Why hasn't Gregory been charged?

[All-American]

Am I? I'm okay with the prosecutor not going to trial after charging someone with breaking the law, but I'm not okay with not charging someone in the media who intentionally breaks the law while ranting that the gun control laws are not strict enough.

Correct me if I'm wrong in assuming that your objection would not be satisfied if the DC prosecutor decided to charge Gregory and then not go to trial.

[il Padrino Ute]

I don't need to tell you how many "double standards" you just sanctioned by approving of plea bargaining and not pulling over every speeder, do I?

Plea bargaining comes after the charges are made, are they not? There's a difference between being charged and plea bargaining. A prosecutor can't plea bargain until a charge has been made, no? In this case, I'm not sanctioning a double standard.

As for speeders, I'll admit that the police discriminately target those that they pull over, so there is a double standard. And it's a double standard that you seem with which to agree there's no problem.

[il Padrino Ute]

Correct me if I'm wrong in assuming that your objection would not be satisfied if the DC prosecutor decided to charge Gregory and then not go to trial.

You would be wrong. Look at my posts.

[All-American]

You would be wrong. Look at my posts.

Really? So he charges him today, files a nolle prosequi tomorrow, and we're done? You have no further objections?

[All-American]

Plea bargaining comes after the charges are made, are they not? There's a difference between being charged and plea bargaining. A prosecutor can't plea bargain until a charge has been made, no? In this case, I'm not sanctioning a double standard.

As for speeders, I'll admit that the police discriminately target those that they pull over, so there is a double standard. And it's a double standard that you seem with which to agree there's no problem.

I'm not sure why you give so much weight to the fact that charges are filed and then dropped, so I'll not dig much deeper there. As for speeders, setting aside the obviously-wrong cases of pulling somebody over because of race, I don't see a double standard when police give a ticket to somebody going 25 over and not to somebody going 3 over. Nor do I see a double standard in prosecuting somebody who has live rounds of ammunition on his person, but not somebody who has an empty magazine. That's sound use of prosecutorial discretion, as far as I'm concerned. (Assuming, of course, that the law should be enforced to begin with-- but that's another discussion.)

[il Padrino Ute]

Really? So he charges him today, files a nolle prosequi tomorrow, and we're done? You have no further objections?

None whatsoever. Charge Gregory so it's on the books, then use discretion to not prosecute. As long as it's on the books that Gregory broke the law, I'm fine.

[il Padrino Ute]

I'm not sure why you give so much weight to the fact that charges are filed and then dropped, so I'll not dig much deeper there. As for speeders, setting aside the obviously-wrong cases of pulling somebody over because of race, I don't see a double standard when police give a ticket to somebody going 25 over and not to somebody going 3 over. Nor do I see a double standard in prosecuting somebody who has live rounds of ammunition on his person, but not somebody who has an empty magazine. That's sound use of prosecutorial discretion, as far as I'm concerned. (Assuming, of course, that the law should be enforced to begin with-- but that's another discussion.)

See my post above.

[All-American]

None whatsoever. Charge Gregory so it's on the books, then use discretion to not prosecute. As long as it's on the books that Gregory broke the law, I'm fine.

You aren't found to have broken any law until conviction. The guy who is arrested, charged, prosecuted, and not found guilty is as innocent as the guy who has never seen a pair of handcuffs.

[pellegrino]

You aren't found to have broken any law until conviction. The guy who is arrested, charged, prosecuted, and not found guilty is as innocent as the guy who has never seen a pair of handcuffs.

in theory, yes, but that's not necessarily the way it works. I know people whose lives have been ruined for wrongful accusations, even though they were never convicted.

[UtahDan]

I think Gregory clearly made a mistake here, probably got some bad advice. Now the DC police are forced to spin their wheels. I think what he ought to do is go sit down and talk to the investigator and a prosecutor, acknowledge his wrong doing and make a public apology. Then he can make a donation to charity that helps victims of violence and the prosecutor can announce they are not pressing charges. It lets them save face and everyone can move on. He's not actually charged with something that serious and what I am proposing is the sort of deal that a non-celebrity has access to as well. Happens all the time. Of course, he can do nothing and see what happens (which is always the most conservative thing to do) but I think a larger harm happens to his career in the mean time.

[il Padrino Ute]

You aren't found to have broken any law until conviction. The guy who is arrested, charged, prosecuted, and not found guilty is as innocent as the guy who has never seen a pair of handcuffs.

You're correct. What I meant to say is that after being charged, it's on his record, guilty or not. It needs to be on record that he was charged.

[Jacob]

how do we know that is the case? are you positing that gregory's intent was to disobey the law by possessing the magazine for however long he was on air? if publicly violating law was the outcome he sought, it seems like the only motivation for intentionally breaking a law on national tv would be to demonstrate its absurdity. i think il pad and left-wing dickhead david gregory are in agreement

That's funny. One would think that. But instead, Gregory's only intention was to argue for more and stricter laws than the one he was breaking. This stupidity is all the more reason to throw the book at him. People don't generally get off the hook in DC or these types of jurisdictions for breaking these types of laws. Why should the guy who thinks the law is actually a good one?

[UtahDan]

You're correct. What I meant to say is that after being charged, it's on his record, guilty or not. It needs to be on record that he was charged.

Most places if you are not convicted you are entitled to have the charge expunged from your record. And when we talk about a "record" it is two things: the court file and the NCIC/FBI Database. Neither are actually erased, but they are sealed and cannot be viewed without a court order so for all intents and purposes there is no visible record it ever occurred. Now for a public figure like Gregory, it would never be gone from public knowledge. But I'm describing how it works for the average person.

[il Padrino Ute]

Most places if you are not convicted you are entitled to have the charge expunged from your record. And when we talk about a "record" it is two things: the court file and the NCIC/FBI Database. Neither are actually erased, but they are sealed and cannot be viewed without a court order so for all intents and purposes there is no visible record it ever occurred. Now for a public figure like Gregory, it would never be gone from public knowledge. But I'm describing how it works for the average person.

I appreciate the info.

My only point in this entire thread is that Gregory should be held to the same standard as anyone else.