A Fifth Circuit Bait-and-Switch to Ignore Crime Victims' Rights

This article adopts the framing and voice of an advocate (the author is counsel for the victims' families) rather than a neutral reporter. The language is emotionally charged ('cruel judicial bait-and-switch,' 'fundamentally offensive,' 'sweetheart DPA') and the author explicitly editorializes throughout, positioning the court's logic as 'absurd' and the Department's conduct as deceptive.

Primary voices: elected official or advocate (author as counsel), state or recognized government, academic or expert (judge)

• This article does not explain the Justice Department's rationale for pursuing the DPA or NPA, or why prosecutors believed these agreements served the public interest.
• This article does not address whether the victims' families had alternative legal remedies available or why Rule 48(a) dismissals are standard practice.
• This article does not include a response or statement from the Department of Justice defending its conferral or prosecutorial discretion.