|
quote:The worst part about this is the fact that each month he owes more than he can pay off by working. He hasn't even been parolled yet. That won't occur until 2028, and that's if they even grant him parole. So what's the point? Why all of a sudden did they decide to sue instead of waiting until he was closer to parole, i.e. more money owed. There are only two possible answers in my opinon. 1. He was trying to transfer the money to his daughter when Prison Officials saw the amount and decided to sue so they wouldn't loose out; or 2. He just reached the 10k mark and are suing since they legally can so he doesn't spend the money and they get it. Either way it's inhuman. That man spent 60 years working for that money getting paid ~$75 a month, it's his. The 60 years of his life spent in prison up to this point is his payment to society for his crime. Edit: Read the article wrong, he's 60 years old and spent ~28 years behind bars. PTBrennan fucked around with this message at 14:26 on Mar 16, 2011 |
#
?
Mar 15, 2011 16:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
21stCentury posted:The worst part about this is the fact that each month he owes more than he can pay off by working. Don't forget the people he owes money to have already greatly profited by selling his hand-made furniture at gigantic markups! Giant markups and they can make up their own rate at which to charge him debt! Pure genius capitalism if you ask me. He's not getting paid enough by the people he owes the debt to to cover his debt while the people he owes the debt to profit hand over foot from his work for which they are not paying him and continually add to his debt. BigHead fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Mar 15, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2011 18:09
|
|
|
BigHead posted:Don't forget the people he owes money to have already greatly profited by selling his hand-made furniture at gigantic markups! Giant markups and they can make up their own rate at which to charge him debt! Pure genius capitalism if you ask me. Well, yeah it was unfortunate but that was a fairly typical slave arrangement, where no matter what you did you couldn't really ever afford to buy your freedom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2011 19:46
|
|
|
21stCentury posted:i mean, basically, it's like your Landlord preventing you from leaving the block before paying the monthly rent and allowing you to work for him, but only paying you 20% of the monthly rent per month. How can that fly? How can no one get angry about the underlying situation? The man was a slave for 60 years; if no one gets angry about that I don't see why throwing some indentured servitude on top would really change the situation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2011 20:38
|
|
|
quote:The man was a slave for 60 years; if no one gets angry about that I don't see why throwing some indentured servitude on top would really change the situation. Yeah but the problem is this isn't a man, it's a convicted convict, a.k.a. Criminal. We don't treat them like humans. The more I read about humanity and the way we treat one another the more depressed I get.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2011 23:48
|
|
|
PTBrennan posted:The more I read about humanity and the way we treat one another the more depressed I get. Cheer up! One day, we'll all be dead! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2011 23:58
|
|
|
This on the level of having to pay your own train ticket.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2011 01:26
|
|
|
He's 60 years old, he has been in prison for 23 years for murder. Either way, it's pretty doubtful he'll live to see parole. Edit: Well, he's been in prison for 28 years, this lawsuit started back in '05. The Dregs fucked around with this message at 05:24 on Mar 16, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2011 05:22
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:This on the level of having to pay your own train ticket. What?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2011 08:39
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:What? Auschwitz reference. Auschwitz I and Birkenau were death camps; Auschwitz III was a work camp. So not entirely inappropriate  VVVV Gadaffi Duck fucked around with this message at 15:41 on Mar 16, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2011 09:43
|
|
|
Madman Theory posted:Auschwitz reference. Well, maybe not an extermination camp, but a work camp has a ridiculous amount of parallels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2011 13:45
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Well, maybe not an extermination camp, but a work camp has a ridiculous amount of parallels. The nazis didn't get hard core into the murder until they started running into budgetary problems from fighting a two front war....
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2011 19:35
|
|
|
I have 2 questions: 1. How do they decide which prison to send someone to? I used to think it had to do with where someone got arrested but then figured out there is no connection. I don't mean how do people get classified by security level, but more how is it decided where one should go when there are very similar options all around. 2. Are there gang problems in women's prisons? Everything I've heard from there tends to focus on how they form more romantic-type relationships than gang-type ones, but that might be the only side presented to the public.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2011 05:00
|
|
|
DeKalb posted:I have 2 questions: It depends on the case. It's usually up to the DOC in that state; so custody score, offense type, length of sentence, where any witnesses or informants are, whatever deal was worked out (I'll plead to this if I can go here), gang intelligence, bed availability, treatment options, etc, will come into play. This is actually a good thing when it's implemented properly as sometimes you just can't go to this facility or this yard or whatever, for your own good or everyone else's. It's abused to be sure, but DOC deciding housing is a good thing if there's sufficient oversight. DeKalb posted:2. Are there gang problems in women's prisons? Everything I've heard from there tends to focus on how they form more romantic-type relationships than gang-type ones, but that might be the only side presented to the public. It's not as prevalent but it does happen. Gangs happen, in the World or in prison, that's just real. They're not going to show it on TV, but it does happen in women's prison. Go ask Griselda Blanco if you don't think there are female shot-callers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2011 04:19
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:The nazis didn't get hard core into the murder until they started running into budgetary problems from fighting a two front war.... How many wars are American fighting now? Does American have any budgetary problems?
