U.S. NEWS
DECEMBER 29, 2008, 1:54 P.M. ET
Murders of Black Teens Are Up 39% Since 2000-01
Study Finds Killings Rose More Than Five Times Overall Rate; Cuts in Law Enforcement, Youth Programs Are Cited as Factors
By GARY FIELDS
WASHINGTON -- Murders of African-American teenagers have risen 39% since 2000 and 2001, according to a report due out Monday.
Neighbors and friends mourn Jamiel Shaw Jr., 17 years old, who was shot to death in Los Angeles in March. In 2006-07, the number of homicides in which blacks ages 14 to 17 were victims rose to 927.
Homicides in which blacks ages 14 to 17 years old were the victims rose to 927 over the two-year period of 2006-07, the last years for which statistics are available, compared with 666 during 2000-01, according to the study by criminal-justice professors at Boston's Northeastern University.
The 39% increase is much greater than the rise in overall homicides, which jumped 7.4% from 2000-01 to 2006-07.
Murders rose among black teens in 2006 and 2007 as overall homicides dropped compared with the previous year. And the 2000-07 rate of increase among black teens was more than twice the rate of increase among white teens, the study found.
The authors explained that they compared two-year periods to try to limit a statistical skewing of the numbers that might have occurred if they had simply looked at differences in 2000 and 2007.
The data confirm a pattern identified earlier this year by The Wall Street Journal, which found that while most communities in the U.S. were seeing a decline in homicides, many African-American neighborhoods were continuing to see an increase.
The Northeastern University research shows that the pattern is more pronounced among juveniles.
James Alan Fox, co-author of the study, attributed the numbers to a variety of issues, including cuts in funding for local law-enforcement programs that were credited with lowering the nation's record murder rates in the 1990s. "It's hard to pin down cause and effect," Mr. Fox said.
An overwhelming proportion of the killings involve black-on-black crime. The reasons for high rates of violence in African-American communities have been the subject of debate among criminologists. Some attribute it to the migration of prison culture, with large numbers of incarcerated young men returning to their communities.
Mr. Fox said the cuts in law-enforcement programs and activities geared toward youth disproportionately affect African-Americans because they are more likely than their white counterparts to come from communities where there is inadequate adult supervision, high rates of single-parent homes, inferior schools and widespread gang activity.
"Cuts in support for youth have a much greater impact on black families who don't have alternatives," Mr. Fox said.
Write to Gary Fields at gary.fields@wsj.com
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc
Monday, December 29, 2008
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
An Enigma
December 24, 2008
Weighing Guilt When the Man on Trial Did No Killing
By KAREEM FAHIM
In the glare of public scrutiny, juries in Brooklyn and the Bronx started deliberations on separate cases last week, considering the same shocking charge — the murder of a police officer.
That was not all they had to contend with: Prosecutors in both cases were asking for murder convictions for the defendants who, the authorities acknowledged, were not the men who fired the fatal shots.
In deciding whether to convict, the jurors in Brooklyn repeatedly asked for readings of the law, and explanations, in plain English, for what it meant to be an accessory to murder.
In the Bronx, jurors sifted through all of the evidence over and over, to try and divine whether the defendant in their case knew that an acquaintance of his — the man who killed the officer — was carrying a gun.
In both cases, jurors had to be sure that while the defendant did not pull the trigger, his role in the crime was enough for a murder conviction.
In the Bronx case, the jury decided that the defendant, Lillo Brancato Jr., a former actor, did not know that the man he was with had a gun. Mr. Brancato, 32, was acquitted of felony murder in the 2005 killing of Officer Daniel Enchautegui, but convicted of attempted burglary.
The man Mr. Brancato was with that night, Steven Armento, 51, was convicted by another Bronx jury on Oct. 30 of first-degree murder for firing the fatal shot.
The Brooklyn case ended in a mistrial.
The defendant, Lee Woods, 30, was charged with aggravated murder and other crimes for what prosecutors said was his part in the killing of Officer Russel Timoshenko during a traffic stop last year.
Prosecutors said that Mr. Woods, who will be retried, had not fired a gun but was a willing partner of the men who did.
On Monday, when the mistrial was declared because a juror fell ill, other jurors said they were still debating the murder charge.
Public officials and relatives of the police officers expressed frustration and anger.
The mayor, Michael R. Bloomberg, captured some of the feelings about the Brancato verdict on Tuesday. “It’s just beyond me,” he said, “how the jury could come to that conclusion.”
But interviews with jurors and the defense lawyers in the two cases present a more complicated picture, and suggest that murder convictions for these two men presented a difficult leap for many jurors. Prosecutors in both cases declined to be interviewed.
Mr. Woods and Mr. Brancato were charged with murder under two different legal theories, each one presenting challenges.
Mr. Brancato was charged with felony murder, in which any participant in a felony crime is held responsible for any deaths that occur during the crime — in Mr. Brancato’s case, burglary.
A few states, including Hawaii, Kentucky and Michigan, have abolished their versions of felony murder.
Mr. Brancato’s lawyer, Joseph Tacopina, said New York State’s version of the law was “archaic,” and shifted the burden of proving innocence onto the defendants.
A juror in Mr. Brancato’s case, Arnaldo Nuñez, said that Mr. Brancato’s version of events had been convincing.
In the jury room, he said, “Every stone was turned over at least four times,” but the panel could not find that Mr. Brancato had known or should have known that his accomplice was carrying a gun.
Mr. Woods was charged as an accessory — someone who played a role, no matter how small, in a crime and is criminally liable for the acts of his partners.
Being present, the judge told his jury, was not enough. Jurors asked him to explain several times.
According to Robert C. Gottlieb, a criminal defense lawyer and a former prosecutor, “there is nothing inherently confusing about the law as it pertains to accomplice liability.”
But the difficulty comes when prosecutors have to apply “the facts that fit the law.”
He added, “The law is murky if the facts are murky.”
Many aspects of the case were murky, jurors said. Officer Timoshenko and his partner, Officer Herman Yan, were both shot as they approached an S.U.V they had pulled over.
And while prosecutors established that Mr. Woods and two other men, Dexter Bostic and Robert Ellis, were in the car, it was not clear where each of the men was sitting or who fired the shots.
Part of that mystery was cleared up last week, though, when Mr. Bostic’s jury convicted him of murdering Officer Timoshenko.
Still, a juror in Mr. Woods’s case said the instructions to the jury about an accessory’s liability had been confusing. “Even when the judge read it back, he never explained it in laymen’s terms,” said the juror, who insisted on anonymity because he was concerned about his safety.
Another juror, he said, was troubled with the notion that Mr. Woods could be guilty of murder without pulling a trigger. He said jurors were also confused about the concept of “acting in concert.”
Accepting that a defendant is an accessory “may be difficult for a juror to do, and it should be difficult,” Mr. Gottlieb said. “The jury must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Michael Wilson contributed reporting.
2008 The New York Times Company
Weighing Guilt When the Man on Trial Did No Killing
By KAREEM FAHIM
In the glare of public scrutiny, juries in Brooklyn and the Bronx started deliberations on separate cases last week, considering the same shocking charge — the murder of a police officer.
That was not all they had to contend with: Prosecutors in both cases were asking for murder convictions for the defendants who, the authorities acknowledged, were not the men who fired the fatal shots.
In deciding whether to convict, the jurors in Brooklyn repeatedly asked for readings of the law, and explanations, in plain English, for what it meant to be an accessory to murder.
In the Bronx, jurors sifted through all of the evidence over and over, to try and divine whether the defendant in their case knew that an acquaintance of his — the man who killed the officer — was carrying a gun.
In both cases, jurors had to be sure that while the defendant did not pull the trigger, his role in the crime was enough for a murder conviction.
In the Bronx case, the jury decided that the defendant, Lillo Brancato Jr., a former actor, did not know that the man he was with had a gun. Mr. Brancato, 32, was acquitted of felony murder in the 2005 killing of Officer Daniel Enchautegui, but convicted of attempted burglary.
The man Mr. Brancato was with that night, Steven Armento, 51, was convicted by another Bronx jury on Oct. 30 of first-degree murder for firing the fatal shot.
The Brooklyn case ended in a mistrial.
The defendant, Lee Woods, 30, was charged with aggravated murder and other crimes for what prosecutors said was his part in the killing of Officer Russel Timoshenko during a traffic stop last year.
Prosecutors said that Mr. Woods, who will be retried, had not fired a gun but was a willing partner of the men who did.
On Monday, when the mistrial was declared because a juror fell ill, other jurors said they were still debating the murder charge.
Public officials and relatives of the police officers expressed frustration and anger.
The mayor, Michael R. Bloomberg, captured some of the feelings about the Brancato verdict on Tuesday. “It’s just beyond me,” he said, “how the jury could come to that conclusion.”
But interviews with jurors and the defense lawyers in the two cases present a more complicated picture, and suggest that murder convictions for these two men presented a difficult leap for many jurors. Prosecutors in both cases declined to be interviewed.
Mr. Woods and Mr. Brancato were charged with murder under two different legal theories, each one presenting challenges.
Mr. Brancato was charged with felony murder, in which any participant in a felony crime is held responsible for any deaths that occur during the crime — in Mr. Brancato’s case, burglary.
A few states, including Hawaii, Kentucky and Michigan, have abolished their versions of felony murder.
Mr. Brancato’s lawyer, Joseph Tacopina, said New York State’s version of the law was “archaic,” and shifted the burden of proving innocence onto the defendants.
A juror in Mr. Brancato’s case, Arnaldo Nuñez, said that Mr. Brancato’s version of events had been convincing.
In the jury room, he said, “Every stone was turned over at least four times,” but the panel could not find that Mr. Brancato had known or should have known that his accomplice was carrying a gun.
Mr. Woods was charged as an accessory — someone who played a role, no matter how small, in a crime and is criminally liable for the acts of his partners.
Being present, the judge told his jury, was not enough. Jurors asked him to explain several times.
According to Robert C. Gottlieb, a criminal defense lawyer and a former prosecutor, “there is nothing inherently confusing about the law as it pertains to accomplice liability.”
But the difficulty comes when prosecutors have to apply “the facts that fit the law.”
He added, “The law is murky if the facts are murky.”
Many aspects of the case were murky, jurors said. Officer Timoshenko and his partner, Officer Herman Yan, were both shot as they approached an S.U.V they had pulled over.
And while prosecutors established that Mr. Woods and two other men, Dexter Bostic and Robert Ellis, were in the car, it was not clear where each of the men was sitting or who fired the shots.
Part of that mystery was cleared up last week, though, when Mr. Bostic’s jury convicted him of murdering Officer Timoshenko.
Still, a juror in Mr. Woods’s case said the instructions to the jury about an accessory’s liability had been confusing. “Even when the judge read it back, he never explained it in laymen’s terms,” said the juror, who insisted on anonymity because he was concerned about his safety.
Another juror, he said, was troubled with the notion that Mr. Woods could be guilty of murder without pulling a trigger. He said jurors were also confused about the concept of “acting in concert.”
Accepting that a defendant is an accessory “may be difficult for a juror to do, and it should be difficult,” Mr. Gottlieb said. “The jury must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Michael Wilson contributed reporting.
2008 The New York Times Company
Monday, December 22, 2008
Economy Affects Right to Trial
Even jury hiring is frozen
To cut costs, New Hampshire courts won't hold criminal or civil jury trials for a month. At least 19 other states have slashed court budgets and other state services.
By Bob Drogin December 22, 2008
Reporting from Brentwood, N.H. --
Come February, the red-brick Rockingham County Courthouse, one of New Hampshire's busiest, will arraign criminal suspects, process legal motions and otherwise deal with murders, mayhem and contract disputes.
What it won't do is hold jury trials.The economic storm has come to this: Justice is being delayed or disrupted in state courtrooms across the country.
Financially strapped New Hampshire has become a poster child for the problem. Among other cost-cutting measures, state courts will halt for a month all civil and criminal jury trials early next year to save $73,000 in jurors' per diems.
Officials warn they may add another four-week suspension."It brings our system almost to a screeching halt," said county prosecutor James M. Reams.
His aides are scrambling to reschedule 77 criminal trials that were on the February docket."All the effort to subpoena witnesses and prepare for those trials is right out the window," Reams said, frustration in his voice. "Internally, it's a monumental waste of time. We'll have to redo everything."
At least 19 other states, including California, have slashed court budgets and other government services as their economies have tanked, said Daniel Hall, vice president of the National Center for State Courts, a nonprofit in Williamsburg, Va."Courts are there to provide a fair and impartial resolution of disputes," Hall said.
