The Times Finds a Prosecutor It Likes

We have written a number of times about Mary Moriarty, the leftist who now serves as County Attorney for Hennepin County, Minnesota. Moriarty is a former public defender who thinks her job as prosecutor is to take the side of criminals. When she was sworn in as county attorney, did she put her hand on the Bible or perhaps a copy of the Constitution? No: she rested it on a graphic novel about the life of Democratic Congressman John Lewis. She is known for her view that the human brain isn’t really developed until age 25, so that criminals under that age–most criminals, I would think–should not be seriously punished no matter what they do (e.g., in one case, murdering a woman in the course of a home invasion).

You can imagine what the New York Times thinks of Moriarty. Of course, they have to be delicate in how they describe her career. Many things must be omitted.

The Times seems puzzled by the fact that Moriarty has become deeply unpopular because of her soft-on-crime approach. For an explanation, they turned to Moriarty herself:

In an interview, Ms. Moriarty, 60, said she was under no illusion that the vision she campaigned on would be easy to carry out. But the intensity of the pushback she has seen has been jarring, she said.

“I actually find it hard to believe we’re in the city where George Floyd happened,” she said. “It’s very easy to scare people with crime. It’s a tactic that people have used forever and it’s starting to work again.”

But of course, there is a reason why people are scared of crime. It isn’t a right-wing plot. People don’t want to be shot, stabbed, robbed or raped. Moriarty apparently finds this odd.

The Times gives considerable space to Moriarty’s prosecution of State Trooper Ryan Londregan, which we wrote about here and here. The Times presents a sanitized version of the case, while acknowledging that public officials, including Democrats, have been critical of the prosecution. The Times also notes that Moriarty hired a use of force expert to help analyze the case, but stopped working with him when he told her that Londregan’s actions were justified. And the Times does quote Londregan’s lawyer, Chris Madel.

This is what happened: A convicted felon (a fact not mentioned by the Times) named Ricky Cobb was driving down a major highway in the Twin Cities in the middle of the night with no taillights. He was pulled over by the State Patrol, Londregan and his partner. They ran Cobb’s identity through the computer and found that there was an arrest warrant out for him. So their duty was to pick him up (a fact glossed over by the Times). They instructed Cobb to get out of his car, but he refused (a fact not mentioned by the Times). He likely refused because he had a gun in the car (a fact not mentioned by the Times) and, if arrested, would be subject to a prison term for being a felon illegally in possession of a firearm (a fact not mentioned by the Times).

Because Cobb refused to get out of his vehicle, Londregan’s partner opened the driver’s door and reached into the vehicle to unbuckle Cobb and pull him out. At the same time, Londregan opened the passenger side door and leaned into the car with his weapon drawn so he could cover his partner in case the wanted felon had a gun (he did). At that point, Cobb hit the gas and tried to flee (a fact glossed over by the Times). Both troopers were flung violently from the car, with Londregan’s partner being thrown into the right-hand lane of traffic (a fact not mentioned by the Times). It was only through luck or the grace of God–take your pick–that he was not run over and killed. Knowing that both he and his partner were in grave physical danger, as he was being thrown from the car, Londregan fired at the fleeing Cobb. No wonder the use of force expert said he did the right thing!

The Londregan case is likely to mark a turning point in attitudes toward law enforcement in the Twin Cities. It has utterly discredited Mary Moriarty and there has been an outpouring of public support for Londregan (a fact not mentioned by the Times).

The paper gives the last word to a local professor who heads a Center for the Study of Black Life and the Law:

“This is the first time we’ve ever had in our lives prosecutors that are willing to say: ‘What about all the people I’m throwing in jail?’” he said. “They’ve taken Black Lives Matter and they’ve actualized it.”

That actually sums it up fairly well. But a prosecutor’s job is to protect the public by prosecuting criminals. It is the victims of crime, not the criminals, who should be represented by the prosecutor’s office. Across the country, people who foolishly voted for far-left prosecutors are learning what it is like to live in a lawless society.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses