DA Steve Wolfson should be applauded for decision regarding aide’s theft

I weigh in on the recent “DA Wolfson kept quiet about aide’s theft” article (March 15 Review-Journal) both to balance the commentary and to commend Mr. Wolfson for his decision.

During my four-plus decades of federal and state criminal practice, I have resolved dozens of criminal transgressions just the way Mr. Wolfson resolved his aide’s case — and I did so with never a whisper that the resolution constituted “special treatment” or a “hushed-up scandal.”

Indeed, for a nonviolent, nonsexual property offense with the consent (and often the suggestion) of the victim (here, Mr. Wolfson), such a resolution has long been used and not infrequently. Going as far back as district attorneys George Franklin, Roy Woofter, George Holt, Rex Bell, Stewart Bell and David Roger, the prosecutors and local police practiced an informal “victim’s rights” approach by affording victims participation in a fair resolution that results in restitution and a nonprosecution.

This alternative to prosecution for low-level criminal offenders is not unique to the Clark County district attorney’s office and has evolved as a pretrial diversion program in the U.S. criminal justice system and in most states. The common themes in these programs (both formal and informal) are the prevention of future criminality by addressing the identifiable rehabilitative needs of the offender, the conservation of precious prosecutorial resources and the implementation of restorative justice (restitution).

It seems to me that Audrie Locke was a perfect candidate for diversion. Indeed, she is a “poster child” for the success of this rehabilitative justice.

The article seemed fair and balanced on the factual reporting. But the opinions solicited from the hand-picked academics and legal practitioners (naysayers only) created a tone of scandal and wrongdoing which, in my opinion, was unbalanced and unjustified.

I salute Mr. Wolfson and hope he continues this longstanding practice. The victim, the offender and society all benefit.