A different perspective on the booking process

A different perspective on the booking process

San Fran has a DA that does not charge criminals for crimes.  The DA allows criminals to get out of jail right after being booked, without any cash bail or way to assure they will stop committing crimes or even show up for hearings and trial.  What is the result?

“San Francisco crimes year-to-date under Boudin: 

  • Homicides +33 percent
  • Arson +48 percent
  • Burglaries +42 percent”

No wonder decent people are fleeing the City—it is safe as Teheran!  This is a war zone—and the DA sides with the criminals.  If you go to San Fran and get mugged, robbed or physically harmed, it is possible that your insurance will not pay off—you went into a war zone, you should have known better.

Rebuttal to Tim Redmond and Chesa Boudin

San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, Photo: SFGov.TV

Photo credit: Michael Coghlan via Flickr

by Lou Barberini, Marina Times 9/20/20 

September 2020

In his September 21 blog, Tim Redmond claimed my recent article was inaccurate when I ascribed the sexual assault on a juvenile girl by a released burglar as the responsibility of San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin. Both Redmond and Boudin have asked for my source, which I will disclose. Also, this week my source informed me that it was actually an attempted rape.

To believe Boudin’s assertion (through Redmond), readers will have to believe that the San Francisco court system has instructed the district attorney’s office that they must run arrestee’s cases through a computer algorithm, and the district attorney’s office is prohibited from independently evaluating a case after a person is arrested. Perhaps Boudin can document which statute authorized that power grab.

My recent articles have exposed Boudin’s many misrepresentations, such as claiming someone involved in a murder was in jail for a 14-year-old marijuana case; claiming he filed charges on a murderer, but really let him out on a misdemeanor; and having a burglar captured on video and caught with the merchandise let go because DNA was not collected. As a document to my accuracy, Boudin has not issued a single official statement refuting any of the above cases or my attribution of the attempted rape to his stewardship of the DA’s office. Instead, Boudin has spoon-fed filtered information to Redmond as his political bodyguard.

Redmond’s first line of attack was to associate me with the San Francisco Police Officers Association, but the union did not allow me to submit an article for the last 11-years of my career. Strike one!

Next Redmond insinuated statistics from the SFPD Dashboard were inferior to the district attorney-generated crime stats. However, public records requests documented that Boudin also used SFPD Dashboard as references for his Twitter feed. Strike 2!

Redmond’s last defense of Boudin was that I was inaccurate when I pointed the finger that it was Boudin’s responsibility that a young girl was subject to an attempted rape.

There are four reasons why I believe Chesa Boudin personally opened the door for a burglar to roam free and eventually burglarize again and attempt a rape on a juvenile girl.

FIRST, THE ALGORITHMS

An August 1, 2016 San Francisco Chronicle article reported that District Attorney George Gascon was instrumental in bringing algorithms (artificial intelligence compute decision making) to San Francisco courts: 

San Francisco is seeking to modernize its bail system by using a computer algorithm to predict whether a defendant might re-offend or bolt if freed from jail, an effort to reform long-standing practices that many in the city’s justice system believe penalized the poor and opened up potential racial bias.

In layman’s terms, the San Francisco DA’s office was encouraging the use of a robot prosecutor and umpire, instead of human experience, to determine whether or when a suspect should be released. Facial recognition is not allowed, but computer umpires are?

In November 2016, a 20-year-old man breaking into cars at Twin Peaks was put on felony probation. Then, per a KQED article on August 18,  2017, the same 20-year-old was arrested on July 4, 2017 for gun possession. On July 11, using the scores from DA Gascon’s algorithms, the judge released the 20-year-old into the public. (Was there even a prosecuting attorney in the courtroom?) Only 5 days later, the 20-year-old returned to Twin Peaks with a buddy and was involved in a robbery and murder of a 71-year old tourist, named Edward French. 

Not learning from French’s murder, neither Gascon nor Boudin reduced the use of the algorithms. (If Gascon or Boudin were running Boeing, 737 MAXes would still be in the air.) I found no Boudin statements where he disparages the robot umpires. The district attorneys I have spoken to claim Boudin is actually a strong advocate of algorithms. Anyway, Boudin’s silence is complicity. 

Per my source, a direct contact of Boudin, it was the algorithm that released the burglar/rapist. Thus, Boudin has perpetuated the use of robot umpires as substitutes for human experience, and positioned himself so that if anything goes wrong, he just blames the computer. In a sense Redmond is correct: Boudin didn’t release the potential rapist, he just pushed the button that enabled the computer algorithm to release the prisoner. 

