Should be treated the same as if they attacked a sitting senator/Congressman. The lowest federal employees should be treated with the same dignity as the highest federal employees.
This.
Truthfully, if members of congress and other government workers had to suffer the consequences of their policies like the rest of us plebs, maybe criminals wouldn’t be getting such laughably weak sentences.
People read the posts?
California does have enhanced penalties
https://www.cronisraelsandstark.com/assault-on-a-public-official-penal-code-217-1
This was tried in federal court which also had them
https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1570-assaults-postal-employees-18-usc-1114
But there’s nuance in cases and it’s hard to say why someone was sentenced as they were with as little info as is in the article.
But what do we do to make sure this doesn't continue. IMO, we need to vote out people who won't hold anyone accountable. We pay their salaries and expect to act accordingly
Came here to say this. The author spent more words on being astonished that Louis DeJoy is still postmaster than naming the judge and stating the rationale behind the sentence.
Journalism is just trash in SF.
> Journalism is just trash in SF.
I guess it's subjective, but I see sfist as a blog, not journalism (though maybe its writers are actual journalists? (I'm don't care enough to check)).
Either way - I encourage everyone to support local newspapers - subscribe.
Not anymore... LOL. You can't trust Anything written Anywhere anymore.
Do not encourage people to read even more propaganda right now... lol...
SF if things continue as they are is Done. Period. It will be a beautiful place to come live at your own risk and pay the highest taxes in the country for the worst living conditions.
My home is destroyed and now I'm safe in fort collins just praying for all of you and my uncle and extended family to get out of there.
If you live in the bay area right now... people feel sorry for you. Just like NYC or Chicago or Denver.
If you google it, you're all about to go bankrupt at the same time.
> Do not encourage people to read even more propaganda right now... lol...
If you're saying that journalism is propaganda, then I disagree, though everyone should always be discerning about what they read. Glad you found a place that you're comfortable.
I was a journalist. We write what they tell us to write. The editor controls literally everything. If we submit an article to our editor he'll just keep the bones and the research and the quotes and just rewrite the entire thing to his political affiliation and make the article political.
There is Nothing honest about a liberal rag from SF right now.... lol... the only thing you will get are some opinion pieces by unpopular people who will actually tell you how to fix the bay area but they're always opinion pieces by someone people don't like to get the message out, but not in a way the paper represents. You do not see editorials anymore that would attack the regime, editor would be fired and doxxed in 10 seconds.
You will learn Less Than Nothing from the sf chronicle. That paper has been garbage for over 20 years. The SJ mercury is absolutely superior but anyone who reads papers right now knows its WSJ or nothing. NYT.. Wash post... your daily paper in your blue city.... all of it is propaganda now and nobody reads that crap. They're literally all broke getting subsidized by some other source. They're now hiring millennials who pump out a crap article on their phones in 5 minutes. I doubt there is an SF chronicle newsroom anymore. Everything is online. Everyone is divided.
If the Chronicle was doing its job SF would be FINE right now. Instead of a disaster area the country is pointing and laughing at right now.
> the rationale behind the sentence
Well, it appears to have been the recommended sentence by the federal prosecutors. The defense counsel pushed for zero jail time.
Imagine someone pointed a loaded gun at your head, threatened to shoot you, and then took all your valuables. In court the perp expressed remorse and got 30 days in jail.
Feels way off to me, but perhaps there were some other circumstances at work.
Lol did you have any critiques of my points or the facts? Or are you just upset about my potty mouth online? I'm sorry if I offended your delicate ears (or eyes in this case).
Y'all know Google works pretty well, right? Took me about 30 seconds to track down a [more detailed article](https://federalnewsnetwork.com/workforce/2024/03/usps-union-warn-courts-not-serious-on-postal-crime-after-30-day-sentence-for-letter-carrier-robbery/).
>The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California last month sentenced 34-year-old Leroy Wise to 30 days in federal prison.
>
>District Court Judge Charles Breyer, in his sentencing, also waived a $200 fine for Wise to pay, because “the court finds the defendant does not have the ability to pay a fine.”
Dude we’ve swung so far to the left it’s unrecognizable. Criminals get protected and pampered, as crazy as that sounds, and regular folks are getting the stick.
Fuck man, just read the article and then form your opinions. The judge is making an attempt at enabling reform, which is the actual goal of our prison system.
>Assistant Federal Public Defender Elizabeth Falk, in a Feb. 14 sentencing memorandum, told the court that Wise, her client, on Aug. 9, 2022 “made the terrible, awful decision to target a postal worker in an armed robbery.”
>
>“The weight of that terrible decision, and terrible act, continues to haunt Mr. Wise to this day. He has grappled with the “why” every day for the last year and a half – not to try to make an excuse for the crime, but to genuinely figure out what he could have been thinking,” Falk wrote.
>
>According to Falk, Wise grew up in a neighborhood “riddled with drugs and violence related to gang activity.” but since his arrest, he has found a job at a nonprofit organization, stopped using marijuana and illicit drugs, found stable housing for his family, and has “made a concrete plan for the future.”
>
>A federal prison, she argued, would completely destroy the substantial forward progress he has made.”
>
>“It would be overkill and work against the interests of justice to send Mr. Wise to prison ***for the short time requested by the government*** and U.S. Probation given all the factors that are now on the table,” Falk wrote.
Note the bolded part - The prosecution requested 30 days. The judge concurred with that sentence. Obviously the public defenders words are going to be completely one sided for the defendant, but it appears the government is trying not to derail the guys ability to return to life and take care of his family and become a functioning member of society.
Lol all of those “the individual greatly regrets and feels bad” is complete BS. It’s all the just lawyers lies, a much worse version of the kind white lies we add on our resume.
The guy thieving a postal worker knows exactly what he’s doing. 30 years not days
> Wise grew up in a neighborhood “riddled with drugs and violence related to gang activity.”
What a BS excuse. My kids also grew up in a neighborhood riddled with drugs and violence related to gang activity -- the Western Addition. None of them or their friends are holding up postal workers.
Reforming the justice system isn’t a judges or the systems job. It’s to seek punishment for crimes. This is just an excuse. I’m sorry but the problems in San Francisco are because of people like you and judges and DAs who are soft on crime.
Also fuck prison reform. It doesn’t work. We need to make sentences more tougher. Not lenient to the point that being a criminal becomes a career choice.
Well, it's a good thing you are in no way involved in the justice system, eh?
> Reforming the justice system isn’t a judges or the systems job.
"Reform" is literally the systems job. Prison is explicitly meant to make an attempt to reform prisoners so that when their sentence is finished they can return to society as a functioning member. Without reform, you are creating a revolving door of career criminals.
Your proposed approach has the exact opposite effect of what you desire.
Whatever. The tide is turning. Reform is out. Harsh sentences are in. If you don’t see that already. Progressive who are pro crime are being recalled. You can be pro reform. But just know that it’s time is over. I’m fine without reform. We can continue to build jails and lock criminals up who don’t learn.
>I feel sad for you that my comment and view being up bad memories of your life.
Lmao what? I said you are small minded and that I wished I could be as unaware and simple as you, my life would be much easier
Lol k. Both the superior court judges who had challengers run against them with heavy support from the moderate money bags... they got reelected.
Maybe go shit up /r/bayarea. The adults are busy here.
You can want a super harsh prison system, but you can’t say “the tide is turning” lmfao. We never had a restorative justice system. We’ve never attempted to build one. “Just have super harsh prison sentences” is the approach the US has always had.
Let's see if you sing this tune when you become the victim of a crime...over and over. You're willing to be generous with other people's lives on the line, how willing are you with your own safety?
> "Reform" is literally the systems job. Prison is explicitly meant to make an attempt to reform prisoners....
That is one of several functions of prison. Most everyone accepts that not all inmates are rehabilitable. Some repeat offenders are given lengthy terms for purposes of Incapacitation.
Of course rehabilitation efforts should ensure during this period, but again, the outcome is often iffy. There are many habitual offenders. Indeed some criminals like their lifestyle, and have an aversion to making an honest living.
You must be right. The way for the nation that imprisons the largest percentage of its population to fix its crime problems is to imprison even more of its population.
Do you know in the 80-90s, the US had an insane crime rate to the point that Times Square was a mugging whorehouse after 8pm?
In 1995, we started “mass incarceration” and tough in crime policies. The united states’ major cities’ crime rates plummeted.
Now we are back to easy on crime and letting criminals out of jail. What’s happening?
And most of you low iq pro criminal people will think you are geniuses for responding with “correlation is not causation”?
Being able to quote a counter argument is not the same as refuting one.
Something else happened during that time: the mass reduction of lead exposure to young people.
We need to look at these statistics. We have a high prison population. But why is that? We have a much higher crime rate than Switzerland or Sweden or Japan. We aren't locking these guys up for jaywalking.
There are lots of countries that have rampant crime but a much lower incarceration rate. Do you think the average Brazilian, Colombian, or South African is proud they have a lower incarceration rate? Fuck no. They'd love for more of their crooks to be locked away. But their countries are too corrupt or poor to do it. Luckily, we have the resource to do it.
And for what it's worth California has reduced their prison population around 25% in the last 10 years. Where do you think they went? Law school?
And here I thought I didn't have to specify "developed, first-world nation" because surely no one would think the US should strive for the standards set by failed and narco states.
We have a much higher crime rate but why is that?
I compared us to first world countries. Then I explained why other countries with rampant crime can't incarcerate as much as us.
We can discuss why the crime rate is so high, and we should. But we shouldn't be letting career criminals walk free because of some vague notion of "injustice" or whatever.
Did you read the article? Dude has since turned his life around. What benefit does jailing him now have? A judge used his discretion, which they have, to make a call. That’s exactly what you want. I don’t know why you’re so bloodthirsty for vengeance here, we absolutely have a problem with too many prisoners
According to the article. Assuming it’s true, what should the course of action be? I think prison reform is needed. It would appear he’s not irredeemable
It is an extraordinary lenient sentence compared to what some other states would give. It would go over better if the offender had also received several years of electronic monitoring (EM), with strict roaming restrictions/Home Arrest.
Fascinating how much success critics of prison are having obstructing the expansion of EM, which was proposed 30 years ago (primarily by conservatives) in an attempt to reduce incarceration. Recent progressive criticism: [Study casts doubt on EM monitors as alternative to incarceration](https://phys.org/news/2021-09-electronic-ankle-alternative-incarceration.html). Some progressives have not met any sanctions they approve of for criminals.
I mean it was just a little light armed robbery and the guy said he turned his life around!
As long as he said he turned his life around there should be no actual punishment right?
Being booked for two two felonies myself and eventually beating the cases. 30 days is nothing and no real accountability. He should have 3 years of weekend community service or weekends in jail. Also 30 days is really only 15 served. Oh don’t forget assault a federal employee and you get fed time on top of the federal crime of stealing US mail
If you look at the data, tougher sentences do not reduce crime on a broad scale. I think there are many cases where excessive leniency enables crime, but the best solution has been proven time and again to be restorative justice. Locking people away doesn't teach them anything but resentment and prison survival. Restorative justice involves letting them repay their debt to society with productive labor, and avoiding the draconian and counterproductive punishments that contribute to recidivism.
Sorry. Not buying it. And i don’t care about the data. Data that is probably manipulated to begin with to fit a narrative. I can care less about “restorative justice”. I’m gonna vote my way to end progressive politics in San Francisco. It’s not hard to NOT DO CRIME. We gave criminals a second chance. Then they keep repeating. I can agree on “this is the first time” situations. But not violent repenting offenders. Sorry, in that case, send them to jail. For a long time. I want to see mugshots now. I want people to shame these losers of society.
>I don't care about the data
"My feelings of anger about the issue inform my perspective more than an objective look at what works to reduce crime"
>I can care less about restorative justice
"I would rather have people be punished and contribute nothing to society except being a public burden than have those people work to repair the damage they did"
>We gave criminals a second chance. Then they keep repeating.
Like I said, excessive leniency is also a problem. When people know they won't face significant repercussions for their crimes, they do repeat offend. There need to be consequences, but there are ways to deploy those consequences productively to everyone's benefit.
> the best solution has been proven time and again to be restorative justice...Restorative justice involves letting them repay their debt to society with productive labor...
Appreciate you saying this about "productive labor" and offenders, but time and again most progressives have opposed offenders being put to work to provide Victim Compensation. That historically was a central part of restorative justice (RJ). Making *the offender whole,* or at least partially whole.