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2011 04:35
|
|
|
HidingFromGoro posted:Go ask Griselda Blanco if you don't think there are female shot-callers. The film "Cocaine Cowboys" goes into some detail on this point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2011 08:00
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:The film "Cocaine Cowboys" goes into some detail on this point. And Cocaine Cowboys II goes even further, both of which are available on Netflix streaming.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2011 14:34
|
|
|
On Wednesday, Gov. Rick Scott (R-FL), along with his cabinet, reinstated a rule with major civil rights implications requiring felons to wait at least five years beyond the end of their sentence before applying to regain the right to vote... (The policy) prevents felons who have paid their debt to society from voting until a Clemency Board — composed of the governor and three cabinet members — grants restoration of civil rights. This rule still has major racial implications. As in most states, Florida's prison population is disproportionately black, and as of 2006, over 13 percent of Florida's non-incarcerated voting-age black population had lost the right to vote. I'm crossposting this from another thread. Here's the article referenced in the above link.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2011 00:00
|
|
|
"Good job, son, you've paid your debt to society as determined by our legal system... now pay some more."
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 19:28
|
|
|
Is that constitutional?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2011 17:57
|
|
|
duck monster posted:Is that constitutional? Yes. Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974) Short version: The Supreme Court interpreted Section 2 of the 14th Amendment as permitting the States to disenfranchise people on the basis of "participation in rebellion or other crime."
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2011 19:30
|
|
|
21stCentury posted:The worst part about this is the fact that each month he owes more than he can pay off by working.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2011 20:36
|
|
|
Drug Court... This story was on NPR today, It should be on the site soon but here is the tidbit... This week: A drug court program that we believe is run differently from every other drug court in the country, doing some things that are contrary to the very philosophy of drug court. The result? People with offenses that would get minimal or no sentences elsewhere sometimes end up in the system five to ten years. Ira reports from Glynn County Georgia on Superior Court Judge Amanda Williams and how she runs the drug courts in Glynn, Camden and Wayne counties. We hear the story of Lindsey Dills, who forges two checks on her parents' checking account when she's 17, one for $40 and one for $60, and ends up in drug court for five and a half years, including 14 months behind bars, and then she serves another five years after that—six months of it in Arrendale State Prison, the other four and a half on probation. The average drug court program in the U.S. lasts 15 months. But one main way that Judge Williams' drug court is different from most is how punitive it is. Such long jail sentences are contrary to the philosophy of drug court, as well as the guidelines of the National Association of Drug Court Professionals. For violating drug court rules, Lindsey not only does jail terms of 51 days, 90 days and 104 days, Judge Williams sends her on what she calls an "indefinite sentence," where she did not specify when Lindsey would get out. (30 minutes) --- In short, a 16-18 year old girl gets hooked on drugs, writes some checks on her dads account, and gets 10 years of jail/ probation. The crime she commuted only commanded 6 months probation from both defense and prosecution. In some ways she made the choice to do the program, but the programs punishment for relapse has effectively made her a life long criminal since its near imposable to keep on the good side of the program. Since she signed up for drug court, she has signed away many of her rights, when not behind bars she gets random, almost daily drug tests, as well a curfew (electronically monitored) and is more or less unemployable. Treatment like this should be called in for cruel and unusual since it goes 800% out of the norm and has no effective end date for the punishment. This is compounded by the fact that the program is meant to get kids off drugs, clean their records and help them, not make them life long criminals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2011 21:46
|
|
|
How is an indefinite sentence even possible to be a thing and not blatantly cruel and unusual punishment?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 00:30
|
|
|
New report on drug courts: http://www.drugpolicy.org/library/drugcourts.cfm
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 02:17
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Yes. Ah drat. Yeah that seems pretty clear that the authorization is there. Can't see the conservatives voting to fix that one up anytime soon 
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 03:17
|
|
|
PyRosflam posted:Drug Court... Are these judges actual judges with legal experience and a law school education? Or are they justices of the peace, or laypeople with legal training, or something? That kind of sentencing sounds a lot like other quasi-judicial entities I've seen, or diversion measures, where the measures that can be imposed vary widely and hilariously and can be way more stiff than what someone would get if they plead out or took it to trial. As an advocate it's an interesting and double-edged process, because when you're dealing with people who have relatively little legal experience they tend to be a lot less tethered to precedent and you can get a lot if you just ask for it, but the downside is they have a tendency to just come up with whatever the gently caress they feel is appropriate (like an "indefinite sentence" whatever the gently caress that is) edit: hurr durr guess who read "Superior Court Judge" just now. ya'll have some flakey loving jurists down there hypocrite lecteur fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Mar 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 03:35
