Obama: Drug Addiction is a Disease, Not a Crime
"The Office of National Drug Control Policy hosted a media briefing on Nov. 20, to highlight the Obama Administration’s unprecedented approaches to addressing drug addiction.
Ben Tucker, deputy director for State, Local, and Tribal Affairs set the tone by giving stats about how costly criminalizing drug use has been.
“The Department of Justice released new data showing that drug use cost our society about $193 billion a year. Fifty six billion of those dollars can be traced directly back to costs associated solely with the criminal justice system,” said Tucker.
The deputy pointed out that contributing to this immense cost are the more than seven million people in the United States who are under the supervision of the criminal justice system with more than two million behind bars.
For states and localities across the country, the costs of managing these populations have grown significantly. Between 1988 and 2009, state corrections spending increased from $12 billion to more than $50 billion per year.
“African Americans and Hispanics are disproportionately incarcerated for drug offenses. These two groups have consistently higher proportions of inmates in state prison who are drug offenders compared to Whites - about 50 percent higher among these minorities compared to Whites,” said Tucker.
“As our nation works to recover from the greatest recession we’ve had, we must do everything we can to lessen the harm that drug offenses and drug use have on the health, safety, and economic potential of our nation and our fellow citizens.”
Gil Kerlikowske, director of National Drug Control Policy outlined unprecedented actions being undertaken by the Obama Administration to address this challenge by breaking the cycle of drug use, crime, incarceration and re-arrest.
The Obama Administration’s approach to criminal justice drug policy is guided by three facts; that addiction is a disease that can be treated; people can recover and new interventions are needed to appropriately address substance abuse and drug-related crime.
“We cannot arrest our way out of our nation’s drug problem and while new strategies are being implemented there is more to do,” said Kerlikowske.
This last fiscal year, the Obama Administration spent $10.4 billion on drug prevention and treatment programs compared to $9.2 billion on domestic drug enforcement."
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Monday, November 28, 2011
Beyond Fighting Crime, FBI Reaches Out To Victims : NPR
Beyond Fighting Crime, FBI Reaches Out To Victims : NPR
"When FBI agents arrive at the scene of a shooting or a terrorist attack, there's often someone else standing in the background. It's a representative from the FBI's Office for Victim Assistance, there to help people suffering in the aftermath of a disaster.
The planning for those unfortunate days starts here, in a windowless conference room in the J. Edgar Hoover FBI building, where seven serious-looking people are sitting around a table.
They're talking about how to pick volunteers to serve on five elite teams of victim specialists they deploy when something really bad happens: what they call a mass casualty event. That means a bombing, a massacre or a terrorist attack.
Dr. Steve Porter is a clinical neuropsychologist who used to work with special forces in the military.
"It's a very demanding process," Porter says of the victim-assistance rapid-deployment teams. "These people who volunteer to be on this have to be able to leave in a moment's notice, almost. ... They have to be on call 24/7. They never know when they're going to get called."
They need to be able to help with basic needs, Porter says, such as safety, food, shelter and clothing.
In cases they know about in advance, such as raids on brothels where young women are trafficked, FBI social workers say they plan ahead: buying T-shirts, sweat pants and flip-flops for women inside who might need them.
"There are so many things we can't do for them — we can't alleviate their loss — but we do try to provide for those practical needs and a lot of that starts with information," says Kathryn Turman, who created the victim-assistance office at the FBI 10 years ago this December.
Sometimes that means a little something more. In the early days, not long after Turman started the unit at the FBI, she reached out to a woman whose husband had been killed in a bombing in Iraq.
"I said, 'I wanted to say how sorry we are about your husband's murder,'" Turman says. "And she said, 'You're the first person who's used that word.' And that's what it was: It was a murder."
Turman and the FBI office she leads represent a pioneering philosophy, says Mai Fernandez, who directs the National Center for Victims of Crime, a nonprofit advocacy group."
"When FBI agents arrive at the scene of a shooting or a terrorist attack, there's often someone else standing in the background. It's a representative from the FBI's Office for Victim Assistance, there to help people suffering in the aftermath of a disaster.
The planning for those unfortunate days starts here, in a windowless conference room in the J. Edgar Hoover FBI building, where seven serious-looking people are sitting around a table.
