Tag: incarceration

  • Criminal Justice Reform in the Age of Trump

    Over at the Cato Institute, Steven Teles wrote a piece about conservatives and how we can de-incarcerate. A group of people, myself included, are writing response pieces. Here is mine:

    A few years back, for a brief while, it really did seem as if conservative Republicans were interested in reducing the number of prisoners in America. Teles argues that once conservatives get in a position of political omnipotence, they don’t have liberals to kick around anymore. Political control brings policy ownership. Without fear of political defeat or being labeled “soft on crime,” conservatives are free to judge prisons on cost, effectiveness, and even morality.

    There are indeed some extremely low-hanging fruits of de-incarceration, some truly nonviolent offenders and others who may have been ignorant of the crime they committed. [But] to return to pre-1980 levels of incarceration in America, 80 percent of prisoners would have to be released. This will not happen.

    On crime and police, the first steps in incarceration, Democrats in the past two years were eager to abandon 20 years of generally pro-police policy dating back to Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Trump’s victory could allow the left (at least the moderate left) to shift from the #BlackLivesMatter police-are-the-problem mentality to one more focused on actually preventing crime…. Had Hillary Clinton won the election, an unprecedented two-year 25 percent increase in nationwide homicide since 2014 would certainly have revived crime as a wedge issue and placed Democrats on the defensive. It still may. The coming days could be dark indeed.

  • “My Four Months as a Private Prison Guard: A Mother Jones Investigation”

    Shane Bauer researched and wrote an amazingly important article for Mother Jones. (It’s a book really, at 35,000 words.) Bauer because a prison guard for a few months, took notes, and wrote about it. It can be that simple. You really should read all this. It’s gripping. And big props to Mother Jones for doing real investigative reporting. He became a correctional officer so you don’t have to. It’s the best thing I’ve read all year:

    If I were not working at Winn and were reporting on the prison through more traditional means, I would never know how violent it is. While I work here, I keep track of every stabbing that I see or hear about from supervisors or eyewitnesses. During the first two months of 2015, at least 12 people are shanked. The company is required to report all serious assaults to the DOC. But DOC records show that for the first 10 months of 2015, CCA reported only five stabbings. (CCA says it reports all assaults and that the DOC may have classified incidents differently.)

    I know my field is police. But I wrote a damn book about incarceration. This book of mine, In Defense of Flogging, was favorable reviewed in The Economist and featured in Mother Jones, the Wall Street Journal, Time, the Atlanticand seemingly every other publication in the world. My idea even got me a fabulous speaking gig ever at Sydney Opera House’s Festival of Dangerous Ideas!

    (But no. It didn’t sell at all. Why do you ask?)

    Here’s my point: I give a shit about incarceration in this country. Most people don’t. And then those who do care are too busy bitching about police to notice the real harms — evils even — that are happening to literally millions of American, just out of sight in our jails and prisons.

    Bauer doesn’t go into great depth explaining mass incarceration. He doesn’t offer massive policy solutions to the war on drugs. He doesn’t hide behind sociological theory. What he writes is more basic and all the more powerful. Bauer describes what the hell happens in prison: how it operates, how guards survive, how prisoners survive. Guards are paid $9 an hour (yes, $18,000 a year, though it went up to $10 an hour) and go through minimal training and work 12-hour shifts in one of the world’s shittiest jobs. And yes, of course corruption is rampant.

    Bauer works at Winn Correctional Center in Louisiana, a medium-security prison. It’s not the nation’s best prison nor is it the worst (though it’s certainly well below average). But you can’t run a prison well. At least not on the cheap. Of course the inmates run the prison. But we knew that, right? And what goes on there — to both workers and prisoners — should cause more outrage.

    Meanwhile the CEO of the for-profit CCA made $3.4 million dollars in 2015. (19 times the salary of the director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons.) CCA pinches every penny possible, because every dime not spent on labor or inmates is profit. They’re in it for the money. (They also lobby for more prisoners and tougher immigration laws, which is essentially the same thing.)

    [Keep in mind that private prison only hold about 8 percent of all prisoners, but there’s something particularly horrible about the concept of profiting momentarily from human captivity.]

