Unfortunately, I would be inclined to agree with the prosecutor. The problem is that prosecutors office is unable to accept money from a citizen in regards XXXXX XXXXX specific case. Prosecutors are held to a very high ethical standard and the acceptance of money directed at any case specifically creates an impression of impropriety.
Having said that, there may be other recourse. Based on your statement, I assume there is already a warrant out for this persons arrest. If so, he is faced with the possibility of being arrested repeatedly until the warrant is resolved. And, of course, if he is ever arrested anywhere in Washington, he will be held in jail until the case is resolved.
Please let me know if anything needs clarification.
Also, several customers have asked how they may direct a question to me in particular. If you specifically want me to assist you in your legal matter, just put "FOR JOSEPH" in the subject line and I will gladly pick up the question as soon as I am on-line.
I have been told by the police that 2 of the crimes, firearms theft and check forgery, were federal offenses and that would be justification for the County to pay for the extradition from CA to WA. It's not that they don't have the money, which would be under $2000.00 (he stole over $11,000.00), but whether or not they "want to" spend the money...there's politics envolved here, and if the victim had been a person of "influence", the decision would likely have been different. My offer to pay was only in the event that the County PA's Office would not. In addition to the theft, the criminal failed to appear for a jail sentence (for which there is already a misdemeaner warrant issued - in state only), he is wanted for unpaid child support, unemployment fraud, $5000 in unpaid fines, and about $10,000 owed to 2 different collection agencies.
None of this is final at this time, but the PA's Office has been sitting on this for over a month...they have been promising a decision for the past 2 wks., but always have an excuse for a delay...today they assured me there would be an definite answer by next Wed.
I'll bet your advice is to be patient and wait to do anything else until I find out for sure what their decision is. The evidence against him is indisputable, so what reasons could they possibly have not to issue a nationwide bench warrant for his arrest and find a way to pay for the extradition??
I would suggest that you alluded to the answer yourself, it comes down to a decision as to where to spend the money. Is the money there? Sure. Should it be spent on this particular defendant? Well, the government's answer to that question may very well be no.
If, in fact, the federal government files charges, then prosecution would seem more likely. In that event, the feds would have the authority to pick him up anywhere in the US and would be much more likely to transfer him to the appropriate jurisdiction for prosecution.
Are there any precedents where someone other than the PA's Office has picked up the tab for extradition?? Is it not different to allow someone to pay for a plane ticket than to "accept money directed at a case", which may appear to be a bribe. In one case you're merely paying a bill for travel...in the other your accepting money that may influence the outcome and violate the persons rights. Making sure he's brought to trial will not determine whether or not he gets a fair trial...right??
I wrote the above before I received your last answer and hope you will still address the questions...Also, following up on your last answer...How do you get the feds to file charges...??
One reason that the prosecutor cannot accept money is that it creates an appearance of a wealthier victim being able to "buy" justice. Whether you pay money to the prosecutor or to an airline company, it creates the same impression. And no, I am unaware of any situation in any court where an individual provided money for extradition.
As to the feds, an individual can't really "get the feds to file charges". Rather, this would be up to local law enforcement and/or the local prosecutor. If they deemed it appropriate, they would contact the appropriate federal entity, report the allegations and inquire as to whether the feds might desire to take over the prosecution.
Actually, yes. Whether we agree or not, our system is founded on the rights of the accused. While victims certainly have rights, their rights are trumped by the rights of the accused. The thought of our founding fathers was that the rights of the accused must be paramount to help ensure that an innocent man is never wrongly convicted.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).