They're talking about how to pick volunteers to serve on five elite teams of victim specialists they deploy when something really bad happens: what they call a mass casualty event. That means a bombing, a massacre or a terrorist attack.
Dr. Steve Porter is a clinical neuropsychologist who used to work with special forces in the military.
"It's a very demanding process," Porter says of the victim-assistance rapid-deployment teams. "These people who volunteer to be on this have to be able to leave in a moment's notice, almost. ... They have to be on call 24/7. They never know when they're going to get called."
They need to be able to help with basic needs, Porter says, such as safety, food, shelter and clothing.
In cases they know about in advance, such as raids on brothels where young women are trafficked, FBI social workers say they plan ahead: buying T-shirts, sweat pants and flip-flops for women inside who might need them.
"There are so many things we can't do for them — we can't alleviate their loss — but we do try to provide for those practical needs and a lot of that starts with information," says Kathryn Turman, who created the victim-assistance office at the FBI 10 years ago this December.
Sometimes that means a little something more. In the early days, not long after Turman started the unit at the FBI, she reached out to a woman whose husband had been killed in a bombing in Iraq.
"I said, 'I wanted to say how sorry we are about your husband's murder,'" Turman says. "And she said, 'You're the first person who's used that word.' And that's what it was: It was a murder."
Turman and the FBI office she leads represent a pioneering philosophy, says Mai Fernandez, who directs the National Center for Victims of Crime, a nonprofit advocacy group."
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
The Charlotte Post - Challenge to Racial Justice Act
The Charlotte Post - Challenge to Racial Justice Act
"Two years after it became law, the Racial Justice Act is under attack by N.C. district attorneys who fear it could wreak havoc on public safety and want it repealed.
“No district attorney supports race as a factor in either death penalty cases or in the criminal justice system in general,” Susan Doyle, president of the North Carolina Conference of District Attorneys, said in a statement. “While the name of the act sounds well-intentioned, the actual application is a threat to justice, truth and public safety.”
Supporters of the RJA, which prohibits seeking or imposing the death penalty on the basis of race, say that it is not a get of jail pass. For those who prove racial discrimination, their sentence will be commuted to a life without parole.
“It doesn’t let anybody get out of jail,” said Rep. Larry Womble, D-Forsyth, a primary sponsor of the act. “You have to spend the rest of your life in jail.”
But Doyle said that argument is misleading because prior to October 1, 1994, life without parole wasn’t an option under the Fair Sentencing Act, which governed sentencing during the 1980s and early 1990s. Anyone who committed a crime under that law would be eligible for parole after 20 years, which would include time served.
“The most concerning thing is that the law as it’s currently written could allow anywhere from 73 to 90 people who are currently death row inmates to be immediately considered for parole if their death sentences were vacated and life imposed,” she said.
A letter addressed to N.C. Sen. Phil Berger (D-Guilford), president pro tempore, on Nov. 14 on behalf of all 44 district attorneys, calls for an amendment the RJA. All but two of the DAs are white, and only one attorney didn’t sign the resolution. Durham District Attorney Tracey Cline, who didn’t sign it, declined comment.
The letter came just days after prosecutors failed in their attempt to stop Gregory Weeks, an African-American superior court judge, from presiding over the state’s first RJA case.
The N.C. RJA allows for relevant evidence to be used including statistical evidence to establish that race was a significant factor in seeking or imposing the death penalty."
"Two years after it became law, the Racial Justice Act is under attack by N.C. district attorneys who fear it could wreak havoc on public safety and want it repealed.
“No district attorney supports race as a factor in either death penalty cases or in the criminal justice system in general,” Susan Doyle, president of the North Carolina Conference of District Attorneys, said in a statement. “While the name of the act sounds well-intentioned, the actual application is a threat to justice, truth and public safety.”
Supporters of the RJA, which prohibits seeking or imposing the death penalty on the basis of race, say that it is not a get of jail pass. For those who prove racial discrimination, their sentence will be commuted to a life without parole.
“It doesn’t let anybody get out of jail,” said Rep. Larry Womble, D-Forsyth, a primary sponsor of the act. “You have to spend the rest of your life in jail.”
But Doyle said that argument is misleading because prior to October 1, 1994, life without parole wasn’t an option under the Fair Sentencing Act, which governed sentencing during the 1980s and early 1990s. Anyone who committed a crime under that law would be eligible for parole after 20 years, which would include time served.