|
|
|
KingEup posted:New report on drug courts: http://www.drugpolicy.org/library/drugcourts.cfm The "Drug court" thing must be done a little different in the US than it is here. The way it works in WA (or worked, it might have been discontinued after the conservatives freaked out it was "going soft on crime" was that people arrested for burglaries and hold ups and poo poo, if they could show it was caused by addiction (like needing money for hammer or whatever), could be diverted to the drug court. From there the judge would basically say "Well, we can send you to rehab and get you help or you can go back and face trial for the burglary". They'd then be booked in for rehab and if they completed it and got clean, the original charges would be dropped (I think the original condition was it couldn't be used for sex or violent crimes). It actually worked really well, but was grossly underfunded. One of the street kids the anarchist housing collective I worked with was dealing with got caught trying to hold up a petrol station and was looking at about a years jail time , so we got our lawyer in and convinced the police to redirect him through drug court (he was pretty messed up on heroin.). The cops agreed, and this kid was just so excited because his attempts at getting clean on his own kept failing and failing, but he could never get into a rehab program (he was also illiterate which made it *very* hard to understand the paperwork to navigate the bureacracy). But he was so drat excited. But its here where it went wrong. The drug court judge and psychiatrist found the guy was not antisocial but just hopelessly messed up on heroin and the judge ordered that he be put through rehab , and if successful the charges dropped. He couldn't be happier. But heres where it got loving messed up. The police said that they had no spots for him for 3 months, but they'd start doing the compliance drug tests immediately. Meaning he had to get clean *before* going to rehab with no medical assistance and stay clean for 3 months and THEN do rehab. Needless to say he made it 3 days before freaking out and running off (from my back shed, where on his wishes we padlocked him in, gave him a gently caress-tonne of valium and weed to smooth out "the horrors" and he shat and vomited everywhere for 3 days until finally he lost it and managed to (somehow, withdrawals make you incredibly weak and sick) break out and run off and get his fix. He was so sad, and apologizing profusely but nobody could blame him. Heroin withdrawal really needs to be done in a medical setting with good structured pain relief and psychological help to get over the trauma. 1 week later he was back in the lockup, and ended up doing 1 1/2 years prison. Poor bastard. Was such a well meaning guy too. Totally took to the idea of anarchist mutual aid and helping the community and really loving loved the community gardens and helping out with the hip-hop studio we set up for the homeless guys. I honestly think the drug court system (as practiced here) CAN work, its extremely rare that junkies wanted to be a junkie and all of them had huge amounts of regret for not listening to the warnings when they started. But it has to be funded right, and with treatment starting the second the monitoring starts. No dumping people back into the community and saying "get clean or we gently caress you up", it HAS to be "We can take you to hospital, and you'll be taking a couple of months out of your life ,but if you stick with it, you'll be a free man in more than one way". Heroins not THAT hard to kick with medical supervision. The Naltrexone implant (not pills, it has to be the implant method. the two have remarkably different outcomes. The pills are useless, because people can just stop taking them. The implants last 3-4 months and heroin just dont work during that time) has a remarkable rate of success, but it needs to be in a long term supervised setting with a structured treatment plan that includes heavy psychological work. Likewise with amphetamines (speeds not really that brutal to come off physically, though there absoultely are physical withdrawals, but it does need a lot of psychiatric intervention due to speeds knack at crazy-making). However I cant see punitive approaches to drug use itself as every being more successful than it currently is (which is "not at all"). Offering rehab as an alternative for prison for RELATED crime (theft, prostitution, etc) *IS* a smart option however, it just has to be fully funded or it wont work. I've seen it work well, I've also seen it fail, and when its failed, its not the users fault, its the half-assed aproach to the intervention.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 03:57
|
|
|
There's a new report from NPR about empty prisons. I heard some of the audio on my way to work today.NPR posted:http://www.npr.org/2011/03/28/134855801/private-prison-promises-leave-texas-towns-in-trouble
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 20:09
|
|
|
PyRosflam posted:Drug Court... It was this weeks episode of This American Life. Fantastic episode, and it got my girlfriend to start reading this thread because she was so disgusted. Give it a listen if you've got an hour. edit: The "extra" from this episode was even worse than what they covered on the radio: Very Tough Love:Extra Story posted:This is another case with a surprisingly high penalty. Link here Eat This Glob fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Mar 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 23:13
|
|
|
Episode link http://podcast.thisamericanlife.org/podcast/430.mp3 If I, or anyone I ever knew was told to go to this drug court I'd say "gently caress you, trial by jury"(I may skip the gently caress you part). This is one of the few cases I'd know I'd have a better chance with a jury trial then with the judge. I really think that a Jury trial would ask why there being summoned over 2 pain killer pills or the prosecution would drop the charge since you just pulled 2 major items, 1 shown the railroading process can be jumped, 2 establish that if you go to trial your going to get a better deal then Drug Court. Sadly I am sure that the Judge would do everything in her power, from crappy jury instructions to trying to pass sentence herself because the jury is to light but at least I could appeal to a higher authority. From what those drug court story's say almost all rights are signed away including appeals (how is this possible?). I'm surprised it hasn't been attacked as cruel and unusual yet since thats the only way I could see an appeal going to the appeals court and not back to the same judge who's causing the issue. Did someone catch if it was $15,000 bond or $150,000 bond put on them? (can you say excessive bond if the alternative is to sign away your rights and go free?) It really sounds like this court needs to be called on its BS from above. The really sad part is I could see this idea working if it had more structure and fairness in its system. I am personally a caffeine addict and I saw what happens the first time I went 2 weeks with out a coke. (I could kill someone for a coke at the end). Detox is not a simple process, A judge who is standing over a Detox program really needs to understand that both false positives happen and people may relapse if the craving is strong enough. Just a side note: The USMC had a drug problem at my base in the past, the commander tightened down on the drug standards he wanted for his troops (military logic, tighter standards are aways better). The next random drug test over 20 troops are positive for opium. At least they get retests but after the retest 14 still fail. (there were other failures as well) Turns out that the commanding officer pushes for bad conduct discharges and only when they get to court does the new standard come to light. The standard was that of a single poppyseed (from the mess hall) muffin if tested within 4 hours. This is the kind of poo poo you need a judge you can argue in front of who does not have a holy war against drugs of all kinds.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2011 00:21
|
|
|
anonumos posted:There's a new report from NPR about empty prisons. I heard some of the audio on my way to work today. I hate this state. As for drug courts, in my experience in CA they're pointless as implemented. The voters approved prop 36 because they thought it would give people help instead of incarcerating them. However, because of the lack of funding (to you, know pay for effective treatment), understanding of addiction by judges and prosecutors, and more it is really just an installment plan. In fact, it is pretty common to advise clients who aren't looking a prison time to just opt out and do some jail time. nm fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Mar 29, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2011 00:23
|
|
|
PyRosflam posted:Did someone catch if it was $15,000 bond or $150,000 bond put on them? (can you say excessive bond if the alternative is to sign away your rights and go free?) It really sounds like this court needs to be called on its BS from above. $15k minimum for any drug case. Plus you can't post (even if you have the money) until you've been seen by the drug court judge for any drug case. Like the two darvocet the girl in the story had and had to wait, if I remember correctly, 6 days just to be seen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2011 00:25
|
|
|
nm posted:Ok so in Texas sentencing reform and declining crime rates have reduced prison populations. Here in supposedly liberal California prisons are overcrowded, kids with no records get 20 years for robberies and we spend more on prisons than the UC system. It's probably the only good thing to ever come out of Texas being a Right to Work state.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2011 04:59
|
|
|
KIM JONG TRILL posted:It's probably the only good thing to ever come out of Texas being a Right to Work state. I'm sorry, I must be missing something, do you mind explaining the connection?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2011 20:10
|
|
|
AmbassadorFriendly posted:I'm sorry, I must be missing something, do you mind explaining the connection? Part of why California is so hosed up is the political sway held by the prison guards union.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2011 20:24
|
|
|
Mort posted:Part of why California is so hosed up is the political sway held by the prison guards union.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 01:22
|
|
|
The same thing happens in Texas except instead of the union it's the for-profit prison industry.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 02:22
|
|
|
UK: Kenneth Clarke ready to bring in troops if strikes erupt over privatized prison.quote:The justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, has confirmed that he is willing to call in the army should "serious trouble" erupt over his decision that the private security company, G4S, should run Birmingham prison – making it the first public sector jail to be privatised. "We have to be prepared should anything go wrong," he told MPs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 02:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
Mort posted:Part of why California is so hosed up is the political sway held by the prison guards union. So I guess that, in California, its a great time to be a prison guard!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2011 12:26
|
|