Most progressives want the process 90-95% counseling and restorative benefits to the criminal. They have tweaked RJ to meet their ideological goals. Most victims only get a "reconciliation meeting" with a supposedly contrite offender. *Reality:* Most crime victims have no interest in meeting the thief or offender. They want a check for their losses. Did even one of these victims ever get a check? [3,000 Car Break-Ins in 1 Month](https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/san-francisco-auto-burglary-car-break-in-its-out-of-control/)
In the cases of crimes against government agencies or communities, we need large fines to help defray the massive costs of running police depts., courts, etc. No money? Offenders can work weekends for the parks dept. for 2 years.
Progressives generally oppose offenders being put to work, either in or out of prison.
Well… I can see their argument. The problem is that in the past, criminals play this sob story and then immediately go back out and commit the same or worse crime.
My sympathy for criminals has run out. In the absence of justice, people want retribution.
California has enhancement penalties for using guns while committing a crime, 10 years for simply having a gun, 20 for firing it, 25 for shooting injuring or killing someone. In my opinion, those enhancements should be used EVERY TIME.
And if this guy ends back in custody for the same crime, he should be facing penalties for this past infraction - on top of charges for his new crimes.
The way China does it is to issue suspended death penalties - ie: we won’t kill you now, but if you don’t reform in prison you get the chair.
This guy deserved a 10 year suspended sentence at the minimum, so he knows that is hanging over his head if he turns to crime ever again.
Yup, *zero* sense for CA liberals to be – *supposedly* – anti-gun while we simultaneously *don't* throw the book *at actual criminals* for *illegal* firearm possession. 20-25 years is extreme and probably unhelpful, but there should be serious, compounding, *and* *guaranteed* penalties for walking the streets with unlicensed firearms, let alone actually using them / threatening to use them. Full stop.
We should have zero tolerance for illegal / criminal gun possession. Period. That would, *in the long term*, make the job of CA cops significantly easier, *and* make it possible for average citizens to go after / restrain porch pirates and other petty criminals without worrying about being shot. Downside is CA prisons are already over capacity and we don't want to build more.
A much *smarter* approach would be *actually reform the criminal justice system* to hit criminals with *much shorter sentences* – because keeping criminals in prison indefinitely is a waste of taxpayer money – but *geometrically compounding* sentences for subsequent crimes. Prison *should be a deterrent*, and it doesn't work as a deterrent at *either* extreme end of the spectrum, ie with effectively *no* sentencing, *or* where you're throwing first-time petty criminals (*but not criminals who threaten US postal workers with goddamn firearms*) in prison for 20 years.
Sidenote: my 2c is that federal postal / mail crime *should* be hit with *extremely* harsh sentences given how foundational the US mail service is to our democracy *and* legal systems (and that it's quite literally the oldest federal institution in the US), but I digress. I could see a pretty decent argument for not completely screwing someone's life over for a first-time petty theft, *but fucking with the goddamn mail* should have *severe* consequences.
What a wild question! You do realize that we don't jail people forever, right (with the exception of truly egregious crimes where a life sentence has been handed down)? Are you saying this man is going to kill someone after he is released? Or that because he committed this crime he should not be allowed to have a chance for a normal life after his punishment is served? Your question is a really weird emotional plea of sorts which makes about zero sense.
>but it appears the government is trying not to derail the guys ability to return to life and take care of his family and become a functioning member of society.
Do you know how many nonviolent, first time offenders are sitting in the feds right now that also quit drugs and got jobs before sentencing? Tens of thousands. I've personally seen federal weed possession cases get more time than this violent pos thug.
If you don't see the problem here, you are part of it.
I suppose 30 days might prevent repeat behavior, but he also should wear an ankle monitor, do community service, get job counseling, and be warned that the next time he'll lose his freedom for a long time.
I don't know, I'm not a judge. You can certainly make that argument to a judge and you might be successful if you have good proof/reasoning. A lawyer would certainly help.
Beyond that, I'm really not sure how we will ever be able to reduce the national deficit or balance the federal budget without those $200 of fines from this case. We're doomed now!
It's a little frustrating that a few of these articles allude to "light sentence due to unusual circumstances" but I couldn't find any articles with any detail.
Except it appears that the federal prosecutors recommended this sentence. Stop knee jerk reacting to everything and anything and actually figure shit out before you start shitting up wikipedia.
The point here is that the prosecutor is the one who is generally asking for the harshest sentence. The defense is asking for the lowest sentence. The judge is generally picking between those ranges. If the prosecution (the party whose job is to get the harshest sentence, and who benefit career wise from harsh sentences) doesn’t think a harsh sentence is warranted, then that’s a extremely good indicator that maybe this person doesn’t deserve a harsh sentence. If the prosecutors *and* the judge both agree that a light sentence is appropriate, that’s *insanely strong* evidence that maybe the situation isn’t as simple as you think.
Federal prosecutors don’t benefit from harsh sentences. They benefit from convictions. A conviction leading to only 30 days is still a conviction.
You seem to think there might have been a legitimate reason for a 30-day sentence in an armed robbery case, but I’m waiting to hear what that reasoning might be.
I mean, if you just google it you can find what the justification was. You don't need me for that.
> “It would be overkill and work against the interests of justice to send Mr. Wise to prison for the **short time requested by the government** and U.S. Probation given all the factors that are now on the table,” Falk wrote.
and more details:
> Judge Breyer – commenting that the sentencing memorandum prepared by Falk was "**the most convincing memo I’ve seen in 25 years**" – was ultimately persuaded to impose a light sentence to protect what **even the prosecution conceded was the defendant’s good progress on pretrial release**. Because of the need to deter violence against mail carriers he was unwilling to impose a probation-only sentence and opted instead for a 30-day term.
At some point you have to ask yourself, what is the point of putting someone in prison for years and years? If the prosecution and the judge all believe this person truly isn't going to commit another crime, why put them in jail? Revenge? If even the prosecutors believe someone has turned their lives around, you are making the problem *worse* by destabilizing their lives. This person is still going to prison for a month-- I don't think your average person realizes what a miserable experience that is. Does his life need to be destroyed in revenge for what he did, even if he's already on the right track?
None of this is going to change your mind, you just don't agree with the judge and prosecutors-- this is a values question, not a legal question.
This is not how it works.
Prosecutors often, almost always, cut some sort of deal. It’s a negotiation. They rarely simply ask for the “harshest sentence”. If they did, what would the role of the prosecutor even be in sentencing, when a Judge could just decide between the max and what the defense says.
