Justice Is "Justice" When It's Something Wealthy And Connected People Can Buy
I've blogged before about how obscene it is that we cage people who are non-violent offenders, unlikely to run, simply because they don't have money for bail.
For those of you who'd argue that they might run, I wrote this on another post:
Paying for ankle monitors for those who cannot afford them (or bail) is cheaper than caging people simply because they can't scare up enough cash for bail -- and the right thing to do.
The crux of what should be done is from the LAT piece I linked to in that post:
Jails should not be used to lock up people awaiting trial just because they can't pay, if their release is not likely to put people in danger.
This leads to unequal justice -- to people pleading out just to get out of jail when they can't pay, even when they aren't guilty:
"Look," the prosecutor tells him, "I know you did it, so plead guilty and we'll ask for nothing more than time already served." He protests that he's innocent. But he's also stuck in jail and he wants to go home. If he had money, he'd already be there, but he doesn't -- so he drops his defense and gets a felony record.A key precept of the American justice system is that a defendant's wealth or poverty has no bearing on his treatment or his ability to mount a defense. The bail system, when it is misused, undermines that value.
...In addition to often working a miscarriage of justice, the practice of keeping people locked up based on how much they can afford to pay rather than how much risk they pose to others also is a wasteful misuse of jail space. Jails should not be used to lock up people awaiting trial just because they can't pay, if their release is not likely to put people in danger.
On a related note, Karol Markowicz writes in the NY Observer that it's time to end crazily unequal prison sentences:
I'm a law-and-order conservative but in a fair system the punishment has to fit the crime. There are so many recent stories in the news where it simply does not. In our zeal to punish criminals, we have made bail too high and sentences too long. The worst part about it is how randomly these punishments seem to be applied....Soft-spoken with a dedication to working with inner-city youth, Mendeeces Harris is one of the stars of the VH1 reality show Love & Hip Hop. He is, by far, the most upstanding man on the show. Several years ago, Harris was arrested in connection with a drug ring in Rochester, New York. After being held in jail for 15 months, he was released on bail and eventually pleaded guilty to the charges--despite noting he had never set foot in Rochester before his criminal case began. A few weeks ago he was finally sentenced to 8 to 10 years for his crimes. Had he been convicted at trial, he could have gotten as many as 20.
On the same show, female rapper Remy Ma was recently released from a 6-year stint in prison for shooting someone in a crowded nightclub. How does it make sense that a violent crime garners less time than a drug offense?
At the same time, The New York Times is profiling entrepreneurs in Colorado and Silicon Valley who are making their fortunes in the marijuana business which has been legalized in Colorado and California. These drug dealers are seen in an entirely different light than Mr. Harris and instead of a drug dealing "conspiracy" they are involved in the marijuana "industry" and instead of "co-conspirators" they have "investors." It's just not right.
It's easy to focus these sentencing discrepancies on race but that's only part of the equation. More often it's about money, influence and power. Those who don't have it see their bail amounts and eventual sentences enter another stratosphere. No one is saying that those who commit crimes shouldn't be punished, they certainly should, but if sentencing guidelines don't make sense, and they currently do not, it erodes the public trust in our justice system.
Markowicz writes in the New York Post about wrecking families to fill our prisons -- ridiculously long sentences meted out for non-violent crimes:
In February 2012, someone I consider one of my best friends, I'll call him M, was arrested with over 30 others in a high-profile insurance-fraud bust. He had run a medical office, in Brooklyn, and the feds said that the patients at the office were receiving treatment for ailments they didn't have.M maintained his innocence and went to trial, a rarity in federal cases like his. M's first trial ended in a hung jury, but he was found guilty in his second trial and is awaiting sentencing at Metropolitan Correction Center, where he's allowed to have visitors for one hour, one time a week. He has two kids under 10 years old. He's been there since November and is due to be sentenced in June.
Seven months in a holding pattern like this, with such a limited visitation schedule, is unreasonable. More unreasonable: He could face up to 200 years in prison, though he'll probably get more like 20. For a nonviolent crime.
...Along with a prison population that has become obscenely large, sentences for many crimes are far too long. It would be one thing if the length of a potential sentence would act as a deterrent to criminals, but many studies, including one report from the National Research Council in 2014, suggest it doesn't.
Instead, long prison sentences make it less possible that someone gets out of prison and goes on to live a normal life.
The incarceration industy like the higher ed industry has become largely self funding with too much call on the the public prise and access to the fees generated by the crininal justice process.
When we start taking the money and the incentives out of government for prosecuting these crimes than the attitude will change.
On the fip side, in states that do this, it will be increasingly less pleasant to live in places that ignore minor crime. It will affect the quality of life when we start ignoring people pissing and shitting on the sidewalk and selling drugs on the street corner or sleeping in the gutter.
I hope your friend does get twenty years in jail for insurance fraud. He is a large part of the reason why your expensive insurance policy now covers almost nothing.
Question: Do you think an illiegal alein arrested for driving with a fake license and no insurance should be released on his own recognizance? If not, than should an American citizen committing the same crime be treated differently by the justice system?
Isab at January 5, 2018 7:07 AM
I'm wondering just when bad decisions are ever going to be the responsibility of the person making the bad decision - or a series of them.
There's a phenomenon on TV now called, "LivePD", where a company is following ~30 deputies/city police officers with cameras; there are a few things easy to see: drugs are everywhere, and they are never an asset to the arrested's lives. People stopped have no idea whose car it is, whose gun that is, where that crack/meth/pot/coke/heroin came from, where they came from or are going -- or even who that is in their car.
Despite the simplicity of putting a valid tag on the car, having a license, getting insurance, making sure the lights all work and that the driver behaves, these things just can't get done for lots of people.
These are things the rest of us have to do. If one of these people hits you, damaging your car and injuring you, that's OK, right? They can just be released, where they will do more of it, right?
Don't doubt that that happens. It's not like a guy busted for DWI is not gonna drive again once he gets out.
And there's your reason to keep him awhile.
Radwaste at January 5, 2018 7:11 AM
These are things the rest of us have to do. If one of these people hits you, damaging your car and injuring you, that's OK, right? They can just be released, where they will do more of it, right?
I peruse the local constabulary's daily arrest sheet from time to time.
More than a few of the stars were cited for driving on a revoked or suspended license, particularly the women folk. Generally, that's a tack-on offense for something else, like reckless driving or not keeping the lights on.
I'm going to guess that the cause of the suspension is that they're either really bad drivers and racked up enough points to get yanked, or that they were arrested for DUI.
Love the ones that get put back on a Failure To Appear (FTA). How do you fail to appear? I'm sure you're told when your court date is set, and court is not held in a secret location. This shit is important.
As for LivePD, that's a disaster waiting to happen. Law enforcement is not a profit center.
I R A Darth Aggie at January 5, 2018 8:38 AM
Question: Do you think an illiegal alein arrested for driving with a fake license and no insurance should be released on his own recognizance? If not, than should an American citizen committing the same crime be treated differently by the justice system?
Maybe. Citizenship has its privileges.
Also: hold the illegal until ICE can pick his ass up and deport him back to the idyllic paradise from whence he came.
Remember: the USofA is a racist, homophobic, islamophobic, transphobic hellhole that somehow manages to remain the go-to destination of anyone wanting a better life. I just can't square that round peg.
I R A Darth Aggie at January 5, 2018 8:44 AM
The insurance guy of whom Karol Markowitz writes may well deserve serious jail time; it's not just about violent or nonviolent offenses. Bernie Madoff probably never laid a hand on any of his investors, yet he ruined their lives.
I do agree on unequal sentencing, but it's not a new problem. The poor and powerless get the short end of the stick in the justice system.
Kevin at January 5, 2018 10:57 AM
"How does it make sense that a violent crime garners less time than a drug offense?"
A huge part of it is the one was 'female' the other male. The sex of the perp and the sex of the victim are the two main pushers of sentencing differences, not race or $. Race and $ are contributors but much less than the sex.
Joe J at January 5, 2018 3:33 PM
"As for LivePD, that's a disaster waiting to happen. Law enforcement is not a profit center."
Uhh, yes, it is. Get a ticket on the Interstate in GA or OK. In OK, if the trooper discovers you have a debit card, it will get drained right there because that's drug money. Look at the "city" Web site for many small towns like Gifford, SC, and you'll see the police chief is a source of revenue.
So far, to my surprise, the cops followed by cameras are shown giving people breaks... it's a surprise because many of them have body cameras, suggesting that the local DA will have a hand in ticketing or jailing for profit.
DeBlasio found out his cops didn't like him, and the rest of NYC was relieved to suddenly find that the cops weren't fining people silly. Some good will resulted, as nobody wants to attract the ire of NYPD.
The key to law and order has always been a bond between responsible people and police, not an us-vs-them situation. Humanizing cops may be the salient feature of LivePD.
Radwaste at January 6, 2018 5:10 AM
Restitution with asset seizure and, if necessary, indentured servitude to cover the damage done.
No prison time - especially for non-violent offenses.
Ben David at January 9, 2018 2:53 AM
Leave a comment