Prosecutorial Abuse: DA's Can Even Indict a Ham Sandwich

[Doug here: Look at Trump's sham indictments or most any indictments--they can mean literally nothing! Prosecutors use "conspiracy to do this, conspiracy to that" and countless other tricks and threats to force plea bargain and possibly enforce jail time 90% of the time--even though you may be completely innocent!! Trump has the resources to force a trial, while millions of Americans don't. Few can fight big "government" and ITS UNLIMITED RESOURCES!] 

From Martin Armstrong [with comments by Doug in brackets]

Lawyers for decades have said a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich because the system is outright corrupt beyond compare. 

That phrase was first coined by a New York State Judge named Sol Wachtler (born 1930). Wachtler was the former chief judge of New York State who coined that term in a January 1985 interview with the New York Daily News‘ Marcia Kramer and Frank Lombardi. The relevant portion:

“In a bid to make prosecutors more accountable for their actions, Chief Judge Sol Wachtler has proposed that the state scrap the grand jury system of bringing criminal indictments.

Wachtler, who became the state’s top judge earlier this month, said district attorneys now have so much influence on grand juries that “by and large” they could get them to “indict a ham sandwich.”

A month later, the New York Times noted that Wachtler believed grand juries “operate more often as the prosecutor’s pawn than the citizen’s shield.” 

The fact that prosecutors can get grand juries to do whatever they want them to do is universal and if this is not seriously changed, we will see massive civil unrest tear the system apart limb for limb.

[Doug here: see excerpts of a Brookings article below entitled “Reforming our prosecutorial system is no longer just a proposition—it is an urgent imperative” which is making the same point that massive reform is necessary. We live in “prison nation” with far more people in prison than in China who has 5 times as many people.]

We now have another Democrat screwing with the 2024 election to ensure they win. Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes manipulated a grand jury in Arizona on Wednesday, indicting 18 Republicans with conspiracy, fraud, and forgery for submitting a document to Congress “falsely” declaring that Donald Trump beat Joe Biden in Arizona during the 2020 presidential election. She has listed a “prior U.S. president,” presumably referring to President Trump, as an unindicted co-conspirator. Mayes blacked out the names of seven individuals she indicted, saying they would be released once they were served.

Another Rogue, Sleeze Bag Democrat Prosecutor DA Kris Mayes

What is wrong with our legal system is that they can indict anybody for anything. I recommend you read America on Trial by Alan Dershowitz, about all the famous cases that were wrongful prosecutions. You will be shocked at how the government abuses the law all the time.

They are NOT required to tell even the truth to a Grand Jury, and they are NOT required to present ANY contrary evidence. The Supreme Court has WRONGLY held that you have no right to be present at a Grand Jury. You have the right to defend yourself before the jury in court.

What is wrong with it is they can accuse you of murdering your spouse with absolutely no evidence whatsoever, throw you in pretrial detention, keep you there for years, or pay an inmate to kill you all with NO EVIDENCE OF GUILT! You are then indicted, and it is your burden to prove your innocence. Our legal system is so bad that it is frustrating. They have killed people, claiming they murdered someone, and have no body or any evidence.

An  Indictment is an ABUSE OF POWER as it is being used today. In Florida, you have Trump fighting just to get a list of who will testify against him. They provide no notice and consistently seek to present guilt by surprise.

The way indictments are obtained is really a violation of the spirit of DUE PROCESS OF LAW, where a citizen MUST be provided with clear evidence of such a charge – fair notice.

[Doug here: Who’s fighting FOR the defendant?? Who’s gathering evidence for you while you’re in jail? What if you have few friends or little money? Answer: you’re screwed. Maybe defendants have a right to hire a private investigator paid by the State?]

Reforming our prosecutorial system is no longer just a proposition—it is an urgent imperative

From a Brookings Institute Article that is well worth a read. [Doug here: I recommend the entire article, but here’s some of it, my edit:]

Each year, more than 2.3 million felonies and 10 million misdemeanors are handled by over 2,300 individual prosecutor’s offices, but these crucial decisions are largely made outside the watchful eye of the public’s scrutiny. Prosecutors control secret grand jury proceedings, determine who will face prosecution, and decide the specifics of charges. They operate within a labyrinthine legal framework, armed with the threat of lengthy mandatory minimum sentences. This creates strong incentives for defendants to agree to lesser charges, even for crimes they did not commit.

More than 90% of both federal and state court cases are resolved through plea bargaining, sidestepping the courtroom entirely. [Doug here: This means few jury trials and any opportunity for a ‘jury of your peers’ to properly adjudicate your case and consider factors that matter such as prosecutorial misconduct. Heck, everyone should be able to get a trial by jury!] This confluence of autonomy, secrecy, complex laws, and powerful sentencing tools endow prosecutors with enormous leverage, leading critics to question whether this prosecutorial power is wielded too selectively and relentlessly, undermining the right to a fair trial, fostering mass incarceration, and eroding what’s left of the public’s faith in equal justice.

Official misconduct by both police and prosecutors contributed to nearly 60% of exoneration cases since 1989. Such misconduct can adopt many faces: a prosecutor might hide evidence that could absolve the defendant, a practice known as “Brady violations”; they might unduly influence witnesses, pushing them to exaggerate or fabricate testimonies; or they might cross boundaries during the trial by making misleading statements to the jury. Such actions have become commonplace, leading to wrongful convictions and playing a part in approximately 30% of wrongful conviction cases that have led to exoneration. Despite these unsettling figures, only 4% of prosecutors face repercussions for their actions, painting a grim portrait of a system in which misconduct often remains unaddressed.