That case was particularly staggering because a jury found Liang guilty of manslaughter after a trial, and the judge reduced the charge to criminally negligent homicide.

That almost never happens.
It might be one thing if Justice Chun gave non-incarcetory sentences to everyone.

That isn't the case. In fact it is so very far from being the case.
In that case the DA had asked for 18 years prison (which was a stunningly high recommendation for a child charged with felony murder) but Chun actually went above that.

Some jurors said afterwards they did not understand Marcell could receive anything like that sort of time.
It is not a coincidence that Justice Chun hears cases involving police officers. They are steered to his part. The same way other judges handle most DWI cases or most domestic violence cases.
These are just his greatest hits - or misses - there are more.

And, please don't let this read as Justice Danny Chun is the problem and if he weren't on the bench we would have fair and just police prosecutions.
Yes he is a huge problem. He should not be hearing police cases. But there is a similar problem in every borough of New York City. Why do police cases in the Bronx always go before Justices Robert Neary or Steven Barrett, who are also sympathetic to cops?
But the problem is not one judge, or even these three judges. It's certainly *a* problem when police defendant and police complainant cases get steered towards certain pro-police judges. But of course the problem is bigger than that. It's the whole entire damn corrupt system.
You can follow @DrRJKavanagh.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: