By Earl Ofari Hutchinson
Contributing Columnist
On July 12, I met with Los Angeles County District Attorney candidate Nathan Hochman.
In some early polls, he is the favorite to unset current District Attorney George Gascón in the November election. Hochman wanted to sell me not just on his candidacy, but how badly Gascón allegedly has dropped the ball as district attorney.
Specifically, he contended that Gascón has been a towering failure in lowering crime rates. The latest reports on crime do show an uptick in some types of crime, but the big bugaboo in crime statistic watching and public concern is always the rate of violent crime.
It is up in Los Angeles. I immediately reached out to Gascón to give him equal time to respond to Hochman’s assault on him for allegedly not doing enough to curb violent crime in the city. I made it clear that Gascón would have equal time to respond whenever he chooses.
Even before Hochman made the charge to me about Gascón’s alleged failure on crime fighting, and in all his campaign appearances and interviews, I repeatedly said that Gascón was in an unenviable position. He is damned when he does and damned when he doesn’t.
The when he does is delivering on his long-standing promises to crack down on police misconduct cases. The damned when he doesn’t is when he doesn’t file charges against officers who abuse their badge. But the real gripe about Gascón has been his alleged softness on violent crime.
During his nearly four-year tenure as district attorney, he has been the target of multiple recall efforts. All targeted him under the guise that he is too soft on crime.
The recall hit on him was not undertaken by a public outraged on this issue, though many are motivated by that fear. It was a well-funded and well-orchestrated campaign by prison guard associations, police unions and associations, victims’ rights groups, disgruntled deputy district attorney and their associations and a legion of conservative talking heads to nail Gascón. Most have endorsed Hochman.
Their alleged beef with him was and is that his reforms swing the prison and jail gates wide open and unloose hordes of dangerous criminals back on the streets. Unfortunately, the campaign was filled with a dose of half-truths, distortions, and out-and-out lies about Gascón’s reforms.
His greatest sin to them remains that he believes that district attorneys should not simply be about the business of locking up as many folk as possible, the overwhelming majority of whom are poor, Black and Hispanic. He is one of an increasing number of reform-minded district attorneys nationally who believe that equal protection under the law is something more than just noble words on a scrap of paper.
This means enforcing the law in a fair, impartial, even-handed, and — most importantly — just way.
That is just the starting point to try and make sense of why Gascón instantly raised the hackles of the right and the old guard law enforcement establishment and why Hochman has drawn so much support in his bid to oust Gascón.
Traditionally, district attorneys are a fixed extension of policing. Their mandate is a single-minded focus on prosecutions, convictions and maximum incarceration for offenders.
Their one-dimensional approach to the criminal justice system has made them virtually immune to any talk of reform, which would mean finding ways to provide services and support to at-risk individuals to prevent criminal activity and reduce the chance of recidivism. Traditionally, district attorneys have another mandate. That is to turn as blind an eye as possible to police misconduct.
District attorneys know that if they forget that and start holding cops who break the law accountable, there will be a loud howl from police unions and associations. They will suddenly find themselves the target of a relentless big-money campaign to dump them from office. Few district attorneys have the stomach to risk that.
Thus it is no surprise then that district attorneys have been the loudest proponents of three-strikes laws. With few exceptions, district attorneys also were the loudest in protesting any relaxing or outright repeal of three-strikes laws.
Then there’s the public. Gascón’s opponents such as Hochman again repeatedly cite public concern over alleged rising crime as their rationale for going after him. That is an easy card to play.
Simply mention crime and that always stirs anxiety and terror among many. The fear card is even easier to play with middle-class to wealthy, business people and homeowners.
Toss in the conjured image of packs of poor young Blacks and Hispanics running roughshod through their neighborhoods, and that part of the public is off to the races demanding a crackdown.
Gascón continually refers to the need for “prosecutorial excellence” in his approach to criminal justice reform. A major part of that is prosecuting and winning convictions against cops who wantonly use deadly force against civilians.
He has done that in some cases and hasn’t in others. That is why he is dammed when he does and damned when he doesn’t. And that is what Hochman told me. Now it’s time for Gascón to respond.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His forthcoming book is “President Trump’s America” (Middle Passage Press). He also is the host of the weekly Hutchinson Report on KPFK 90.7 FM Los Angeles and the Pacifica Network.
