FBI seeks to update definition of rape - baltimoresun.com
"The FBI is moving to change the federal definition of rape for the first time in 80 years, which authorities and women's advocacy groups hope will lead to improved tracking of the crime and an attitude shift among investigators.
Critics have maintained that the current definition is archaic, too narrow and leaves crimes uncounted in police statistics, resulting in fewer resources for victims and law enforcement. Women's advocates accelerated their push for an updated definition last year with a hearing on Capitol Hill, spurred in part by reporting by The Baltimore Sun showing how city police had misclassified rapes and sexual assaults for years.
A subcommittee of the Criminal Justice Information Service of the FBI plans to take up the task at an Oct. 18 meeting in Baltimore. Its recommendations will go to an advisory board and then to FBI Director Robert Mueller for approval.
Greg Scarbro, the FBI's unit chief for the Uniform Crime Report, said the agency has been discussing revisions since last year.
"From the highest levels of the FBI, there's an understanding that this needs to change. We just need to make sure it happens in the right way," he said.
Since 1927, rape has been defined as forcible male penile penetration of a female — which excludes cases involving oral and anal penetration, where the victims were drugged or under the influence of alcohol, and male victims.
"In order for the public to combat violence in our communities, we need to know where it exists and what it looks like," said Carol Tracy, director of the Women's Law Project, which helped spur reform in Philadelphia a decade ago and has taken a leading role in the push to update the FBI's definition.
The New York Times first reported Thursday the potential for change after police chiefs, sex-crimes investigators, federal officials and advocates convened in Washington to discuss the limitations of the federal definition and the wider issue of local police departments not adequately investigating rapes.
Among those who spoke at that meeting was Baltimore Police Commissioner Frederick H. Bealefeld III, who told The Sun that he supports a change.
"Revising the definition of rape would result in a higher and more accurate number of rapes that are reported nationwide each year," Bealefeld said. "As we in Baltimore know all too well, the accurate and complete reporting of sexual assault is critically important in order to build victim confidence and trust, as well as to understand the nature of the problem nationwide."
According to statistics released by the FBI this month, there were 84,767 sexual assaults across the country last year, a drop of 5 percent from the previous year. Sexual assaults have long been one of the most underreported types of crime, with an estimated 80 percent of assaults not referred to police, experts say."
Friday, September 30, 2011
Thursday, September 29, 2011
New way eases gunshot forensics (Science Alert)
New way eases gunshot forensics (Science Alert)
"Forensic detection of gunshot residues at crime scenes could be made easier and more affordable with further development of detecting barium (Ba) through anodic stripping voltammetry.
ECU School of Natural Sciences researcher Dr Magdalena Warjak says that while lead (Pb), antimony (Sb), and copper (Cu) in gunshot residues could be detected, barium is more difficult.
“There is no reliable and highly accurate on-site method for barium detection and many other industries, such as oil and gas, use barium compounds and need to constantly monitor barium concentrations in their waste before releasing it into the environment,” she says.
“Anodic stripping voltammetry is an analytical technique that allows us to detect very low levels of metal and semi-metal ions present in liquid samples, using oxidation and reduction processes—concentrations down to micrograms per litre (µg) or parts per billion (ppb).
“Each metal or semi-metal has a different stripping potential and that’s how we can identify what metals are present in a particular sample.
“The main problem is barium requires very negative potential values for the barium ions to be deposited on the working electrode and this consequently causes problems with sensitivity, reproducibility and accuracy with its detection.
“The research involves investigating different electrolyte solutions, a variety of working electrodes and the use of an ultrasonic probe to reduce interference from gases formation.”
Using a portable digital voltammeter (PDV6000+), Dr Warjak has been able to detect barium in 10ppb and 20ppb barium standard solutions—the next goal is to lower the detection limit and then test the method on real gunshot residue samples.
“Currently, gunshot residues are collected using special adhesive sampling discs of various surfaces around crime scenes which must then be sent to be analysed qualitatively by a scanning electron microscope,” she says.
“This process is expensive, takes considerable time, requires trained chemists and may require additional samples to be collected later.
“It would be useful in some cases to perform a screen test to determine the presence of barium, lead and antimony in samples before sending them to the laboratory.”
Interest in Dr Warjak’s work has already come from the UK’s Cogent Environmental Company because it has clients that need to detect barium in industrial wastewater on-site.
“Anodic stripping voltammetry has yet to be presented to police forensic departments until the method has been developed and tested on real gunshot residue samples,” she says.
Dr Warjak expects her research on the residues to be finished by the end of the year."
"Forensic detection of gunshot residues at crime scenes could be made easier and more affordable with further development of detecting barium (Ba) through anodic stripping voltammetry.
ECU School of Natural Sciences researcher Dr Magdalena Warjak says that while lead (Pb), antimony (Sb), and copper (Cu) in gunshot residues could be detected, barium is more difficult.
“There is no reliable and highly accurate on-site method for barium detection and many other industries, such as oil and gas, use barium compounds and need to constantly monitor barium concentrations in their waste before releasing it into the environment,” she says.
“Anodic stripping voltammetry is an analytical technique that allows us to detect very low levels of metal and semi-metal ions present in liquid samples, using oxidation and reduction processes—concentrations down to micrograms per litre (µg) or parts per billion (ppb).
“Each metal or semi-metal has a different stripping potential and that’s how we can identify what metals are present in a particular sample.
“The main problem is barium requires very negative potential values for the barium ions to be deposited on the working electrode and this consequently causes problems with sensitivity, reproducibility and accuracy with its detection.
“The research involves investigating different electrolyte solutions, a variety of working electrodes and the use of an ultrasonic probe to reduce interference from gases formation.”
Using a portable digital voltammeter (PDV6000+), Dr Warjak has been able to detect barium in 10ppb and 20ppb barium standard solutions—the next goal is to lower the detection limit and then test the method on real gunshot residue samples.
“Currently, gunshot residues are collected using special adhesive sampling discs of various surfaces around crime scenes which must then be sent to be analysed qualitatively by a scanning electron microscope,” she says.
“This process is expensive, takes considerable time, requires trained chemists and may require additional samples to be collected later.
“It would be useful in some cases to perform a screen test to determine the presence of barium, lead and antimony in samples before sending them to the laboratory.”
Interest in Dr Warjak’s work has already come from the UK’s Cogent Environmental Company because it has clients that need to detect barium in industrial wastewater on-site.
“Anodic stripping voltammetry has yet to be presented to police forensic departments until the method has been developed and tested on real gunshot residue samples,” she says.
Dr Warjak expects her research on the residues to be finished by the end of the year."
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Department of Justice: Trying Youth As Adults - PR Newswire - sacbee.com
Department of Justice: Trying Youth As Adults - PR Newswire - sacbee.com
"WASHINGTON, Sept. 27, 2011 -- New bulletin analyzes state laws to transfer juvenile offenders to adult court
WASHINGTON, Sept. 27, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Department of Justice has released a new bulletin that examines laws that allow or require states to prosecute some juvenile offenders in adult criminal courts. The bulletin, Trying Juveniles as Adults: An Analysis of State Transfer Laws and Reporting, provides the latest overview of state juvenile transfer laws and practices and examines available state-level data on juveniles adjudicated in the criminal justice system.
Transfer laws are not new—all states have one or more transfer mechanisms—but legislative changes in recent decades have greatly expanded their scope. To date, only 13 states publicly report the total number of their transfers, and even fewer report offense profiles, demographic characteristics, or details regarding processing and sentencing. Although nearly 14,000 transfers can be derived from available 2007 sources, data from 29 states are missing from that total.
Among the findings reported in this bulletin are the following:
In most states, criminal prosecution renders a juvenile an "adult" forever.
The number of judicially waived cases hit an historic peak in 1994, when about 13,100 cases were waived, and has fallen 35 percent since that year.
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/09/27/3942121/department-of-justice-trying-youth.html#ixzz1ZGIp61HI
"WASHINGTON, Sept. 27, 2011 -- New bulletin analyzes state laws to transfer juvenile offenders to adult court
WASHINGTON, Sept. 27, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Department of Justice has released a new bulletin that examines laws that allow or require states to prosecute some juvenile offenders in adult criminal courts. The bulletin, Trying Juveniles as Adults: An Analysis of State Transfer Laws and Reporting, provides the latest overview of state juvenile transfer laws and practices and examines available state-level data on juveniles adjudicated in the criminal justice system.
Transfer laws are not new—all states have one or more transfer mechanisms—but legislative changes in recent decades have greatly expanded their scope. To date, only 13 states publicly report the total number of their transfers, and even fewer report offense profiles, demographic characteristics, or details regarding processing and sentencing. Although nearly 14,000 transfers can be derived from available 2007 sources, data from 29 states are missing from that total.
Among the findings reported in this bulletin are the following:
In most states, criminal prosecution renders a juvenile an "adult" forever.
The number of judicially waived cases hit an historic peak in 1994, when about 13,100 cases were waived, and has fallen 35 percent since that year.
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/09/27/3942121/department-of-justice-trying-youth.html#ixzz1ZGIp61HI
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Former Texas prison cook offers to make 'last meals' for free - latimes.com
Former Texas prison cook offers to make 'last meals' for free - latimes.com
"A former Texas inmate who cooked the so-called last meals for hundreds of death row inmates has offered to donate his services rather than allow condemned prisoners to do without their last meal of choice.
Last week, Texas officials announced that they were ending the practice of allowing prisoners to request special last meals. The decision came after a state lawmaker complained that an inmate had manipulated the system before his execution by requesting a large amount of food -- that he then refused to eat.
Starting this week, death row inmates will receive the same meals as other inmates, prison officials said.
Brian Price, a longtime prison cook, told the Associated Press on Monday that the move by prison officials was "cold-hearted."
"I am offering to prepare, and/or pay for, all of the last-meal requests from this day forward," he told the Associated Press. "Taxpayers will be out nothing."
Price made 220 final meals, beginning in 1991, while doing time for a pair of convictions related to the abduction of his brother-in-law and a sexual assault on his ex-wife. After his release in 2003, Price wrote a cookbook about his days at the Huntsville Unit called "Meals to Die For." He now runs a restaurant at Houston County Lake in East Texas. He could not be reached by phone late Monday.
Texas Department of Criminal Justice spokeswoman Michelle Lyons called Price's proposal "a kind offer" that the state did not intend to accept.
"It's not the cost but rather the concept we're moving away from," she told The Times."
"A former Texas inmate who cooked the so-called last meals for hundreds of death row inmates has offered to donate his services rather than allow condemned prisoners to do without their last meal of choice.
Last week, Texas officials announced that they were ending the practice of allowing prisoners to request special last meals. The decision came after a state lawmaker complained that an inmate had manipulated the system before his execution by requesting a large amount of food -- that he then refused to eat.
Starting this week, death row inmates will receive the same meals as other inmates, prison officials said.
Brian Price, a longtime prison cook, told the Associated Press on Monday that the move by prison officials was "cold-hearted."
"I am offering to prepare, and/or pay for, all of the last-meal requests from this day forward," he told the Associated Press. "Taxpayers will be out nothing."
Price made 220 final meals, beginning in 1991, while doing time for a pair of convictions related to the abduction of his brother-in-law and a sexual assault on his ex-wife. After his release in 2003, Price wrote a cookbook about his days at the Huntsville Unit called "Meals to Die For." He now runs a restaurant at Houston County Lake in East Texas. He could not be reached by phone late Monday.
Texas Department of Criminal Justice spokeswoman Michelle Lyons called Price's proposal "a kind offer" that the state did not intend to accept.
"It's not the cost but rather the concept we're moving away from," she told The Times."
Monday, September 26, 2011
Tough Sentences Help Prosecutors Push for Plea Bargains - NYTimes.com
Tough Sentences Help Prosecutors Push for Plea Bargains - NYTimes.com
"GAINESVILLE, Fla. — After decades of new laws to toughen sentencing for criminals, prosecutors have gained greater leverage to extract guilty pleas from defendants and reduce the number of cases that go to trial, often by using the threat of more serious charges with mandatory sentences or other harsher penalties.
Some experts say the process has become coercive in many state and federal jurisdictions, forcing defendants to weigh their options based on the relative risks of facing a judge and jury rather than simple matters of guilt or innocence. In effect, prosecutors are giving defendants more reasons to avoid having their day in court.
“We now have an incredible concentration of power in the hands of prosecutors,” said Richard E. Myers II, a former assistant United States attorney who is now an associate professor of law at the University of North Carolina. He said that so much influence now resides with prosecutors that “in the wrong hands, the criminal justice system can be held hostage.”
One crucial, if unheralded, effect of this shift is now coming into sharper view, according to academics who study the issue. Growing prosecutorial power is a significant reason that the percentage of felony cases that go to trial has dropped sharply in many places.
Plea bargains have been common for more than a century, but lately they have begun to put the trial system out of business in some courtrooms. By one count, fewer than one in 40 felony cases now make it to trial, according to data from nine states that have published such records since the 1970s, when the ratio was about one in 12. The decline has been even steeper in federal district courts."
"GAINESVILLE, Fla. — After decades of new laws to toughen sentencing for criminals, prosecutors have gained greater leverage to extract guilty pleas from defendants and reduce the number of cases that go to trial, often by using the threat of more serious charges with mandatory sentences or other harsher penalties.
Some experts say the process has become coercive in many state and federal jurisdictions, forcing defendants to weigh their options based on the relative risks of facing a judge and jury rather than simple matters of guilt or innocence. In effect, prosecutors are giving defendants more reasons to avoid having their day in court.
“We now have an incredible concentration of power in the hands of prosecutors,” said Richard E. Myers II, a former assistant United States attorney who is now an associate professor of law at the University of North Carolina. He said that so much influence now resides with prosecutors that “in the wrong hands, the criminal justice system can be held hostage.”
One crucial, if unheralded, effect of this shift is now coming into sharper view, according to academics who study the issue. Growing prosecutorial power is a significant reason that the percentage of felony cases that go to trial has dropped sharply in many places.
Plea bargains have been common for more than a century, but lately they have begun to put the trial system out of business in some courtrooms. By one count, fewer than one in 40 felony cases now make it to trial, according to data from nine states that have published such records since the 1970s, when the ratio was about one in 12. The decline has been even steeper in federal district courts."
Friday, September 23, 2011
Texas Prisons End Special Last Meals In Executions : NPR
Texas Prisons End Special Last Meals In Executions : NPR
"HOUSTON (AP) — It's a tradition with roots that can be traced far back in history: Before being put to death, a condemned prisoner can choose his last meal.
Not so anymore in Texas.
Officials who oversee the country's busiest death chamber stopped the practice on Thursday after a prominent state senator complained about a hefty request from a man executed for his role in a notorious dragging death. Now, inmates get to eat only what the kitchen serves.
The controversy began after Lawrence Russell Brewer, who was executed on Wednesday for the hate crime slaying of James Byrd Jr. more than a decade ago, asked for two chicken fried steaks, a triple-meat bacon cheeseburger, fried okra, a pound of barbecue, three fajitas, a meat lover's pizza, a pint of ice cream and a slab of peanut butter fudge with crushed peanuts. Prison officials said Brewer didn't eat any of it.
"It is extremely inappropriate to give a person sentenced to death such a privilege," Sen. John Whitmire, chairman of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, wrote in a letter Thursday to Brad Livingston, the executive director of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
Within hours, Livingston said the senator's concerns were valid and the practice of allowing death row offenders to choose their final meal was history.
"Effective immediately, no such accommodations will be made," Livingston said. "They will receive the same meal served to other offenders on the unit."
That had been the suggestion from Whitmire, who called the traditional request "ridiculous."
"It's long overdue," the Houston Democrat told The Associated Press. "This old boy last night, enough is enough. We're fixing to execute the guy and maybe it makes the system feel good about what they're fixing to do. Kind of hypocritical, you reckon?
"Mr. Byrd didn't get to choose his last meal. The whole deal is so illogical."
Brewer, a white supremacist gang member, was convicted of chaining Byrd, 49, to the back of a pickup truck and dragging him to his death along a bumpy road in a case shocked the nation for its brutality.
It was not immediately clear whether other states have made similar moves. Some limit the final meal cost — Florida's ceiling is $40, according to the Department of Corrections website, with food to be purchased locally. Others, like Texas, which never had a designated dollar limit, mandate meals be prison-made. Some states don't acknowledge final meals, and others will disclose the information only if the inmate agrees, said K. William Hayes, a Florida-based death penalty historian."
"HOUSTON (AP) — It's a tradition with roots that can be traced far back in history: Before being put to death, a condemned prisoner can choose his last meal.
Not so anymore in Texas.
Officials who oversee the country's busiest death chamber stopped the practice on Thursday after a prominent state senator complained about a hefty request from a man executed for his role in a notorious dragging death. Now, inmates get to eat only what the kitchen serves.
The controversy began after Lawrence Russell Brewer, who was executed on Wednesday for the hate crime slaying of James Byrd Jr. more than a decade ago, asked for two chicken fried steaks, a triple-meat bacon cheeseburger, fried okra, a pound of barbecue, three fajitas, a meat lover's pizza, a pint of ice cream and a slab of peanut butter fudge with crushed peanuts. Prison officials said Brewer didn't eat any of it.
"It is extremely inappropriate to give a person sentenced to death such a privilege," Sen. John Whitmire, chairman of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, wrote in a letter Thursday to Brad Livingston, the executive director of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
Within hours, Livingston said the senator's concerns were valid and the practice of allowing death row offenders to choose their final meal was history.
"Effective immediately, no such accommodations will be made," Livingston said. "They will receive the same meal served to other offenders on the unit."
That had been the suggestion from Whitmire, who called the traditional request "ridiculous."
"It's long overdue," the Houston Democrat told The Associated Press. "This old boy last night, enough is enough. We're fixing to execute the guy and maybe it makes the system feel good about what they're fixing to do. Kind of hypocritical, you reckon?
"Mr. Byrd didn't get to choose his last meal. The whole deal is so illogical."
Brewer, a white supremacist gang member, was convicted of chaining Byrd, 49, to the back of a pickup truck and dragging him to his death along a bumpy road in a case shocked the nation for its brutality.
It was not immediately clear whether other states have made similar moves. Some limit the final meal cost — Florida's ceiling is $40, according to the Department of Corrections website, with food to be purchased locally. Others, like Texas, which never had a designated dollar limit, mandate meals be prison-made. Some states don't acknowledge final meals, and others will disclose the information only if the inmate agrees, said K. William Hayes, a Florida-based death penalty historian."
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Chief judge proposes sweeping juvenile justice reforms
Chief judge proposes sweeping juvenile justice reforms
"NEW YORK, Sept 21 (Reuters) - New York state's chief judge announced on Wednesday a sweeping proposal to divert youth accused of committing minor crimes from criminal to family court, a move he acknowledged could place a "heavy burden" on an already cash-strapped court system.
At a forum held at Fordham University by the Citizens Crime Commission, Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman told a packed room of lawyers and judges that the adult criminal-justice system, with its emphasis on punishment over rehabilitation, was not equipped to deal with the needs of 16- and 17-year-olds.
"Prosecuting these adolescents in the criminal court does not improve public safety or the quality of life in our communities," he said.
Currently, 37 states and the District of Columbia treat 18 as the age of criminal responsibility. New York and North Carolina are the only states that prosecute 16-year-olds as adults. Lippman said that a proposal in North Carolina to increase the age of criminal responsibility could mean that "New York may very soon have the dubious distinction of standing alone on this issue."
Every year, between 45,000 and 50,000 16- and 17-year-olds are arrested in New York and prosecuted as adults, Lippman said, adding that a small fraction of these cases involved serious crimes such as rape, murder or robbery.
In family court, Lippman said, the law gives the Department of Probation the discretion to close a case if a juvenile offender complies with certain conditions. Criminal court judges have no such discretion."
"NEW YORK, Sept 21 (Reuters) - New York state's chief judge announced on Wednesday a sweeping proposal to divert youth accused of committing minor crimes from criminal to family court, a move he acknowledged could place a "heavy burden" on an already cash-strapped court system.
At a forum held at Fordham University by the Citizens Crime Commission, Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman told a packed room of lawyers and judges that the adult criminal-justice system, with its emphasis on punishment over rehabilitation, was not equipped to deal with the needs of 16- and 17-year-olds.
"Prosecuting these adolescents in the criminal court does not improve public safety or the quality of life in our communities," he said.
Currently, 37 states and the District of Columbia treat 18 as the age of criminal responsibility. New York and North Carolina are the only states that prosecute 16-year-olds as adults. Lippman said that a proposal in North Carolina to increase the age of criminal responsibility could mean that "New York may very soon have the dubious distinction of standing alone on this issue."
Every year, between 45,000 and 50,000 16- and 17-year-olds are arrested in New York and prosecuted as adults, Lippman said, adding that a small fraction of these cases involved serious crimes such as rape, murder or robbery.
In family court, Lippman said, the law gives the Department of Probation the discretion to close a case if a juvenile offender complies with certain conditions. Criminal court judges have no such discretion."
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
New York’s Chief Judge Seeks New System for Juvenile Defendants - NYTimes.com
New York’s Chief Judge Seeks New System for Juvenile Defendants - NYTimes.com
"New York State has long dealt with 16- and 17-year-old defendants more severely than almost every other state, trying all of them as adults in criminal courts. Now, New York’s chief judge is calling for a less punitive approach that would focus on finding ways to rehabilitate them.
The judge, Jonathan Lippman, is proposing that the state transfer jurisdiction for 16- and 17-year-olds accused of less serious crimes to family courts, which have more social services, while continuing to prosecute the most violent juveniles as adults. The plan reflects an emerging consensus in many states that troubled teenagers have been mishandled by the adult court system.
If the state adopts the plan, it will most likely have to allocate more money for social services and for the court system, which is already financially overburdened. The change would require a reorganization of the network of city and state agencies in the criminal justice system. The roles of judges, prosecutors, correction and probation officers and many others would change.
“I think it’s complex but feasible,” said Edwina G. Richardson-Mendelson, the administrative judge for New York City Family Court, which would have to handle tens of thousands more cases each year under the plan.
Judge Lippman’s proposal would have to be approved by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and the State Legislature. The Republican majority in the State Senate has often favored more stringent criminal justice measures, and may be reluctant to approve it.
A spokesman for Mr. Cuomo did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A spokesman for the Senate majority leader, Dean G. Skelos of Long Island, said his office would review the proposal.
The Democratic majority in the Assembly has historically supported such measures.
New York and North Carolina are the only states that try all 16-year-olds as adults. This year, North Carolina lawmakers introduced legislation to move those cases to juvenile court. Several other states have made similar moves in recent years.
In a speech that Judge Lippman is scheduled to give on Wednesday to the Citizens Crime Commission of New York City, he is to push for the state’s sentencing commission to draft a bill to be introduced in the State Legislature at the beginning of the 2012 session in January."
"New York State has long dealt with 16- and 17-year-old defendants more severely than almost every other state, trying all of them as adults in criminal courts. Now, New York’s chief judge is calling for a less punitive approach that would focus on finding ways to rehabilitate them.
The judge, Jonathan Lippman, is proposing that the state transfer jurisdiction for 16- and 17-year-olds accused of less serious crimes to family courts, which have more social services, while continuing to prosecute the most violent juveniles as adults. The plan reflects an emerging consensus in many states that troubled teenagers have been mishandled by the adult court system.
If the state adopts the plan, it will most likely have to allocate more money for social services and for the court system, which is already financially overburdened. The change would require a reorganization of the network of city and state agencies in the criminal justice system. The roles of judges, prosecutors, correction and probation officers and many others would change.
“I think it’s complex but feasible,” said Edwina G. Richardson-Mendelson, the administrative judge for New York City Family Court, which would have to handle tens of thousands more cases each year under the plan.
Judge Lippman’s proposal would have to be approved by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and the State Legislature. The Republican majority in the State Senate has often favored more stringent criminal justice measures, and may be reluctant to approve it.
A spokesman for Mr. Cuomo did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A spokesman for the Senate majority leader, Dean G. Skelos of Long Island, said his office would review the proposal.
The Democratic majority in the Assembly has historically supported such measures.
New York and North Carolina are the only states that try all 16-year-olds as adults. This year, North Carolina lawmakers introduced legislation to move those cases to juvenile court. Several other states have made similar moves in recent years.
In a speech that Judge Lippman is scheduled to give on Wednesday to the Citizens Crime Commission of New York City, he is to push for the state’s sentencing commission to draft a bill to be introduced in the State Legislature at the beginning of the 2012 session in January."
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Debate still simmers over NY hate crime stabbing - CBS News
Debate still simmers over NY hate crime stabbing - CBS News
"(AP) PATCHOGUE, New York — Library assistant Gilda Ramos says she was stunned the first time Hispanics in her English language class told her that many had been victims of attacks and robberies by marauding gangs of teenagers. "Walking ATMs," is how she describes the workers, who often were robbed on Friday or Saturday night after getting paid from jobs such as dishwashing, construction or landscaping.
The revelation came just days before the fatal stabbing of Ecuadorean immigrant Marcelo Lucero in November 2008, only a block or so from the library where Ramos teaches. His attackers later told a judge that targeting Hispanics was something they did for kicks; confident their victims would not call police, because they feared questions about their immigration status, or they assumed their complaints would be disregarded.
Seven high school pals are now in prison; the teen who inflicted the fatal blow is serving 25 years. A new PBS documentary portrays efforts by community leaders to put the killing in the past. However, a letter last week to county leaders from the U.S. Justice Department, which began a probe of police policy after the killing, indicates much still needs to be done.
The 28-page missive to Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy from the department's Civil Rights Division lists recommendations for improving hate crime investigations and cites vague policies and procedures that preceded Lucero's killing. Michael Goldberger, chief of the Civil Rights Division in the department's Brooklyn, New York, office, said these were just preliminary recommendations; a final report is pending.
The recommendations included making it easier for people to register complaints about the police by placing notices in libraries and other public places, and better community outreach and improved communication with officers on the beat. The letter cited some confusion over interpreting what a hate crime is.
"Officers need to be informed clearly that youths are capable of committing hate crimes," the letter says. "The tendency to brush off attacks as 'just kids being kids' fails to recognize the severity of criminal conduct in which minors may engage, as seen from the murder of Marcelo Lucero."
"(AP) PATCHOGUE, New York — Library assistant Gilda Ramos says she was stunned the first time Hispanics in her English language class told her that many had been victims of attacks and robberies by marauding gangs of teenagers. "Walking ATMs," is how she describes the workers, who often were robbed on Friday or Saturday night after getting paid from jobs such as dishwashing, construction or landscaping.
The revelation came just days before the fatal stabbing of Ecuadorean immigrant Marcelo Lucero in November 2008, only a block or so from the library where Ramos teaches. His attackers later told a judge that targeting Hispanics was something they did for kicks; confident their victims would not call police, because they feared questions about their immigration status, or they assumed their complaints would be disregarded.
Seven high school pals are now in prison; the teen who inflicted the fatal blow is serving 25 years. A new PBS documentary portrays efforts by community leaders to put the killing in the past. However, a letter last week to county leaders from the U.S. Justice Department, which began a probe of police policy after the killing, indicates much still needs to be done.
The 28-page missive to Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy from the department's Civil Rights Division lists recommendations for improving hate crime investigations and cites vague policies and procedures that preceded Lucero's killing. Michael Goldberger, chief of the Civil Rights Division in the department's Brooklyn, New York, office, said these were just preliminary recommendations; a final report is pending.
The recommendations included making it easier for people to register complaints about the police by placing notices in libraries and other public places, and better community outreach and improved communication with officers on the beat. The letter cited some confusion over interpreting what a hate crime is.
"Officers need to be informed clearly that youths are capable of committing hate crimes," the letter says. "The tendency to brush off attacks as 'just kids being kids' fails to recognize the severity of criminal conduct in which minors may engage, as seen from the murder of Marcelo Lucero."
Monday, September 19, 2011
Tickle The Wire » Justice Department Upping Efforts to Police the Police
Tickle The Wire » Justice Department Upping Efforts to Police the Police
"WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is ramping up civil rights enforcement against local police nationwide, opening a number of investigations to determine whether officers are guilty of brutality or discrimination against Hispanics and other minorities.
In recent months, the Justice Department has begun inquiries into major city police departments such as Portland, Ore., where officers shot several people who had mental health issues, and Seattle, where police were accused of gunning down a homeless Native American woodcarver. The department issued a scathing report earlier this month accusing Puerto Rico police of a “staggering level of crime and corruption.’’
All told, Justice’s Civil Rights Division is conducting 17 probes of police and sheriff departments — the largest number in its 54-year history. The investigations are civil, meaning they will not lead to criminal charges, but can result in court-enforced reforms."
"WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is ramping up civil rights enforcement against local police nationwide, opening a number of investigations to determine whether officers are guilty of brutality or discrimination against Hispanics and other minorities.
In recent months, the Justice Department has begun inquiries into major city police departments such as Portland, Ore., where officers shot several people who had mental health issues, and Seattle, where police were accused of gunning down a homeless Native American woodcarver. The department issued a scathing report earlier this month accusing Puerto Rico police of a “staggering level of crime and corruption.’’
All told, Justice’s Civil Rights Division is conducting 17 probes of police and sheriff departments — the largest number in its 54-year history. The investigations are civil, meaning they will not lead to criminal charges, but can result in court-enforced reforms."
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Police chief, chief judge participating in conference on criminal justice, technology - The Washington Post
Police chief, chief judge participating in conference on criminal justice, technology - The Washington Post
"WASHINGTON — “Criminal Justice in the Digital Age” is the topic of a conference being held in Washington that will include the city’s chief of police and the chief judge of the superior court.
Thursday’s conference at the city’s convention center includes District of Columbia Police Chief Cathy Lanier as well as D.C. Superior Court Chief Judge Lee Satterfield. The conference includes discussions on social media, technology and children and the courtroom of the future."
"WASHINGTON — “Criminal Justice in the Digital Age” is the topic of a conference being held in Washington that will include the city’s chief of police and the chief judge of the superior court.
Thursday’s conference at the city’s convention center includes District of Columbia Police Chief Cathy Lanier as well as D.C. Superior Court Chief Judge Lee Satterfield. The conference includes discussions on social media, technology and children and the courtroom of the future."
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Law panel, not MPs, to rule on right to silence - NZ Government - NZ Herald News
Law panel, not MPs, to rule on right to silence - NZ Government - NZ Herald News
"The Government's stalled reforms of the justice sector have been given an unusual lifeline with a proposal to take the controversial issue of the right to silence out of Parliament's hands and leave it to a group of legal experts.
The Criminal Procedure (Reform and Modernisation) Bill is likely to have its second reading this week, having spent a month on the order paper while Justice Minister Simon Power sought the numbers to pass it.
The bill is a shake-up of the criminal justice system and includes the removal of an accused's right to remain silent and not have that held against them.
As it stands, the bill would require the defence to disclose to the prosecution before a trial all issues in dispute. Failure to do so would enable a judge or jury to infer that the accused is more likely to be guilty. At present, a defendant can say nothing, leaving the case to the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt.
The Labour, Green and Maori parties are strongly against the bill in its present form, but the Herald understands Mr Power has won the support of United Future leader Peter Dunne and Act MPs Hilary Calvert, Heather Roy and Sir Roger Douglas by removing the disclosure regime from the bill (Act MPs are not "whipped" to vote as a caucus).
The ability of a judge or jury to infer a greater likelihood of guilt from non-compliance would also be removed.
A new clause would allow the Rules Committee, a panel of legal experts chaired by Chief Justice Dame Sian Elias, to decide if a disclosure regime should be enforced, and if so, how.
The committee has responsibility for procedural rules in the court system, and relies on advice from judges, lawyers and other interested parties.
Dr Bill Hodge, an associate professor of law at Auckland University, said delegating control to the committee would be "unusual" because Parliament usually makes the law, while the judiciary applies it."
"The Government's stalled reforms of the justice sector have been given an unusual lifeline with a proposal to take the controversial issue of the right to silence out of Parliament's hands and leave it to a group of legal experts.
The Criminal Procedure (Reform and Modernisation) Bill is likely to have its second reading this week, having spent a month on the order paper while Justice Minister Simon Power sought the numbers to pass it.
The bill is a shake-up of the criminal justice system and includes the removal of an accused's right to remain silent and not have that held against them.
As it stands, the bill would require the defence to disclose to the prosecution before a trial all issues in dispute. Failure to do so would enable a judge or jury to infer that the accused is more likely to be guilty. At present, a defendant can say nothing, leaving the case to the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt.
The Labour, Green and Maori parties are strongly against the bill in its present form, but the Herald understands Mr Power has won the support of United Future leader Peter Dunne and Act MPs Hilary Calvert, Heather Roy and Sir Roger Douglas by removing the disclosure regime from the bill (Act MPs are not "whipped" to vote as a caucus).
The ability of a judge or jury to infer a greater likelihood of guilt from non-compliance would also be removed.
A new clause would allow the Rules Committee, a panel of legal experts chaired by Chief Justice Dame Sian Elias, to decide if a disclosure regime should be enforced, and if so, how.
The committee has responsibility for procedural rules in the court system, and relies on advice from judges, lawyers and other interested parties.
Dr Bill Hodge, an associate professor of law at Auckland University, said delegating control to the committee would be "unusual" because Parliament usually makes the law, while the judiciary applies it."
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Capitol Weekly: California violent crime at lowest since 1968
Capitol Weekly: California violent crime at lowest since 1968
"California’s crime rate dropped across the board in every major measured category, with violent crimes – including murders and rapes – at their lowest comparable levels in more than 40 years, the state Justice Department says.
The department’s report, “Crime in California,” tracked offenses, arrests, judicial dispositions of felonies, probation, complaints against peace officers, domestic violence calls and other data over time. The full study can be seen here.
Meanwhile, some 67.6 percent of those arrested for felonies wound up getting convicted -- the lowest level in a decade.
The dense report, a collection of tables and fine print detailing criminal behavior in California society, reflects the spikes and declines of crime over several decades.
A startling finding is that the most violent crimes, homicide and forcible rape, have dropped to their lowest levels per 100,000 of population since 1966. Murders during 2010 were at 4.7 per 100,000 people, and rapes were at 21.4.
Aggravated assaults accounted for 246.5 per 100,000, compared with 155 in 1966. But the latest level is down dramatically from the high of 632.5 in 1992.
The violent crime rate dipped 6.9 percent, down to 422.3 per 100,000 from 453.6 in 2009. The decline reflected its lowest level since 1968, when it was 411.1.
The property crime rate also declined by 2.7 percent from 2009. According to the Justice Department, the largest decline in property crimes was in motor vehicle theft, which dipped 7.6 percent. The auto theft rate has dropped 62 percent since 1989, the reported noted."
"California’s crime rate dropped across the board in every major measured category, with violent crimes – including murders and rapes – at their lowest comparable levels in more than 40 years, the state Justice Department says.
The department’s report, “Crime in California,” tracked offenses, arrests, judicial dispositions of felonies, probation, complaints against peace officers, domestic violence calls and other data over time. The full study can be seen here.
Meanwhile, some 67.6 percent of those arrested for felonies wound up getting convicted -- the lowest level in a decade.
The dense report, a collection of tables and fine print detailing criminal behavior in California society, reflects the spikes and declines of crime over several decades.
A startling finding is that the most violent crimes, homicide and forcible rape, have dropped to their lowest levels per 100,000 of population since 1966. Murders during 2010 were at 4.7 per 100,000 people, and rapes were at 21.4.
Aggravated assaults accounted for 246.5 per 100,000, compared with 155 in 1966. But the latest level is down dramatically from the high of 632.5 in 1992.
The violent crime rate dipped 6.9 percent, down to 422.3 per 100,000 from 453.6 in 2009. The decline reflected its lowest level since 1968, when it was 411.1.
The property crime rate also declined by 2.7 percent from 2009. According to the Justice Department, the largest decline in property crimes was in motor vehicle theft, which dipped 7.6 percent. The auto theft rate has dropped 62 percent since 1989, the reported noted."
Monday, September 12, 2011
JURIST - Dateline
JURIST - Dateline
"Christie Tomm, St. John's University School of Law Class of 2012, is the author of the second article in a ten part series from the staffers of the Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development under the direction of Professor Leonard Baynes. She writes on the need to maintain a single justice system in prosecuting alleged foreign terrorists.
After a decade of uncertainty, the Obama administration recently announced that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would be tried in a military tribunal, as opposed to federal court. Until the death of Osama Bin Laden, Mohammed was the person most directly involved in the 9/11 attacks apprehended by US authorities. As such, his prosecution would function as a symbol of much-awaited justice for those Americans whose lives were devastated by the horrific events of that day. However, in deciding to try Mohammed in a military tribunal, that justice will be muted and its significance undermined.
The US government set a dangerous precedent when it passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA). In doing so, it gave another governing body, one that is not required to adhere to the fundamental rights outlined in the Constitution, jurisdiction to determine the guilt or innocence of non-citizens suspected of terror-related crimes. For the Constitution to continue to serve as a fundamental governing principle nationally and internationally, its validity and dominance in the federal criminal justice system should never be questioned. To ensure this, when a person, citizen or non-citizen, is charged with any crime, from petty larceny to tax evasion or terrorism, there can be only one set of rules that govern what rights the defendant is entitled to.