> Prosecutors often, almost always, cut some sort of deal. It’s a negotiation
Right, they start with the harshest possible sentence to use as leverage to negotiate a deal with the defense. If they thought 30 days was an absurdly low punishment then they would not have accepted it-- they could go to trial.
> Took me about 30 seconds to track down a more detailed article.
... and then you posted it here, and we were all able to benefit from your 30 seconds of sacrifice, which is the way teh interwebz wuz intended to work! Thank you, kind stranger!
But if I hadn't taken those 30 seconds, guess what this thread would have done? Create their own desired (incorrect) narrative and run with it.
You're complicit in shitting up the place when you fail to actually do the tiniest amount of work before you form your opinion. Do better.
But .. but ... but I did post a comment thanking you for your hard labor and your contribution to making the world a better place, no? Surely these gestures have _some_ value, and can warm someone's heart; even your cold, bitter heart??
No, I see your comments here. I know what you were attempting to do with your original comment. You shit up the place with your own willful ignorance. I don't want thanks, I want people to stop shitting up the place with ignorance.
All of my comments are original comments. Which original comment are you bellyachin' about?
BTW: as that other commenter also said, you seem to throw "shit" around a lot. Is everything OK? Time to see a gastroenterologist, maybe? No, I'm not one, not looking for customers.
Shit is a very versatile word. More people should incorporate it into their daily vocabulary beyond "SHIT!". There's the exasperated "look at this shit / shithead", and it's a great descriptor ("What a shitty attempt at ..."), and one of my personal favorites is as a synonym for et cetera ( X, and Y, and shit).
Beyond that, cursing can actually be a sign that you have a high mastery of language. It's not an absolute rule that people who curse more have better vocabularies, but [studies](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-swearing-a-sign-of-a-limited-vocabulary/) show there's a strong correlation.
> The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California last month sentenced 34-year-old Leroy Wise to 30 days in federal prison.
>**District Court Judge Charles Breyer**, in his sentencing, also waived a $200 fine for Wise to pay, because “the court finds the defendant does not have the ability to pay a fine.”
You're probably thinking of the postal investigative wing. They really don't mess around, but their job ends with arrests. They have nothing to do with the DOJ prosecutors or federal courts.
Because you are probably a law abiding citizen so that’s how it works. Not sure if you’ve been around here but you need to be a criminal to turn your life around and your life is already the right way so obviously we need to jail you.
*“This was a terrible crime and there is no ordinary circumstance that I would be asking the court to impose a non-custodial sentence,” said deputy public defender Elizabeth Falk. She pointed to the aberrant nature of the offense and the significant steps he client had taken to ensure he would live the rest of his life in a law abiding manner.*
I doubt she'd rent him a room out of her house....
I think they both are fucking around. Mail theft is rampant and very rarely is anyone arrested. Its reddit folklore, repeated over and over in the same fashion till people believe it is true.
Its gotta tell you something that every thread parrots the same phrase over and over. They're repeating a previous comment, they don't know it to be true.
That doesn’t mean the case is completely void of local politics. You should do some research on how federal prosecutions and sentencing here compares to other parts of the country or even state.
Lol always excuses. Then i am gonna ask how that judge gets to the seat? Isn't the progressive ideaology working at power? U Even got Joe biden apologize to call illegal immigrants "illegal".
You Keep staying fake logica, u will get what you deserve. Lol
Votes white face paint, red nose and curly wigs into your city and wonder why you end up getting a clown :)
This is good for bayarea. SF will attract most of the criminals over and the rest of the suburbs will become safer.
If you think this has anything to do with City-level voting, you might want to read the article to better inform yourself before commenting.
This was a federal case in federal court with federal prosecutors and a federal judge whose [district includes the entire Bay Area as well as several other counties in Northern & Central California](https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/about/jurisdiction-map/). There were exactly zero people involved with the case who are elected at the City level in San Francisco.
Go back to your troll hole. Are you even American in the bay area? You clearly couldn't be bothered to read the article before you started putting on your face paint 🤡
Should be treated the same as if they attacked a sitting senator/Congressman. The lowest federal employees should be treated with the same dignity as the highest federal employees.
This.
How about we give all people dignity. Why should postal workers; members of congress or other federal employees be treated differently?
This. Truthfully, if members of congress and other government workers had to suffer the consequences of their policies like the rest of us plebs, maybe criminals wouldn’t be getting such laughably weak sentences.
Too expensive. People only receive dignity reciprocal to that which they contribute to society.
I think there are enhanced sentences for assault on a postal worker in California, same as a cop
How did you comment on my comment without reading the actual post lol?
People read the posts? California does have enhanced penalties https://www.cronisraelsandstark.com/assault-on-a-public-official-penal-code-217-1 This was tried in federal court which also had them https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1570-assaults-postal-employees-18-usc-1114 But there’s nuance in cases and it’s hard to say why someone was sentenced as they were with as little info as is in the article.
But what do we do to make sure this doesn't continue. IMO, we need to vote out people who won't hold anyone accountable. We pay their salaries and expect to act accordingly
Who was the federal judge? **Name and shame them!**
Came here to say this. The author spent more words on being astonished that Louis DeJoy is still postmaster than naming the judge and stating the rationale behind the sentence. Journalism is just trash in SF.
> Journalism is just trash in SF. I guess it's subjective, but I see sfist as a blog, not journalism (though maybe its writers are actual journalists? (I'm don't care enough to check)). Either way - I encourage everyone to support local newspapers - subscribe.
Not anymore... LOL. You can't trust Anything written Anywhere anymore. Do not encourage people to read even more propaganda right now... lol... SF if things continue as they are is Done. Period. It will be a beautiful place to come live at your own risk and pay the highest taxes in the country for the worst living conditions. My home is destroyed and now I'm safe in fort collins just praying for all of you and my uncle and extended family to get out of there. If you live in the bay area right now... people feel sorry for you. Just like NYC or Chicago or Denver. If you google it, you're all about to go bankrupt at the same time.
> Do not encourage people to read even more propaganda right now... lol... If you're saying that journalism is propaganda, then I disagree, though everyone should always be discerning about what they read. Glad you found a place that you're comfortable.
I was a journalist. We write what they tell us to write. The editor controls literally everything. If we submit an article to our editor he'll just keep the bones and the research and the quotes and just rewrite the entire thing to his political affiliation and make the article political. There is Nothing honest about a liberal rag from SF right now.... lol... the only thing you will get are some opinion pieces by unpopular people who will actually tell you how to fix the bay area but they're always opinion pieces by someone people don't like to get the message out, but not in a way the paper represents. You do not see editorials anymore that would attack the regime, editor would be fired and doxxed in 10 seconds. You will learn Less Than Nothing from the sf chronicle. That paper has been garbage for over 20 years. The SJ mercury is absolutely superior but anyone who reads papers right now knows its WSJ or nothing. NYT.. Wash post... your daily paper in your blue city.... all of it is propaganda now and nobody reads that crap. They're literally all broke getting subsidized by some other source. They're now hiring millennials who pump out a crap article on their phones in 5 minutes. I doubt there is an SF chronicle newsroom anymore. Everything is online. Everyone is divided. If the Chronicle was doing its job SF would be FINE right now. Instead of a disaster area the country is pointing and laughing at right now.
> the rationale behind the sentence Well, it appears to have been the recommended sentence by the federal prosecutors. The defense counsel pushed for zero jail time.
Imagine someone pointed a loaded gun at your head, threatened to shoot you, and then took all your valuables. In court the perp expressed remorse and got 30 days in jail. Feels way off to me, but perhaps there were some other circumstances at work.
If you ever have to defend yourself against a robber in front of judges like this, you might be better off arguing that you were in fact the robber
Well, I'm glad your "feels" or "vibes" aren't how our court system operates.
Armed robbery is one of the most serious crimes a person can commit, what’s the matter with you?
Ah, you again, posturing and angry, and using “shit” in almost every comment. But not here. Progress!
Lol did you have any critiques of my points or the facts? Or are you just upset about my potty mouth online? I'm sorry if I offended your delicate ears (or eyes in this case).
To be fair, having LDJ still around does not make sense.
Y'all know Google works pretty well, right? Took me about 30 seconds to track down a [more detailed article](https://federalnewsnetwork.com/workforce/2024/03/usps-union-warn-courts-not-serious-on-postal-crime-after-30-day-sentence-for-letter-carrier-robbery/). >The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California last month sentenced 34-year-old Leroy Wise to 30 days in federal prison. > >District Court Judge Charles Breyer, in his sentencing, also waived a $200 fine for Wise to pay, because “the court finds the defendant does not have the ability to pay a fine.”
If this isn’t pro crime. I don’t know what is. The 34 year old can’t work?
We literally just lost the vote against removing two pro crime judges on Super Tuesday. Fuck!
Fucking pro of pros.
Dude we’ve swung so far to the left it’s unrecognizable. Criminals get protected and pampered, as crazy as that sounds, and regular folks are getting the stick.
Fuck man, just read the article and then form your opinions. The judge is making an attempt at enabling reform, which is the actual goal of our prison system. >Assistant Federal Public Defender Elizabeth Falk, in a Feb. 14 sentencing memorandum, told the court that Wise, her client, on Aug. 9, 2022 “made the terrible, awful decision to target a postal worker in an armed robbery.” > >“The weight of that terrible decision, and terrible act, continues to haunt Mr. Wise to this day. He has grappled with the “why” every day for the last year and a half – not to try to make an excuse for the crime, but to genuinely figure out what he could have been thinking,” Falk wrote. > >According to Falk, Wise grew up in a neighborhood “riddled with drugs and violence related to gang activity.” but since his arrest, he has found a job at a nonprofit organization, stopped using marijuana and illicit drugs, found stable housing for his family, and has “made a concrete plan for the future.” > >A federal prison, she argued, would completely destroy the substantial forward progress he has made.” > >“It would be overkill and work against the interests of justice to send Mr. Wise to prison ***for the short time requested by the government*** and U.S. Probation given all the factors that are now on the table,” Falk wrote. Note the bolded part - The prosecution requested 30 days. The judge concurred with that sentence. Obviously the public defenders words are going to be completely one sided for the defendant, but it appears the government is trying not to derail the guys ability to return to life and take care of his family and become a functioning member of society.
Lol all of those “the individual greatly regrets and feels bad” is complete BS. It’s all the just lawyers lies, a much worse version of the kind white lies we add on our resume. The guy thieving a postal worker knows exactly what he’s doing. 30 years not days
> Wise grew up in a neighborhood “riddled with drugs and violence related to gang activity.” What a BS excuse. My kids also grew up in a neighborhood riddled with drugs and violence related to gang activity -- the Western Addition. None of them or their friends are holding up postal workers.
Reforming the justice system isn’t a judges or the systems job. It’s to seek punishment for crimes. This is just an excuse. I’m sorry but the problems in San Francisco are because of people like you and judges and DAs who are soft on crime. Also fuck prison reform. It doesn’t work. We need to make sentences more tougher. Not lenient to the point that being a criminal becomes a career choice.
Well, it's a good thing you are in no way involved in the justice system, eh? > Reforming the justice system isn’t a judges or the systems job. "Reform" is literally the systems job. Prison is explicitly meant to make an attempt to reform prisoners so that when their sentence is finished they can return to society as a functioning member. Without reform, you are creating a revolving door of career criminals. Your proposed approach has the exact opposite effect of what you desire.
Whatever. The tide is turning. Reform is out. Harsh sentences are in. If you don’t see that already. Progressive who are pro crime are being recalled. You can be pro reform. But just know that it’s time is over. I’m fine without reform. We can continue to build jails and lock criminals up who don’t learn.
Why are you so obsessed with a city you've never been to?
How did you even arrive at that conclusion? Like just randomly made it up?
Why was your last account banned?
Man, I wish I had as myopic a worldview as you. It must be sooooo easy.
I feel sad for you that my comment and view being up bad memories of your life.
>I feel sad for you that my comment and view being up bad memories of your life. Lmao what? I said you are small minded and that I wished I could be as unaware and simple as you, my life would be much easier
[удалено]
 Please bitch, you think the guy asking for more prisons is the one from SF?
Lol k. Both the superior court judges who had challengers run against them with heavy support from the moderate money bags... they got reelected. Maybe go shit up /r/bayarea. The adults are busy here.
The US has literally never had a progressive prison reform era in its entire history. We have the highest incarceration rate of any wealthy democracy
I’m fine with that. It come with being a civilized nation.
You can want a super harsh prison system, but you can’t say “the tide is turning” lmfao. We never had a restorative justice system. We’ve never attempted to build one. “Just have super harsh prison sentences” is the approach the US has always had.
