Over a year ago, the urgent need for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s removal became evident as he displayed a blatant disregard for enforcing the law, thereby emboldening criminals, asserted former NYPD Commissioner Bernie Kerik during an interview with Newsmax on Sunday.
Kerik’s remarks followed severe criticism directed at Bragg for his decision to release a group of migrants without bail, despite their involvement in a vicious attack on New York City police officers in Times Square, a disturbing incident captured on video.
Bragg’s subsequent attempts to salvage his image involved public appearances aimed at highlighting efforts to apprehend the suspects.
Bernie Kerik (Credits: NBC News)
According to Kerik, action should have been taken against Bragg “a year, year and a half ago when the governor and the city of New York recognized that he was bolstering the confidence of thugs. He wasn’t pursuing charges, holding individuals accountable, or making arrests.”
While acknowledging Bragg’s recent presence at press conferences, Kerik pointed out the inconsistency in his earlier stance. Bragg initially claimed, after viewing the video, that he found insufficient evidence to justify holding the suspects.
Labeling Bragg’s statement as moronic, Kerik underscored the overwhelming evidence present in the video, coupled with statements from the police officers and eyewitnesses.
The former NYPD Commissioner lamented that criminals are well aware they can act with impunity against New York City police officers, fostering a sense of impunity and a belief that there are no consequences for their actions.
This lack of accountability, as highlighted by Kerik, poses a significant threat to law enforcement and public safety, as it sends a clear message to criminals that they can operate without fear of repercussions.
The absence of charges and arrests by Bragg contributes to an atmosphere where criminals feel empowered to engage in unlawful activities without consequences.
Moreover, Kerik criticized Bragg’s delayed acknowledgment of the evidence, emphasizing that the video alone presented a compelling case for holding the suspects accountable.
By initially dismissing the evidence, Bragg, in Kerik’s view, exhibited a concerning lack of discernment and a failure to prioritize the safety of law enforcement officers and the general public.
The consequences of Bragg’s actions, as articulated by Kerik, extend beyond the immediate incident in Times Square. Criminals, aware of the leniency in law enforcement, may continue to commit offenses, knowing that they can act with impunity.
This erosion of public safety and the integrity of the justice system necessitates a reevaluation of Bragg’s suitability for the position of Manhattan District Attorney.
In conclusion, Kerik’s critique of Bragg centers on the prosecutor’s failure to uphold the law and ensure accountability for criminal actions.
The repercussions of this lax approach extend to the emboldening of criminals and the potential escalation of criminal activities, posing a significant threat to the safety and well-being of both law enforcement officers and the public at large.
