425 North Andrews Avenue • Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 4 00 "ti e 6.‘ tk i r atire CalkAllfle alvdtr aIINNEV rar ,NYTTENNINIP PITNEY 'OWES 02 !F $003 , 50 0 000i3V, wit JAN 2i 2,2!3 .a4P En M ZIP t20-12E 3330 Dexter Lee A. Marie Villafatia 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 EFTA00191396 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, 1. UNITED STATES, Respondent. SEALED DOCUMENT EFTA00191397 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, UNITED STATES, Respondent. SEALED DOCUMENT MOTION TO SEAL Petitioners Jane Doc No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2, joined by movants Jane Doe No. 3 and Jane Doe No. 4, move to file the attached pleading and supporti
From: '
From: ' (USAFLS)" To: >, ' (USAFLS)" Subject: RE: Motion to Compel and S.J. Briefing Schedule Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 19:38:15 +0000 Importance: Normal Hi I.— You can get me on the line once calls in. I will be at my desk — 41047 A. Vi&faller Assistant U.S. Attorney Southern District of Florida From: M, (USAFLS) Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 2:11 PM To:a (USAFLS) < Cc:a MI I. (USAFLS) Subject: Re: Motion to Compel and Si. Briefing Schedule I am out of class at 5:15 pm. What number shall I call? Sent from my iPhone c On Mar 8, 2017, at 11:56, a, (USAFLS) > wrote: Can we talk later this afternoon? Begin forwarded message: From: Paul Cassell <a> Date: March 8, 2017 at 8:51:03 AM EST To: "Brad Edwards (USAFLS)" Cc: " I. (USAFLS)" '`= > (USAFLS)" Subject: RE: Motion to Compel and S.J. Briefing Schedule Dear I'm writing to express some concerns about the Government's recent response to our most recent discovery requests and to request a stipulated bri
To: Paul Cassell <[email protected]>, Brad Edwards <[email protected]>
To: Paul Cassell <[email protected]>, Brad Edwards <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Proposed email to Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 21:57:54 +0000 Importance: Normal Dear Paul and Brad: As I promised, since returning to work on Tuesday, I have been working diligently on trying to provide you with the answers that you have requested in connection with the Jane Doe I. United States lawsuit. Both the referral of your allegations to the Office of Professional Responsibility and the request for our Office to "step aside" in the Jane Doe litigation are not insignificant matters. As you doubtless are aware, the position that you are asking us to adopt, simply by "stepping aside," will have repercussions for every U.S. Attorney's Office throughout the country, and, therefore, requires approval from the Department in Washington, D.C. We also are trying to balance our obligations to with our obligations to the other identified victims in the Epstein ma
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.