Is Baratta Running For Prosecutor or Persecutor?

On his campaign webpage, Northampton County District Attorney candidate Steve Baratta launches a quiver full of arrows, in the forlorn hope that one finds its mark. Part of his barrage is the claim that "t]he current District Attorney [Terry Houck] gives little effort and support to our crime victims. He, quite simply, does not care. His lack of attention to victims and ongoing failures to provide the opportunity for victims to participate in the prosecutorial process have become a common theme." Unlike Houck, Baratta claims he "understands the importance of providing support and guidance to victims and families who have endured domestic violence, psychological trauma from victimization or have been injured by crimes of violence." He pledges to build "authentic relationships." Without question, crime victims have rights, and prosecutors have a responsibility to look out for them. They also have a special responsibility to be fair to criminal defendants. They are prosecutors, not persecutors. In his pursuit of the District Attorney office, Baratta has unfortunately stepped all over the rights of both defendants and victims.

At last week's televised debate and in one of his campaign mailers, Baratta took Houck to task for his handling of a homicide case that arises from a fentanyl overdose. These are difficult cases. You have to provide specific evidence of the drug that killed a victim, and must show that the specific batch supplied by the dealer contained that drug and was used.  This requires expert testimony about a new drug and the expert is busy testifying across the country. Houck's office has been forced to ask the state Superior Court for an extension because of the delay involved. 

In last week's debate and in at least one of his mailers, Baratta refers to the victim of that homicide and also erroneously claimed that the Defendant is on the streets while waiting for a ruling. He made these remarks with no regard how it might upset the victim's family or prejudice a Defendant who is presumed innocent.   

Out of respect for the family of the victim, I decline to mention this case. But a neutral party who met recently with the victim's father said he is outraged that Baratta would keep harping on this matter by name, which only adds to his grief. Houck spoke with the victim's family as well. Baratta has not. Of the family, Houck said "they are deeply, deeply pained and upset at him [Baratta] making this a political issue 

So much for "authentic relationships" with crime victims. 

His comment about the Defendant roaming the streets is false, and was recklessly made without checking the actual facts. It was made to scare you. As Houck pointed out, that Defendant is "under house arrest - that's another lie that was told - is under strict monitoring and he wears a [ankle] bracelet.". So much for refraining from "extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused."