Facebook
Fark
digg
Reddit
Stumble
Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson
Viewing video requires the latest version of Adobe's Flash Player
Thursday, March 1, 2012 | 7:30 p.m.
Clark County's new District Attorney is striking out with the public on his first big decision. Steve Wolfson says it's not in the community's interest to prosecute the cop who kicked a motorist in the head. Hear from him next on Face to Face.
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Post a comment
More Video »
- Locally owned and independent since 1950; Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, best news website in the nation & DuPont Award for broadcast journalism
John, Why all the focus on Seelkatz. Yant is still on the hook for perjury at the minimum. Colling should be charged with assault with a deadly weapon and kidnapping. And why are we ignoring the murder of Ruslan Zhgenti by HPD officer Edward Little (http://wp.me/P2bnGV-1e). There is no way to justify the prosecution of Ben Hawkins and not prosecuting Little. Hawkins has evidence to support his self defense claim, while Little has nothing to corroborate his claim he killed his lover's husband in self-defense. Quite the opposite, witnesses have contradicted Little and his lover at every turn.
We are all victims of police corruption. Stand up for us or you will see how wrong you are about this being a popularity contest come election day.
Jon, this was a great interview. The questions you asked have to be answered as a minimal first step of many before the public is going to be lured from the perception so well articulated by bghs1986 that, "we are all victims of police (and DA--my addition) corruption". Rather than use the length of time between the outrageous conduct of Seelkatz (not his first time, apparently, as it is turning out) as an excuse not to prosecute this criminal, it should be used as a reason to prosecute criminally those who covered up the video (and irrefutable evidence) for so long.
Can you imagine what the criminal gang in uniform would be saying if that were a video of an off-duty policeman being kicked 5 times by a Crips member? Would the DA have the same forgiving attitude just because a member of the second gang (the Crips) had prevented the tape from being viewed for five years--must less 15 months?
The common law and Constitutional protections that gang #1 (the uniformed gang) constantly stand behind are designed to protect the non-uniformed public from abuse by government apparatchiks--not to protect those abusers (and at least 99% of the violence perpetuated throughout history is inflicted by government actors--as the Founding Fathers understood) from prosecution for their crimes.
What we need more than anything is a DA who is willing to educate the jury how much more serious an act committed by a "law" "enforcement" official is than same act committed by some common criminal. In fact, we now know that former DA Roger (and most former DAs?) were covertly and illegally working FOR the uniformed criminal defendants! It should come as NO surprise that juries never convicted these thugs. Maybe that DA, at least, should be prosecuted for not doing the job we (not the police) all paid him to do? Other countries permit private individuals to initiate criminal lawsuits against criminals. Maybe this monopoly power should be snatched from the DA. Keep asking the questions, please, Jon. No one else is doing it. You are the only link we have to logic, sanity and eventual justice. Ed Uehling