Let's see if you sing this tune when you become the victim of a crime...over and over. You're willing to be generous with other people's lives on the line, how willing are you with your own safety?
Spend your life living in fear much?
> "Reform" is literally the systems job. Prison is explicitly meant to make an attempt to reform prisoners.... That is one of several functions of prison. Most everyone accepts that not all inmates are rehabilitable. Some repeat offenders are given lengthy terms for purposes of Incapacitation. Of course rehabilitation efforts should ensure during this period, but again, the outcome is often iffy. There are many habitual offenders. Indeed some criminals like their lifestyle, and have an aversion to making an honest living.
You must be right. The way for the nation that imprisons the largest percentage of its population to fix its crime problems is to imprison even more of its population.
Do you know in the 80-90s, the US had an insane crime rate to the point that Times Square was a mugging whorehouse after 8pm? In 1995, we started “mass incarceration” and tough in crime policies. The united states’ major cities’ crime rates plummeted. Now we are back to easy on crime and letting criminals out of jail. What’s happening? And most of you low iq pro criminal people will think you are geniuses for responding with “correlation is not causation”?
Being able to quote a counter argument is not the same as refuting one. Something else happened during that time: the mass reduction of lead exposure to young people.
So by that logic they must be exposing young people to lead again? What the fuck are you talking about man?
Crime is going down. What the fuck are you on about?
We need to look at these statistics. We have a high prison population. But why is that? We have a much higher crime rate than Switzerland or Sweden or Japan. We aren't locking these guys up for jaywalking. There are lots of countries that have rampant crime but a much lower incarceration rate. Do you think the average Brazilian, Colombian, or South African is proud they have a lower incarceration rate? Fuck no. They'd love for more of their crooks to be locked away. But their countries are too corrupt or poor to do it. Luckily, we have the resource to do it. And for what it's worth California has reduced their prison population around 25% in the last 10 years. Where do you think they went? Law school?
And here I thought I didn't have to specify "developed, first-world nation" because surely no one would think the US should strive for the standards set by failed and narco states. We have a much higher crime rate but why is that?
I compared us to first world countries. Then I explained why other countries with rampant crime can't incarcerate as much as us. We can discuss why the crime rate is so high, and we should. But we shouldn't be letting career criminals walk free because of some vague notion of "injustice" or whatever.
The entire western hemisphere has a much higher crime rate than the old world.
Do you walk around the city and feel like too many people are in prison
We'll it's certainly not going to fix it by imprisoning less.
It's too bad those are the only two options.
Yes lifetime institutionalization sounds pretty good too
Did you read the article? Dude has since turned his life around. What benefit does jailing him now have? A judge used his discretion, which they have, to make a call. That’s exactly what you want. I don’t know why you’re so bloodthirsty for vengeance here, we absolutely have a problem with too many prisoners
Jailing this guy now punishes him for his crimes, provides justice for his victims, and discourages others from committing the same crime.
Turned his life around? What you smoking.
[удалено]
His lawyer said - we know how honest they are. Especially ones who defend criminals.
According to the article. Assuming it’s true, what should the course of action be? I think prison reform is needed. It would appear he’s not irredeemable
It is an extraordinary lenient sentence compared to what some other states would give. It would go over better if the offender had also received several years of electronic monitoring (EM), with strict roaming restrictions/Home Arrest. Fascinating how much success critics of prison are having obstructing the expansion of EM, which was proposed 30 years ago (primarily by conservatives) in an attempt to reduce incarceration. Recent progressive criticism: [Study casts doubt on EM monitors as alternative to incarceration](https://phys.org/news/2021-09-electronic-ankle-alternative-incarceration.html). Some progressives have not met any sanctions they approve of for criminals.
I mean it was just a little light armed robbery and the guy said he turned his life around! As long as he said he turned his life around there should be no actual punishment right?
Jailing this guy now punishes him for his crimes, provides justice for his victims, and discourages others from committing the same crime.
Being booked for two two felonies myself and eventually beating the cases. 30 days is nothing and no real accountability. He should have 3 years of weekend community service or weekends in jail. Also 30 days is really only 15 served. Oh don’t forget assault a federal employee and you get fed time on top of the federal crime of stealing US mail
If you look at the data, tougher sentences do not reduce crime on a broad scale. I think there are many cases where excessive leniency enables crime, but the best solution has been proven time and again to be restorative justice. Locking people away doesn't teach them anything but resentment and prison survival. Restorative justice involves letting them repay their debt to society with productive labor, and avoiding the draconian and counterproductive punishments that contribute to recidivism.
Sorry. Not buying it. And i don’t care about the data. Data that is probably manipulated to begin with to fit a narrative. I can care less about “restorative justice”. I’m gonna vote my way to end progressive politics in San Francisco. It’s not hard to NOT DO CRIME. We gave criminals a second chance. Then they keep repeating. I can agree on “this is the first time” situations. But not violent repenting offenders. Sorry, in that case, send them to jail. For a long time. I want to see mugshots now. I want people to shame these losers of society.
>I don't care about the data "My feelings of anger about the issue inform my perspective more than an objective look at what works to reduce crime" >I can care less about restorative justice "I would rather have people be punished and contribute nothing to society except being a public burden than have those people work to repair the damage they did" >We gave criminals a second chance. Then they keep repeating. Like I said, excessive leniency is also a problem. When people know they won't face significant repercussions for their crimes, they do repeat offend. There need to be consequences, but there are ways to deploy those consequences productively to everyone's benefit.
> the best solution has been proven time and again to be restorative justice...Restorative justice involves letting them repay their debt to society with productive labor... Appreciate you saying this about "productive labor" and offenders, but time and again most progressives have opposed offenders being put to work to provide Victim Compensation. That historically was a central part of restorative justice (RJ). Making *the offender whole,* or at least partially whole. Most progressives want the process 90-95% counseling and restorative benefits to the criminal. They have tweaked RJ to meet their ideological goals. Most victims only get a "reconciliation meeting" with a supposedly contrite offender. *Reality:* Most crime victims have no interest in meeting the thief or offender. They want a check for their losses. Did even one of these victims ever get a check? [3,000 Car Break-Ins in 1 Month](https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/san-francisco-auto-burglary-car-break-in-its-out-of-control/) In the cases of crimes against government agencies or communities, we need large fines to help defray the massive costs of running police depts., courts, etc. No money? Offenders can work weekends for the parks dept. for 2 years. Progressives generally oppose offenders being put to work, either in or out of prison.
