the fact these individuals managed to circumvent the hurdles that normally befall those attempting to integrate back into polite society following a aggravated felony conviction speaks to the privilege they were able to leverage in spite of their overwhelming guilt. In a less liberal state such a past would have prohibited any kind of professional license and almost guaranteed life long struggle for meaningful employment. Such is the case for countless people with far less serious records.
The woke radical left loves to pretend using critical theory to attack familial traditions and institutions will result in some kind of woke utopia when time after time it has proven to be the exact opposite.
In fact the most rebellious act of subversion Chesa could commit in the current political climate is to be an unapologetic Judge Dredd style arbiter of justice that is competent at their job.
Dec 15, 2023Liked by Richard Cheverton, Pamela Fitzsimmons
I couldn’t disagree more with the contention that prison doesn’t make anyone safer. Thanks to prison and the justice system that put him there, Ward Weaver has been unable to murder more 13 year old girls and bury them in his yard for close to 20 years.
During my years as a federal prosecutor (1987-2015), I was continually amazed at how many career criminals could recite the various mandatory minimum sentences under the Federal Criminal Code for firearms, robbery, drugs, etc. Through experience, they know more criminal law than the average social worker. Statistics show a relatively small number of repeat offenders commit the bulk of the violent crimes, and locking them up for long sentences has a proven deterrent effect.
Dec 15, 2023·edited Dec 17, 2023Liked by Richard Cheverton, Pamela Fitzsimmons
I've been wanting to express my opinions about Chesa Boudin and Mike Schmidt for quite a while now. Here they are:
CHE-sa Guevarra Boudin is radical royalty and as such he is dedicated to accomplishing from within the system what his blood-drenched mother and her gang of criminals couldn't do through violence.
Like other members of the East Coast silver-spoon set, young Che sailed into the nation's most elite institutions as if he'd been enrolled in them from birth. He was happy to collect all the brass rings - a degree from Yale Law, a coveted federal judicial clerkship, a Rhodes scholarship - as his rightful due.
Even when Che decided to cast his lot with alleged criminals instead of with the world of the white-shoe law firm, he did so in a suitably posh way. His gilt-edged law degree (and, perhaps, his radical pedigree) ensured he wouldn't have to enter the San Francisco Public Defender's Office cheek by jowl with commoners but rather as a "post doctoral fellow." As one does, young Che then took another clerkship in the federal judiciary. Mind you, there are scores of law schools who report federal judicial clerkships in their placement statistics only once in a blue moon.
Having received the most prestigious legal education possible and having had the opportunity to make the most advantageous connections a young lawyer could possibly have, Che then launched an agenda that almost destroyed law and order in the once great city of San Francisco.
Compared to Boudin, Mike Schmidt is a nobody. His legal alma mater (and mine), Lewis and Clark Law School, ranks 84th in U.S. News & World's list of the "best" law schools. Viewed from the Olympian heights of Yale Law, Lewis and Clark is an ant-like speck on the pavement. While Schmidt lacks Che's extreme left lineage, he has other assets that help make up for having been born to the wrong parents. One is what must surely be a prodigious talent at sucking up to power in his ambitious pursuit of power. Also, while Che and Schmidt are both pretty boys, Schmidt is so soap-opera handsome that he makes Che look like the average grubby anarchist bro.
I hadn’t thought about that, but Boudin never got his hands dirty defending street criminals. Neither did Schmidt, yet Oregon supposedly has a dire need for criminal defense attorneys for the indigent.
You make another important point about Schmidt’s “soap-opera handsome” looks. How many voters, who don’t study the issues, browse the Voters Guide shortly before they mark their ballots and judge a candidate on his looks?
Great comment and perspective! Very insightful and amusing too. Schmidt looks like the great white hope, but he’s just not very smart. He proves it every day… 😊
Schmidt's shocking lack of attention to the legal requirements of the commutation process - failing to notify the all the victims or their survivors, for example - suggests laziness and poor delegation skills. It might also reflect an awareness on his part that the convicts he was championing were not really worthy of lenience and a reluctance to let anyone else in his office in on what he was up to.
A prosecutor friend of mine has had to deal with Schmidt on a professional level. His opinion is simple: Schmidt is a boy in every meaning of the word. Boy prosecutor, but a very ideological and dangerous one.
Dec 15, 2023Liked by Richard Cheverton, Pamela Fitzsimmons
This was so moving. And disturbing. This is yet another example of all the ongoing and relentless efforts to rewrite history and frame a situation, people and behavior, in such a way that the guilty are presented as innocent victims merely fighting to survive against a system of oppression, and if people (fathers, mothers and children) die at the hands of these individuals it is inconsequential, because the virtue of breaking the system is all that matters - the noble pursuit of the greater good! The fact that so many people fall for this crap keeps me up at night wondering how we’ve gotten here. What a twisted reality a great many of our fellow citizens now live in. The Propaganda machine is hard at work in PDX (at the Oregon Museum of SCIENCE and Industry no less). Where Science, when understood properly would never, ever allow such a film to be hosted in the halls of a Science Museum - what a crock! After all, the 4 hallmarks of scientific critical thinking are to be: objective, comprehensive, transparent, and empirical. This film lacks all of these qualities while Pamela’s article here, checks off all 4. Job well done.
The reference to Thomas Gaddis, the man behind the “Birdman of Alcatraz” is a fascinating example of Fitzsimmon’ painstaking research.
When I attended the University of Oregon in the 70s I was aware of what I now know was Gaddis’ Project Newgate,” which turned into a real disaster as hardened, violent criminals who had conned their way into the program.groomed and abused naive young students. I took criminal Justice classes in those years and saw a couple shy sorority students whose previous idea of wild life was having a beer turn into injectable drug addicts scamming for their new inmate boyfriends. Even the UofO had to admit Project Newgate was a disaster, and closed it down!
A superb deconstruction of the group of Quislings who have infiltrated the American justice system.
Armed with the self-righteous absolutism of their fanaticism, they are pulling apart the very support blocks of a safe and sane Democratic legal system that had promised to protect all its citizens from assault, attack, and murder, and to do so without “fear, favor or promise of reward.”
Fitzsimmons reveals the historical facts that the MSM either ignores, or more sadly and likely, was never even aware of!
Bravo! This is such a great article. The research and work that goes into your articles is so apparent. You present the hypocrisy of Mikey Boy, and poor, deluded Chesa, so well! That the only humans are the fukk ups who end up arrested for violent crimes and headed to the joint!!
God forbid police officers might be considered human. Thats just too hard for the mental defectives like Chesa and Mikey, and their loser “parents.”
Rob a Brinks truck?? That in itself showed how stupid and ignorant they all were. They both deserved their decades in prison, because they were all callous murderers and also because they were so unbelievably stupid they thought they could rob a Brinks truck.
Mikey Boy, and orphan Chesa deserve each other. They are able to turn off human emotions if it means a police officer was killed. Because to them police are not human. I detest both of them, and their stupid friends. They don’t care about anyone but themselves… they are hollow men…
After the film, I went up to Chesa and told him that whenever Portlanders turn out to protest police shootings of a black man, they always yell, “Say his name!” I told Chesa I didn’t hear the names of the security guard and two police officers who were killed. I asked him if he could say their names.
Chesa first said I could get the names online from old news stories. I asked him if he could say their names out loud right then and there. He did, looking at me and speaking each name distinctly. But then he followed up with a poor excuse about why the film barely touched on the dead men and their families.
“Privacy issues,” he said.
Something else you might find of note (and a reflection of Ollie's comment), audience members seemed more interested in Boudin than Schmidt. They flocked around Boudin, one even asked him if he was going to run for San Francisco DA again. He isn't. He's sticking with academia.
the fact these individuals managed to circumvent the hurdles that normally befall those attempting to integrate back into polite society following a aggravated felony conviction speaks to the privilege they were able to leverage in spite of their overwhelming guilt. In a less liberal state such a past would have prohibited any kind of professional license and almost guaranteed life long struggle for meaningful employment. Such is the case for countless people with far less serious records.