SECOND, THE NON-CASH BAIL ENVIRONMENT

Upon his swearing-in, Boudin argued that arrestees’ having to come up with bail was discriminatory and onerous on the poor. In January 2020, Boudin instituted a no-bail system so that poor prisoners could expedite their freedom, which included the burglar/attempted rapist. 

Just a few weeks after the burglar/attempted rapist was set free, San Francisco Superior Court reversed Boudin’s no-bail policy⎯ too late for the traumatized girl. In a Bay City News June 19 statement, Boudin said, “The overwhelming majority of people released on zero-bail did not offend.” Hey Boudin, tell that to the poor girl.

THIRD, COVID-19

Boudin has consistently used Covid-19 as a health excuse to both reduce incarceration and accelerate the release of arrestees. In the same Bay City News article, Boudin said, “San Francisco jails have successfully avoided a major outbreak of Covid by listening to medical experts and keeping the jail population low.” Meanwhile, the San Francisco homicide and burglary rates increased proportionally.

FOURTH, BOUDIN DOESN’T PROSECUTE ANYWAY

Per the district attorneys I have spoken to, they claim Redmond and Boudin are misdirecting their readers by claiming SFPD’s report was received late. The timing of the report is only a factor because Boudin had a no-bail policy (at the time) and continued to substitute algorithms for real-life assistant district attorneys. If either of those two factors was removed, the timing of the report would have been insignificant. However, it is Boudin’s philosophy that arrestees should spend as little time at county jail as possible, so he changed the game clock and then blamed SFPD.

Just about any urban DA, not coming from the progressive angle, would have kept the burglar in the county jail. In the first week of demonstrations, SFPD arrested 117 burglary suspects. Boudin, how many of those 117 burglaries did you achieve a felony conviction for and how many burglars served after the conviction?

Boudin will sell to the public that he has “filed” felony cases, but then he immediately lets most of the arrestees out on misdemeanors or transfers them into nonprofit programs. It is like a neighborhood complaining that drivers are speeding past the local elementary school. Police come in droves and pull over hundreds of speeders, but the problem doesn’t go away. Then the neighbors learn that though they witnessed the cops citing speeders, in fact the cops were only citing for seat belt violations. It’s the Boudin bait-and-switch! 

Since it didn’t matter what time the SFPD report came in, readers should ask themselves what is the name of the human prosecutor that represented San Francisco’s interests against the future attempted rapist? And, if it was just an algorithm that made the decision, then it was Boudin that opened the prison door that allowed the trauma and attempted rape committed on a young girl. Strike 3!

Now for my source: It’s actually Tim Redmond. Every time Redmond asked me a question, I responded with numerous questions. It was Redmond, through his conversations with Boudin, who confirmed my suspicions of the robot umpire ⎯ algorithms. It was Redmond who disclosed the sexual encounter was an attempted rape. 

Redmond is a passionate writer, but he appears to have weak skepticism genes. He seems to fall for anything progressives serve him. In February, Redmond wrote how Boudin’s friend, Vilaska Nguyen, lived in District 7 for ten years. It was my article that corrected Redmond in that Vilaska had spent a full 10 of the previous 10-¼ years in District 11. Redmond has amended the original article, but only because of the clarity I provided. 

During my email exchange with Redmond, I concluded every email with, “Have Chesa call me.” It was pretty obvious; like a voyeur, Boudin was hiding behind Redmond’s questions. 

Boudin, you were quoted in Redmond’s article, and in your Tweet you acted surprised like it was independent journalism. It was such an obvious setup ⎯ it’s like a third grader sending dozens of Valentine Day cards to himself and then bragging to the class how popular he is. Avoiding my requests to speak with you, not responding to my letter last week, is a sign Boudin is afraid and hiding under Redmond’s mask. 

San Francisco crimes year-to-date under Boudin: 

  • Homicides +33 percent
  • Arson +48 percent
  • Burglaries +42 percent
About Stephen Frank

Stephen Frank is the publisher and editor of California Political News and Views. He speaks all over California and appears as a guest on several radio shows each week. He has also served as a guest host on radio talk shows. He is a fulltime political consultant.

Comments

  1. Is Teheran unsafe?

Leave a Reply to David Z Cancel reply

*