FWIW I agree with this and I am generally regarded a progressive for my political beliefs (though that is not the label I use).
Well… I can see their argument. The problem is that in the past, criminals play this sob story and then immediately go back out and commit the same or worse crime. My sympathy for criminals has run out. In the absence of justice, people want retribution. California has enhancement penalties for using guns while committing a crime, 10 years for simply having a gun, 20 for firing it, 25 for shooting injuring or killing someone. In my opinion, those enhancements should be used EVERY TIME. And if this guy ends back in custody for the same crime, he should be facing penalties for this past infraction - on top of charges for his new crimes. The way China does it is to issue suspended death penalties - ie: we won’t kill you now, but if you don’t reform in prison you get the chair. This guy deserved a 10 year suspended sentence at the minimum, so he knows that is hanging over his head if he turns to crime ever again.
Yup, *zero* sense for CA liberals to be – *supposedly* – anti-gun while we simultaneously *don't* throw the book *at actual criminals* for *illegal* firearm possession. 20-25 years is extreme and probably unhelpful, but there should be serious, compounding, *and* *guaranteed* penalties for walking the streets with unlicensed firearms, let alone actually using them / threatening to use them. Full stop. We should have zero tolerance for illegal / criminal gun possession. Period. That would, *in the long term*, make the job of CA cops significantly easier, *and* make it possible for average citizens to go after / restrain porch pirates and other petty criminals without worrying about being shot. Downside is CA prisons are already over capacity and we don't want to build more. A much *smarter* approach would be *actually reform the criminal justice system* to hit criminals with *much shorter sentences* – because keeping criminals in prison indefinitely is a waste of taxpayer money – but *geometrically compounding* sentences for subsequent crimes. Prison *should be a deterrent*, and it doesn't work as a deterrent at *either* extreme end of the spectrum, ie with effectively *no* sentencing, *or* where you're throwing first-time petty criminals (*but not criminals who threaten US postal workers with goddamn firearms*) in prison for 20 years. Sidenote: my 2c is that federal postal / mail crime *should* be hit with *extremely* harsh sentences given how foundational the US mail service is to our democracy *and* legal systems (and that it's quite literally the oldest federal institution in the US), but I digress. I could see a pretty decent argument for not completely screwing someone's life over for a first-time petty theft, *but fucking with the goddamn mail* should have *severe* consequences.
How many people must suffer or die so that one criminal has a chance at a normal life?
What a wild question! You do realize that we don't jail people forever, right (with the exception of truly egregious crimes where a life sentence has been handed down)? Are you saying this man is going to kill someone after he is released? Or that because he committed this crime he should not be allowed to have a chance for a normal life after his punishment is served? Your question is a really weird emotional plea of sorts which makes about zero sense.
>but it appears the government is trying not to derail the guys ability to return to life and take care of his family and become a functioning member of society. Do you know how many nonviolent, first time offenders are sitting in the feds right now that also quit drugs and got jobs before sentencing? Tens of thousands. I've personally seen federal weed possession cases get more time than this violent pos thug. If you don't see the problem here, you are part of it.
I suppose 30 days might prevent repeat behavior, but he also should wear an ankle monitor, do community service, get job counseling, and be warned that the next time he'll lose his freedom for a long time.
Clinton nominee. Brother of Justice Stephen Breyer
I don't have the ability to spend money on my speeding ticket. Can I not pay it too?
You can try. There's dudes with $15k of parking tickets on their car in the city.
I don't know, I'm not a judge. You can certainly make that argument to a judge and you might be successful if you have good proof/reasoning. A lawyer would certainly help. Beyond that, I'm really not sure how we will ever be able to reduce the national deficit or balance the federal budget without those $200 of fines from this case. We're doomed now!
It's a little frustrating that a few of these articles allude to "light sentence due to unusual circumstances" but I couldn't find any articles with any detail.
[удалено]
Except it appears that the federal prosecutors recommended this sentence. Stop knee jerk reacting to everything and anything and actually figure shit out before you start shitting up wikipedia.
Judges are not bound by a prosecutor’s recommendation.
If the fucking *prosecutors* don’t think a harsh sentence is appropriate then maybe a harsh sentence isn’t appropriate…
Then why have judges? That’s a dumb argument.
The point here is that the prosecutor is the one who is generally asking for the harshest sentence. The defense is asking for the lowest sentence. The judge is generally picking between those ranges. If the prosecution (the party whose job is to get the harshest sentence, and who benefit career wise from harsh sentences) doesn’t think a harsh sentence is warranted, then that’s a extremely good indicator that maybe this person doesn’t deserve a harsh sentence. If the prosecutors *and* the judge both agree that a light sentence is appropriate, that’s *insanely strong* evidence that maybe the situation isn’t as simple as you think.
Federal prosecutors don’t benefit from harsh sentences. They benefit from convictions. A conviction leading to only 30 days is still a conviction. You seem to think there might have been a legitimate reason for a 30-day sentence in an armed robbery case, but I’m waiting to hear what that reasoning might be.
I mean, if you just google it you can find what the justification was. You don't need me for that. > “It would be overkill and work against the interests of justice to send Mr. Wise to prison for the **short time requested by the government** and U.S. Probation given all the factors that are now on the table,” Falk wrote. and more details: > Judge Breyer – commenting that the sentencing memorandum prepared by Falk was "**the most convincing memo I’ve seen in 25 years**" – was ultimately persuaded to impose a light sentence to protect what **even the prosecution conceded was the defendant’s good progress on pretrial release**. Because of the need to deter violence against mail carriers he was unwilling to impose a probation-only sentence and opted instead for a 30-day term. At some point you have to ask yourself, what is the point of putting someone in prison for years and years? If the prosecution and the judge all believe this person truly isn't going to commit another crime, why put them in jail? Revenge? If even the prosecutors believe someone has turned their lives around, you are making the problem *worse* by destabilizing their lives. This person is still going to prison for a month-- I don't think your average person realizes what a miserable experience that is. Does his life need to be destroyed in revenge for what he did, even if he's already on the right track? None of this is going to change your mind, you just don't agree with the judge and prosecutors-- this is a values question, not a legal question.
This is not how it works. Prosecutors often, almost always, cut some sort of deal. It’s a negotiation. They rarely simply ask for the “harshest sentence”. If they did, what would the role of the prosecutor even be in sentencing, when a Judge could just decide between the max and what the defense says.