The MCA is contrary to the principles established by the US during more than 200 years of common law. The MCA allows military tribunals to admit into evidence confessions that do not respect an individual's Miranda or Fifth Amendment rights, and the MCA does not require that a terror suspect be given a trial to determine his guilt once he is deemed an enemy combatant, essentially allowing for his indefinite detention. However, despite the fact that the federal criminal justice system does provide these fundamental rights, it is more than adequately able to handle the trials of suspected terrorists. The executive branch, through its specially trained district attorneys, FBI agents and terrorist task forces, is prepared to deal with the particular challenges that come with investigating and trying a suspect that is not a US citizen, likely to be uncooperative and to evoke controversy and intense emotion in the public forum."
"Christie Tomm, St. John's University School of Law Class of 2012, is the author of the second article in a ten part series from the staffers of the Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development under the direction of Professor Leonard Baynes. She writes on the need to maintain a single justice system in prosecuting alleged foreign terrorists.
After a decade of uncertainty, the Obama administration recently announced that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would be tried in a military tribunal, as opposed to federal court. Until the death of Osama Bin Laden, Mohammed was the person most directly involved in the 9/11 attacks apprehended by US authorities. As such, his prosecution would function as a symbol of much-awaited justice for those Americans whose lives were devastated by the horrific events of that day. However, in deciding to try Mohammed in a military tribunal, that justice will be muted and its significance undermined.
The US government set a dangerous precedent when it passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA). In doing so, it gave another governing body, one that is not required to adhere to the fundamental rights outlined in the Constitution, jurisdiction to determine the guilt or innocence of non-citizens suspected of terror-related crimes. For the Constitution to continue to serve as a fundamental governing principle nationally and internationally, its validity and dominance in the federal criminal justice system should never be questioned. To ensure this, when a person, citizen or non-citizen, is charged with any crime, from petty larceny to tax evasion or terrorism, there can be only one set of rules that govern what rights the defendant is entitled to.
The MCA is contrary to the principles established by the US during more than 200 years of common law. The MCA allows military tribunals to admit into evidence confessions that do not respect an individual's Miranda or Fifth Amendment rights, and the MCA does not require that a terror suspect be given a trial to determine his guilt once he is deemed an enemy combatant, essentially allowing for his indefinite detention. However, despite the fact that the federal criminal justice system does provide these fundamental rights, it is more than adequately able to handle the trials of suspected terrorists. The executive branch, through its specially trained district attorneys, FBI agents and terrorist task forces, is prepared to deal with the particular challenges that come with investigating and trying a suspect that is not a US citizen, likely to be uncooperative and to evoke controversy and intense emotion in the public forum."
Friday, September 9, 2011
UK riots cause 8% rise in jailed children | Society | The Guardian
UK riots cause 8% rise in jailed children Society The Guardian
"The influx of child prisoners accused of involvement in last month's looting and rioting has contributed to an 8% increase in the juvenile prison population in England and Wales.
That calculation is based on Youth Justice Board (YJB) figures which show 170 riot offenders aged under 18 are now in custody, adding to the 2,075 child prisoners recorded in June, the latest statistics available. A Ministry of Justice report out on Thursday suggests a lower tally; it says there are 125 juveniles behind bars for riot offences, with 21 sentenced and 104 on remand.
The Guardian has learned that two-fifths of children in custody have had no previous connection with youth offending teams – a marker of criminal behaviour which resulted in a court order.
The YJB, which has responsibility for the administration of youth justice in England and Wales, says that half of under-18s brought in front of the courts on charges of rioting and looting last month were completely unknown to the criminal justice system and only 10-15% of juvenile rioters had any sort of gang affiliation.
The statistics on minors, who comprise 20% of all those convicted of riot offences, undermine claims from justice minister Kenneth Clarke that the riots were caused by a hardcore criminal underclass.
Campaigners have warned the sudden rise in the number of children in jail was a possible breach of the UK's commitment to protect children's rights. Article 37 in the UN convention states that custody should only be used "as a last resort".
Andrew Neilson, assistant director at the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: "We were very concerned that there was a rush to custody. Normally young people would be recognised as vulnerable and different and that would be reflected... and that wasn't happening. It's been a one-size-fits-all approach.
"Pushing someone from no contact at all to a youth offending institute, which is the deep end is a very risky thing [and]... this is one of the most disproportionate impacts of the riot sentencing"
"The overuse of remand and some of the sentencing certainly puts in doubt the government's claims that child custody is used as a last resort."
John Drew, the chief executive of the YJB, said there was a crisis in young offenders' institutions (YOIs) because of the sudden spike in the prison population. Offenders, especially in London, have had to share cells or have been moved to prisons hundreds of miles away from home.
He said one of the YJB's biggest concerns was the threat of violence against naive entrants to the prison system. Therefore, all those on riot sentences have been categorised as vulnerable, a measure normally reserved for a small minority."
"The influx of child prisoners accused of involvement in last month's looting and rioting has contributed to an 8% increase in the juvenile prison population in England and Wales.
That calculation is based on Youth Justice Board (YJB) figures which show 170 riot offenders aged under 18 are now in custody, adding to the 2,075 child prisoners recorded in June, the latest statistics available. A Ministry of Justice report out on Thursday suggests a lower tally; it says there are 125 juveniles behind bars for riot offences, with 21 sentenced and 104 on remand.
The Guardian has learned that two-fifths of children in custody have had no previous connection with youth offending teams – a marker of criminal behaviour which resulted in a court order.
The YJB, which has responsibility for the administration of youth justice in England and Wales, says that half of under-18s brought in front of the courts on charges of rioting and looting last month were completely unknown to the criminal justice system and only 10-15% of juvenile rioters had any sort of gang affiliation.
The statistics on minors, who comprise 20% of all those convicted of riot offences, undermine claims from justice minister Kenneth Clarke that the riots were caused by a hardcore criminal underclass.
Campaigners have warned the sudden rise in the number of children in jail was a possible breach of the UK's commitment to protect children's rights. Article 37 in the UN convention states that custody should only be used "as a last resort".
Andrew Neilson, assistant director at the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: "We were very concerned that there was a rush to custody. Normally young people would be recognised as vulnerable and different and that would be reflected... and that wasn't happening. It's been a one-size-fits-all approach.
"Pushing someone from no contact at all to a youth offending institute, which is the deep end is a very risky thing [and]... this is one of the most disproportionate impacts of the riot sentencing"
"The overuse of remand and some of the sentencing certainly puts in doubt the government's claims that child custody is used as a last resort."
John Drew, the chief executive of the YJB, said there was a crisis in young offenders' institutions (YOIs) because of the sudden spike in the prison population. Offenders, especially in London, have had to share cells or have been moved to prisons hundreds of miles away from home.
He said one of the YJB's biggest concerns was the threat of violence against naive entrants to the prison system. Therefore, all those on riot sentences have been categorised as vulnerable, a measure normally reserved for a small minority."
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Jeb Bush and Newt Gingrich Agree With ACLU on Something: Criminal Justice Needs a Tweak - Broward/Palm Beach News - The Daily Pulp
Jeb Bush and Newt Gingrich Agree With ACLU on Something: Criminal Justice Needs a Tweak - Broward/Palm Beach News - The Daily Pulp
"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is the latest to sign GOP group Right on Crime's Statement of Principles. It's being framed as a conservative approach to reforming the criminal justice system.
Other conservative backers include Newt Gingrich, Grover Norquist, and Tony Perkins (president of the anti-gay, anti-choice Family Research Council).
The Texas Public Policy Foundation initiated the Right on Crime campaign. It's based on reforms implemented in Texas that the group claims have reduced crime by 9 percent while saving taxpayers more than $2 billion.
According to the statement, Right on Crime supports "constitutionally limited government, transparency, individual liberty, personal responsibility, and free enterprise." The goal of the campaign is to "produce the best possible results at the lowest possible costs" while treating crime victims as "'consumers' of the criminal justice system."