"When you start affecting that, you affect who we are."California cut its judicial branch budget by more than $200 million, or about 10%, in the current fiscal year, and further reductions are almost certain as the state grapples with a projected $40-billion deficit.
A Republican proposal unveiled last week, for example, would trim a further $205 million from the judiciary.H.D. Palmer, spokesman for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's finance department, said it was "not yet clear" whether the judiciary would be granted an exemption to the governor's order to reduce state payrolls by 10% through layoffs and unpaid furloughs.
Criminal defendants have a constitutional right to a speedy trial. Judges usually give such trials priority over civil cases involving broken sidewalks, medical malpractice and the like.
As a result, civil litigation and family law cases are bearing the brunt of the disruptions. And cascading bankruptcies, foreclosures and business disputes have only increased the backlog.
After two rounds of budget cuts in Florida, courts have laid off 280 clerks, lawyers and other staff members, and cut funding for a judges' unit that helps resolve civil disputes.
State legislators meeting next month are expected to demand more spending cuts.An additional 10% reduction would mean "all civil cases in the state of Florida would virtually be suspended," Belvin Perry Jr., chief judge of Florida's 9th Judicial Circuit and chairman of a trial court budget commission, warned a legislative committee in Tallahassee this month.
In Vermont, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul L. Reiber recently proposed closing as many as seven county courts, as well as laying off employees, to help ease a budget deficit. The state already shuts district and family courts half a day each week to save money."None of our choices are good," Reiber conceded in a memo to court employees.
With rising joblessness and falling revenues, New Hampshire projects a budget deficit this year of $250 million. The crisis has forced Gov. John Lynch to seek spending cuts across state government, including the judicial system.John T. Broderick, chief justice of the state Supreme Court, has carved $2.7 million from the judicial budget. In addition to the one-month halt in jury trials and trimming back courtroom security, seven of the state's 59 judgeships will be left vacant through June, when the fiscal year ends.
Three of the empty slots are in trial courts. Worse, Broderick said, he may need to suspend jury trials for another month, and leave open a Supreme Court slot after one of the five justices retires in February.
It is the state's only appellate court."In my 36 years here as a lawyer and judge, I've never felt as insecure about the state courts in terms of operations and resources as I do now," Broderick said.
Robert J. Lynn, chief justice of the superior courts, which conduct all New Hampshire jury trials, said he fears the delays inevitably will cause damage. "There is some element of 'justice delayed, justice denied,' no doubt about it," he said.
Christopher Keating, executive director of the New Hampshire Public Defender program, said his chief concern now is "people in custody who will endure delays in getting their day in court."
The state Supreme Court threw out two criminal cases this year because trials did not begin within six months of arraignment, the legal limit.
Prosecutors fear more cases may be dismissed.Delays in jury trials in 2001 and 2002, during a previous budget crisis, caused less disruption because they involved fewer cases, said John Safford, Superior Court clerk in the Hillsborough County district that includes Manchester, the largest city.
This time, he needs to reschedule up to 100 trials."I've been here 30 years," he said. "This is the worst I've ever seen it."The delays may encourage some defendants to seek plea deals, or litigants to settle out of court.
Some counties are advocating out-of-court mediation and conflict resolution. But other cases may face new hurdles as time passes. "Witnesses die, memories fade; things happen when trials are delayed," said John Hutson, dean of Franklin Pierce Law Center, the state's only law school.
"Then you'll get a bow wave of cases, so they pile up the next month and it's hard to catch up.
"The slowdown has unnerved many residents in the state, where granite-hewn courthouses often anchor Colonial-era town squares. "You're talking about erosion of our fundamental civic fabric," said Ellen J. Shemitz, executive director of the New Hampshire Assn. for Justice, which represents civil trial attorneys.
James J. Tenn Jr., incoming president of the state's bar association, said that as the crisis has grown, New Hampshire courts have been slow to process orders, respond to lawyers' requests and "do the daily work." "We've just seen delay after delay after delay," said David Slawsky, a civil lawyer in Manchester.
"The court process is breaking down."Dennis Ducharme, a Manchester attorney, received cancellation notices last week for four personal injury cases scheduled for trial next year.
He worries that a delay of six months, perhaps longer, will make witnesses less willing to testify."The longer you drag it out, the more reluctant people become to cooperate," he said.
In Newport, in the rural west, lawyer Lisa Wellman-Ally has seen a property rights trial postponed four times. Each time, she has prepared 100 exhibits, re-subpoenaed witnesses, refreshed her arguments and billed her client for the time.
"Then we would get bounced again," she said.
No new trial date has been scheduled
.bob.drogin@latimes.com
To cut costs, New Hampshire courts won't hold criminal or civil jury trials for a month. At least 19 other states have slashed court budgets and other state services.
By Bob Drogin December 22, 2008
Reporting from Brentwood, N.H. --
Come February, the red-brick Rockingham County Courthouse, one of New Hampshire's busiest, will arraign criminal suspects, process legal motions and otherwise deal with murders, mayhem and contract disputes.
What it won't do is hold jury trials.The economic storm has come to this: Justice is being delayed or disrupted in state courtrooms across the country.
Financially strapped New Hampshire has become a poster child for the problem. Among other cost-cutting measures, state courts will halt for a month all civil and criminal jury trials early next year to save $73,000 in jurors' per diems.
Officials warn they may add another four-week suspension."It brings our system almost to a screeching halt," said county prosecutor James M. Reams.
His aides are scrambling to reschedule 77 criminal trials that were on the February docket."All the effort to subpoena witnesses and prepare for those trials is right out the window," Reams said, frustration in his voice. "Internally, it's a monumental waste of time. We'll have to redo everything."
At least 19 other states, including California, have slashed court budgets and other government services as their economies have tanked, said Daniel Hall, vice president of the National Center for State Courts, a nonprofit in Williamsburg, Va."Courts are there to provide a fair and impartial resolution of disputes," Hall said.
"When you start affecting that, you affect who we are."California cut its judicial branch budget by more than $200 million, or about 10%, in the current fiscal year, and further reductions are almost certain as the state grapples with a projected $40-billion deficit.
A Republican proposal unveiled last week, for example, would trim a further $205 million from the judiciary.H.D. Palmer, spokesman for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's finance department, said it was "not yet clear" whether the judiciary would be granted an exemption to the governor's order to reduce state payrolls by 10% through layoffs and unpaid furloughs.
Criminal defendants have a constitutional right to a speedy trial. Judges usually give such trials priority over civil cases involving broken sidewalks, medical malpractice and the like.
As a result, civil litigation and family law cases are bearing the brunt of the disruptions. And cascading bankruptcies, foreclosures and business disputes have only increased the backlog.
After two rounds of budget cuts in Florida, courts have laid off 280 clerks, lawyers and other staff members, and cut funding for a judges' unit that helps resolve civil disputes.
State legislators meeting next month are expected to demand more spending cuts.An additional 10% reduction would mean "all civil cases in the state of Florida would virtually be suspended," Belvin Perry Jr., chief judge of Florida's 9th Judicial Circuit and chairman of a trial court budget commission, warned a legislative committee in Tallahassee this month.
In Vermont, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul L. Reiber recently proposed closing as many as seven county courts, as well as laying off employees, to help ease a budget deficit. The state already shuts district and family courts half a day each week to save money."None of our choices are good," Reiber conceded in a memo to court employees.
With rising joblessness and falling revenues, New Hampshire projects a budget deficit this year of $250 million. The crisis has forced Gov. John Lynch to seek spending cuts across state government, including the judicial system.John T. Broderick, chief justice of the state Supreme Court, has carved $2.7 million from the judicial budget. In addition to the one-month halt in jury trials and trimming back courtroom security, seven of the state's 59 judgeships will be left vacant through June, when the fiscal year ends.
Three of the empty slots are in trial courts. Worse, Broderick said, he may need to suspend jury trials for another month, and leave open a Supreme Court slot after one of the five justices retires in February.
It is the state's only appellate court."In my 36 years here as a lawyer and judge, I've never felt as insecure about the state courts in terms of operations and resources as I do now," Broderick said.
Robert J. Lynn, chief justice of the superior courts, which conduct all New Hampshire jury trials, said he fears the delays inevitably will cause damage. "There is some element of 'justice delayed, justice denied,' no doubt about it," he said.
Christopher Keating, executive director of the New Hampshire Public Defender program, said his chief concern now is "people in custody who will endure delays in getting their day in court."
The state Supreme Court threw out two criminal cases this year because trials did not begin within six months of arraignment, the legal limit.
Prosecutors fear more cases may be dismissed.Delays in jury trials in 2001 and 2002, during a previous budget crisis, caused less disruption because they involved fewer cases, said John Safford, Superior Court clerk in the Hillsborough County district that includes Manchester, the largest city.
This time, he needs to reschedule up to 100 trials."I've been here 30 years," he said. "This is the worst I've ever seen it."The delays may encourage some defendants to seek plea deals, or litigants to settle out of court.
Some counties are advocating out-of-court mediation and conflict resolution. But other cases may face new hurdles as time passes. "Witnesses die, memories fade; things happen when trials are delayed," said John Hutson, dean of Franklin Pierce Law Center, the state's only law school.
"Then you'll get a bow wave of cases, so they pile up the next month and it's hard to catch up.
"The slowdown has unnerved many residents in the state, where granite-hewn courthouses often anchor Colonial-era town squares. "You're talking about erosion of our fundamental civic fabric," said Ellen J. Shemitz, executive director of the New Hampshire Assn. for Justice, which represents civil trial attorneys.
James J. Tenn Jr., incoming president of the state's bar association, said that as the crisis has grown, New Hampshire courts have been slow to process orders, respond to lawyers' requests and "do the daily work." "We've just seen delay after delay after delay," said David Slawsky, a civil lawyer in Manchester.
"The court process is breaking down."Dennis Ducharme, a Manchester attorney, received cancellation notices last week for four personal injury cases scheduled for trial next year.
He worries that a delay of six months, perhaps longer, will make witnesses less willing to testify."The longer you drag it out, the more reluctant people become to cooperate," he said.
In Newport, in the rural west, lawyer Lisa Wellman-Ally has seen a property rights trial postponed four times. Each time, she has prepared 100 exhibits, re-subpoenaed witnesses, refreshed her arguments and billed her client for the time.
"Then we would get bounced again," she said.
No new trial date has been scheduled
.bob.drogin@latimes.com
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Suggestions for TYC
Friday, December 19, 2008
TCJC: Jails need technical assistance to reduce unnecessary overcrowding
As part of their participation in the Sunset review process for the Texas Commission on Jail Standards, the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition:
recently launched an anonymous online survey targeted towards Texas Sheriffs, County Court Judges, and Jail Administrators. Specifically, this survey was intended to address questions posed by the Sunset Advisory Commission in regards to the mission and performance of the Texas Commission on Jail Standards (TCJS).
See the full survey here (pdf).
Most respondents said no changes were needed to TCJS' functions, but the largest number who offered suggestions believed that "additional assistance to jails and counties in their efforts to be safe and compliant," while responses to another question placed the highest premium on "more training for jail staff; more education and available information."
I think that's exactly right; TCJS currently performs annual inspections but does not have capacity to provide significant technical assistance to counties to help them implement diversion programs or reduce overcrowding. As a result, TCJC recommended that:
TCJS should be given additional staff that can focus solely on providing technical assistance for programs that provide rehabilitation, education, and re-integration for inmates confined in county and municipal jail facilities under its jurisdiction.
Such programs could include (a) group counseling, (b) drug education, (c) basic education programs, (d) transition planning, and (d) aftercare planning.
Staffing that function at TCJS could have a big impact on local jail overcrowding and help ensure that lessons learned in one jurisdiction are communicated to jailers in other counties. IMO, the other big need is for greater oversight by TCJS of medical and mental health-related jail functions, both as part of the inspection process and providing technical assistance to improve these functions.
Respondents to TCJC's survey were asked to list the biggest challenges facing their jails and TCJS in the next five to ten years and, perhaps predictably, the top three were:
36% = overcrowding (due to increasing jail populations)
22% = additional jail and TCJS staffing•
13% = additional jail construction
It's true that jail populations are increasing in Texas even though crime has been declining, but nearly all that trend results from expanded use of pretrial detention for low-level offenders.
Given that, staffing TCJS to provide technical assistance aimed at reducing pretrial detention could produce a lot of bang for the buck for county taxpayers, particularly in the near term when many jurisdictions are still using inefficient practices. I think that's a really smart suggestion.
Read TCJC's full written response to the Sunset Staff Report here.
See also the Sunset staff report and public comments submitted as part of the Sunset process.
Posted by Gritsforbreakfast at 8:45 AM
TCJC: Jails need technical assistance to reduce unnecessary overcrowding
As part of their participation in the Sunset review process for the Texas Commission on Jail Standards, the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition:
recently launched an anonymous online survey targeted towards Texas Sheriffs, County Court Judges, and Jail Administrators. Specifically, this survey was intended to address questions posed by the Sunset Advisory Commission in regards to the mission and performance of the Texas Commission on Jail Standards (TCJS).
See the full survey here (pdf).
Most respondents said no changes were needed to TCJS' functions, but the largest number who offered suggestions believed that "additional assistance to jails and counties in their efforts to be safe and compliant," while responses to another question placed the highest premium on "more training for jail staff; more education and available information."
I think that's exactly right; TCJS currently performs annual inspections but does not have capacity to provide significant technical assistance to counties to help them implement diversion programs or reduce overcrowding. As a result, TCJC recommended that:
TCJS should be given additional staff that can focus solely on providing technical assistance for programs that provide rehabilitation, education, and re-integration for inmates confined in county and municipal jail facilities under its jurisdiction.
Such programs could include (a) group counseling, (b) drug education, (c) basic education programs, (d) transition planning, and (d) aftercare planning.
Staffing that function at TCJS could have a big impact on local jail overcrowding and help ensure that lessons learned in one jurisdiction are communicated to jailers in other counties. IMO, the other big need is for greater oversight by TCJS of medical and mental health-related jail functions, both as part of the inspection process and providing technical assistance to improve these functions.
Respondents to TCJC's survey were asked to list the biggest challenges facing their jails and TCJS in the next five to ten years and, perhaps predictably, the top three were:
36% = overcrowding (due to increasing jail populations)
22% = additional jail and TCJS staffing•
13% = additional jail construction
It's true that jail populations are increasing in Texas even though crime has been declining, but nearly all that trend results from expanded use of pretrial detention for low-level offenders.
Given that, staffing TCJS to provide technical assistance aimed at reducing pretrial detention could produce a lot of bang for the buck for county taxpayers, particularly in the near term when many jurisdictions are still using inefficient practices. I think that's a really smart suggestion.
Read TCJC's full written response to the Sunset Staff Report here.
See also the Sunset staff report and public comments submitted as part of the Sunset process.
Posted by Gritsforbreakfast at 8:45 AM
Thursday, December 18, 2008
SHould Jury Verdict be Unanimous
GA Sentence Prompts Calls For Change In Jury Unanimity Rule
Georgia legislators have began lining up to introduce bills eliminating the requirement that juries be unanimous for a death sentence, days after Atlanta mass murderer Brian Nichols got a life sentence instead of condemnation when three jurors declined to vote for execution.
Hard-on-crime lawmakers have long favored easier rules on death sentencing, but the Nichols sentence has given new urgency to their cause. "Unfortunately, you have people who say they're willing to consider the death penalty, but when they get on a jury, it becomes clear that they're actually death penalty opponents," said Representative Barry A. Fleming, a Harlem Republican who twice sponsored efforts to revoke the unanimity requirement.
Jurors in the Nichols trial reported that one juror was so opposed to the death penalty that she plugged her ears with earphones and solved a crossword puzzle during the sentencing phase, said Paul Howard, the district attorney of Fulton County.
It is not clear that the proposal can withstand a constitutional challenge. Even critics of the death penalty worried about the message sent by the Nichols sentence. "This case shows how arbitrary and irrational the death penalty can be," said Richard C. Dieter, the executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center. "People shake their heads when they hear that someone got the death penalty for robbing a 7-Eleven, and Brian Nichols got life in prison for his heinous crimes."
New York Times
Georgia legislators have began lining up to introduce bills eliminating the requirement that juries be unanimous for a death sentence, days after Atlanta mass murderer Brian Nichols got a life sentence instead of condemnation when three jurors declined to vote for execution.
Hard-on-crime lawmakers have long favored easier rules on death sentencing, but the Nichols sentence has given new urgency to their cause. "Unfortunately, you have people who say they're willing to consider the death penalty, but when they get on a jury, it becomes clear that they're actually death penalty opponents," said Representative Barry A. Fleming, a Harlem Republican who twice sponsored efforts to revoke the unanimity requirement.
Jurors in the Nichols trial reported that one juror was so opposed to the death penalty that she plugged her ears with earphones and solved a crossword puzzle during the sentencing phase, said Paul Howard, the district attorney of Fulton County.
It is not clear that the proposal can withstand a constitutional challenge. Even critics of the death penalty worried about the message sent by the Nichols sentence. "This case shows how arbitrary and irrational the death penalty can be," said Richard C. Dieter, the executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center. "People shake their heads when they hear that someone got the death penalty for robbing a 7-Eleven, and Brian Nichols got life in prison for his heinous crimes."
New York Times
Crime Rate Stays the Same
WASHINGTON, Dec. 17 (UPI) -- The violent crime rate in 2007 was close to the 2005 rate while the property crime rate was somewhat below the 2005 figure, the U.S. Justice Department said.
Violent and property crime rates in 2007 were at or near the lowest levels recorded data was first available in 1973, the department's Bureau of Justice Statistics said Wednesday in a news release.
Rates for 2007 and 2005 were compared since 2006's rates were atypical because of methodology changes made to the National Crime Victimization Survey, the bureau said.
In 2007, the violent crime rate of 20.7 incidents per 1,000 persons over the age of 12 was 43 percent lower than the rate in 1998, and the property crime rate of 146.5 incidents per 1,000 households was 33 percent lower than in 1998, the bureau said.
During 2007, U.S. residents over the age of 12 experienced an estimated 23 million crimes of violence and theft.
Males experienced 22 violent victimizations per 1,000 males, while females experienced 19 violent victimizations per 1,000 females, the statistics indicated.
The bureau's data indicate 46 six percent of all violent crimes and 37 percent of all property crimes were reported to the police.
© 2008 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Violent and property crime rates in 2007 were at or near the lowest levels recorded data was first available in 1973, the department's Bureau of Justice Statistics said Wednesday in a news release.
Rates for 2007 and 2005 were compared since 2006's rates were atypical because of methodology changes made to the National Crime Victimization Survey, the bureau said.
In 2007, the violent crime rate of 20.7 incidents per 1,000 persons over the age of 12 was 43 percent lower than the rate in 1998, and the property crime rate of 146.5 incidents per 1,000 households was 33 percent lower than in 1998, the bureau said.
During 2007, U.S. residents over the age of 12 experienced an estimated 23 million crimes of violence and theft.
Males experienced 22 violent victimizations per 1,000 males, while females experienced 19 violent victimizations per 1,000 females, the statistics indicated.
The bureau's data indicate 46 six percent of all violent crimes and 37 percent of all property crimes were reported to the police.
© 2008 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Education Link to Lower Cost of Corrections
Prison system in need of correction
by Jeffery C. Mays/Star-Ledger
Sunday December 14, 2008, 9:17 AM
Faced with spending up to eight years at Mountainview Youth Correctional Facility in Annandale on drug and robbery charges, William Blaine -- for the first time in his 21 years -- had a moment of forced stillness to reflect on his future.
Blaine received a high school equivalency degree, but when he wanted to take the next step and enroll in college and computer classes, he was told the state no longer offered those courses.
"Getting my GED made me feel so good. If there were more classes to take, I would have kept pushing," said Blaine, now 36, who was released in two years. "They called it a correctional facility but there was no correcting going on."
Reinstating educational programming inside New Jersey's prisons is just one of the recommendations that has come out of "Counting The Costs," a series of public hearings seeking to elicit public input on how to improve the state's criminal justice system and the process of reintegrating ex-offenders into society upon their release.
Sponsored by Assembly Majority leader Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-Mercer), the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice and the Second Chance Campaign of New Jersey, the third of nine expected hearings was held at Rutgers-Newark last week.
Coleman said she hopes the hearings will lead to major changes in New Jersey's criminal justice system either by legislation -- ending the practice of forcing those convicted of certain criminal offenses to notify potential employers -- or by administrative adjustments to the way the system operates -- eliminating the onerous phone surcharges that inmates face when making calls.
"We wanted to get a full appreciation of the issues by talking to people in the system, the ex-offenders, the people who deliver the services, the families," Coleman said at the Rutgers hearing, which focused on education and drug treatment.
"When looking at the social and economic cost to our state, there should be a tremendous will to reform the system."
Experts agree the system is both expensive and broken. The cost of housing the state's inmate population has increased to more than $1 billion, and two-thirds of the 70,000 adults and juveniles released from prison over the next five years are excepted to be rearrested within three years.
While it costs $40,000 to house an inmate for a year, half as much can be spent to provide comprehensive drug treatment or education.
Michael B. Jackson, a motivational speaker and member of the Juvenile Justice Commission, said the state simply isn't friendly to formerly incarcerated men and women who are trying to improve life for themselves and their families.
Jackson, who went to prison 35 years ago after becoming addicted to heroin at 17, and spent the next several years going in and out of prison for parole violations, said the stigma of having served time never goes away.
"After 35 years, when I go for insurance I still have to check the box that I've been incarcerated. Will it ever end?" he asked during his testimony.
Robert Parkinson, a manager for Integrity House who spent six years behind bars for vehicular homicide while he was an alcoholic, said prison alone will never be the answer, especially since drug addiction is such a prevalent issue among ex-offenders.
An informal survey among the 289 ex-offenders at Integrity House revealed startling statistics. They had served a combined 1,532 years over 2 1/2 prison terms at a cost to taxpayers of $53 million. Almost 80 percent identified themselves as substance abusers. The convictions led 71 percent of them to have suspended licenses and made 56 percent ineligible for welfare. Combined, they owed $650,000 in child support that they were unable to pay.
"There's a tremendous misnomer that if you send someone to prison that hard time fixes them and they fold back into society. Nothing is further from the truth. Addiction is a disease and a disease needs treatment," said Parkinson.
Omar Shabazz, a counselor who works with ex-offenders with the American Friends Service Committee, bemoaned the fact that the programs that allowed him to get a college degree while he spent the years from his 18th to 40th birthdays in prison for a drug-related murder, kidnapping and robbery, no longer exist.
The issues he sees facing incarcerated and newly released inmates range from the basic -- not having identification and medical records and overpriced prison goods, to systematic failures -- a difficult and slow parole process.
There are cost-effective ways to address these issues, said Cornell Brooks, executive director of New Jersey Institute for Social Justice. Online classes can be an inexpensive way to deliver classes to large numbers of inmates. The state can also add incentives such as reduced prison time for inmates who improve themselves educationally. The vocational classes that are offered should match job demands.
In terms of drug treatment, the number of beds simply does not address the need, said Brooks. Drug courts that emphasize intervention, treatment and supervision can help keep nonviolent inmates out of prison and save money.
"After a certain point, the public can't sustain throwing money at a problem and failing all the while talking about being tough on crime. The best way to be tough on crime is to reduce it," said Brooks.
Blaine, who accepts responsibility for his choices, thinks not being able to take college courses may have killed his momentum. After being released, he returned to the streets and got a low-paying job. He soon became distracted by the lure of abundant drug money, drug use and the street lifestyle. To the surprise of no one, he found himself back in trouble.
"Being incarcerated I gained knowledge of what I wanted to be. But when I reached a certain level, I felt the support wasn't there. There just wasn't enough to grab onto," said Blaine.
by Jeffery C. Mays/Star-Ledger
Sunday December 14, 2008, 9:17 AM
Faced with spending up to eight years at Mountainview Youth Correctional Facility in Annandale on drug and robbery charges, William Blaine -- for the first time in his 21 years -- had a moment of forced stillness to reflect on his future.
Blaine received a high school equivalency degree, but when he wanted to take the next step and enroll in college and computer classes, he was told the state no longer offered those courses.
"Getting my GED made me feel so good. If there were more classes to take, I would have kept pushing," said Blaine, now 36, who was released in two years. "They called it a correctional facility but there was no correcting going on."
Reinstating educational programming inside New Jersey's prisons is just one of the recommendations that has come out of "Counting The Costs," a series of public hearings seeking to elicit public input on how to improve the state's criminal justice system and the process of reintegrating ex-offenders into society upon their release.
Sponsored by Assembly Majority leader Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-Mercer), the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice and the Second Chance Campaign of New Jersey, the third of nine expected hearings was held at Rutgers-Newark last week.
Coleman said she hopes the hearings will lead to major changes in New Jersey's criminal justice system either by legislation -- ending the practice of forcing those convicted of certain criminal offenses to notify potential employers -- or by administrative adjustments to the way the system operates -- eliminating the onerous phone surcharges that inmates face when making calls.
"We wanted to get a full appreciation of the issues by talking to people in the system, the ex-offenders, the people who deliver the services, the families," Coleman said at the Rutgers hearing, which focused on education and drug treatment.
"When looking at the social and economic cost to our state, there should be a tremendous will to reform the system."
Experts agree the system is both expensive and broken. The cost of housing the state's inmate population has increased to more than $1 billion, and two-thirds of the 70,000 adults and juveniles released from prison over the next five years are excepted to be rearrested within three years.
While it costs $40,000 to house an inmate for a year, half as much can be spent to provide comprehensive drug treatment or education.
Michael B. Jackson, a motivational speaker and member of the Juvenile Justice Commission, said the state simply isn't friendly to formerly incarcerated men and women who are trying to improve life for themselves and their families.
Jackson, who went to prison 35 years ago after becoming addicted to heroin at 17, and spent the next several years going in and out of prison for parole violations, said the stigma of having served time never goes away.
"After 35 years, when I go for insurance I still have to check the box that I've been incarcerated. Will it ever end?" he asked during his testimony.
Robert Parkinson, a manager for Integrity House who spent six years behind bars for vehicular homicide while he was an alcoholic, said prison alone will never be the answer, especially since drug addiction is such a prevalent issue among ex-offenders.
An informal survey among the 289 ex-offenders at Integrity House revealed startling statistics. They had served a combined 1,532 years over 2 1/2 prison terms at a cost to taxpayers of $53 million. Almost 80 percent identified themselves as substance abusers. The convictions led 71 percent of them to have suspended licenses and made 56 percent ineligible for welfare. Combined, they owed $650,000 in child support that they were unable to pay.
"There's a tremendous misnomer that if you send someone to prison that hard time fixes them and they fold back into society. Nothing is further from the truth. Addiction is a disease and a disease needs treatment," said Parkinson.
Omar Shabazz, a counselor who works with ex-offenders with the American Friends Service Committee, bemoaned the fact that the programs that allowed him to get a college degree while he spent the years from his 18th to 40th birthdays in prison for a drug-related murder, kidnapping and robbery, no longer exist.
The issues he sees facing incarcerated and newly released inmates range from the basic -- not having identification and medical records and overpriced prison goods, to systematic failures -- a difficult and slow parole process.
There are cost-effective ways to address these issues, said Cornell Brooks, executive director of New Jersey Institute for Social Justice. Online classes can be an inexpensive way to deliver classes to large numbers of inmates. The state can also add incentives such as reduced prison time for inmates who improve themselves educationally. The vocational classes that are offered should match job demands.
In terms of drug treatment, the number of beds simply does not address the need, said Brooks. Drug courts that emphasize intervention, treatment and supervision can help keep nonviolent inmates out of prison and save money.
"After a certain point, the public can't sustain throwing money at a problem and failing all the while talking about being tough on crime. The best way to be tough on crime is to reduce it," said Brooks.
Blaine, who accepts responsibility for his choices, thinks not being able to take college courses may have killed his momentum. After being released, he returned to the streets and got a low-paying job. He soon became distracted by the lure of abundant drug money, drug use and the street lifestyle. To the surprise of no one, he found himself back in trouble.
"Being incarcerated I gained knowledge of what I wanted to be. But when I reached a certain level, I felt the support wasn't there. There just wasn't enough to grab onto," said Blaine.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
When Courts Defy the Supreme Court
Hard as it is to believe, there have been times in our history when lower courts have not followed out the mandates of the United States Supreme Court which has no built-in means of enforcement.
This appeared in today's New York Times
December 4, 2008
Justices Look Anew at Case in Which Oregon Court Has Twice Rebuffed Them
By ADAM LIPTAK
WASHINGTON — The United States Supreme Court takes its name seriously, and it expects lower courts to follow its instructions. But the Oregon Supreme Court has twice refused to reduce a $79.5 million punitive damages award in the face of increasingly blunt directions from the nation’s highest court.
When the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the Oregon case for a third time in June, many legal experts assumed it did so to teach the lower court a lesson about which court has the last word.
“The Oregon Supreme Court really has continued to be defiant in this case,” Benjamin C. Zipursky, a Fordham law professor, said.
Philip Morris USA, which is fighting the award, filed unusually aggressive briefs in recent months, comparing the Oregon Supreme Court’s conduct to that of recalcitrant Southern courts in the civil rights era. And the company’s lawyer, Stephen M. Shapiro, sounded confident that he would be speaking to a sympathetic audience when he faced the justices on Wednesday.
“We are here today,” Mr. Shapiro said, “because the Oregon court failed to follow this court’s directives.”
But Mr. Shapiro’s reception was decidedly mixed. Justice Stephen G. Breyer, the author of the 5-to-4 decision last year that ordered the Oregon court to have a fresh look at the award, said his initial reaction to the state court decision had been skeptical.
“I thought, ‘This is a runaround,’ ” Justice Breyer said. But he added, “I’m not sure I think that now.”
The United States Supreme Court’s instructions last year, concerning how the punitive award had been calculated, seemed clear enough.
The Oregon courts had allowed the jury to consider two kinds of harm in assessing the award at issue in the case, Philip Morris v. Williams, No. 07-1216.
One was routine: the jury looked at the harm suffered by Jesse D. Williams, the man whose widow brought the case. Mr. Williams died of lung cancer in 1996 after smoking two packs of Marlboros a day for decades.
But the jury also considered a second kind of harm, to other smokers, and Justice Breyer last year said that was a serious error. “The due process clause prohibits a state’s inflicting punishment for harm caused strangers to the litigation,” he wrote.
Punitive damages cases can produce unusual alliances. Here, Justice Breyer was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and by Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter and Samuel A. Alito Jr. The dissenters were Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
In sum, Justice Breyer wrote last year, “the Oregon Supreme Court applied the wrong constitutional standard” and should now “apply the standard we have set forth.”
But the Oregon court, which in an earlier decision had said Philip Morris “engaged in a massive, continuous, near-half-century scheme to defraud the plaintiff and many others,” did not apply the new standard. Instead, it ruled against Philip Morris on a different, technical and arguably trivial ground involving flaws in the jury instructions Philip Morris had submitted at the trial in 1999. The jury instructions, the state court ruled, used “may” when they should have used “shall,” and they referred to “illicit profits” when they should have omitted the adjective.
“It’s truly a game of gotcha that just nullifies the defendant’s due process rights,” Mr. Shapiro told the justices.
But there is a requirement of Oregon law that says jury instructions to be “clear and correct in all respects” and “altogether free from error.”
“They are pretty picky,” Justice Breyer said of the Oregon justices. “And not only are they being picky, but they are being picky after the event.”
Justice Scalia, who was in dissent last year, sounded exasperated. “Is it up to a state court to sit in judgment about whether our remand orders are in error or not?” he asked.
The Oregon court’s approach did not seem to bother Justice Souter, who was in the majority last year, or Justice Ginsburg, who dissented. Both indicated that the Oregon court was free to decide the jury-instruction issue as and when it wanted.
But even justices who seemed inclined to allow the Oregon court’s ruling to stand worried about the signal that might send to a lower court, particularly in capital cases.
“Is there any way for us to ensure against, in effect, a bad-faith response to our decision?” Justice Souter asked.
Chief Justice Roberts had an answer. “There is, of course, another way to protect our constitutional authority in this case” aside from telling state courts when to decide which issue, he said.
“If there is something malodorous about the fact that the Oregon Supreme Court waited until the last minute to come up with this rule that was before them all the time,” he said, perhaps the United States Supreme Court should agree to decide a separate and fundamental issue that it has so far pointedly avoided in this case, the proper ratio between the punitive and compensatory awards.
The punitive award was 97 times as large as the compensatory award of $821,000. Recent Supreme Court decisions have suggested that the ratio between punitive and compensatory awards should not ordinarily exceed a single digit and should perhaps be capped at 1:1.
It was not clear how serious the chief justice was about the suggestion. But there is at least some chance that the court will avoid ruling on whether the Oregon Supreme Court had defied it by simply addressing what is in some ways the core issue in the case.
****
The United States Constitution was written with states' rights recognized and a government that has two parallel components: federal government (all three branches) and state governments (all three branches). Accepting all this, do you believe that the actions of the Oregon Supreme Court as well at the United States Supreme Court are in keeping with the intent of the founders of our nation who penned the United States Constitution?
This appeared in today's New York Times
December 4, 2008
Justices Look Anew at Case in Which Oregon Court Has Twice Rebuffed Them
By ADAM LIPTAK
WASHINGTON — The United States Supreme Court takes its name seriously, and it expects lower courts to follow its instructions. But the Oregon Supreme Court has twice refused to reduce a $79.5 million punitive damages award in the face of increasingly blunt directions from the nation’s highest court.
When the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the Oregon case for a third time in June, many legal experts assumed it did so to teach the lower court a lesson about which court has the last word.
“The Oregon Supreme Court really has continued to be defiant in this case,” Benjamin C. Zipursky, a Fordham law professor, said.
Philip Morris USA, which is fighting the award, filed unusually aggressive briefs in recent months, comparing the Oregon Supreme Court’s conduct to that of recalcitrant Southern courts in the civil rights era. And the company’s lawyer, Stephen M. Shapiro, sounded confident that he would be speaking to a sympathetic audience when he faced the justices on Wednesday.
“We are here today,” Mr. Shapiro said, “because the Oregon court failed to follow this court’s directives.”
But Mr. Shapiro’s reception was decidedly mixed. Justice Stephen G. Breyer, the author of the 5-to-4 decision last year that ordered the Oregon court to have a fresh look at the award, said his initial reaction to the state court decision had been skeptical.
“I thought, ‘This is a runaround,’ ” Justice Breyer said. But he added, “I’m not sure I think that now.”
The United States Supreme Court’s instructions last year, concerning how the punitive award had been calculated, seemed clear enough.
The Oregon courts had allowed the jury to consider two kinds of harm in assessing the award at issue in the case, Philip Morris v. Williams, No. 07-1216.
One was routine: the jury looked at the harm suffered by Jesse D. Williams, the man whose widow brought the case. Mr. Williams died of lung cancer in 1996 after smoking two packs of Marlboros a day for decades.
But the jury also considered a second kind of harm, to other smokers, and Justice Breyer last year said that was a serious error. “The due process clause prohibits a state’s inflicting punishment for harm caused strangers to the litigation,” he wrote.
Punitive damages cases can produce unusual alliances. Here, Justice Breyer was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and by Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter and Samuel A. Alito Jr. The dissenters were Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
In sum, Justice Breyer wrote last year, “the Oregon Supreme Court applied the wrong constitutional standard” and should now “apply the standard we have set forth.”
But the Oregon court, which in an earlier decision had said Philip Morris “engaged in a massive, continuous, near-half-century scheme to defraud the plaintiff and many others,” did not apply the new standard. Instead, it ruled against Philip Morris on a different, technical and arguably trivial ground involving flaws in the jury instructions Philip Morris had submitted at the trial in 1999. The jury instructions, the state court ruled, used “may” when they should have used “shall,” and they referred to “illicit profits” when they should have omitted the adjective.
“It’s truly a game of gotcha that just nullifies the defendant’s due process rights,” Mr. Shapiro told the justices.
But there is a requirement of Oregon law that says jury instructions to be “clear and correct in all respects” and “altogether free from error.”
“They are pretty picky,” Justice Breyer said of the Oregon justices. “And not only are they being picky, but they are being picky after the event.”
Justice Scalia, who was in dissent last year, sounded exasperated. “Is it up to a state court to sit in judgment about whether our remand orders are in error or not?” he asked.
The Oregon court’s approach did not seem to bother Justice Souter, who was in the majority last year, or Justice Ginsburg, who dissented. Both indicated that the Oregon court was free to decide the jury-instruction issue as and when it wanted.
But even justices who seemed inclined to allow the Oregon court’s ruling to stand worried about the signal that might send to a lower court, particularly in capital cases.
“Is there any way for us to ensure against, in effect, a bad-faith response to our decision?” Justice Souter asked.
Chief Justice Roberts had an answer. “There is, of course, another way to protect our constitutional authority in this case” aside from telling state courts when to decide which issue, he said.
“If there is something malodorous about the fact that the Oregon Supreme Court waited until the last minute to come up with this rule that was before them all the time,” he said, perhaps the United States Supreme Court should agree to decide a separate and fundamental issue that it has so far pointedly avoided in this case, the proper ratio between the punitive and compensatory awards.
The punitive award was 97 times as large as the compensatory award of $821,000. Recent Supreme Court decisions have suggested that the ratio between punitive and compensatory awards should not ordinarily exceed a single digit and should perhaps be capped at 1:1.
It was not clear how serious the chief justice was about the suggestion. But there is at least some chance that the court will avoid ruling on whether the Oregon Supreme Court had defied it by simply addressing what is in some ways the core issue in the case.
****
The United States Constitution was written with states' rights recognized and a government that has two parallel components: federal government (all three branches) and state governments (all three branches). Accepting all this, do you believe that the actions of the Oregon Supreme Court as well at the United States Supreme Court are in keeping with the intent of the founders of our nation who penned the United States Constitution?
Monday, December 1, 2008
Manipulation by Psychologists and 6 innocents go to prison
Published Saturday November 29, 2008
Psychologist had dual role in confessions of Beatrice 6
BY PAUL HAMMEL
WORLD-HERALD BUREAU
•
What were the stories of the Beatrice 6?
RELATED
•
LINCOLN — How could so many people admit in vivid detail to a horrendous crime
that they didn't commit?
That was the question after the Central Park 5.
After the Norfolk 4.And now, the Beatrice 6.
The murder case out of Beatrice, Neb., in which six people were wrongfully convicted
in 1989 of the slaying of a 68-year-old woman, is a new national record for the most people
exonerated in one case by DNA evidence.
Types of false confessions
Voluntary: Without prompting from police, people profess guilt to crimes
they didn't commit for attention, to protect someone else or because
they suffer from delusions.
Compliant: A suspect confesses falsely to avoid punishment,
escape from a stressful interrogation or gain an implied reward.
Internalized: Vulnerable suspects, due to young age, mental problems
and other factors, exposed to highly suggestive interrogation tactics,
not only confess but grow to believe that they committed a crime.
Sources: Saul Kassin, psychology professor, John Jay College of Criminal Justice;
World-Herald files
Two national experts who study false confessions said the Beatrice case
appears to fit patterns of other cases: The suspects were young people with low-esteem
or mental problems who were abusing alcohol or drugs.
They were easily influenced, easily confused and worn out by aggressive
questioning.But Saul Kassin, a professor of psychology at the John Jay College
of Criminal Justice in New York City, and Richard Leo, a law professor at the
University of San Francisco, said the Beatrice case had an unusual aspect:
the role played during interrogations by a police psychologist who previously
had served as private therapist to some of those being questioned.
In general, false confessions, even by several people in the same case, are not that unusual,
Kassin said. About 25 percent of the cases where DNA evidence has led to exonerations
involve false confessions.
Some prior cases with multiple defendants include the four sailors who admitted
to the 1997 rape and murder of a colleague's wife in Norfolk, Va., though later DNA
tests led to the real killer, and the five New York City teenagers who confessed to a
1989 gang rape of a jogger in Central Park, a case later linked by DNA to a single, serial rapist.
In the Beatrice 6 case, five of the defendants acknowledged their guilt,
and at least four gave detailed statements about who was involved and
why they would brutally attack, sexually assault and murder Helen Wilson.
On Nov. 7, authorities announced that DNA from the case matched that of a
now-deceased Oklahoma City man, Bruce Smith.
The state is seeking pardons for five of the defendants and has declined
to seek a new trial for the sixth, whose conviction was overturned after
the new DNA findings.
Kassin and Leo said that a psychologist acting in the dual role of trusted
therapist and criminal interrogator would have had a powerful place of trust
and persuasion over suspects."That is a wide open target," Leo said,
of the involvement of Wayne Price, a licensed psychologist
who consulted with the Gage County Sheriff's Office on criminal behavior.
Price, reached several times recently, said he could not comment because
he is still a part-time sheriff's deputy in Beatrice.
Price did say he didn't recall much from the Wilson case,
which began with the murder in 1985 and ended in 1989
with the arrest and convictions of the six.
Court records indicate that he warned those he interviewed in 1989
that anything they said would be passed on to investigators.
When questioned about his conflicting roles during a pretrial deposition
in 1989, Price said, "What I find, I find. It makes no difference to me. . . .
When I have an emotional involvement or vested interest and can't do it objectively,
I will say so."The prosecutor in the Beatrice 6 case, former Gage County Attorney
Dick Smith, defended Price's involvement, saying it was mainly to have a
trained witness in case defendants sought to have themselves declared
mentally unfit to stand trial.Price, Smith said, was a sworn deputy
for the Gage County Sheriff's Office and there was nothing improper
with allowing him to do some interrogations.
Smith said he's still unsure if the 1989 confessions were completely false.
He presented other scenarios: Bruce Smith, the DNA-linked rapist,
might have arrived after the six others had assaulted Helen Wilson;
or might have been with the six others, who may not have left evidence;
or that evidence was missed."I can't say 100 percent sure they didn't do it," he said.
Experts Kassin and Leo said safeguards against false confessions include requiring
videotaping of police interviews in their entirety — the Nebraska Legislature passed
such a law limited to certain felonies last spring — and making sure that confessions
match facts known only to police.
Confessions are powerful tools in criminal trials, viewed as the "gold standard"
of evidence by legal scholars, according to Kassin.
In the Beatrice 6 case, only one of the defendants, Joseph White,
then a 26-year-old drifter out of Alabama, refused to confess.
He testified that he had nothing to do with the slaying but was found guilty
by a jury of first-degree murder. The verdict hinged mostly on the testimony
of three co-defendants who faced reduced charges in exchange for testimony
and guilty pleas.
Those three were: Ada JoAnn Taylor, 25, Deb Shelden, 31, and James Dean, 25.
Two other defendants pleaded no-contest to reduced charges:
Thomas Winslow, 23, and Kathy Gonzalez, 29.
One of White's attorney's in 1989, Toney Redman, recalled arguing in court
that those testifying were "so weak-minded" that their stories could not be trusted.
"I'm fully convinced now," he said this week, "that the police, if they wanted to,
could get any borderline personality person, who has alcohol and drug issues,
and scare them to death and get them to confess to anything."
The testimony of the main witnesses changed over time as they "remembered"
details.Taylor, for instance, in a videotaped interrogation session, initially said
that she couldn't recall much because she had memory problems.
She denies telling anyone she had committed a murder, and says
police told her she was at the crime scene.
Taylor eventually tells them that she and White and another man drove
in a light blue car to a house where an older lady was assaulted.
But an investigator questions the story, asking if she was "confused"
about the location.
"Yeah," Taylor responds, mentioning her personality disorder,
diagnosed by Price years earlier.
Later, after the videotape is turned off for 19 minutes,
Taylor comes back and implicates Winslow, describes his large brown and beige car
— the car police had believed was used in the crime —
and says she might have told others she was involved.
She also then tells investigators that she remembers that the location
was a red brick apartment building.
Sam Stevens, an investigator for the Beatrice Police Department,
also asks Taylor if she remembers "a struggle in the bedroom,
do you remember the light in the bedroom, was there blood on the sheets,
was there blood on the walls?"
"Yeah, yeah I do," Taylor responds.
Leading questions and feeds about crime-scene information
are common in false confessions, Kassin and Leo said.
Interrogators also are trained in a controversial questioning style,
called the Reid technique, to confront a suspect,
minimize any statements of innocence and
suggest morally justified reasons why the person committed the crime.
Suspects also are sometimes told that it's natural
to "block" or suppress memories of such gruesome events.
According to court records, Kathy Gonzalez in 1989 repeatedly denied
that she was involved in the Wilson case and told Price that
she didn't even know Winslow.
"You apparently don't want to," replies Price,
telling Gonzalez there was a good chance, based on statements
by others, that she was at the crime but blocked it from her memory.
He added that he could "work with" her on memory problems.
Winslow's attorney in 1989, John Stevens Berry, said his client
decided to plead no contest after White was found guilty by a jury
that deliberated only 2½ hours.
Berry said White's defense attorneys, Redman and Alan Stoler,
cross-examined the four co-defendants who testified against White,
questioning whether they really witnessed the events,
dreamed about them or were fed information.
Berry said that today, people are "scratching their heads"
over the mistaken convictions.•
Contact the writer: 402-473-9584, paul.hammel@owh.com
Contact the Omaha World-Herald newsroomCopyright ©2008 Omaha World-Herald®. All rights reserved.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Murder by Internet
This is the 2nd internet case involving suicide. The
other involved a young person who set up
a web cam and announced his intention
to commit suicide and let viewers watch.
Watch they did for 11 hours. Some egged
him on when he was still undecided
whether or not to continue.
After 10 hours one person called the webspace
company. The company was able to get
the address and call 911.
Unfortunately by then the youth was dead.
Neighbor Guilty in MySpace Hoax Case
Lori Drew Found Guilty of Misdemeanor Charges, but Not Felony Charges
By SCOTT MICHELS
Nov. 26, 2008—
A suburban mother was found guilty today of minor misdemeanor charges for her role in an online hoax that prosecutors said led to the suicide of her teenage neighbor.
Lori Drew, 49, was convicted on three misdemeanor counts of unauthorized access to computers in a case that drew nationwide attention both for its novel use of a computer hacking law to combat alleged cyberbullying and for its tales of suburban neighborhood rivalries and teenage suicide.
The jury could not reach a verdict on a single felony conspiracy charge. Drew, who lives in a suburb of St. Louis, was acquitted of several felony counts of unauthorized access to computers in order to inflict emotional distress on 13-year-old Megan Meier.
Drew faces a possible sentence ranging from probation to a year in prison and a $100,000 fine for each misdemeanor count. She could have faced up to 20 years in prison if convicted of the felony charges.
Megan Meier committed suicide in October 2006 after the end of her online relationship with a 16-year-old boy named Josh Evans. Prosecutors said "Josh Evans" was the fictitious creation of Drew, her daughter and her assistant, who allegedly created the fake MySpace account to spy on Megan.
Legally, as Drew's lawyer Dean Steward repeatedly reminded the jury, the case was not about whether Drew caused Megan to commit suicide. Instead, Drew was accused of violating MySpace's terms of service by obtaining personal information to inflict emotional distress on the teen.
But the emotional pull, and much of the testimony in the trial in federal court in Los Angeles, centered on the suicide. "The tragedy in this case is not just Megan Meier's suicide. It's the fact that it was so preventable," U.S.attorney Thomas O'Brien said in his closing statement.
Megan killed herself after "Josh" told her the world would be better off without her, prosecutors said. The assistant, 20-year-old Ashley Grills, testified under a grant of immunity that she was the one who sent the final message. Drew's daughter Sarah was also not charged.
Sarah told jurors her mother thought inventing "Josh" was a good idea but changed her mind two weeks later and told Grills to shut it down. But Grills testified that Drew orchestrated the hoax and knew Megan was depressed and suicidal. Prosecutors also said Drew later bragged about the prank to her friends and co-workers.
Groundbreaking Case
Steward has said that Drew did not encourage or participate in the hoax and was not aware of the mean messages being sent to Megan. He repeatedly asked U.S. District Judge George Wu to exclude testimony about Megan's suicide and twice sought a mistrial.
The case is believed to be one of the first of its kind to use the statute barring unauthorized access to computers, which has previously been used to combat computer hacking, to address so-called cyberbullying. Drew's lawyers and outside legal experts have argued that the unusual prosecution could broaden the scope of what's considered criminal conduct on the Internet. Drew was charged for violating the MySpace terms of service, a set of rules that many users probably do not read. "How can you violate something when you haven't even read it?" Steward asked, according to the Associated Press. "End of case."
According to prosecutors, for several years the Meiers and the Drews were friendly. Both families had girls the same age who attended school together, and they had gone on family trips together.
Megan's mother, Tina Meier, told jurors that her daughter was taking medication for attention deficit disorder and depression, and that she struggled with low self-esteem. Concerned about her daughter's safety, Meier said she had Megan's father reverse the lock on her bedroom.
"I was nervous she would do something," said Meier, adding that Megan had previously tried to commit suicide.
Prosecutors contend that Drew suspected that Megan was spreading rumors about her daughter. They said Drew, her daughter and Grills set up a fake MySpace account in the name of Josh Evans, an attractive 16-year-old boy who was new in town, to spy on Megan.
They allegedly used the Josh Evans account to contact and befriend Megan. Within a few days, Drew encouraged her daughter and Grills to flirt with Megan and planned to lure the teenager to the mall to confront her with the hoax and taunt her, prosecutors said.