The woke radical left loves to pretend using critical theory to attack familial traditions and institutions will result in some kind of woke utopia when time after time it has proven to be the exact opposite.
In fact the most rebellious act of subversion Chesa could commit in the current political climate is to be an unapologetic Judge Dredd style arbiter of justice that is competent at their job.
I couldn’t disagree more with the contention that prison doesn’t make anyone safer. Thanks to prison and the justice system that put him there, Ward Weaver has been unable to murder more 13 year old girls and bury them in his yard for close to 20 years.
During my years as a federal prosecutor (1987-2015), I was continually amazed at how many career criminals could recite the various mandatory minimum sentences under the Federal Criminal Code for firearms, robbery, drugs, etc. Through experience, they know more criminal law than the average social worker. Statistics show a relatively small number of repeat offenders commit the bulk of the violent crimes, and locking them up for long sentences has a proven deterrent effect.
I've been wanting to express my opinions about Chesa Boudin and Mike Schmidt for quite a while now. Here they are:
CHE-sa Guevarra Boudin is radical royalty and as such he is dedicated to accomplishing from within the system what his blood-drenched mother and her gang of criminals couldn't do through violence.
Like other members of the East Coast silver-spoon set, young Che sailed into the nation's most elite institutions as if he'd been enrolled in them from birth. He was happy to collect all the brass rings - a degree from Yale Law, a coveted federal judicial clerkship, a Rhodes scholarship - as his rightful due.
Even when Che decided to cast his lot with alleged criminals instead of with the world of the white-shoe law firm, he did so in a suitably posh way. His gilt-edged law degree (and, perhaps, his radical pedigree) ensured he wouldn't have to enter the San Francisco Public Defender's Office cheek by jowl with commoners but rather as a "post doctoral fellow." As one does, young Che then took another clerkship in the federal judiciary. Mind you, there are scores of law schools who report federal judicial clerkships in their placement statistics only once in a blue moon.
Having received the most prestigious legal education possible and having had the opportunity to make the most advantageous connections a young lawyer could possibly have, Che then launched an agenda that almost destroyed law and order in the once great city of San Francisco.
Compared to Boudin, Mike Schmidt is a nobody. His legal alma mater (and mine), Lewis and Clark Law School, ranks 84th in U.S. News & World's list of the "best" law schools. Viewed from the Olympian heights of Yale Law, Lewis and Clark is an ant-like speck on the pavement. While Schmidt lacks Che's extreme left lineage, he has other assets that help make up for having been born to the wrong parents. One is what must surely be a prodigious talent at sucking up to power in his ambitious pursuit of power. Also, while Che and Schmidt are both pretty boys, Schmidt is so soap-opera handsome that he makes Che look like the average grubby anarchist bro.
I hadn’t thought about that, but Boudin never got his hands dirty defending street criminals. Neither did Schmidt, yet Oregon supposedly has a dire need for criminal defense attorneys for the indigent.
You make another important point about Schmidt’s “soap-opera handsome” looks. How many voters, who don’t study the issues, browse the Voters Guide shortly before they mark their ballots and judge a candidate on his looks?
I sure can’t judge ‘em I guess. To me Schmidt just looks like a dork.
And they certainly can't hurt Schmidt's relations with the ladies* who run Multnomah County.
*Ironically speaking . . .
Great comment and perspective! Very insightful and amusing too. Schmidt looks like the great white hope, but he’s just not very smart. He proves it every day… 😊
Schmidt's shocking lack of attention to the legal requirements of the commutation process - failing to notify the all the victims or their survivors, for example - suggests laziness and poor delegation skills. It might also reflect an awareness on his part that the convicts he was championing were not really worthy of lenience and a reluctance to let anyone else in his office in on what he was up to.
