The tragic death of 23-year-old Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, allegedly at the hands of a recently released repeat offender, is reigniting debates across the nation regarding judicial decisions that allow violent suspects back into communities.

Critics have long contended that the judiciary is overly lenient. However, Nicole Brenecki, a trial attorney based in New York City, highlights the complexity of the issue.

“It’s more than just common perception,” Brenecki explained to Fox News Digital. “Current statistics indicate a troubling increase in repeat offenses. Recidivism rates have reached unprecedented levels.”

A mugshot of Decarlos Brown, alongside surveillance images capturing him on the light rail before the alleged murder of Zarutska, emphasizes the case’s gravity. (Sources: Mecklenburg County Sheriff’s Office; CATS)

Brenecki further elaborated that the period immediately following an individual’s release from incarceration is when they are most vulnerable to reoffending. This vulnerability stems from factors like unstable housing, job insecurity, and a lack of essential resources. She also noted the added pressure on courts to expedite cases amid overwhelming caseloads.

“There is a trend towards leniency,” she said. “And that trend is criticized because we see the results – these people do go out and commit the offense again. And that jeopardizes public safety.”

A view of the memorial dedicated to slain 23-year-old Ukrainian Iryna Zarutska at the East/West Blvd light rail station in Charlotte NC, United States on Sept. 11, 2025.  (Peter Zay/Anadolu via Getty Images)

The suspect in Zarutska’s killing, Decarlos Brown Jr., allegedly attacked and stabbed her to death while the young Ukrainian refugee was commuting home from her pizzeria job in August.

Brown had a history of violent crime, including assaults and robberies, and had also been diagnosed with schizophrenia. Yet he was still free and walking the streets.

Brenecki said that judges often face public backlash in such cases like Zarutska’s, but many misunderstand the legal constraints in place.

Attorney Nicole Brenecki said that not all arrests result in convictions, but that repeated arrests still signal a clear pattern of dangerous behavior. (FILE PHOTO/JaysonPhotography)

“This is a very, very difficult subject because we have this term ‘judicial discretion,’” she said. “When it comes to the release or bail, it’s all discretionary. There are risk assessment factors they’re supposed to be looking at, but mistakes are made.”

She said that judges are required to strike a balance between maintaining the presumption of innocence for the accused and ensuring public safety. But even so, some decisions defy common sense.

“When you see the articles in the media saying people were released and they had, I don’t know, 70 prior arrests, there is a red flag there,” she said. “For some reason, it is not being brought to attention at the time of the sentencing or release.”

She noted that not all arrests result in convictions, but that repeated arrests still signal a clear pattern of dangerous behavior.

“Arrest does not always lead to a conviction, but the arrest is usually based on some act,” she said. “So even if this person finds themselves perpetually in those types of situations that lead to arrests, it’s somewhat of a red flag.”

WATCH: Chicago train attack revives debate on cashless bail for repeat offenders

Brenecki said that part of the problem is that judges are influenced, consciously or not, by political and social pressures for deincarceration.

“I don’t think judges should be looking at the state of society and saying, ‘Oh, perhaps we should be doing better as a nation in terms of curbing poverty,’” she said. “This is not a judge’s place to make those considerations and have them outweigh public safety.”

“If I were to sum up everything, I think it’s the failure of the judicial system and the court system and the court system more than anything else,” she said.