DC prosecutor brings numerous Jan. 6 charges, overlooks certain city violence cases
Crime in Washington, D.C.: A Crisis in the Nation’s Capital
Six months ago, the Washington Examiner delved into the problems plaguing Washington, D.C. Since then, the situation has only worsened. However, there may be a glimmer of hope on the horizon. In this series, we will explore how the capital ended up with such a high crime rate, how it impacts its global reputation, and what can be done to turn things around. In part three, we focus on one prosecutor who has taken a special interest in the events of Jan. 6, sometimes at the expense of other cases.
The Controversial Approach of U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves
U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves has gained national attention for his tough stance on defendants involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol breach. At the same time, violent crime rates in Washington, D.C. skyrocketed under his watch last year.
This has led to criticism of Graves, who was appointed by President Joe Biden as Washington’s chief prosecutor in 2021.
Graves recently announced that his office has brought charges against over 1,300 defendants involved in the Jan. 6 riot since 2021. Many of them have been convicted through plea deals or jury trials. The charges range from minor trespassing violations to rare seditious conspiracy felonies.
However, some critics, like former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy, argue that the Department of Justice would not typically charge minor infractions like they have against these defendants. McCarthy believes that these cases are being pursued to serve the Democrats’ political agenda, rather than focusing on more serious crimes.
Graves’s Focus on Jan. 6 vs. Local Violent Crime
While Graves’s efforts to prosecute Jan. 6 cases have drawn attention, his approach to local violent crime has also faced scrutiny. In fiscal 2022, his office declined to prosecute nearly 70% of suspects who were arrested, raising concerns about his priorities.
Homicides, gun violence, robberies, and carjackings have plagued Washington, D.C. in recent years. Homicide rates reached a 20-year high, and carjackings doubled from the previous year.
Graves has acknowledged the issue of violence and promised a “surge of resources” to address it. However, critics question whether he should have allocated fewer resources to nonviolent suspects from the Jan. 6 breach and focused more on those who committed acts of violence and destruction.
Diverting Resources and Backlogged Courts
Some critics, like former U.S. attorney Brett Tolman, argue that the focus on Jan. 6 cases has diverted precious law enforcement resources away from tackling more serious crimes. Tolman believes that Graves and the Department of Justice saw this as a politically expedient moment.
The U.S. attorney’s office has confirmed that only 3% of its federal prosecutors are assigned to Jan. 6-related cases. However, this figure does not account for prosecutors brought in from other cities to handle these cases.
Defense attorney William Shipley has observed prosecutors from various cities working on Capitol riot cases. He also points out that the court system is backlogged, with one small court and multiple other cases to handle.
Declination Rate and Prosecutorial Discretion
Graves’s high declination rate, where his office declines to prosecute suspects who have been arrested, has raised eyebrows. In fiscal 2022, the declination rate reached 67%, the highest in the last decade. Although it decreased to 56% in fiscal 2023, it remains significantly high.
Graves has defended his declination rate, citing reasons such as lacking evidence, objections from victims, and prosecutorial discretion. He argues that flooding the judicial system with cases that will ultimately be dismissed is not beneficial for public safety.
However, critics like former federal prosecutor Zack Smith believe that the declination rate is too high, suggesting that the office is only interested in pursuing cases that are presented perfectly.
Graves’s Efforts on Jan. 6 Cases
Graves’s office has been actively involved in prosecuting Jan. 6 cases, maintaining a live database of prosecutions. He has emphasized that his office will continue to bring cases, including trespassing cases, and is seeking public assistance to identify individuals who were violent toward police officers during the breach.
Graves recognizes the harm caused by the mob that stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6 and the injuries sustained by police officers. He has faced criticism for his prosecutorial decisions regarding Jan. 6, but he maintains that the situation was unique and unlike any other crime.
It is important to note that improving violent crime in Washington is not solely Graves’s responsibility. There are various factors at play, including controversial positions taken by the D.C. Council and the role of the district attorney general in prosecuting juvenile offenders.
As the debate continues, Graves’s office remains committed to bringing justice to those involved in the Jan. 6 riot.
What measures should U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves and the Department of Justice take to address the backlog of local violent crime cases and improve the criminal justice system’s efficiency in Washington, D.C
Ed, which means that cases involving local violent crimes are experiencing significant delays in their prosecution.
The backlog in the court system has further exacerbated the issue of crime in Washington, D.C. Victims of violent crimes are left waiting for justice, and criminals are left free to commit more crimes while awaiting trial or resolution of their cases. This not only undermines public safety but also erodes trust in the criminal justice system.
An Urgent Need for Change and Collaboration
The situation in Washington, D.C. calls for a comprehensive approach that addresses both the Jan. 6 cases and the local violent crime crisis. While it is important to hold those responsible for the Capitol breach accountable, it should not come at the expense of neglecting other crimes that pose a direct threat to the safety and well-being of the city’s residents.
U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves must reconsider his priorities and allocate resources accordingly. This may entail bringing in additional prosecutors to handle the backlog of local violent crime cases and assisting with the overwhelmed court system.
Moreover, collaboration with local law enforcement agencies and community organizations is essential. Together, they can develop proactive strategies to prevent crime, improve community-police relations, and provide support and resources to those affected by violence.
Additionally, it is crucial that the Department of Justice review its approach to charging and prosecuting cases related to the Jan. 6 riot. While it is necessary to pursue justice, it should be done in a fair and impartial manner, without giving precedence to political motives.
Conclusion
The crime crisis in Washington, D.C. demands immediate attention and action. U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves and the Department of Justice must reevaluate their priorities and focus on effectively addressing both the Jan. 6 cases and the ongoing local violent crime problem. Collaboration with local law enforcement and community organizations is crucial for developing comprehensive solutions that prioritize public safety and rebuild trust in the criminal justice system. Only by working together can we hope to turn the tide and restore security and stability to the nation’s capital.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
