Liberal judge who could have put cop killer in prison: Sorry!

You didn't hear a lot about the murder of New York police officer Randolph Holder, because #blacklivesdontmatter if they're cops, and especially if the suspected killer is also black. That is of no use in furthering liberal narratives, and it also doesn't help the news media in provoking one of its favorite things - race riots.

But there are a lot of reasons you should have heard about this murder, not least of which was the fact that the apparent killer never should have been on the streets in the first placd. With a long rap sheet, Tyrone Howard was a fairly obvious candidate for serious prison time when he was convicted six months before the murder of Officer Holder. But alas, there is this thing called a "drug diversion program," which is designed to reduce the prison population and is based on the notion that drug criminals aren't really dangerous. They just need help man. And all Howard needed as a liberal judge who bought into this nonsense, and he got that in the form of Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Justice Patricia Nuñez, who took her cue from her colleague state Supreme Court Justice Edward McLaughlin. So a guy that anyone should have seen was dangerous does no prison time, is quickly returned to the streets, and now a good cop is dead:

Officer Randolph Holder's killing Tuesday has raised questions about the risks and potential shortcomings of drug courts, or drug diversion programs, which have been embraced nationwide as a way to ease jail overcrowding and reduce crime by attacking it at one of its sources: drug abuse. New York's mayor and police commissioner have branded Howard a career criminal who had once been arrested in a 2009 gunfight on an East Harlem basketball court and should not have been out on the streets.

---

"He would have been the last person in New York City I would've wanted to see in the diversion program," Police Commissioner William Bratton said. Yet another judge who handled the case said Howard — a longtime PCP user who despite his long rap sheet had no convictions for violent crimes — was a compelling candidate for drug court. "I don't get a crystal ball when I get the robe," said state Supreme Court Justice Edward McLaughlin. He defended his decision as "accurate and appropriate," saying that doing time hadn't helped Howard before.

Give some thought to that last statement by McLaughlin. He thought it made sense to send Howard to drug diversion rather than prison because doing time hadn't helped him before. The first responsibility of the justice system is to help innocent members of the public remain safe from criminals, not to "help" the criminals. Of course it's a worthy goal to help someone get back on the right path if they want to and if they're willing to work at it. But when a guy is just clearly a career criminal and that's all he has any interest in being, your imperative is not to help him, but to make sure he can't do any further harm to the public. If the guy has already been the prison, and he's still as dangerous a criminal as he was before, then that's all the more reason to lock him up again and this time for longer than before. Who cares if it "helps him"? You lock him up for everyone else's safety. It's fine and good for these judges to now express regret because their stupid decision got a cop killed, but if they continue to think their job as judges is to help criminals, then there's no reason to think they won't repeatedly make the same mistake. The solution is to replace them with new judges who understand their actual job.