|
There are alot of inaccuracies in this thread. Alot of truth too. This is going to be a long effort post so bear with me. There are serious issues with the correctional system. I entered it with the logic that you have to be the change you want to see. As someone who has worked in both a mental health prison and a probation office I've seen most of adult corrections and what this thread talks about first hand. I also understand the perspectives of people who make the decisions you disagree with and how they could arrive at the conclusions they do. If you guys want candid answers from what I have see inside the system I can provide them. But let me list off some bullet points. *You can't be thrown in prison or jail for a failure to pay fines and fees if you can show legitimate financial hardship. (at least in MY state) Typically that means if you are on disability, have some kind of injury, or can show that you have been looking for work and you either can't find work or that you cannot support yourself on work you do get. Ultimately what that qualifies is up to a judge. Judges will sometimes give community service instead of a fine or fee. Oh, also this little factoid isn't something we are required to share in probation and it's something the judges won't always uphold if there is not a lawyer present. Just remember that judges are elected. When was the last time you voted for a Superior Court judge in your city again? Most people don't vote, and fewer people vote in mid term elections. Even LESS people vote for stuff like mayor, and if the Judges aren't on a ticket with any of the above? How many judges run completely unopposed again? You gotta be the change you want. Judges have MASSIVE power over the correctional system, and they are relatively easy to sway due to the election process. But the reality is that most judges are selected by elderly conservatives sense they are the ones who come out to vote. *People don't pay to be on parole, well they are supposed too, but Parole almost never makes them pay fines and fees and almost always waives supervision fees for parolees. Parole will often waive failed drug tests as well, I've seen them cut loose people positive for meth. At least in my state you can't be on parole and probation at the same time for the same offense. People DO pay to be on probation, however judges can waive that fee and in liberal areas often will. The logic is that probation is basically you make up for what you did in some other way then time in a facility, via money and community service. The treatment parts that are mandated are just a nod towards rehabilitation. There is also drug court and mental health court probation, that plays by a different set of rules and has more of rehabilitative focus. Those individuals get their records sealed if they can go 5 years with no new offenses after they complete probation. *Felons qualify for the Pell Grant and Federal loans. This changes if you have a drug offense, a drug offense makes it so you have to complete a drug treatment program. Then bamm your eligible again. For some drug offenses all you have to do is pass a drug test twice and show documentation to that effect. In any case your automatically re-eligible after 2 years (and thats for a dealing drugs offense) *Trade programs have been greatly reduced. However at the prison I worked at there was a full ride program for a fully regionally accredited program that took you all the way to GED to Masters degree in Theology. In addition there was a fully functioning Mechanic trade shop. However slots in both were pretty highly coveted and fought over. But at least certain offenders seem to get some trade skill training still. What is really bad though is private prisons, they give the inmates virtually nothing other than a bare bones GED program, state institutes at least make noises about rehabilitation. (just noises though) More ability to earn chances for good job training is absolutely necessary, but it's my experience that most of the inmates care more about the hustle and the illegal smuggling trade in prisons. Where you can make 10 times what you can make on the street, and that includes tobacco and cell phones. You can buy a 20 dollar pre-paid phone and make 200 bucks on it in prison, you can buy a pack of cigarettes and make 50 dollars. Of course I worked in a maximum security / mental health facility so that might skew my perspective. *On the topic of private prisons, private probation is terrible. State probation (where I work) will try to come up with some way to address a failure to pay probation fines and fees. (all fines and fees are decided by the judge and let me once again remind you that YOU elect your judges). We will suggest community service or a fine or fee reduction or that if they can get into some kind of college it will get waived or reduced. Private probation will do everything in their power to collect every dollar they can. Minor violation? Make him pay 150 additional dollars a month for an at home breathlyzer unit! Private corrections is terribbad and should be illegal. But in all likelihood it's going to be all that remains. *On the topic of jobs. I am not going to delude myself into thinking that felons don't have it significantly harder finding jobs. I know that I do know that I have managed to help a few find work. Very few come up to me asking for help though. When I do ask them about a job the answer out of there mouth without fail is "Well I just got a job and I will pay in a couple of weeks when I get paid!" without fail. I also know that the Department of Labor keeps a pool of job leads in reserve specifically for felons. Furthermore there is a tax credit that businesses receive for hiring people released from prisons. I want to say it's about 5000 dollars. *There is a first offender and conditional discharge laws in my state to protect the criminal records of individuals on first offenses so that they won't be hosed up jobwise. Most of these people seem to commit new felonies and get themselves caught up. (I can't think of a time we have taken their first offender status for not paying or a traffic ticket, it's typically new drug offenses). This gets perverted by private business trolling record databases at jails which put up mugshots before the records get sealed. But private industry perverting justice seems to be a theme in corrections doesn't it?
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:08 |
|
|
Gourd of Taste posted:Do you not know about supervision costs? People pay to be on parole. No, I don't, but I guess that isn't surprising since I am not an American  At face value, the idea seems obscene.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 01:40
|
|
|
anglachel posted:*You can't be thrown in prison or jail for a failure to pay fines and fees if you can show legitimate financial hardship. (at least in MY state) Typically that means if you are on disability, have some kind of injury, or can show that you have been looking for work and you either can't find work or that you cannot support yourself on work you do get. Ultimately what that qualifies is up to a judge. Judges will sometimes give community service instead of a fine or fee. Oh, also this little factoid isn't something we are required to share in probation and it's something the judges won't always uphold if there is not a lawyer present. Just remember that judges are elected. When was the last time you voted for a Superior Court judge in your city again? Most people don't vote, and fewer people vote in mid term elections. Even LESS people vote for stuff like mayor, and if the Judges aren't on a ticket with any of the above? How many judges run completely unopposed again? You gotta be the change you want. Judges have MASSIVE power over the correctional system, and they are relatively easy to sway due to the election process. But the reality is that most judges are selected by elderly conservatives sense they are the ones who come out to vote. Proving inability to pay creates a burden on the defendant that is basically homeless, you are screwed. poo poo, I had a judge order a homeless client to pay $800 because he was working as a salvation army bell ringer. quote:*People don't pay to be on parole, well they are supposed too, but Parole almost never makes them pay fines and fees and almost always waives supervision fees for parolees. Parole will often waive failed drug tests as well, I've seen them cut loose people positive for meth. At least in my state you can't be on parole and probation at the same time for the same offense. People DO pay to be on probation, however judges can waive that fee and in liberal areas often will. The logic is that probation is basically you make up for what you did in some other way then time in a facility, via money and community service. The treatment parts that are mandated are just a nod towards rehabilitation. There is also drug court and mental health court probation, that plays by a different set of rules and has more of rehabilitative focus. Those individuals get their records sealed if they can go 5 years with no new offenses after they complete probation. Do they actually pay for being on "parole?" No effectively, but they do pay for the GPS monitoring (and/or stolen equipement, which happens all the time to the homeless), drug tests ($15/pop, which is a lot if you qualify for SSI but not SSD), bullshit DV classes ($20/week), outpatient drug treatment scams, etc. quote:*On the topic of jobs. I am not going to delude myself into thinking that felons don't have it significantly harder finding jobs. I know that I do know that I have managed to help a few find work. Very few come up to me asking for help though. When I do ask them about a job the answer out of there mouth without fail is "Well I just got a job and I will pay in a couple of weeks when I get paid!" without fail. I also know that the Department of Labor keeps a pool of job leads in reserve specifically for felons. Furthermore there is a tax credit that businesses receive for hiring people released from prisons. I want to say it's about 5000 dollars. Most aren't asking for help not because they don't want jobs (that segments really exists), but that they're not wanting to give signs that they are having issues to someone who they think wants to put them in jail. quote:*There is a first offender and conditional discharge laws in my state to protect the criminal records of individuals on first offenses so that they won't be hosed up jobwise. Most of these people seem to commit new felonies and get themselves caught up. (I can't think of a time we have taken their first offender status for not paying or a traffic ticket, it's typically new drug offenses).
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 06:43
|
|
|
nm posted:I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. If it is that legitimately poor people get tossed in jail for not doing classes and poo poo that are ordered and cost thousands of dollars daily, you are correct. If the opposite, you are dead wrong. Then that judge is an rear end in a top hat and should be voted out. I've seen plenty of judges give community service instead of fines, and I've also seen plenty of judges throw people in jail or prison for frivolous bullshit. I've also seen judges throw POs in jail for bringing up the whole "can't be imprisoned for failure to pay" thing in court for contempt of court. At the end of the day bitching about the justice system when the vast majority of it is based on the judges who are elected seems odd. Judges don't typically get the stream of corporate money that most people in elected offices get (at the local level at least, feds is a whole different kettle of fish) and they tend to win by either small percentages of the population voting for them or run unopposed. I'm willing to bet in the vast majority of counties a dedicated group of about 20 people who worked hard could get most judges knocked off their bench. nm posted:I don't know what state you are in, but in California, treatment in prop36 is an underfunded joke. Treatment programs are always underfunded. But we are trained to administer many of the classes ourselves at no additional cost to the clientele.Individuals who are indigent can receive free mental health and addiction services from a state clinic down the street. Our office has a full time mental health counselor ,which as a minimum must have a masters degree in counseling, and the one we had used to crisis intervention for suicide watch with me in the prison, and he's really good. I've never heard of parole do what you just mentioned, and I've never seen us in Probation do it either. I have heard of private for profits do what you just said. We never charge for a drug test, and EM hookup's are rare and are reserved for individuals who have STG classifications (in a major gang), people with a history of violent crime, or Sex Offenders (typically with Child Molestation charges) nm posted:They don't ask for help because you're their PO. Even if it isn't you, they've been conditioned by years of rear end in a top hat POs to not have any more contact with probation/parole than will keep them out of jail. The most effective program I've ever seen splits the enforcement function and rehab function into different people (they even prohibit POs for carrying weapons into the rehab center). I would agree with this. But I do try to help them. Some POs are assholes, other ones try to help people. There has been a deliberate effort lately to hire individuals with a social work or psychology background instead of prior law enforcement with bachelors degee's which had been the fad for awhile. nm posted:This doesn't exist in the county I practice for anything but drug offenses (because it is legally mandated). Petty theft? You get that for life. Even CA's "expungement" doesn't actually do that as your guilty plea remains on the record. In my county there is Mental Health Court, Drug Court, First Offender Discharge (which applies to any offense that they don't serve prison time for, they can serve jail time), and Conditional Discharge. Additionally there are "Youthful Offender" discharges in which they can have their record expunged after 5 years if they committed the offense(s) between the ages of 18 to 21. I'm sorry that California is particularly bad. A First Offender or Conditional Discharge status means your adjudication status will stay pending and never be switched to guilty status. After your probation is up you can legally say that you were found not guilty. Basically what are you saying is that California has one of the worst prison systems in the entire world. That the Probation and Parole Officers in the country, and the whole correctional system there should be taken over by the feds. Hell we tell stories about how corrupt the Parole Officers there are, stories about how they will allow certain people under their supervision to sell drugs and require they get a cut or shake down probationer and parolees for extra money for their own personal use or they get locked up. But I think we already knew from this thread that California has the worst correctional system in the country.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 13:53
|
|
|
anglachel posted:Then that judge is an rear end in a top hat and should be voted out. I've seen plenty of judges give community service instead of fines, and I've also seen plenty of judges throw people in jail or prison for frivolous bullshit. I've also seen judges throw POs in jail for bringing up the whole "can't be imprisoned for failure to pay" thing in court for contempt of court. At the end of the day bitching about the justice system when the vast majority of it is based on the judges who are elected seems odd. Judges don't typically get the stream of corporate money that most people in elected offices get (at the local level at least, feds is a whole different kettle of fish) and they tend to win by either small percentages of the population voting for them or run unopposed. I'm willing to bet in the vast majority of counties a dedicated group of about 20 people who worked hard could get most judges knocked off their bench. That strikes me as a little bit giving in to the just world fallacy, honestly. Are you saying that because it's conceivably possible to oust lovely judges we don't get to complain about them?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2013 05:56
|
|
|
anglachel posted:Then that judge is an rear end in a top hat and should be voted out. I've seen plenty of judges give community service instead of fines, and I've also seen plenty of judges throw people in jail or prison for frivolous bullshit. I've also seen judges throw POs in jail for bringing up the whole "can't be imprisoned for failure to pay" thing in court for contempt of court. At the end of the day bitching about the justice system when the vast majority of it is based on the judges who are elected seems odd. Judges don't typically get the stream of corporate money that most people in elected offices get (at the local level at least, feds is a whole different kettle of fish) and they tend to win by either small percentages of the population voting for them or run unopposed. I'm willing to bet in the vast majority of counties a dedicated group of about 20 people who worked hard could get most judges knocked off their bench. And quite frankly, most of my clients can't vote anyhow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2013 06:12
|
|
|
anglachel posted:*People don't pay to be on parole, well they are supposed too, but Parole almost never makes them pay fines and fees and almost always waives supervision fees for parolees. Parole will often waive failed drug tests as well, I've seen them cut loose people positive for meth. At least in my state you can't be on parole and probation at the same time for the same offense. People DO pay to be on probation, however judges can waive that fee and in liberal areas often will. The logic is that probation is basically you make up for what you did in some other way then time in a facility, via money and community service. The treatment parts that are mandated are just a nod towards rehabilitation. There is also drug court and mental health court probation, that plays by a different set of rules and has more of rehabilitative focus. Those individuals get their records sealed if they can go 5 years with no new offenses after they complete probation. Related, a friend of mine recently finished serving a sentence and came out with around $30k worth of debt, over $20k of that is interest owed. It's ridiculous and even the state recognizes it: Washington State Legislature posted:Finding -- 2011 c 106: "(1) The legislature finds that it is in the interest of the public to promote the reintegration into society of individuals convicted of crimes. Research indicates that legal financial obligations may constitute a significant barrier to successful reintegration. The legislature further recognizes that the accrual of interest on nonrestitution debt during the term of incarceration results in many individuals leaving prison with insurmountable debt. These circumstances make it less likely that restitution will be paid in full and more likely that former offenders and their families will remain in poverty. In order to foster reintegration, this act creates a mechanism for courts to eliminate interest accrued on nonrestitution debt during incarceration and improves incentives for payment of legal financial obligations. The question is, what's the point of such a massive interest rate in the first place? I've never been able to find a reasonable answer to that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
Anglachel, I appreciate your comments and understand that you are technically correct. However, you're basically saying that a felon who is well educated in their options, is motivated, only deals with honest people looking to help them, and has the time/money to take advantage of the opportunities can eventually work their way out of the system. Yes, it is possible for someone to get back to a productive life, the problem is that the deck is stacked so far against them that they have little chance of actually making it. s0meb0dy0 fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Jun 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
s0meb0dy0 posted:Anglachel, I appreciate your comments and understand that you are technically correct. However, you're basically saying that a felon who is well educated in their options, is motivated, only deals with honest people looking to help them, and has the time/money to take advantage of the opportunities can eventually work their way out of the system. If anything, it makes sense that ex-felons need more help making good choices than the rest of us, given how precarious their position in society is. If anything they should be given more leeway than some upstanding citizen who is not one or two minor slip-ups away from being excommunicated from having the opportunity to ever be a productive law-abiding person. Being tough on criminals is effectively being soft on crime, since by choosing to create a permanent underclass, you are electing to accept that there will be higher crime rates.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
America has seen an increase in private prisons and the Constitution allows using prisoners as slave labor. There is profit to be had in incarcerating as many people as humanly possible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:If anything, it makes sense that ex-felons need more help making good choices than the rest of us, given how precarious their position in society is. If anything they should be given more leeway than some upstanding citizen who is not one or two minor slip-ups away from being excommunicated from having the opportunity to ever be a productive law-abiding person. Being tough on criminals is effectively being soft on crime, since by choosing to create a permanent underclass, you are electing to accept that there will be higher crime rates. You are right, of course, but getting people to understand and accept this requires those people to have logic and reason, two qualities which most people sorely lack.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
Are there any statistics regarding kids being tried as adults? A friend of a friend is suggesting the footballers in the Steubenville rape case should be tried as adults. Wouldn't that mean they get adult sentences, get put into adult prisons, and have permanent felony convictions though? Along with all the other wonderful benefits of being a minor in state prison?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
Mister Macys posted:Are there any statistics regarding kids being tried as adults? I think, no matter how they're tried, they serve their sentences up to a certain age in a juvenile facility, but I'm not 100% sure. I'm pretty sure, though, that being tried as adults means that they would have permanent felony convictions on their record. It's kind of lovely that there's such a call to try minors as adults in serious cases. Either juveniles are able to adult decisions, or they aren't. At most, the distinction should be their level of understanding of the crime they committed and/or mental development, not the seriousness of their offense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I think, no matter how they're tried, they serve their sentences up to a certain age in a juvenile facility, but I'm not 100% sure. I'm pretty sure, though, that being tried as adults means that they would have permanent felony convictions on their record. I know that in some states if not states, children convicted as adults are sent to normal prisons, and when these prisons lack adequate protective custody arrangements (which pretty much all of them do due to overcrowding), they just put the kids into solitary confinement.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2013 22:54
|
|
|
Mister Macys posted:Are there any statistics regarding kids being tried as adults? In California with a conviction as a minor, you're in DJJ (kiddie prison -- which is not great or rehabilitative) until your early 20s. Everything else is correct here. Being tried as an adult basically means you start your adult felony career early. Some states send minors to adult facilities though technically they're not supposed to be general pop. Solitary for a 16 year old is clearly better. . .
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
My understanding is that teenagers are only tried as adults for really, really serious crimes. Like a 17 year old wouldn't likely be tried as an adult for an ounce of pot but is probably getting tried as an adult for murder. At least that's how it works where I'm from. When I was in high school a kid was tried as an adult for first degree murder after shooting his younger sister like 9 times.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:My understanding is that teenagers are only tried as adults for really, really serious crimes. Like a 17 year old wouldn't likely be tried as an adult for an ounce of pot but is probably getting tried as an adult for murder. At least that's how it works where I'm from. When I was in high school a kid was tried as an adult for first degree murder after shooting his younger sister like 9 times. On the other hand, thirteen year olds have been tried as adults and sentenced to die.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2013 03:19
|
|
|
Gourd of Taste posted:On the other hand, thirteen year olds have been tried as adults and sentenced to die. Isn't the youngest like 12 years old I think he was a middle schooler or something can't recall clearly off the top of my head.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 10:24
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:My understanding is that teenagers are only tried as adults for really, really serious crimes. Like a 17 year old wouldn't likely be tried as an adult for an ounce of pot but is probably getting tried as an adult for murder. At least that's how it works where I'm from. When I was in high school a kid was tried as an adult for first degree murder after shooting his younger sister like 9 times. It doesn't make any sense though, to say that you are an adult because your crime was more heinous than another. Unless murder is seen as a mature and reasonable adult response to something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 11:30
|
|
|
TURN IT OFF! posted:It doesn't make any sense though, to say that you are an adult because your crime was more heinous than another. Unless murder is seen as a mature and reasonable adult response to something. Do remember that we live in a society with zero tolerance laws coming to be en vogue. It doesn't matter if you were 7 years old and don't understand anything yet, one wrong word comes out of your mouth and you have a black mark for life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 15:23
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Do remember that we live in a society with zero tolerance laws coming to be en vogue. It doesn't matter if you were 7 years old and don't understand anything yet, one wrong word comes out of your mouth and you have a black mark for life. I'd argue that some of our society's creep in that direction is the result of everyone involved trying to cover their asses. If Timmy runs up in the schoolhouse busting caps, nobody wants to be the one who didn't see it coming. Hence, zero tolerance for pointing a piece of bread like a gun and saying "bang."
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 15:56
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I'd argue that some of our society's creep in that direction is the result of everyone involved trying to cover their asses. If Timmy runs up in the schoolhouse busting caps, nobody wants to be the one who didn't see it coming. Hence, zero tolerance for pointing a piece of bread like a gun and saying "bang." criminalising playing and imagination is probably a great way to prep them for their future career as office drone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 16:02
|
|
|
On the matter of DJJ. I remember one guy I met in the mental health prison I worked at. He had been in the system virtually his entire life. Single mom, no other family. She died when he was 4 (drug overdose). Never got adopted cause he was a little black boy. Acted way up. Went to a DJJ facility when he was 9. Kept attacking people in the facility and caught Aggravated Assault charges when he was 16-17. Got tried as an adult. So as soon as he got out of DJJ he went straight into a state prison until he was 26, one month later he got rape charges, and he's now 34 and still locked up. If this guy gets out he will be in his 50s minimum. He has zero family and no support system whatsoever. Out of 34 years of life he's spent maybe 4 not in the system in some kind of custody. A true product of the system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 21:13
|
|
|
TURN IT OFF! posted:It doesn't make any sense though, to say that you are an adult because your crime was more heinous than another. Unless murder is seen as a mature and reasonable adult response to something. The problem is that the public largely doesn't give a gently caress about whether someone is able to understand the consequences of their actions, and understand the juvenile system solely as something that gives everyone a free pass when they turn 18 no matter what. When a major violent crime happens, people demand vengeance and don't give a crap about any factor that might get in the way of putting them in jail for at least fifteen years. The fact that their brains are not developed enough to truly comprehend their actions doesn't matter to people, since much of America still operates under the assumption that "if you can do the crime, you can do the time". http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/02/18/schwartz.kids.trials/index.html quote:Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- About 20 years ago, 9-year-old Cameron Kocher fired a rifle out of a window of his home in upstate Pennsylvania and hit his 7-year-old neighbor, who was riding on a snowmobile, and killed her. The Jordan Brown case, mentioned in the article, has been taking an encouraging path. While he was originally set to be tried as an adult, the Superior Court ruled that doing so violated his Fifth Amendment rights, and he was ultimately tried as a juvenile instead. He was found guilty of first-degree murder, but the Superior Court overruled the judge again and overturned the verdict last month, citing a lack of evidence and criticizing the state's assumption that Jordan was the only person that could have possibly fired the shot. Still, it's already been four years since the killing, and the prosecution is appealing. At the rate this is going, Jordan's likely to spend his entire adolescence as a murder defendant, and in the meantime it's unlikely he's getting any mental health services.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:My understanding is that teenagers are only tried as adults for really, really serious crimes. Like a 17 year old wouldn't likely be tried as an adult for an ounce of pot but is probably getting tried as an adult for murder. At least that's how it works where I'm from. When I was in high school a kid was tried as an adult for first degree murder after shooting his younger sister like 9 times. Generally, yes. So in my state, for example, juveniles 15-17 have to be tried as adults for murder, forcible rape, armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, and drive-by shooting. They can be tried as adults as young as 14 or for other serious felonies, but in those cases a judge can decide to transfer the case to juvenile court. Younger than that and they go to juvenile court.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 05:40
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:I know that in some states if not states, children convicted as adults are sent to normal prisons, and when these prisons lack adequate protective custody arrangements (which pretty much all of them do due to overcrowding), they just put the kids into solitary confinement. The people responsible for this should hang. There can't be anything less than complete apathy towards other human beings behind something so completely hosed. Can there? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
So has this already been talked about in the thread? http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/06/17/58555.htm Not much to say, private prison guards raping in sick ways. The women, one who was on remand and ended up having the charges dropped, are now suing for punitive damages. I figured people in this thread might be interested in keeping an eye out for the results of this, because I know I am. Also, DO NOT READ if you are sensitive to accounts of graphic rape. It's seriously hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 20:20
|
|
A Large Dinger posted:So has this already been talked about in the thread? http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/06/17/58555.htm
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
kylejack posted:Yeah, was reading that earlier today. Seems like it must have been a massive conspiracy. The Feds should probably investigate this, because I seriously doubt only three guys knew about this. That's what I was thinking too. With how brazen a lot of these acts are there's no way a good amount of others didn't know about it, this is based on nothing but I'd guess pretty much everyone knew about it. The whole part where one of the guards told the woman to stay away from the certain guards upon arrival is just awful, saying he can't tell her why because he'd lose his job. Only three guards are in prison over this and as far as I can tell the leadership at the prison haven't gotten in any trouble. gently caress that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 20:27
|
|
|
Tias posted:The people responsible for this should hang. There can't be anything less than complete apathy towards other human beings behind something so completely hosed. Can there? This is exactly the mindset that leads to juvenile offenders being tried as adults and thrown in prison for life in the first place! People feel that someone who could commit a violent crime at such a young age is irredeemably inhuman and might as well just be locked up forever. A lot of the reasons that people value children over adults tend to be invalidated once the kid intentionally causes major harm to someone - suddenly they're no longer innocents who have their whole lives ahead of them, they become monsters whose lives are tainted by evil, and then no one gives a poo poo whether they live or die anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 21:18
|
|
|
A Large Dinger posted:So has this already been talked about in the thread? http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/06/17/58555.htm  This won't get any mainstream media attention and if it did it would just be saying "so what, if prisoners didn't want to be raped and tortured they shouldn't have been accused of smoking pot." gently caress everything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 23:15
|
|
|
A Large Dinger posted:So has this already been talked about in the thread? http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/06/17/58555.htm Mind you, I'm going to wait until it's actually confirmed to be true before taking it seriously.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 13:48
|
|
MechPlasma posted:Man, that's preeeetty bad! quote:On the video they saw a jailer squatting down by the door in the hallway with his arm in the food hatch of the room housing the other female inmate, a 21-year-old female of Alice. The jailer later admitted inappropriately touching that woman through the food hatch, Busby said.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 13:50
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:This is exactly the mindset that leads to juvenile offenders being tried as adults and thrown in prison for life in the first place! People feel that someone who could commit a violent crime at such a young age is irredeemably inhuman and might as well just be locked up forever. A lot of the reasons that people value children over adults tend to be invalidated once the kid intentionally causes major harm to someone - suddenly they're no longer innocents who have their whole lives ahead of them, they become monsters whose lives are tainted by evil, and then no one gives a poo poo whether they live or die anymore. Hey now, I had a bad day and overreacted. I've been in this thread for quite a while, and I understand perfectly well that dehumanizing people won't lead anywhere good. That said, I do underestand people who survive the system and end up hating it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 15:20
|
|
|
That rape camp story is one of those I think won't effect me when I read it and by the end I feel anxious, upset and like I need to purge it from my memory. What a country.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
kylejack posted:http://www.mysoutex.com/view/full_story/9303542/article-Three-Live-Oak-County-jailers-arrested-for-sexual-assault-of-inmates
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the federal courts in California (Northern and Eastern Districts) issued a ruling on the state government's plan to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling in Brown v. Plata, better described as "Jesus loving Christ, these conditions are a violation of the Eighth Amendment." Andrew Cohen at the Atlantic makes the obvious comparison to the repeated failure to integrate schools. Read the ruling if you can, though it's a bit long and technical in places, but Cohen does a good job in summarizing the clusterfuck here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2013 09:32
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the federal courts in California (Northern and Eastern Districts) issued a ruling on the state government's plan to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling in Brown v. Plata, better described as "Jesus loving Christ, these conditions are a violation of the Eighth Amendment." Andrew Cohen at the Atlantic makes the obvious comparison to the repeated failure to integrate schools. Read the ruling if you can, though it's a bit long and technical in places, but Cohen does a good job in summarizing the clusterfuck here. Also known as "Running a prison at 137.5% capacity is somehow not an Eighth Amendment violation". 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 04:03
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the federal courts in California (Northern and Eastern Districts) issued a ruling on the state government's plan to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling in Brown v. Plata, better described as "Jesus loving Christ, these conditions are a violation of the Eighth Amendment." Andrew Cohen at the Atlantic makes the obvious comparison to the repeated failure to integrate schools. Read the ruling if you can, though it's a bit long and technical in places, but Cohen does a good job in summarizing the clusterfuck here. End result of giving long sentences to shoplifters and persons possessing drugs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:08 |
|
|
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10165360/All-prison-places-for-teenage-girls-axed-to-save-money.html Minor sexism aside*,I'm not sure what I think about this. At all, really. I always thought they should've tried it... but on a smaller scale. It'll be interesting to see how it turns out, anyway. *Pun not intended.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 12:35
|
|