Alvin Bragg Caught Giving Violent Criminals A Pass, Giving Harsh Sentences For Fake Vaccination Cards


In a recent legal development, New York State Supreme Court Justice Brandon T. Lantry made the controversial decision to dismiss felony charges against two individuals, identified only by their initials J.O. and R.V., who had been accused of purchasing counterfeit COVID-19 vaccine cards.

The charges had been brought forth by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who aimed to prosecute the individuals for allegedly obtaining fake vaccine cards from a stripper in New Jersey in an attempt to circumvent New York City’s vaccine mandate.

Of the approximately 100 individuals implicated in the case, Bragg selected 16 for prosecution on felony criminal possession of a forged instrument charges. While fourteen of these individuals opted for plea deals to face lesser charges, J.O. and R.V. decided to contest the accusations, leading to a legal clash with the Manhattan DA.

The case took an unexpected turn when Justice Lantry intervened, deciding to dismiss the felony charges against J.O. and R.V. In justifying his decision, Lantry pointed out a pattern within Bragg’s office, noting that they routinely, almost daily, moved to dismiss more serious charges or entire indictments.

Lantry highlighted instances where Bragg’s office sought dismissals for charges related to sexual assaults, drug sales, robbery, burglary, and various other violent and non-violent serious felony offenses. Moreover, he pointed out that these motions were often submitted months or even years after the 45-day period allowed for dismissals had expired.

Critics swiftly seized upon the decision, questioning Bragg’s priorities and prosecutorial decisions. Social media erupted with commentary, with radio host Buck Sexton expressing dissatisfaction with what he perceived as an inconsistency in Bragg’s approach to criminal cases.

Sexton criticized the leniency afforded to individuals involved in violent crimes while individuals resisting vaccine card requirements faced severe consequences.

Monica Crowley also weighed in on the controversy, drawing attention to what she viewed as misplaced prosecutorial focus. She accused Bragg, often associated with philanthropist George Soros, of prioritizing cases involving fake vaccine cards years after the fact while allowing more serious offenders, including killers, rapists, drug dealers, and those assaulting law enforcement officers, to go free.

The dismissal of charges against J.O. and R.V. has sparked a broader conversation about the discretion exercised by prosecutors, the prioritization of cases, and the perceived inconsistencies in legal actions. As the public grapples with these issues, it remains to be seen how the justice system will navigate the complexities of the COVID-19 era and address concerns raised by both legal experts and the general populace.