NY should revisit Pataki’s ‘three-strikes’ law to fight crime: ex-Gov. David Paterson
Former New York Gov. David Paterson said Sunday that he’s changed his mind — the Empire State should consider bringing back its “three strikes” law to help combat crime in the Big Apple.
“I’ve sort of changed my opinion from what it was when I was younger because [of] so many of these repeat offenders and these situations where, but for the fact that they were released after committing a terrible crime, they then committed another crime,” Paterson told host John Catsimatidis on “Cats Roundtable on WABC-770.
“I think that’s when the attention has to be turned to the society that allows it, and we will have to come up with some kind of system,” he said.
“I know [former] Gov. Pataki [had] ‘three strikes you’re out,’ ” the former governor said. “That seemed to work for a while, but it’s not on the books anymore.
“We might want to take another look at that, particularly in this particular period,” he said — as the city reels from such crimes as subway felonies.
Pataki told The Post on Sunday that he wholeheartedly agrees.
“Absolutely we should bring back the ‘three strikes and you’re out law’ I implemented,” the former three-term GOP governor said. “We need a much more realistic and strict approach to violent crime. Violent criminals are not victims. They’re violent criminals.
“The work we did on criminal justice when I was governor made New York safer,” he said.
He said Paterson, a Democrat, has clearly seen the consequences of being lenient in trying to combat crime.
“There’s a growing bipartisan consensus that crime is not just a political issue to discuss before the election,” Pataki said. “It’s a reality.
“New York has to get a handle on it,” he added.
Pataki introduced the “three-strikes-and-your-out law” during the 1990s while serving as governor, with the statute calling for third-time violent-felony offenders to face a minimum prison term of 15 years to life, a sentence often far beyond the previous normal maximum.
The law was later deemed, in part, to be unconstitutional by a federal court, which found that it violated the Sixth Amendment guarantee of a trial by jury.
The court found that the law allowed judges, not jurors, to determine sentencing facts.
Paterson on Sunday also questioned New York’s controversial 2019 criminal justice reforms that prohibit judges from setting bail on misdemeanors and many felonies.
He said that while the reforms have some good components, they lack the needed teeth to allow judges to consider “the dangerousness of a defendant” — a 1971 stipulation that remained untouched when the latest reforms were instituted.
“Unfortunately, I hope that the legislature in Albany will not get offended thinking that people are blaming them for doing that,” Paterson said. “But they are the only ones right now that could change it.”