A prosecutor friend of mine has had to deal with Schmidt on a professional level. His opinion is simple: Schmidt is a boy in every meaning of the word. Boy prosecutor, but a very ideological and dangerous one.
This was so moving. And disturbing. This is yet another example of all the ongoing and relentless efforts to rewrite history and frame a situation, people and behavior, in such a way that the guilty are presented as innocent victims merely fighting to survive against a system of oppression, and if people (fathers, mothers and children) die at the hands of these individuals it is inconsequential, because the virtue of breaking the system is all that matters - the noble pursuit of the greater good! The fact that so many people fall for this crap keeps me up at night wondering how we’ve gotten here. What a twisted reality a great many of our fellow citizens now live in. The Propaganda machine is hard at work in PDX (at the Oregon Museum of SCIENCE and Industry no less). Where Science, when understood properly would never, ever allow such a film to be hosted in the halls of a Science Museum - what a crock! After all, the 4 hallmarks of scientific critical thinking are to be: objective, comprehensive, transparent, and empirical. This film lacks all of these qualities while Pamela’s article here, checks off all 4. Job well done.
I would so like to pass out a printed copy of your article to every person attending a screening of the Beyond Bars film. Anyone up for that?
You could, with Pamela’s permission email the link, and perhaps even email a pdf of it. Spam it to the powers that be. Maybe we all should. Hmmmm…
The reference to Thomas Gaddis, the man behind the “Birdman of Alcatraz” is a fascinating example of Fitzsimmon’ painstaking research.
When I attended the University of Oregon in the 70s I was aware of what I now know was Gaddis’ Project Newgate,” which turned into a real disaster as hardened, violent criminals who had conned their way into the program.groomed and abused naive young students. I took criminal Justice classes in those years and saw a couple shy sorority students whose previous idea of wild life was having a beer turn into injectable drug addicts scamming for their new inmate boyfriends. Even the UofO had to admit Project Newgate was a disaster, and closed it down!
A superb deconstruction of the group of Quislings who have infiltrated the American justice system.
Armed with the self-righteous absolutism of their fanaticism, they are pulling apart the very support blocks of a safe and sane Democratic legal system that had promised to protect all its citizens from assault, attack, and murder, and to do so without “fear, favor or promise of reward.”
Fitzsimmons reveals the historical facts that the MSM either ignores, or more sadly and likely, was never even aware of!
Bravo! This is such a great article. The research and work that goes into your articles is so apparent. You present the hypocrisy of Mikey Boy, and poor, deluded Chesa, so well! That the only humans are the fukk ups who end up arrested for violent crimes and headed to the joint!!
God forbid police officers might be considered human. Thats just too hard for the mental defectives like Chesa and Mikey, and their loser “parents.”
Rob a Brinks truck?? That in itself showed how stupid and ignorant they all were. They both deserved their decades in prison, because they were all callous murderers and also because they were so unbelievably stupid they thought they could rob a Brinks truck.
Mikey Boy, and orphan Chesa deserve each other. They are able to turn off human emotions if it means a police officer was killed. Because to them police are not human. I detest both of them, and their stupid friends. They don’t care about anyone but themselves… they are hollow men…
After the film, I went up to Chesa and told him that whenever Portlanders turn out to protest police shootings of a black man, they always yell, “Say his name!” I told Chesa I didn’t hear the names of the security guard and two police officers who were killed. I asked him if he could say their names.
Chesa first said I could get the names online from old news stories. I asked him if he could say their names out loud right then and there. He did, looking at me and speaking each name distinctly. But then he followed up with a poor excuse about why the film barely touched on the dead men and their families.
“Privacy issues,” he said.
Something else you might find of note (and a reflection of Ollie's comment), audience members seemed more interested in Boudin than Schmidt. They flocked around Boudin, one even asked him if he was going to run for San Francisco DA again. He isn't. He's sticking with academia.
Great comment. I love that you went there! I wish I had, but I had family obligations, namely Don.
His response sounds disingenuous, which shows that he doesn’t care at all. People like Boudin nauseate me…