All pretty much in line with core conservative principles, right? Read on.The statement is critical of the criminal justice system's overreliance on prisons, which the statement says will in some cases have "the unintended consequence of hardening non-violent, low-risk offenders." Like drug users?
The American Civil Liberties Union -- a cherished whipping boy for right-wing pundits -- agrees with them.
"The authors of Right on Crime may come to their recommendations from a different place from the ACLU," says Baylor Johnson, an ACLU of Florida spokesperson. "[But] the conclusions they draw are very much in line with reforms for which the ACLU has been advocating for years."
A recent ACLU report says the war on drugs has caused the United States to have the world's highest incarceration rate at an astronomical cost. The report suggests that several states known to be "tough on crime" have moved to decriminalize nonviolent drug offenders, a move that has saved them loads of money.
Both groups want to do away with mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenders. Rick Scott too."
"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is the latest to sign GOP group Right on Crime's Statement of Principles. It's being framed as a conservative approach to reforming the criminal justice system.
Other conservative backers include Newt Gingrich, Grover Norquist, and Tony Perkins (president of the anti-gay, anti-choice Family Research Council).
The Texas Public Policy Foundation initiated the Right on Crime campaign. It's based on reforms implemented in Texas that the group claims have reduced crime by 9 percent while saving taxpayers more than $2 billion.
According to the statement, Right on Crime supports "constitutionally limited government, transparency, individual liberty, personal responsibility, and free enterprise." The goal of the campaign is to "produce the best possible results at the lowest possible costs" while treating crime victims as "'consumers' of the criminal justice system."
All pretty much in line with core conservative principles, right? Read on.The statement is critical of the criminal justice system's overreliance on prisons, which the statement says will in some cases have "the unintended consequence of hardening non-violent, low-risk offenders." Like drug users?
The American Civil Liberties Union -- a cherished whipping boy for right-wing pundits -- agrees with them.
"The authors of Right on Crime may come to their recommendations from a different place from the ACLU," says Baylor Johnson, an ACLU of Florida spokesperson. "[But] the conclusions they draw are very much in line with reforms for which the ACLU has been advocating for years."
A recent ACLU report says the war on drugs has caused the United States to have the world's highest incarceration rate at an astronomical cost. The report suggests that several states known to be "tough on crime" have moved to decriminalize nonviolent drug offenders, a move that has saved them loads of money.
Both groups want to do away with mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenders. Rick Scott too."
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
UK riots: Police chief blames soft sentencing - mirror.co.uk
UK riots: Police chief blames soft sentencing - mirror.co.uk
"BRITAIN’S top police chief yesterday blamed soft sentencing and sky-high reoffending rates for last month’s riots.
Tim Godwin, acting Metropolitan Police Commissioner, demanded that “courts prove crime has a consequence”.
He spoke as it was revealed 75% of those arrested in the riots had a criminal record, with 21% under 18 years old.
Mr Godwin told a Commons committee: “This is a wake-up call for the criminal justice system.
“We have been seeking to make justice more relevant – something we need to do. The amount of people with previous convictions poses questions.”
London Mayor Boris Johnson also demanded harsher sentencing, saying: “What was the key factor likely to make you riot? It was that you had a criminal record.”
The attacks came after Justice Secretary Ken Clarke said rioters came from a “feral underclass… from a broken penal system”, but rejected tougher sentences."
Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/2011/09/07/uk-riots-police-chief-blames-soft-sentencing-
"BRITAIN’S top police chief yesterday blamed soft sentencing and sky-high reoffending rates for last month’s riots.
Tim Godwin, acting Metropolitan Police Commissioner, demanded that “courts prove crime has a consequence”.
He spoke as it was revealed 75% of those arrested in the riots had a criminal record, with 21% under 18 years old.
Mr Godwin told a Commons committee: “This is a wake-up call for the criminal justice system.
“We have been seeking to make justice more relevant – something we need to do. The amount of people with previous convictions poses questions.”
London Mayor Boris Johnson also demanded harsher sentencing, saying: “What was the key factor likely to make you riot? It was that you had a criminal record.”
The attacks came after Justice Secretary Ken Clarke said rioters came from a “feral underclass… from a broken penal system”, but rejected tougher sentences."
Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/2011/09/07/uk-riots-police-chief-blames-soft-sentencing-
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Nation's Jails Struggle With Mentally Ill Prisoners | AHN
Nation's Jails Struggle With Mentally Ill Prisoners AHN
"Three hundred and fifty thousand: That's a conservative estimate for the number of offenders with mental illness confined in America's prisons and jails.
More Americans receive mental health treatment in prisons and jails than in hospitals or treatment centers. In fact, the three largest inpatient psychiatric facilities in the country are jails: Los Angeles County Jail, Rikers Island Jail in New York City and Cook County Jail in Illinois.
"We have a criminal justice system which has a very clear purpose: You get arrested. We want justice. We try you, and justice hopefully prevails. It was never built to handle people that were very, very ill, at least with mental illness," Judge Steve Leifman tells Laura Sullivan, guest host of weekends on All Things Considered.
When the government began closing state-run hospitals in the'80s, people with mental illness had nowhere to turn; many ended up in jail. Leifman saw the problem first-hand decades ago in the courtroom. When individuals suffering from mental illness came before him accused of petty crimes, he didn't have many options.
"What we used to do, which I tell people was the definition of insanity [...] was they would commit an offense, the police would arrest them, they'd come to court, they'd be acting out so we would order two or three psychological evaluations at great expense, we would determine that they were incompetent to stand trial and we'd re-release them back to the community and kind of held our breath and crossed our fingers and hoped that somehow they'd get better and come back and we could try them," he says.
Instead, many disappeared and got re-arrested. Sometimes within minutes.
"They'd walk out the door, they were ill, they'd act out, because [the jail] is next to the courthouse there are several officers out there, and they'd get re-arrested," he says.
Not only was the system inefficient, it was costly as well. When Leifman asked the University of South Florida to look at who the highest users of criminal justice and mental health services in Miami-Dade County, researchers found the prime users were 97 people, individuals diagnosed primarily with schizophrenia.
Read more: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/90059074?Nation%27s%20Jails%20Struggle%20With%20Mentally%20Ill%20Prisoners#ixzz1XBijfAne
"Three hundred and fifty thousand: That's a conservative estimate for the number of offenders with mental illness confined in America's prisons and jails.
More Americans receive mental health treatment in prisons and jails than in hospitals or treatment centers. In fact, the three largest inpatient psychiatric facilities in the country are jails: Los Angeles County Jail, Rikers Island Jail in New York City and Cook County Jail in Illinois.
"We have a criminal justice system which has a very clear purpose: You get arrested. We want justice. We try you, and justice hopefully prevails. It was never built to handle people that were very, very ill, at least with mental illness," Judge Steve Leifman tells Laura Sullivan, guest host of weekends on All Things Considered.
When the government began closing state-run hospitals in the'80s, people with mental illness had nowhere to turn; many ended up in jail. Leifman saw the problem first-hand decades ago in the courtroom. When individuals suffering from mental illness came before him accused of petty crimes, he didn't have many options.
"What we used to do, which I tell people was the definition of insanity [...] was they would commit an offense, the police would arrest them, they'd come to court, they'd be acting out so we would order two or three psychological evaluations at great expense, we would determine that they were incompetent to stand trial and we'd re-release them back to the community and kind of held our breath and crossed our fingers and hoped that somehow they'd get better and come back and we could try them," he says.
Instead, many disappeared and got re-arrested. Sometimes within minutes.
"They'd walk out the door, they were ill, they'd act out, because [the jail] is next to the courthouse there are several officers out there, and they'd get re-arrested," he says.