Grills, who helped Drew with her coupon magazine business, testified that she told Drew they might get in trouble for the scheme, but that Drew replied, "It was fine and people do it all the time."
Grills said Drew thought the MySpace account was a funny idea and was present about half of the time when Grills and Sarah sent messages to Megan.
In October 2006, another neighborhood girl obtained the password to the Josh account and sent Megan a message saying that Josh no longer wanted to be her friend. The next day, an online argument escalated until Grills, posing as Josh, told Megan the world would be a better place without her in it, prosecutors said.
About 20 minutes later, Tina Meier found her daughter hanging from her belt in her bedroom closet. She died at the hospital the next day.
Grills said during an interview with "Good Morning America" that she wrote that final message in an effort to end the online relationship with Josh because she felt the joke had gone too far.
Drew had previously denied involvement in the hoax, saying she didn't know about the mean messages being sent to Megan.
Her daughter has not been charged.
'Not Like I Pulled the Trigger'
Prosecutors claimed that after Drew learned what had happened, she told her daughter and Grills to delete the MySpace account and told the girl who said that Josh no longer wanted to be Megan's friend to "keep her mouth shut." At one point, after admitting she had told others to take down the MySpace page, Drew allegedly said, "It's not like I pulled the trigger," said prosecutors.
When Megan's parents learned of Drew's alleged involvement, they contacted the police and the FBI. Local and federal prosecutors in Missouri investigated but never charged Drew, concluding that no crime had been committed, according to court records. Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles, where MySpace's computer servers are located, took the case to a grand jury, which indicted Drew in May.
Judge George Wu ruled before the trial that prosecutors could present evidence of Megan's suicide. The terms of service bar fraud, harassment or using information from MySpace to "harass, abuse or harm another person."
Some observers said that allowing prosecutors to present the evidence of Megan's suicide raises the possibility that the case, at least in the minds of jurors, will become more about the human drama of a teenage girl's death than about the legal issues involved.
"Once the suicide horse is out of the barn it's hard to tell jurors to ignore that," said Joseph DeMarco, a former federal prosecutor. "In a case like this, where the underlying acts seem to be innocent in and of themselves, the inflammatory word 'suicide' might have disproportionate impact."
Though the prosecution has been criticized, prosecutors said the case would not mean that anyone who violated a Web site's terms of service would face criminal charges because prosecutors must still prove that a person acted with criminal intent.
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures
var s_account = "wdgnewabcnews,wdgasec";
other involved a young person who set up
a web cam and announced his intention
to commit suicide and let viewers watch.
Watch they did for 11 hours. Some egged
him on when he was still undecided
whether or not to continue.
After 10 hours one person called the webspace
company. The company was able to get
the address and call 911.
Unfortunately by then the youth was dead.
Neighbor Guilty in MySpace Hoax Case
Lori Drew Found Guilty of Misdemeanor Charges, but Not Felony Charges
By SCOTT MICHELS
Nov. 26, 2008—
A suburban mother was found guilty today of minor misdemeanor charges for her role in an online hoax that prosecutors said led to the suicide of her teenage neighbor.
Lori Drew, 49, was convicted on three misdemeanor counts of unauthorized access to computers in a case that drew nationwide attention both for its novel use of a computer hacking law to combat alleged cyberbullying and for its tales of suburban neighborhood rivalries and teenage suicide.
The jury could not reach a verdict on a single felony conspiracy charge. Drew, who lives in a suburb of St. Louis, was acquitted of several felony counts of unauthorized access to computers in order to inflict emotional distress on 13-year-old Megan Meier.
Drew faces a possible sentence ranging from probation to a year in prison and a $100,000 fine for each misdemeanor count. She could have faced up to 20 years in prison if convicted of the felony charges.
Megan Meier committed suicide in October 2006 after the end of her online relationship with a 16-year-old boy named Josh Evans. Prosecutors said "Josh Evans" was the fictitious creation of Drew, her daughter and her assistant, who allegedly created the fake MySpace account to spy on Megan.
Legally, as Drew's lawyer Dean Steward repeatedly reminded the jury, the case was not about whether Drew caused Megan to commit suicide. Instead, Drew was accused of violating MySpace's terms of service by obtaining personal information to inflict emotional distress on the teen.
But the emotional pull, and much of the testimony in the trial in federal court in Los Angeles, centered on the suicide. "The tragedy in this case is not just Megan Meier's suicide. It's the fact that it was so preventable," U.S.attorney Thomas O'Brien said in his closing statement.
Megan killed herself after "Josh" told her the world would be better off without her, prosecutors said. The assistant, 20-year-old Ashley Grills, testified under a grant of immunity that she was the one who sent the final message. Drew's daughter Sarah was also not charged.
Sarah told jurors her mother thought inventing "Josh" was a good idea but changed her mind two weeks later and told Grills to shut it down. But Grills testified that Drew orchestrated the hoax and knew Megan was depressed and suicidal. Prosecutors also said Drew later bragged about the prank to her friends and co-workers.
Groundbreaking Case
Steward has said that Drew did not encourage or participate in the hoax and was not aware of the mean messages being sent to Megan. He repeatedly asked U.S. District Judge George Wu to exclude testimony about Megan's suicide and twice sought a mistrial.
The case is believed to be one of the first of its kind to use the statute barring unauthorized access to computers, which has previously been used to combat computer hacking, to address so-called cyberbullying. Drew's lawyers and outside legal experts have argued that the unusual prosecution could broaden the scope of what's considered criminal conduct on the Internet. Drew was charged for violating the MySpace terms of service, a set of rules that many users probably do not read. "How can you violate something when you haven't even read it?" Steward asked, according to the Associated Press. "End of case."
According to prosecutors, for several years the Meiers and the Drews were friendly. Both families had girls the same age who attended school together, and they had gone on family trips together.
Megan's mother, Tina Meier, told jurors that her daughter was taking medication for attention deficit disorder and depression, and that she struggled with low self-esteem. Concerned about her daughter's safety, Meier said she had Megan's father reverse the lock on her bedroom.
"I was nervous she would do something," said Meier, adding that Megan had previously tried to commit suicide.
Prosecutors contend that Drew suspected that Megan was spreading rumors about her daughter. They said Drew, her daughter and Grills set up a fake MySpace account in the name of Josh Evans, an attractive 16-year-old boy who was new in town, to spy on Megan.
They allegedly used the Josh Evans account to contact and befriend Megan. Within a few days, Drew encouraged her daughter and Grills to flirt with Megan and planned to lure the teenager to the mall to confront her with the hoax and taunt her, prosecutors said.
Grills, who helped Drew with her coupon magazine business, testified that she told Drew they might get in trouble for the scheme, but that Drew replied, "It was fine and people do it all the time."
Grills said Drew thought the MySpace account was a funny idea and was present about half of the time when Grills and Sarah sent messages to Megan.
In October 2006, another neighborhood girl obtained the password to the Josh account and sent Megan a message saying that Josh no longer wanted to be her friend. The next day, an online argument escalated until Grills, posing as Josh, told Megan the world would be a better place without her in it, prosecutors said.
About 20 minutes later, Tina Meier found her daughter hanging from her belt in her bedroom closet. She died at the hospital the next day.
Grills said during an interview with "Good Morning America" that she wrote that final message in an effort to end the online relationship with Josh because she felt the joke had gone too far.
Drew had previously denied involvement in the hoax, saying she didn't know about the mean messages being sent to Megan.
Her daughter has not been charged.
'Not Like I Pulled the Trigger'
Prosecutors claimed that after Drew learned what had happened, she told her daughter and Grills to delete the MySpace account and told the girl who said that Josh no longer wanted to be Megan's friend to "keep her mouth shut." At one point, after admitting she had told others to take down the MySpace page, Drew allegedly said, "It's not like I pulled the trigger," said prosecutors.
When Megan's parents learned of Drew's alleged involvement, they contacted the police and the FBI. Local and federal prosecutors in Missouri investigated but never charged Drew, concluding that no crime had been committed, according to court records. Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles, where MySpace's computer servers are located, took the case to a grand jury, which indicted Drew in May.
Judge George Wu ruled before the trial that prosecutors could present evidence of Megan's suicide. The terms of service bar fraud, harassment or using information from MySpace to "harass, abuse or harm another person."
Some observers said that allowing prosecutors to present the evidence of Megan's suicide raises the possibility that the case, at least in the minds of jurors, will become more about the human drama of a teenage girl's death than about the legal issues involved.
"Once the suicide horse is out of the barn it's hard to tell jurors to ignore that," said Joseph DeMarco, a former federal prosecutor. "In a case like this, where the underlying acts seem to be innocent in and of themselves, the inflammatory word 'suicide' might have disproportionate impact."
Though the prosecution has been criticized, prosecutors said the case would not mean that anyone who violated a Web site's terms of service would face criminal charges because prosecutors must still prove that a person acted with criminal intent.
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures
var s_account = "wdgnewabcnews,wdgasec";
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Am I the only one?
When I read what follows, which is not related to crime in any manner, shape, or form, I could not stop wondering why in such huge deficit, hard economic times, our government wants to spend money to appeal something this relatively trivial. Bringing an appeal is costly and time consuming.
United States Appeals Wardrobe Ruling
Compiled by DAVE ITZKOFF
Published: November 21, 2008
It’s the malfunction that won’t die: four months after a federal court found that CBS was not liable for a 2004 incident in which Janet Jackson’s breast was partly uncovered during a televised Super Bowl halftime performance, the United States government has appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, Agence France-Presse reported.
In the appeal government lawyers asked the court to reinstate a fine of $550,000 levied against CBS by the Federal Communications Commission for what the government called “the most widely viewed broadcast public nudity in television history.”
In a statement CBS said it hoped the Supreme Court would “recognize there are rare instances, particularly during live programming, when it may not be possible to block unfortunate fleeting material, despite best efforts.”
United States Appeals Wardrobe Ruling
Compiled by DAVE ITZKOFF
Published: November 21, 2008
It’s the malfunction that won’t die: four months after a federal court found that CBS was not liable for a 2004 incident in which Janet Jackson’s breast was partly uncovered during a televised Super Bowl halftime performance, the United States government has appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, Agence France-Presse reported.
In the appeal government lawyers asked the court to reinstate a fine of $550,000 levied against CBS by the Federal Communications Commission for what the government called “the most widely viewed broadcast public nudity in television history.”
In a statement CBS said it hoped the Supreme Court would “recognize there are rare instances, particularly during live programming, when it may not be possible to block unfortunate fleeting material, despite best efforts.”
Friday, November 21, 2008
Is there a solution in these economic times?
November 21, 2008 Editorial
Hard Times and the Right to Counsel
Forty-five years after the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling established a defendant’s constitutional right to counsel in state criminal proceedings, that crucial right is hanging by a tattered thread.
Public defenders’ offices always have been underfinanced and overburdened. With state revenues in free fall, the problem is reaching crisis proportions and creating a legal and moral challenge for the criminal justice system, state legislatures and the legal profession.
Statewide public defenders in Kentucky and Minnesota and in cities such as Miami and Atlanta have been forced by budget cuts to fire or furlough lawyers. In at least seven states, public defenders’ offices are refusing to take on new cases or have sued to limit them. They argue that budget cuts and rising case loads undermine their ability to provide adequate representation.
In a disturbing example of legal triage, a Florida judge ruled in September that the public defenders’ office in Miami-Dade County could refuse to represent many poor defendants arrested on lesser felony charges so that its lawyers could provide a better defense for other clients. Behind the ruling were some chastening statistics: Over the past three years, the average number of felony cases handled by each lawyer rose from 367 annually to nearly 500. Misdemeanor case loads rose from 1,380 to 2,225.
Public defenders’ offices all over the country are reporting similar problems. The immediate result is that innocent defendants may feel pressure to plead guilty. There also is an increased risk of wrongful conviction, which means that the real offenders would go free.
With states struggling to come up with financing for schools and hospitals, we fear politicians are unlikely to argue for significantly more money for public defenders’ offices. To solve the immediate crisis, new sources of support would have to be found — quickly.
One approach would be for states to increase the registration fees charged to lawyers. The private bar also must significantly expand pro bono representation. Such efforts alone cannot fill the gap. Ultimately, government must take responsibility. All defendants, rich or poor, have the right to competent legal counsel.
Bad Economic Times DOES NOT Mean More Crime
This fascinating article looks back to the Depression period and other hard economic times and reveals that crime does not become rampant even though most people believe it happens.
You can either read the article itself or click on the article and listen to it as a podcast.
The one area that does increase involves domestic abuse. This is not surprising. Remember in Texas, the law requires that you report suspected elder or child abuse.
