SANTA FE, NM – Reportedly seven out of the eight defendants responsible for the destroying of a 152-year-old obelisk on Columbus Day in 2020 are going to be avoiding jail, compliments of a pre-prosecution probation program coined as “restorative justice” championed by the local District Attorney that put this deal into motion.
This of course has drawn heavy criticism by some in the community, with even the former City Councilor calling it a “crock of crap.”
— Cynthia Ford (@CynthiaFord6764) May 26, 2021
District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies defended her position to divert nearly all the defendants accused of the destroying of the Plaza obelisk on May 24th, saying that the riotous destruction enacted last October was “a political problem that got forced upon the criminal justice system.”
Referring to blatant property destruction in broad daylight as a “political problem” certainly serves as new grounds.
The defendants in this case allegedly tore down this 152-year-old obelisk on Columbus Day because they were among a group of people that were offended that the landmark paid homage to those that lost their lives in conflicts against Native Americans during the more formative, and feudal, periods of America.
District Attorney Carmack-Altwies proclaims that had she attempted to allow these defendants to run through the standard criminal justice process based upon the charges connected to the offense, she believes the chance of them seeing any jail time would have been “slim to none.”
DA Carmack-Altwies defended her decision to divert nearly all the defendants charged in the destruction of the Plaza obelisk into a pre-prosecution probation program, calling the crime “a political problem that got forced upon the criminal justice system” https://t.co/WVFjvWLK1B pic.twitter.com/7UhOCz8ibE
— Prison_Health (@Prison_Health) May 26, 2021
This proclamation was based upon the defendants not having any prior criminal history, in conjunction with the offense being criminal damage, which is a fourth degree felony.
The District Attorney stated she “wanted more than that,” and opted for the defendants to participate in a restorative justice program which would see these seven defendants put on probation anywhere from six months to two years, having to perform 40 hours of community service and writing a letter admitting their role in destroying the obelisk.
Carmack-Altwies earnestly believes that this is the best method to address the criminal actions from October 12th of 2020:
“It’s supposed to bring both sides together and get everyone to come to a resolution or conclusion about what they should do as part of their punishment. And it is a punishment.
“It’s not punitive, necessarily, in that it’s not jail. But it is a punishment — they have to participate in this. And if they drop out and they don’t do it, then we lift the stay and prosecution keeps going.”
Carmack-Altwies also noted that, based upon her campaign promises made last year when she ran for the First Judicial District Attorney’s Office, she would be retracting her promises to reduce mass incarceration and explore more diversionary efforts in the criminal justice system:
“If I start treating this case differently, then what’s to say that the next thing that comes along that’s high-profile, do I treat that differently? And then, where’s the justice? I either have to treat these people exactly the way that I said I was, or I ran on nothing.”
This position of course has not leveled out well with some in the community, with City Councilor Ron Trujillo calling DA Carmack-Altwies’ direction on this case a “crock of crap.”
Nonetheless, the deal is moving forward for seven out of the eight implicated in the crime. One of the defendants, identified as Stephen Fox, will not be receiving this deal.
While New Mexico is letting rioters tear down monuments over a century old with near impunity, legislation is being brought that would criminalize parents teaching their children how to shoot.
Here’s that previous report from February.
_
SANTA FE, NM- We have already seen how Democrats in Congress are making a run on the 2nd Amendment, and now that pathogen seems to have seeped down to the states, in this case the previously dead red state of New Mexico.
A new bill introduced by a Democrat in that state would criminalize someone for teaching their children to shoot under certain circumstances, the Daily Wire reports.
SB-0224, introduced by Democrat State Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez states, in part:
A. It is an offense for a firearm owner or authorized user to store or keep a firearm in any premises unless the firearm is secured in a locked container or secured by a gun lock or other means so as to render the firearm inaccessible or unusable to any person other than the owner or other authorized user.
B. If a firearm owner or authorized user knows or reasonably should have known that a minor, an at-risk person or a prohibited person could gain access to a firearm belonging to or under the control of that owner or authorized person, and if a minor, an at-risk person, or a prohibited person obtained access to that firearm, it is an offense if the firearm owner or authorized user failed to secure the firearm in a locked container or by a lock or other means so as to render such firearm in accessible or unusable to any person other than the firearm owner or other authorized user.
F. A minor may be an authorized user only if the minor is at least twelve years of age and has successfully completed a firearm safety training course. [emphasis added]
"Mandatory firearm storage" laws are back in 2021. But SB224 would also make it a crime to teach your child how to shoot a gun unless they had already taken a formal class, and you could be held liable if your gun was stolen. #2a #nmpol #nmleg
— NM Shooting Sports Association (@NM_SSA) February 2, 2021
The problem comes in under Section F. of the proposal, which the New Mexico Shooting Sports Association (NMSSA) says the “storage mandate” in the proposed legislation “would make it a crime for a child to handle your firearm unless the child was 12 or older and had previously completed a firearms safety class,” as the PinonPost reported.
“You would become a criminal for taking your child to go shooting if they had not previously taken some kind of formal class,” NMSSA said.
“The bill is an uneducated attempt to demonize firearms…It is already a crime to place child in a situation that endangers their life, this law does nothing to add to a child’s safety.”
NMSSA continued:
“The law is completely unenforceable unless they plan on going door-to-door inspecting firearms storage in your home.
But this bill again goes beyond what they have attempted in the past. If a prohibited possessor gains access to your firearm you are liable as well…Albuquerque is the property crime capital of America; if your home or vehicle was broken into and a convicted felon stole your firearm, you could be charged with a crime under the bill.
Instead of taking on the issue of the crime wave that has engulfed Albuquerque and other parts of the state, Sedillo Lopez wants to blame you, someone just seeking to defend yourself, if your firearm is stolen.”
Under the legislation, according to The RF Angle, a parent could be subject to a $1,000 fine for a violation. In addition, the bill doesn’t mention if the so-called training course would be provided by the state, and if so if there was a fee associated with it.
The bill could make you liable if your firearm was stolen and it would make it a crime to teach your child how to shoot. #2a https://t.co/ACPYw0jicS
— NM Shooting Sports Association (@NM_SSA) February 2, 2021
The Angle said if there are fees charged for participating in the safety course, it could affect low-income families on a disproportionate basis.
In addition, there is also concern about the “storage mandate” in the bill because of how it is worded. The wording in the bill implies that a firearm owner could be held liable for a firearm stolen from either a home or vehicle by a “minor,” an “at-risk person,” or a “prohibited person.”
An “at-risk” person is defined as a person who made statements or exhibited behavior that indicates to a reasonable person there is a likelihood that the person is at risk of attempting suicide or causing physical harm to that person or others.
Meanwhile, a “prohibited person” is “a person who comes within the prohibitions set forth in Subsection g of 18 U.S.C. Section 922 or who is prohibited by state law from possessing a firearm.”
Not happy with merely going after 2nd Amendment rights, Sedillo Lopez is also going after fracking:
“State Senator Antoinette Sedillo Lopez plans to introduce a bill during the upcoming legislative session that would enact a four-year pause on fracking permits while studies are conducted to determine the impacts of fracking on agriculture, environment and water resources and public health,” said NMPoliticalReport on January 6.
_
Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.
Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