    Because the prison in understaffed and guards poorly paid, they don’t break up fights. So prisoners fend for themselves:

    He asks us what we should do if we see two inmates stabbing each other.

    We could try to break up a fight if we wanted, he says, but since we won’t have pepper spray or a nightstick, he wouldn’t recommend it. “We are not going to pay you that much,” he says emphatically. “The next raise you get is not going to be much more than the one you got last time. The only thing that’s important to us is that we go home at the end of the day. Period. So if them fools want to cut each other, well, happy cutting.”

    And this:

    One day, I meet a man with no legs in a wheelchair. His name is Robert Scott. (He consented to having his real name used.) He’s been at Winn 12 years. “I was walking when I got here,” he tells me. “I was walking, had all my fingers.” I notice he is wearing fingerless gloves with nothing poking out of them. “They took my legs off in January and my fingers in June. Gangrene don’t play. I kept going to the infirmary, saying, ‘My feet hurt. My feet hurt.’ They said, ‘Ain’t nothin’ wrong wicha. I don’t see nothin’ wrong wicha.’ They didn’t believe me, or they talk bad to me—’I can’t believe you comin’ up here!’”

    His medical records show that in the space of four months he made at least nine requests to see a doctor. He complained of sore spots on his feet, swelling, oozing pus, and pain so severe he couldn’t sleep. When he visited the infirmary, medical staff offered him sole pads, corn removal strips, and Motrin. He says he once showed his swollen foot, dripping with pus, to the warden. On one of these occasions, Scott alleges in a federal lawsuit against CCA, a nurse told him, “Ain’t nothing wrong with you. If you make another medical emergency you will receive a disciplinary write-up for malingering.” He filed a written request to be taken to a hospital for a second opinion, but it was denied.

    Eventually, numbness spread to his hands, but the infirmary refused to treat him. His fingertips and toes turned black and wept pus. Inmates began to fear his condition was contagious. When Scott’s sleeplessness kept another inmate awake, the inmate threatened to kill him if he was not moved to another tier. A resulting altercation drew the attention of staff, who finally sent him to the local hospital.

    Of course you could always escape before you lose you limbs. It’s not like the guards are paying attention:

    Two weeks after I start training, Chase Cortez (his real name) decides he has had enough of Winn. It’s been nearly three years since he was locked up for theft, and he has only three months to go. But in the middle of a cool, sunny December day, he climbs onto the roof of Birch unit. He lies down and waits for the patrol vehicle to pass along the perimeter. He is in view of the guard towers, but they’ve been unmanned since at least 2010. Now, a single CO watches the video feeds from at least 30 cameras.

    Cortez sees the patrol van pass, jumps down from the back side of the building, climbs the razor-wire perimeter fence, and then makes a run for the forest. He fumbles through the dense foliage until he spots a white pickup truck left by a hunter. Lucky for him, it is unlocked, with the key in the ignition.

    In the control room, an alarm sounds, indicating that someone has touched the outer fence, a possible sign of a perimeter breach. The officer reaches over, switches the alarm off, and goes back to whatever she was doing. She notices nothing on the video screen, and she does not review the footage. Hours pass before the staff realizes someone is missing. Some guards tell me it was an inmate who finally brought the escape to their attention. Cortez is caught that evening after the sheriff chases him and he crashes the truck into a fence.

    It is dinnertime, but inmates haven’t had lunch yet. A naked man is shouting frantically for food, mercilessly slapping the plexiglass at the front of his cell. In the cell next to him, a small, wiry man is squatting on the floor in his underwear. His arms and face are scraped with little cuts. A guard tells me to watch him.

    It is Cortez. I offer him a packet of Kool-Aid in a foam cup. He says thank you, then asks if I will put water in it. There is no water in his cell.

    This comes from my book on incareration, In Defense of Flogging:

    Years from now, if we’re lucky, future generations will look back to this age of massive incarceration with bemused wonder, seeing it as just another unfortunate blotch on our country’s otherwise noble, democratic ideals. Either that or they will judge us as willing collaborators in an unparalleled atrocity of human bondage. Let us hope for the former.

  • Who speaks for the rapist?

    Apparently, in the Stanford rapist case, the judge. If you’re still in denial that our justice system can be mean and even racist, would you at least consider that it often benefits the rich and privileged? And then can you see that these two statements are essentially one and the same?

    Here’s very interesting take from Ken White, a defense attorney concerning privileged justice, from Mimesis Law:

    Empathy is a blessing. But empathy’s not even-handed. It’s idiosyncratic. Judges empathize with defendants who share their life experiences – and only a narrow and privileged slice of America shares the life experiences of a judge.

    That’s one reason that justice in America looks the way it does.

    Despite what Hollywood would lead you to believe, we criminal defense attorneys do not advocate lenient sentences for all wrongdoers as a matter of policy. Many of our clients are frequently victims of crime themselves, and their lives are circumscribed by criminal environments. We don’t believe, in the abstract, that people who tear the clothes off of young women and violate them in the dirt next to a dumpster should go free. Our role is to stand beside our clients, no matter who they are or what they did, and be their advocates, the one person required to plead their case and argue their interests.

    But most people fed into the criminal justice system aren’t champion athletes with Stanford scholarships. Most aren’t even high school graduates. Most are people who have lived lives that are alien and inscrutable to someone successful enough to become a judge. Judges might be able to empathize with having to quit their beloved college, but how many can empathize with a defendant who lost a minimum-wage job because they couldn’t make bail?

    This means that the system is generally friendly to defendants who look like Brock Allen Turner and generally indifferent or cruel to people who don’t look like him. No high school dropout who rapes an unconscious girl behind a dumpster is getting six months in jail and a solicitous speech from the likes of Judge Persky.

    So you won’t find defense lawyers like me cheering Brock Turner’s escape from appropriate consequences. We see it as a grim reminder of the brokenness of the system. We recognize it as what makes the system impossible for many of our clients to trust or respect. And we know that when there’s a backlash against mercy and lenient sentences – when cases like this or the “affluenza” kid inspire public appetite for longer sentences – it’s not the rich who pay the price. It’s the ones who never saw much mercy to begin with.

    There are two ways to see good fortune and bad fortune. You can say “someone who has enjoyed good fortune should be held to a higher standard, and someone who has suffered bad fortune should be treated with more compassion.” But America’s courts are more likely to say “someone who has enjoyed good fortune has more to lose, and someone who has suffered bad fortune can’t expect any better.”

    Judge Persky and his ilk can’t stop being human. But they are bound by oath to try to be fair. When a judge says you are very fortunate and therefore it would be too cruel to interrupt that good fortune just because you committed a crime, they are not being fair. For shame.

    Let me throw one other contraversial idea out there: six months behind bars for rape is just about right. It’s the “normal” sentences that are way too long! Incarceration is supposed to punish, not destroy lives. If only that standard applied to everybody.

    [Hat tip to Radly Balko’s tweet]

  • Former LA Sheriff Baca Pleads Guilty

    I don’t know much about LA county. The LA Sheriff’s Department has 18,000 employees and 9,100 sworn officers. And running a huge jail system ain’t easy. But Sheriff Baca and his cronies have been in trouble for a long while. His people tried to strong-arm an FBI agent investigating his department. Not cool. Perhaps we shouldn’t be electing top law enforcement officials. From the NYT:

    The plea agreement with the United States attorney’s office caps a stunning fall for Mr. Baca, who was among the most powerful men in Southern California during the 15 years that he led the sheriff’s department. Seventeen sheriff’s department employees have been convicted as part of the federal investigation into corruption and civil rights violations in the Los Angeles County jails during his tenure. Inmates were routinely sexually humiliated and severely beaten by sheriff’s deputies at the jails, according to the Department of Justice.

    The LA Times has more of the salacious details.

  • How many strikes do you get?

    I’m not for “three strikes and you’re out.” I am, however, supportive of 32 strikes and you’re out (I’d even go down to 20). Kari Bazemore, who has a history of random violence, slashed a woman walking down 23rd St at 6AM. There’s something particularly chilling about the pointless randomness of it. No argument. No robbery. No conflict. Just cut and run. This one was caught on video.

    Here’s an interviewwith the latest victim. Good for her for facing the camera, scar and all.

    Thirty-two priors and that doesn’t begin to could all the sh*t he’s done without being arrested? He’s a one-man crime wave. His last arrest was on December 30 (yes, one week prior), when he randomly punched a woman on East 8th Street. He was also arrest in February 2015 for grand larceny and in 2013 for “forcible touching.”

    Does the guy need help? Obviously. But what kind and how do we give it to him? If he hasn’t been able to get needed help by now, what makes anybody think the 33rd arrest is going to be charm? He simply needs to be kept off the streets.

  • “Most people really do not return to prison”

    This goes against common accepted wisdom, which refers to a recidivism rate (ending up behind bars again within three years) of about two-thirds .

    Here’s another good piece by Leon Neyfakh in Slate, an interview with William Rhodes.

    The basic gist is this. Some people recidivate a lot while others do not at all. So if you look at everybody released from prison this year, indeed, two-thirds will be back (75 percent in five years). But if you look at individual people who have been to prison, most never come back! That’s the interesting part, conceptually.

    Here’s the bottom line:

    Two of every three offenders (68 percent) never return to prison. Another 20 percent return just once. The NCRP data are not definitive but it appears that most of these one-time returns are for violating the technical conditions governing community supervision rather than for new crimes. Importantly, only one in ten offenders (11 percent) returns to prison multiple times.

  • Prop 47 in California

    In the Washington Post.

    In the 11 months since the passage of Prop 47, more than 4,300 state prisoners have been resentenced and then released. Drug arrests in Los Angeles County have dropped by a third. Jail bookings are down by a quarter.

    Robberies up 23 percent in San Francisco. Property theft up 11 percent in Los Angeles. Certain categories of crime rising 20 percent in Lake Tahoe, 36 percent in La Mirada, 22 percent in Chico and 68percent in Desert Hot Springs.

    It’s too early to know how much crime can be attributed to Prop 47, police chiefs caution, but what they do know is that instead of arresting criminals and removing them from the streets, their officers have been dealing with the same offenders again and again. Caught in possession of drugs? … Caught stealing something worth less than $950? That means a ticket, too.

    “Frustrating, frustrating,” said Zimmerman, the police chief…. “Just sending our officers to deal with problems that never get solved.”

    “Aren’t we lulling him into a sense of security?” Goldsmith said. “How does it end? There’s no more incremental punishment. We let the behavior continue. We let the problems get worse. And all we can do is wait until he does something terrible, until he stabs somebody or kills somebody, and then we can finally take him off the street.”

    Does America have problems? Yes. Is prison the answer? No. Seriously, if we can’t figure out a better solution to mental illness, drug addiction, and vagrant crimes than — at great expense — locking losers in cages forever, we’re pretty effing stupid!

  • “Kalief Browder, Held at Rikers Island for 3 Years Without Trial, Commits Suicide”

    Meanwhile, with people too busy complaining about cops, I think we’re missing the big picture. We really need to prioritize a bit here. In 2010 a 16-year-old boy was accused of stealing/robbing a backpack. He spent 3 years in a Rikers Island jail.

    Three years.

    He could have gotten out earlier, but he would have had to take a guilty plea. He said he didn’t do it. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn’t. (But given his unwillingness to take a plea, I’m partial to believing he was innocent. But it really doesn’t matter.)

    Kalief Browder wanted his day in court. If he were found guilty in trial, he would have faced up to 15 years. Instead, after three years in jail, his case was dismissed. Charges dropped. He was released. A metro card and home. The end.

    A few days ago he killed himself.

    Browder never recovered from his time in jail. Could you?

    We only now about Kalief Browder because the New Yorker did a piece on him last year.

    There are so many problems here, it might even make one defend flogging.

    How do we allow this to happen in our nation?

    I wrote a book about the horrors of jail and prison. (Did I mention Flogging is short, light, a great beach read, and the most enjoyable book you’ll ever read about whipping people?!) The pointless of it all. The system of justice that does not work. It seems almost pointless to regurgitate them here. And yet this case combines so many bads it seems worth a few highlights.

    Browder was sent to jail as a 16-year-old. Browder, as documented on video, was beaten up by guards and inmates. Because of these fights, Browder spent two of his three years in jail in solitary confinement. Browder would not cop a plea, so he stayed in jail.

    His bail was $3,000. His family couldn’t afford to pay. So he stayed in jail awaiting a trial that never came. In 2013, a judge offered to let him go if he:

    plead guilty to two misdemeanors — the equivalent of sixteen months in jail — and go home now, on the time already served. “If you want that, I will do that today,” DiMango said. “I could sentence you today. . . . It’s up to you.”

    Browder said he wanted to go to trial because he didn’t do it. He faced up to 15 year if convicted at trial.

    Then, on his 31st court date, three years after he was arrested, his case was dismissed. No trial. No conviction. Also no exoneration. It’s like it never happened.

    How can this great nation sent a kid to jail for three years without trial? This is third-world dictatorial bullshit.

    One reason is budgetary. There are not nearly enough judges and court staff to handle the workload; in 2010, Browder’s case was one of five thousand six hundred and ninety-five felonies that the Bronx District Attorney’s office prosecuted. The problem is compounded by defense attorneys who drag out cases to improve their odds of winning, judges who permit endless adjournments, prosecutors who are perpetually unprepared. Although the Sixth Amendment guarantees “the right to a speedy and public trial,” in the Bronx the concept of speedy justice barely exists.

    So one answer, a partial answer, is to throw money at the problem. That ain’t gonna happen. Because that would require us to actually care. But with more judges and lawyers, the justice system might actually administer more justice. Or at least bad justice quicker. But who really cares about justice when it’s other people, poor people, being fucked by the system? Browder is dead because the system — our system — fucked him. And it’s not like the system forget about Browder. This isn’t our system not working as intended. This is the system we have. The least we could is actually care.

  • “If I had a hammer… I’d hammer out justice.”

    This is the second paragraph of an article by Ta-Nehisi Coates:

    When Walter Scott fled from the North Charleston police, he was not merely fleeing Thomas Slager, he was attempting to flee incarceration. He was doing this because we have decided that the criminal-justice system is the best tool for dealing with men who can’t, or won’t, support their children at a level that we deem satisfactory. Peel back the layers of most of the recent police shootings that have captured attention and you will find a broad societal problem that we have looked at, thrown our hands up, and said to the criminal-justice system, “You deal with this.”

    Nothing against women’s rights advocates, but I haven’t heard anybody question the logic of passing laws that lock people up for failure to pay child support. (And while I’m at it, can I just mention that mandatory domestic violence laws are racist, do not work, and have have hurt countless men and women.)

    This is the first paragraph. It’s just as good:

    There is a tendency, when examining police shootings, to focus on tactics at the expense of strategy. One interrogates the actions of the officer in the moment trying to discern their mind-state. We ask ourselves, “Were they justified in shooting?” But, in this time of heightened concern around the policing, a more essential question might be, “Were we justified in sending them?” At some point, Americans decided that the best answer to every social ill lay in the power of the criminal-justice system. Vexing social problems–homelessness, drug use, the inability to support one’s children, mental illness–are presently solved by sending in men and women who specialize in inspiring fear and ensuring compliance. Fear and compliance have their place, but it can’t be every place.

    And this if from the end:

    Police officers fight crime. Police officers are neither case-workers, nor teachers, nor mental-health professionals, nor drug counselors.

    I’m pretty sure Ta-Nehisi Coates isn’t trying to be pro-cop, but that’s the kind of line that will get carried off on cops’ shoulders at a police convention!

    That last paragraph goes on:

    The problem of restoring police authority is not really a problem of police authority, but a problem of democratic authority. It is what happens when you decide to solve all your problems with a hammer. To ask, at this late date, why the police seem to have lost their minds is to ask why our hammers are so bad at installing air-conditioners. More it is to ignore the state of the house all around us. A reform that begins with the officer on the beat is not reform at all. It’s avoidance. It’s a continuance of the American preference for considering the actions of bad individuals, as opposed to the function and intention of systems.

    There’s more. And you should read the whole thing. But that is my good-parts version.

  • 30 years. Death Row. Innocent.

    According to the Death Penalty Information Center, Mr. Hinton is the 152nd person exonerated from an American death row since 1973.”

    You’d think people would care more.