You can either read the article itself or click on the article and listen to it as a podcast.
The one area that does increase involves domestic abuse. This is not surprising. Remember in Texas, the law requires that you report suspected elder or child abuse.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Interesting report on Female Violence
Arrests of girls drop over decade, study says
Fewer girls were arrested last year for violent crimes than a decade earlier, according to new government research prompted by a surge in female juvenile delinquency in the 1990s.
Arrests for aggravated assault by girls younger than 18 fell 17% from 1998 to 2007, the new U.S. Department of Justice research finds. The research comes at a time when widely played videos show girls beating each other up. One such video, circulated on YouTube, showed two teen girls pummeling another girl in June at a Michigan high school.
"We're not facing an epidemic of girls gone wild," says J. Robert Flores, chief of the department's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, which spent $2.5 million on the first U.S.-funded effort to explore girl delinquency.
The research project, known as the Girls Study Group, was launched in 2004, a year in which girls accounted for 30% of all juvenile arrests. The findings will be released in a series of reports in the coming year.
"We want to dispel that myth," that girls have become more violent, says Stephanie Hawkins, leader of the Girls Study Group and research psychologist at RTI International, a research institute.
Among the findings, which cover 1998 to 2007:
• 13% fewer girls were arrested for all violent crimes.
• 10% more girls were arrested for simple assault, although the increase occurred earlier in the decade. The number of simple assault arrests of girls has fallen since 2004.
• Arrests of boys fell even more — 14% for all violent crimes.
The drop in arrests has been less for girls, not because behavior has changed but because of policy, says Darrell Steffensmeier, a member of the study group and a sociology professor at Penn State. He says police are more apt now than decades ago to arrest girls for domestic violence or school fights.
Also, he says girls themselves do not report an increase in violent behavior, according to school-based surveys such as Monitoring the Future.
Some researchers question the study group's data. Girls underestimate their own violence and FBI data fluctuate depending on policy and demographic changes, says James Garbarino, psychology professor at Loyola University and author of the 2006 book, See Jane Hit: Why Girls Are Growing More Violent and What We Can Do About It.
"It's a puzzling area," says Garbarino, adding that cultural messages are telling girls it's OK to be aggressive.
David Finkelhor, head of the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire, agrees pop culture is promoting more assertive females. Still, he says the factors that cause girls to be violent "run deeper," and he doesn't see a trend of increased girl violence.
Those risk factors, says the Girls Study Group, include poor parental supervision, lack of school involvement, early puberty, sexual abuse, depression, anxiety and romantic partners.
 |
| |
| Find this article at: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-11-19-girlscrime_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip |
Does this mean there is no possible solution to problems?
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Back Gate poll finds prison staff fear retaliation for reporting misconduct
Over at The Back Gate, a prison staff-run website, a reader poll asks this question: "As a TDCJ employee, have you witnessed incidents on your unit that you were afraid to report to your warden(s) due to fears of career suicide and or retaliation? (be honest)"
The result: 76% (338 out of 445 at the time of this writing).
Everyone wonders why it's so hard to rid prisons of contraband, but if this poll is an accurate reflection, part of the reason is that non-corrupt guards and other prison employees are afraid to speak up.
The result: 76% (338 out of 445 at the time of this writing).
Everyone wonders why it's so hard to rid prisons of contraband, but if this poll is an accurate reflection, part of the reason is that non-corrupt guards and other prison employees are afraid to speak up.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
So Hard to Fathom
Editorial: DNA Testing
Beyond a shadow of a doubt
It's hard to believe that someone would plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit.
But it happens, more often than anyone likes to admit.
More than 200 people have been exonerated in recent years thanks to advances
in DNA testing. In about 25 percent of those cases, the wrongfully convicted
person either pleaded guilty, confessed to the crime, or made self-incriminating statements.
A variety of factors can contribute to an innocent person's confessing to a crime
he didn't commit, including coercion, duress, fear of violence, limited mental capacity,
ignorance of the law, actual harm, and the threat of a long sentence
or the death penalty if you don't cooperate.
Such a case is now before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, involving a
Philadelphia man convicted of a brutal rape and murder in 1993.
He alleges he was pressured by police to confess to the crimes.
Anthony Wright contends he didn't rape and murder a 77-year-old woman
in her Nicetown home, and he has requested DNA testing of the evidence.
But Philadelphia District Attorney Lynne Abraham has opposed the DNA test,
arguing that there is no need because Wright confessed.
Wright's attorneys filed an appeal last month to the state Supreme Court,
which has yet to rule.
The best and only way to resolve the dispute is to proceed with the DNA test.
Isn't the goal justice?
Wright may very well be guilty. But Abraham's refusal to conduct the DNA test
only raises suspicion and undercuts the D.A.'s argument that the right person is behind bars.
Wright was convicted in 1993 of rape, murder and burglary of Louise Talley,
a widow who lived near him. Wright was sentenced to life in prison for the crimes,
which occurred in September 1991, when he was 20 years old.
Wright's conviction was based largely on his signed confession
and the testimony of two witnesses - one of whom police
initially considered a suspect.
When detectives approached Wright at his home, he voluntarily went
to police headquarters and waived his Miranda rights.
Detectives say Wright eventually gave a detailed confession,
though it wasn't recorded or videotaped.
A good way to reduce false confessions is for police to record interrogations,
criminal-justice experts say.
Wright's confession was written by one of the detectives and
signed by Wright. Wright contends he wasn't allowed
to read the answers attributed to him before he signed the document.
Detectives say Wright confessed to wearing specific clothing on the day of the crime.
When police searched Wright's home they say they found bloodstained
clothing that matched the description that he had provided.
At trial, Wright and his mother denied that the clothing was his
or that it was recovered from their home. Wright also moved
unsuccessfully to have his confession suppressed, arguing it was coerced.
He alleged detectives handcuffed him to a chair and that one
threatened to "rip his eyes out" and "skull-f- him."
In addition, the accounts of the witnesses who put Wright at the scene
of the crime are inconsistent when compared with each other,
raising questions about their credibility.
In Pennsylvania, nine people have been exonerated in recent years
as a result of DNA testing, including Bruce Godschalk of Montgomery County,
who confessed to two 1986 rapes he didn't commit.
Godschalk spent 15 years in prison before his release in 2002.
For seven years he fought to have DNA testing done,
alleging his confession was coerced and effectively written by the detective.
But the District Attorney's Office resisted because he, like Wright, had confessed.
After Godschalk's release from prison, the state enacted a law
that allows convicts to request DNA testing to prove their innocence.
The law applies to convictions before 1995 or to cases where
DNA testing wasn't conducted.
About half of the states have laws that allow for post-conviction DNA testing.
The law exists for cases like Wright's.
If Abraham won't allow the DNA test, the state Supreme Court
should order that it be done to resolve the dispute and
ensure that justice has been served. After all, that is the goal.
|
| |
| Find this article at: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/20081116_Editorial__DNA_Testing.html?adString=inq.currents/currents;!category=currents;&randomOrd=111808082304 |
Friday, November 14, 2008
Criminologist Dispute City Crime Rankings
This is copied in its entirety from the Crime and Justice daily newsletter that I receive.
Critics Assail City Crime Rankings; Publication Due Nov. 24
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The costs of ranking cities by their rates of reported crime outweigh the benefits, criminologist Richard Rosenfeld of the University of Missouri at St. Louis asserted yesterday. Rosenfeld spoke at the American Society of Criminology, which is holding its annual meeting in St. Louis. CQ Press, publisher of an annual volume that ranks cities and metropolitan areas, is scheduled to issue this year's edition on Nov. 24. The company says it will no longer refer to cities at the top and bottom of the list as the "most dangerous" or "safest" cities. Rosenfeld argued that the rankings misinform the public about the true risks of crime in a particular area.
James Noonan of the FBI Uniform Crime Reports unit, speaking on the same panel, noted that the rankings tend to punish police agencies that report crime data accurately. The FBI opposes using its data for rankings.
Jeff Rainford, a top adviser to St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay, contended that the city crime rankings "offer no useful information." In St. Louis, which has ranked high on the list of per capita crime rates, five neighborhoods do have high crime totals but 74 are relatively safe, Rainford said. CQ Press Acquisitions Editor Doug Goldenberg-Hart told the session that publication of the crime data has prompted some cities to step up their anticrime efforts. He cited Oakland as having overhauled its policing in part after being cited as one of the highest-crime cities in the country. "The numbers are the numbers," he said. St. Louis' Rainford suggested that analysts correlate crime rates with other factors such as poverty levels, gun availability, sentencing practices and the impact of tax policy. Crime & Justice News
Critics Assail City Crime Rankings; Publication Due Nov. 24
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The costs of ranking cities by their rates of reported crime outweigh the benefits, criminologist Richard Rosenfeld of the University of Missouri at St. Louis asserted yesterday. Rosenfeld spoke at the American Society of Criminology, which is holding its annual meeting in St. Louis. CQ Press, publisher of an annual volume that ranks cities and metropolitan areas, is scheduled to issue this year's edition on Nov. 24. The company says it will no longer refer to cities at the top and bottom of the list as the "most dangerous" or "safest" cities. Rosenfeld argued that the rankings misinform the public about the true risks of crime in a particular area.
James Noonan of the FBI Uniform Crime Reports unit, speaking on the same panel, noted that the rankings tend to punish police agencies that report crime data accurately. The FBI opposes using its data for rankings.
Jeff Rainford, a top adviser to St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay, contended that the city crime rankings "offer no useful information." In St. Louis, which has ranked high on the list of per capita crime rates, five neighborhoods do have high crime totals but 74 are relatively safe, Rainford said. CQ Press Acquisitions Editor Doug Goldenberg-Hart told the session that publication of the crime data has prompted some cities to step up their anticrime efforts. He cited Oakland as having overhauled its policing in part after being cited as one of the highest-crime cities in the country. "The numbers are the numbers," he said. St. Louis' Rainford suggested that analysts correlate crime rates with other factors such as poverty levels, gun availability, sentencing practices and the impact of tax policy. Crime & Justice News
The Media and Gun Sales
Today's issue of Crime and Justice News included an excerpt from an article in Slate that reiterates the way numbers can be blown out of
proportion to create a non-existent perception of fear.
The article discusses the numerous newspaper headlines and news stories that recently indicated that the nation was busy buying guns in fear that the new administration would place limits upon the 2nd Amendment. Slate analyzes the actual number of sales in comparison to past years.
A major point made is that we do not know how many are new purchasers v those who have guns and want to add to the collection. Additionally the increase in population must be factored in.
This is but another of too many instances where statistics are utilized to support a position without considering all the factors.
When a gunshop owner is interviewed about the increase in sales, we never hear him/her asked if other gunshops in the area have closed. With fewer gunshops, doesn't it make sense that those remaining will see an increase in sales?
When I first read about the increase in gun sales, I wondered if this time of year isn't when hunters make purchses.
I certainly accept the fact that there probably are some who, for whatever reason, headed to the local gunshop when the election results were announced. But to headline this into a show of national fear is unwarranted.
proportion to create a non-existent perception of fear.
The article discusses the numerous newspaper headlines and news stories that recently indicated that the nation was busy buying guns in fear that the new administration would place limits upon the 2nd Amendment. Slate analyzes the actual number of sales in comparison to past years.
A major point made is that we do not know how many are new purchasers v those who have guns and want to add to the collection. Additionally the increase in population must be factored in.
This is but another of too many instances where statistics are utilized to support a position without considering all the factors.
When a gunshop owner is interviewed about the increase in sales, we never hear him/her asked if other gunshops in the area have closed. With fewer gunshops, doesn't it make sense that those remaining will see an increase in sales?
When I first read about the increase in gun sales, I wondered if this time of year isn't when hunters make purchses.
I certainly accept the fact that there probably are some who, for whatever reason, headed to the local gunshop when the election results were announced. But to headline this into a show of national fear is unwarranted.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Freedom can be painful
In 2003 PBS did a documentary about the lives of men who had been exonerated in the months after their release. There is a chart of the amount of money, none in some states, that these innocent individuals may receive for the injustice they endured.
Keep in mind that 5 more years have gone by since this was shown and some states have revisited compensation issues in the intervening years. The number of those innocents who have been released has more than tripled in the intervening years.
Unless we can provide psychiatric/psychological assistance along with housing assistance and jobs, these individuals are being revictimized in many way. As we face economic and budgetary problems, the funds will not be there.
How do you think we might address this issue?
Keep in mind that 5 more years have gone by since this was shown and some states have revisited compensation issues in the intervening years. The number of those innocents who have been released has more than tripled in the intervening years.
