Prosecutor Candidate Subodh Chandra Responds to Questions on Controversial Procedures
This is a big election, and it comes at an important time. County reform is a little over a year old, and many changes have been instituted by newly elected County Executive Ed FitzGerald and the new County Council. But the reform process that has transformed Cuyahoga County didn’t affect the Prosecutor’s Office, until this election.
On Tuesday, March 6, Cuyahoga County voters will choose between five candidates for the position of Cuyahoga County Prosecutor: Subodh Chandra, Stephanie Hall, James McDonnell, Tim McGinty and Robert Triozzi. Each week, we asked a different set of questions:
WEEK THREE:
Please use a maximum of 700 words total to answer the following three questions:
* What is your position on “open discovery?”
* What is your position on “stacking” indictments?
* What is your position on using “jailhouse snitches?”
Definitions
* Open Discovery is the prosecutor sharing all information discovered during an investigation, no matter which direction that information points in, guilt or innocence.
* Stacking Indictments is when a person gets caught with say a rock of crack in their pocket while driving and the car, the cell phone, the money in their possession all become separate cases … now four instead of one. Three will be dismissed if the person agrees to the plea bargain.
* Jailhouse Snitches: If police believe someone is guilty and have no proof, they will place a paid snitch in the cell with the suspect, with the understanding the snitch will come out the next day and say the suspect admitted the crime to them overnight. They’ll take the witness stand and tell the same story. In some cases professional snitches used to be given a “license” to commit crimes, such as selling drugs, so the police don’t have to pay them out of their funds. Also known as a “get out of jail card.”
Prosecutor Candidate Chandra responds:
Open discovery:
I support open discovery. It was my experience as a federal prosecutor, where I practiced open discovery, that it resolved cases and resulted in guilty pleas. It enabled defense attorneys to educate their clients about their exposure. Prosecutors should not be afraid–except where there is a genuine threat of witness retaliation–to show their cards. If prosecutors’ are afraid, I question their ability–or the quality of their cases. I have confidence in my own ability to shatter any one else’s bogus defense because I believe jurors are collectively smart.
Stacking indictments:
As I did in the City of Cleveland criminal division, I will change the prosecutor’s office policy to conform with U.S. Department of Justice standards. The Office should only seek to charge the most serious offense that is consistent with the nature of the defendant’s conduct, and that is likely to result in a sustainable conviction. This determination, however, should be made in the context of an individualized assessment of the extent to which particular charges fit the specific circumstances of the case, are consistent with the Revised Code’s purposes, and maximize the impact on crime of the State’s limited resources. The charges should fairly represent the defendant’s criminal conduct, while due consideration should be given to the defendant’s substantial assistance in an investigation or prosecution.
Sometimes, multiples charges are filed because the nature of the evidence changes during the course of discovery and one charge is sustainable, while another is not. But unless new facts emerge, these should all be filed as part of one case, not as separate indictments. All that does is increase the court costs imposed upon the defendant after a trial. I have seen municipal courts do this to boost their revenues and it is wrong.
Jailhouse snitches:
Information from snitches or informants with suspect backgrounds always must be corroborated to have any value. Otherwise, it’s worth very little and juries see through it. Unfortunately, snitches usually require some consideration in exchange for their cooperation. Prosecutors usually explain this as “we didn’t pick the defendant’s friends–he did.” But that’s why corroboration is so important. Otherwise the information is suspect.
Click here to read the Prosecutor Candidates’ responses to ALL of Cool Cleveland’s questions.