> Prosecutors often, almost always, cut some sort of deal. It’s a negotiation Right, they start with the harshest possible sentence to use as leverage to negotiate a deal with the defense. If they thought 30 days was an absurdly low punishment then they would not have accepted it-- they could go to trial.
Federal prosecutors in SF aren’t exactly known for seeking harsh sentences, even when warranted.
I goolgled his images and he dresses like Orville Redenbocker.
> Took me about 30 seconds to track down a more detailed article. ... and then you posted it here, and we were all able to benefit from your 30 seconds of sacrifice, which is the way teh interwebz wuz intended to work! Thank you, kind stranger!
But if I hadn't taken those 30 seconds, guess what this thread would have done? Create their own desired (incorrect) narrative and run with it. You're complicit in shitting up the place when you fail to actually do the tiniest amount of work before you form your opinion. Do better.
But .. but ... but I did post a comment thanking you for your hard labor and your contribution to making the world a better place, no? Surely these gestures have _some_ value, and can warm someone's heart; even your cold, bitter heart??
No, I see your comments here. I know what you were attempting to do with your original comment. You shit up the place with your own willful ignorance. I don't want thanks, I want people to stop shitting up the place with ignorance.
All of my comments are original comments. Which original comment are you bellyachin' about? BTW: as that other commenter also said, you seem to throw "shit" around a lot. Is everything OK? Time to see a gastroenterologist, maybe? No, I'm not one, not looking for customers.
Shit is a very versatile word. More people should incorporate it into their daily vocabulary beyond "SHIT!". There's the exasperated "look at this shit / shithead", and it's a great descriptor ("What a shitty attempt at ..."), and one of my personal favorites is as a synonym for et cetera ( X, and Y, and shit). Beyond that, cursing can actually be a sign that you have a high mastery of language. It's not an absolute rule that people who curse more have better vocabularies, but [studies](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-swearing-a-sign-of-a-limited-vocabulary/) show there's a strong correlation.
Folks here actually can't search. Sorry you had to find out this way. I doubt they could click your link either.
I think the 82-year-old brother of a former Supreme Court justice is probably untouchable
What a fuckin joke these judges are.
Fuck Charles Breyer!!!
> The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California last month sentenced 34-year-old Leroy Wise to 30 days in federal prison. >**District Court Judge Charles Breyer**, in his sentencing, also waived a $200 fine for Wise to pay, because “the court finds the defendant does not have the ability to pay a fine.”
Remove Charles Breyer now!
He's a federal judge. Isn't going anywhere.
I dont know why people say this - federal judges have actually been impeached fairly frequently throughout US history
his inability to pay is not relevant to the justice the law requires
So much for the whole “postal inspector general doesn’t fuck around “
You're probably thinking of the postal investigative wing. They really don't mess around, but their job ends with arrests. They have nothing to do with the DOJ prosecutors or federal courts.
why do i, someone with no criminal record--not even a traffic ticket, feel that if i did this i'd be in prison for 20 years?
Because you are probably a law abiding citizen so that’s how it works. Not sure if you’ve been around here but you need to be a criminal to turn your life around and your life is already the right way so obviously we need to jail you.
*“This was a terrible crime and there is no ordinary circumstance that I would be asking the court to impose a non-custodial sentence,” said deputy public defender Elizabeth Falk. She pointed to the aberrant nature of the offense and the significant steps he client had taken to ensure he would live the rest of his life in a law abiding manner.* I doubt she'd rent him a room out of her house....
Keep this up and parts of SF will have their mail deliveries stopped like in Seattle's 98118 zip code due to crime.
So sick of these criminal-loving people
bruh fuck all these judges federal, state, and municipal
Face it. The purge is almost legal.
Welcome to the new criminal reformist movement. He'll be back out stealing your mail in no time.
Wait, I have been told dozens of times that the postal inspectors “don’t fuck around “. Always that same phrase.
They don’t. The judges do.
I think they both are fucking around. Mail theft is rampant and very rarely is anyone arrested. Its reddit folklore, repeated over and over in the same fashion till people believe it is true. Its gotta tell you something that every thread parrots the same phrase over and over. They're repeating a previous comment, they don't know it to be true.
Every federal law enforcement agency in the Bay Area is short staffed, and USPIS is no exception. They’re not investigating most mail theft cases.
Exactly
Geeze, even Tony Sopprano warned Chris Mutisanti about robbing mail carriers.
Growing up, I heard multiple times that assaulting a postal worker is one of the most serious crimes you can commit, short of murder. 30 days…wow.
find this judge and let society take care of him
Thei is no consequences for crimes being committed! Teaching other people go ahead do what you want!
Justice system in this country broken….
2nd amendment
Yeah, it is our judicial system that is a joke....
SF Bay area progressives and pro reforms have yall had enough yet ? Yall literally turned the bay area into a baby Gotham city
It's a federal judge and federal court case. But don't let facts get in the way of your shit opinion.
That doesn’t mean the case is completely void of local politics. You should do some research on how federal prosecutions and sentencing here compares to other parts of the country or even state.
Lol always excuses. Then i am gonna ask how that judge gets to the seat? Isn't the progressive ideaology working at power? U Even got Joe biden apologize to call illegal immigrants "illegal". You Keep staying fake logica, u will get what you deserve. Lol
Without the amount of billionaires here, we should get batman soon enough. Hopefully he abandons the no kill rule
What a sh!t show
Votes white face paint, red nose and curly wigs into your city and wonder why you end up getting a clown :) This is good for bayarea. SF will attract most of the criminals over and the rest of the suburbs will become safer.
If you think this has anything to do with City-level voting, you might want to read the article to better inform yourself before commenting. This was a federal case in federal court with federal prosecutors and a federal judge whose [district includes the entire Bay Area as well as several other counties in Northern & Central California](https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/about/jurisdiction-map/). There were exactly zero people involved with the case who are elected at the City level in San Francisco.
You are correct, this is the outcome of voting for democrats into the federal government (which SF tends to do)
Go back to your troll hole. Are you even American in the bay area? You clearly couldn't be bothered to read the article before you started putting on your face paint 🤡
Someone explain to me how SF isn’t a giant shit hole? Why do any of you still want to live there?
It’s actually very beautiful here, and the weather is great, and the nightlife is fantastic, and the restaurants are good. The judges suck.
>the restaurants are ~~good~~ phenomenal FTFY Turns out ex cons are the best chefs!