Unless we can provide psychiatric/psychological assistance along with housing assistance and jobs, these individuals are being revictimized in many way. As we face economic and budgetary problems, the funds will not be there.
How do you think we might address this issue?
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Should Those Writing Lab Reports be Required to Testify
Should Writer of Lab Report testify
Exonerations have risen dramatically as Project Innocence groups have expandedand new DNA testing has become available. Quite often the innocent was convicted
using unreliable eye witness accounts, jailhouse snitches whose testimony
became equivalent to a get out of jail soon key,or even defense counsel
without the resources to challenge evidence.
The United States Supreme Court granted cert
and heard oral arguments this week in a case that centers around
the 6th Amendment's confrontation clause. The issue before the court:
Must lab technicians be available
for cross-examination when states introduce drug, blood,
or other forensic reports at trial?
In the past few years major deficiencies in the laboratory work done in Dallas, Houston, and
other cities has been revealed and resulted in overturned convictions. In some instances
the technicians were not trained in the newest techniques and protocols. The examples
are numerous. By allowing cross-examination some problems may be revealed that
allow an innocent person to be acquitted because of faulty lab work. Fingerprint evidence
and gun casings have been the focus of recent scientific papers.
This is a case that should be watched carefully since its decision will effect criminal trials
across the county.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Taking Best From Both SIdes
In their respective platforms both the Democrats and Republicans addressed criminal justice issues.
I plan to simply list the ones I personally would like to see implementated by bipartisan legislatures.
Because of economic shortfalls for the states as well as the federal government, many worthy projects
will undoubtedly have to be postponed.
My list is NOT prioritized, but I would like to see your responses list your first 3-5 priorities.
Support for local law enforcement by providing additional funding for equipment and manpower.
Support for prison-to-work programs.
Assist all levels of government, including tribes, with funding to combat and prevent drug crimes.
Assist all levels of government to combat and prevent drug and alcohol abuse.
Support programs aimed at ending violence against women.
Back victims' rights legislation.
Support programs aimed at ending child pornography
Support programs providing stronger enforcement against gangs
Support legislation providing for the immediate deportation of illegal aliens who are involved in gangs
Support legislation providing for the immediate deportation of illegal aliens who commit violent crimes
Support legislation providing for the immediate deportation of illegal aliens who commit sex offenses
Reform the prisons
Support drug courts and other alternative court plans
I plan to simply list the ones I personally would like to see implementated by bipartisan legislatures.
Because of economic shortfalls for the states as well as the federal government, many worthy projects
will undoubtedly have to be postponed.
My list is NOT prioritized, but I would like to see your responses list your first 3-5 priorities.
Support for local law enforcement by providing additional funding for equipment and manpower.
Support for prison-to-work programs.
Assist all levels of government, including tribes, with funding to combat and prevent drug crimes.
Assist all levels of government to combat and prevent drug and alcohol abuse.
Support programs aimed at ending violence against women.
Back victims' rights legislation.
Support programs aimed at ending child pornography
Support programs providing stronger enforcement against gangs
Support legislation providing for the immediate deportation of illegal aliens who are involved in gangs
Support legislation providing for the immediate deportation of illegal aliens who commit violent crimes
Support legislation providing for the immediate deportation of illegal aliens who commit sex offenses
Reform the prisons
Support drug courts and other alternative court plans
Which 3-5 of these do you feel needs immediate implementation. Why do you select these above others?
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
This is scary
More reports of violence point to ailing federal prison system
By Erin Rosa 10/30/08 8:36 AM 
(Photo/Todd Ehlers, Flickr)
Deadly assaults in federal penitentiaries are on the rise and they aren’t exclusive to Colorado. Following reports that an inmate was stabbed to death in August at the U.S. Penitentiary in the southern city of Florence, there is news from another federal lockup that a guard was assaulted and stabbed multiple times this month, lending credence to correctional workers’ claims that the entire system is an understaffed tinderbox.
The Bureau of Prisons, the agency overseeing the lockups, has confirmed that a correctional guard was stabbed by an inmate multiple times in the head and lower back at the U.S. Penitentiary Big Sandy in Kentucky, sustaining injuries that required medical attention. Workers at the facility claim that the guard was stabbed with a makeshift “shank” weapon, but the bureau has not yet confirmed that detail.
Bureau officials state that the guard was released from hospital care on Oct. 21, the same day the assault happened. The prison has been on lockdown status since the incident, which means that inmates are generally confined to their cells and not allowed to visit with family members.
Bureau employees familiar with the situation, who commented on an anonymous basis, stated that the guard was “stabbed five times with the weapon” and sustained “3-inch stab wounds to the head area and three stab wounds to the lung and back area,” by an “inmate refusing to be restrained, due to being intoxicated” and that the “officer had blood streaming from the head wounds.”
So far, the bureau has not confirmed the workers’ claims.
The fact that the inmate was able to hide a weapon in the first place, coupled with the bellicose assault on a staff member, are indications that understaffing has created a dangerous environment for both guards and inmates in the federal prison.
In Colorado, at the high-security penitentiary in Florence, three inmates have died in less than four months. Two prisoners were killed by guard gunfire when a massive 200-person riot broke out on the recreation yard of the prison in April after inmates were again allegedly intoxicated on self-brewed alcohol. Another inmate was killed in August in what workers say was a stabbing by another inmate. The prison has been on lockdown since the most recent killing.
Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar, a Democrat, sent a letter to bureau head Harley Lappin in September demanding that the agency publicly disclose the results of an investigation into the riot. However, the bureau has not yet responded to the lawmaker.
It’s not the first letter that has been sent to the bureau, either.
In February Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va., sent a brief memo to Lappin, commenting on increasing violence against correctional workers in the nation’s prisons:
I am concerned about reports of increasing violence in the Federal Prison System, including recent assaults and homicides at [U.S. Penitentiary] Hazelton, [U.S. Penitentiary] Beaumont and [Federal Correctional Institution ] Allenwood. Incidents such as these are particularly troubling given the funding limitations in the Bureau of Prisons in fiscal year 2008, and the impact such constraints may have on the Bureau’s ability to respond to violent threats and attacks.
The violence reached a pinnacle in June when José Rivera, a 22-year-old correctional worker, was stabbed to death by an inmate at the U.S. Penitentiary Atwater in California.
Inmate-on-inmate assaults are also on the rise. According to federal data and media reports, 12 inmates in federal prisons lost their lives due to inmate-on-inmate violence in 2007, and the number has already reached at least 11 in 2008.
Correctional workers have been blowing whistles for years over what they claim are dangerously low staffing levels at government lockups. Employees claim that the low number of guards has made it increasingly difficult to spot contraband like alcohol and weapons.
In March 2005, the bureau implemented a directive called “mission critical,” that ordered all agency institutions to come up with staffing rosters that listed the bare-minimum needed to run each prison safely. Workers contend that the bureau isn’t even fulfilling obligations for the bare-minimum and is vacating units for hours at a time.
Clarification: Story edited to further distinguish claims made from the bureau and workers at the Big Sandy USP relating to statements about a makeshift “shank” weapon.
Decriminalizing marijuana in MA
QUESTION 2
Voters approve marijuana law change
Voters yesterday overwhelmingly approved a ballot initiative to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana, making getting caught with less than an ounce of pot punishable by a civil fine of $100. The change in the law means someone found carrying dozens of joints will no longer be reported to the state's criminal history board.
With about 90 percent of the state's precincts reporting last night, voters favored the Question 2 proposition 65 percent to 35 percent.
"The people were ahead of the politicians on this issue; they recognize and want a more sensible approach to our marijuana policy," said Whitney Taylor, chairwoman of the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy, which campaigned for the ballot initiative. "They want to focus our limited law enforcement resources on serious and violent crimes. They recognize under the new law that the punishment will fit the offense."
The proposition will become law 30 days after it is reported to the Governor's Council, which usually meets in late November or early December. But the Legislature could amend or repeal the new law, as they have done with prior initiatives passed by the voters, said Emily LaGrassa, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Martha Coakley.
Opponents of the proposition said they are concerned about the potential consequences of the vote. "The administration is clear in its opposition to the decriminalization of marijuana, and we are concerned about the effects of ballot Question 2's passage," Kevin Burke, secretary of the state's Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, said in a statement.
He would not comment on whether the administration will try to repeal the law, which will require violators younger than 18 to complete a drug awareness program and community service. The fine would increase to as much as $1,000 for those who fail to complete the program.
Proponents of the initiative, who spent about $1 million promoting it, argued the change in the law would maintain the state's existing penalties for growing, trafficking, or driving under the influence of marijuana, while ensuring that those caught with less than an ounce of pot would avoid the taint of a criminal record.
The opponents, who include the governor, attorney general, and district attorneys around the state, argued that decriminalizing marijuana possession would promote drug use and benefit drug dealers at a time when they say marijuana has become more potent. They warned it would increase violence on the streets and safety hazards in the workplace, and cause the number of car crashes to rise as more youths drive under the influence.
In a statement, the Coalition for Safe Streets, which opposed the initiative, blamed the loss on being outspent by supporters of Question 2, which included the billionaire financier George Soros, who spent more than $400,000 in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.
"Now these pro-drug special interests will move on to another state as part of their plan to inflict a radical drug-legalization agenda on as many communities as possible," said the statement.
The Rev. Bruce Wall, pastor of Global Ministries Christian Church in Dorchester, was among several prominent black ministers in Boston who called on fellow clergy to oppose the initiative.
"I guess there are a lot of people smoking the stuff, and they don't see what we see," Wall said.
The initiative's success last night sparked loud cheers from supporters gathered at the Silvertone Bar & Grill in downtown.
"I think this points to how our Legislature is unwilling to represent their constituents on these issues," said Bill Downing, president of the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition.
Another chance to voice your opinion on this hot button issue
Citizens speak on proposals and amendments
Stem cell, medical marijuana props approved
Charlie Cain / Detroit News Lansing Bureau
Michigan voters easily approved a law Tuesday to allow the seriously ill to smoke marijuana, while a proposal to ease restrictions on stem cell research research won by a tighter margin.
Michigan became the 13th state -- and first in the Midwest -- to legalize medical marijuana. While backers said it would help as many as 50,000 residents ease the pain of cancer, Hepatitis C, HIV/AIDS and other illnesses, Proposal 1 drew widespread opposition from law enforcement, business groups and health organizations.
Dianne Byrum, spokeswoman for Michigan Coalition for Compassionate Care which championed the proposal, said the opposition ads didn't work.
"This is a victory for the patients and their stories resonated with voters," she said. "The scare tactics from the opposition were over the top and not believable."
Said Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Bill Schuette, spokesman for the group opposed to medical marijuana: "We waged a good fight and talked about the unintended consequences. But we were underfunded and came up short."
Mike Chaffee, 48, an accountant from Troy , said medical marijuana is an "alternative to high-cost drugs" and allows patients to "decide what's best for them."
Good chance to voice your opinion
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Unanticipated Consequences
Some Boston Drug Dealers Turn To Prostitution
most dangerous offenders off the streets, but it is driving some dealers
and gang leaders to pursue another line of work: prostitution, the Boston Globe
reports.
Law enforcement officials and victim advocates say girls as young as 14
have become a prized commodity for criminals who would rather exploit them
than run the risk of serving a long federal sentence for dealing drugs.
"The girl has become the new drug," said Kelley O'Connell, who runs the
Boston Police Department's human trafficking unit.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A federal crackdown on drug dealers has taken some of Boston'smost dangerous offenders off the streets, but it is driving some dealers
and gang leaders to pursue another line of work: prostitution, the Boston Globe
reports.
Law enforcement officials and victim advocates say girls as young as 14
have become a prized commodity for criminals who would rather exploit them
than run the risk of serving a long federal sentence for dealing drugs.
"The girl has become the new drug," said Kelley O'Connell, who runs the
Boston Police Department's human trafficking unit.
The trend is in part a consequence of the comparative ease of sexual exploitation
in the digital age. Pimps can advertise girls and women online - a way
to increase demand and avoid street arrests. Some teenagers have recoiled
from crime entirely, deciding to stick with school and seek legitimate jobs
rather than deal drugs. Others have turned to theft.
The greatest impact has been on human trafficking.
Most fledgling pimps are men in their late 20s and early 30s
who served time in prison for drugs, have recently been released,
and have settled on a new source of illicit income.
Tracking the change through statistics is difficult because
law enforcement is focusing less on arresting prostitutes
than on tracking down the people who appear to be exploiting them.
Read the entire article here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
