The plot surrounding the Philadelphia shooter thickens. Not only is Maurice Hill a Muslim (imagine that) but he’s also been a federal informant for years.
DC Clothesline reports:
Last week, a man shot 6 Philadelphia police officers while a crowd mocked them. Not only did we discover the shooter, Maurice Hill, was not only a Muslim, but also has been a federal informant for years.
US Attorney William McSwain quickly blamed Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, who McSwain said promoted “a new culture of disrespect for law enforcement in this City” in the aftermath of the shooting and seven hour standoff with Hill.
“It started with chants at the DA’s victory party – chants of “F*** the police” and “No good cops in a racist system,” wrote McSwain.
However, documents that were obtained by The Appeal, expose that Maurice Hill was actively involved with law enforcement long before Mr. Krasner ever came into the picture.
The judicial system in America is fundamentally flawed. There is always a push to get “other” bad guys by using the ones they already caught. This leads to criminals becoming emboldened and committing bigger more violent, heinous crimes. If criminals know they can just bargain their way to a lighter, shorter sentence, what is stopping them from committing crimes? What incentive do they have to abide by the law? If anything they have more incentive to see how far they can push their criminal behavior. As a criminal, if I have some dirt on someone bigger, “badder,” and more corrupt than me, I have all the leverage in the world.
Example: according to The Appeal, in June of 2008, Philly shooter Maurice Hill pled guilty in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for being in possession of a firearm as a felon. In 2010, he was sentenced for this case and in an April 2010, sentencing memorandum filed with the court said, “Hill’s attorney Wayne Maynard stated that federal prosecutors filed a motion for a downward departure from Hill’s guideline sentence because he provided substantial assistance to the federal government.”
In other words, Hill’s attorney was requesting a lighter sentence in exchange for information Hill gave authorities on other criminals. Hill didn’t provide just a little information either. He was willing to and did testify “before the Grand Jury on two occasions” and was “willing to testify at trial,” and he also “provided information about a shooter that led to an arrest.” So, it’s safe to say Hill will do just about anything to save his own hide.
Now we can see the outcome of this bargaining system. Criminals should never be afforded leverage in the judicial system. Of course we should want to get the guys at the top and solve unsolved violent crimes. This should always be the goal of police departments everywhere but at what cost? Is it worth giving criminals lighter sentences because they have information on other criminals? Sure, they can provide valuable information but it devalues the judicial system and takes away the sting of the punishment.
What’s the solution? No more bargaining with criminals and make them pay fully for the crimes they commit. This will discourage future criminals from committing crimes and show that law enforcement does not negotiate with criminals. If you commit a crime you should expect to do the time.