Not only was the system inefficient, it was costly as well. When Leifman asked the University of South Florida to look at who the highest users of criminal justice and mental health services in Miami-Dade County, researchers found the prime users were 97 people, individuals diagnosed primarily with schizophrenia.
Read more: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/90059074?Nation%27s%20Jails%20Struggle%20With%20Mentally%20Ill%20Prisoners#ixzz1XBijfAne
Friday, September 2, 2011
The Towerlight » Forensic accreditation offered at undergraduate and graduate levels
The Towerlight » Forensic accreditation offered at undergraduate and graduate levels
"When forensic science comes to mind, some people envision television shows like CSI and Dexter, but for Towson students, there’s an opportunity for students to experience it firsthand.
The Jess and Mildred Fisher College of Science and Mathematics,home to both the undergraduate and
graduate programs accredited by the Forensic Science Education Programs Accreditation Commission, provides several training opportunities for hands-on experience.
“Both Towson’s undergrad and graduate programs have FEPAC accreditation,” Mark Profili, director of the forensic science program, said. “We are one of only four schools that have both their undergrad and graduate programs accredited.”
Protocol for accreditation involves meeting several standards and requirements for faculty, assessments, University support, program director and application acceptance process. A working relationship with a laboratory is necessary, too. All of these must be met to maintain accreditation, according to Profili.
Towson’s undergraduate curriculum provides training in one of three specific tracks- general forensics, forensic DNA and forensic trace evidence/toxicology track. Within these programs, training includes experience with pipe bombs, chemical make-up of ammonium bombs and the use of McCormick spices for finger printing, a method developed by students in the program. Distinctive topics such as death analysis and advanced DNA technologies are also incorporated.
“Students are taught the background science necessary to understand the field wherever the technology takes it and students get hands on experience with state of the art equipment and protocols that are used in the field today,” Forensic Science Professor Cynthia Zeller said.“It is the perfect combination of basic and applied science.”
Students may decide to pursue a master’s degree in forensic science, where the focus is primarily in the study of DNA."
"When forensic science comes to mind, some people envision television shows like CSI and Dexter, but for Towson students, there’s an opportunity for students to experience it firsthand.
The Jess and Mildred Fisher College of Science and Mathematics,home to both the undergraduate and
graduate programs accredited by the Forensic Science Education Programs Accreditation Commission, provides several training opportunities for hands-on experience.
“Both Towson’s undergrad and graduate programs have FEPAC accreditation,” Mark Profili, director of the forensic science program, said. “We are one of only four schools that have both their undergrad and graduate programs accredited.”
Protocol for accreditation involves meeting several standards and requirements for faculty, assessments, University support, program director and application acceptance process. A working relationship with a laboratory is necessary, too. All of these must be met to maintain accreditation, according to Profili.
Towson’s undergraduate curriculum provides training in one of three specific tracks- general forensics, forensic DNA and forensic trace evidence/toxicology track. Within these programs, training includes experience with pipe bombs, chemical make-up of ammonium bombs and the use of McCormick spices for finger printing, a method developed by students in the program. Distinctive topics such as death analysis and advanced DNA technologies are also incorporated.
“Students are taught the background science necessary to understand the field wherever the technology takes it and students get hands on experience with state of the art equipment and protocols that are used in the field today,” Forensic Science Professor Cynthia Zeller said.“It is the perfect combination of basic and applied science.”
Students may decide to pursue a master’s degree in forensic science, where the focus is primarily in the study of DNA."
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Banning Kids From Streets May Make Us Less Safe: Mike Males - Bloomberg
Banning Kids From Streets May Make Us Less Safe: Mike Males - Bloomberg
"In the wake of flash-mob riots in several cities, fears of gang violence and age-old anxiety about kids on the streets, authorities in Philadelphia, Chicago and other cities are adopting or beefing up curfews that ban youths from being in public during school hours and at night.
Juvenile curfews are unique to the U.S. No other country, including those in Latin America and Asia or even the U.K. during recent riots in London, invokes such measures except during national emergencies -- and then they apply to all ages.
Although America’s best measure of crime, the National Crime Victimization Survey, finds violence by juveniles has plummeted to a record low and Federal Bureau of Investigation reports also show youth arrests for violent crimes at a nadir, officials and news outlets seem eager to postulate a crisis. For example, news reports have depicted murders of school-aged youths in Chicago as an alarming new trend even though coroners’ records show today’s urban youths, including Chicago’s, are safer from homicide than at any time in at least 40 years.
Similarly, the notion that mass curfews and crackdowns have become necessary because of violence enabled by social media is dubious. In reality, only the term “flash mob” is new. The 1965 Watts riot in Los Angeles began within 20 minutes of its instigating incident as a few onlookers quickly grew to a mob of hundreds, then thousands. “Youth in Danger,” a 1956 report by congressional investigators, cited numerous mob incidents, including ones in Philadelphia identical to those now labeled as flash mobs. The social media of the time were talking and telephones.
Rare Exception
Few studies find curfews effective. One exception, a widely cited analysis by Patrick Kline, a University of California, Berkeley, economist, found small reductions in crime among younger teens. Unfortunately, this study only included cities that implemented curfews and failed to account for national trends showing much larger crime declines among younger teens than among those older teens subject to curfews, including in cities without curfews.
For example, both property and violent crime rates fell steeply in the 1990s and 2000s among youths in San Francisco, which didn’t have a curfew. A “systematic review of empirical research on juvenile curfews” in city after city by Kenneth Adams, an Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis associate professor, found “the evidence does not support the argument that curfews prevent crime and victimization.” Likewise, a study by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice found that during the 1990s and 2000s, juvenile crime and crime in general fell faster in California cities that didn’t enforce youth curfews than in those that did."
"In the wake of flash-mob riots in several cities, fears of gang violence and age-old anxiety about kids on the streets, authorities in Philadelphia, Chicago and other cities are adopting or beefing up curfews that ban youths from being in public during school hours and at night.
Juvenile curfews are unique to the U.S. No other country, including those in Latin America and Asia or even the U.K. during recent riots in London, invokes such measures except during national emergencies -- and then they apply to all ages.
Although America’s best measure of crime, the National Crime Victimization Survey, finds violence by juveniles has plummeted to a record low and Federal Bureau of Investigation reports also show youth arrests for violent crimes at a nadir, officials and news outlets seem eager to postulate a crisis. For example, news reports have depicted murders of school-aged youths in Chicago as an alarming new trend even though coroners’ records show today’s urban youths, including Chicago’s, are safer from homicide than at any time in at least 40 years.
Similarly, the notion that mass curfews and crackdowns have become necessary because of violence enabled by social media is dubious. In reality, only the term “flash mob” is new. The 1965 Watts riot in Los Angeles began within 20 minutes of its instigating incident as a few onlookers quickly grew to a mob of hundreds, then thousands. “Youth in Danger,” a 1956 report by congressional investigators, cited numerous mob incidents, including ones in Philadelphia identical to those now labeled as flash mobs. The social media of the time were talking and telephones.
Rare Exception
Few studies find curfews effective. One exception, a widely cited analysis by Patrick Kline, a University of California, Berkeley, economist, found small reductions in crime among younger teens. Unfortunately, this study only included cities that implemented curfews and failed to account for national trends showing much larger crime declines among younger teens than among those older teens subject to curfews, including in cities without curfews.
For example, both property and violent crime rates fell steeply in the 1990s and 2000s among youths in San Francisco, which didn’t have a curfew. A “systematic review of empirical research on juvenile curfews” in city after city by Kenneth Adams, an Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis associate professor, found “the evidence does not support the argument that curfews prevent crime and victimization.” Likewise, a study by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice found that during the 1990s and 2000s, juvenile crime and crime in general fell faster in California cities that didn’t enforce youth curfews than in those that did."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)