“The most concerning thing is that the law as it’s currently written could allow anywhere from 73 to 90 people who are currently death row inmates to be immediately considered for parole if their death sentences were vacated and life imposed,” she said.
A letter addressed to N.C. Sen. Phil Berger (D-Guilford), president pro tempore, on Nov. 14 on behalf of all 44 district attorneys, calls for an amendment the RJA. All but two of the DAs are white, and only one attorney didn’t sign the resolution. Durham District Attorney Tracey Cline, who didn’t sign it, declined comment.
The letter came just days after prosecutors failed in their attempt to stop Gregory Weeks, an African-American superior court judge, from presiding over the state’s first RJA case.
The N.C. RJA allows for relevant evidence to be used including statistical evidence to establish that race was a significant factor in seeking or imposing the death penalty."
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
NCAI: Congress deals setback to tribal justice
NCAI: Congress deals setback to tribal justice
"According to studies, Indian reservations nationwide face violent crime rates more than 2.5 times the national rate, and some reservations face more than 20 times the national rate of violence.
WASHINGTON – Leaders of the National Congress of American Indians said the U.S. Congress has leveled a major setback to Indian tribes in need of critical resources to combat the highest crime rates in the country.
Congress’s decision to cut more than $90 million from proposed funding for Department of Justice measures in Indian Country leaves tribal law enforcement and federal personnel with far too few resources to fight crime on tribal lands, NCAI officials said.
Signed into law in 2010 with bipartisan support, the Tribal Law & Order Act sets out to reduce crime in Indian Country by making improvements to the way criminal justice is administered on tribal lands and reauthorizing critical tribal justice programs.
On Nov. 14, Congress released the fiscal year 2012 Appropriations Conference Report for Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies. The report shows funding cuts for tribal justice programs across the board and did not include a proposed 7 percent tribal set-aside for all discretionary Office of Justice Programs.
The report also proposes $15 million cuts to both the COPS Tribal Resources Grant Program and the Tribal Youth Program. Funding for tribal assistance within OJP was also cut, receiving only $38 million – $62 million short of the approximate $100 million initially proposed in President Barack Obama’s FY 2012 budget request.
NCAI officials said the funding cut is a failure of significant proportions and will make the act’s intended goals difficult to attain."
"According to studies, Indian reservations nationwide face violent crime rates more than 2.5 times the national rate, and some reservations face more than 20 times the national rate of violence.
WASHINGTON – Leaders of the National Congress of American Indians said the U.S. Congress has leveled a major setback to Indian tribes in need of critical resources to combat the highest crime rates in the country.
Congress’s decision to cut more than $90 million from proposed funding for Department of Justice measures in Indian Country leaves tribal law enforcement and federal personnel with far too few resources to fight crime on tribal lands, NCAI officials said.
Signed into law in 2010 with bipartisan support, the Tribal Law & Order Act sets out to reduce crime in Indian Country by making improvements to the way criminal justice is administered on tribal lands and reauthorizing critical tribal justice programs.
On Nov. 14, Congress released the fiscal year 2012 Appropriations Conference Report for Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies. The report shows funding cuts for tribal justice programs across the board and did not include a proposed 7 percent tribal set-aside for all discretionary Office of Justice Programs.
The report also proposes $15 million cuts to both the COPS Tribal Resources Grant Program and the Tribal Youth Program. Funding for tribal assistance within OJP was also cut, receiving only $38 million – $62 million short of the approximate $100 million initially proposed in President Barack Obama’s FY 2012 budget request.
NCAI officials said the funding cut is a failure of significant proportions and will make the act’s intended goals difficult to attain."
Monday, November 21, 2011
Oddly, Texas can teach the UK a thing or two on criminal justice | Ian Birrell | Comment is free | The Guardian
Oddly, Texas can teach the UK a thing or two on criminal justice | Ian Birrell | Comment is free | The Guardian
"Hang 'em high Texas is not the first place you might look for lessons in criminal justice. The lone star state prides itself on
its toughness, with more executions and fewer bleeding hearts than
elsewhere in America, the most hardline state in a nation that locks
up more miscreants than anywhere else in the world. But it is the unlikely centre of a revolution in prison reform sweeping the US, overthrowing decades of failed polices and sterile debate driven by politicians scared of being seen as soft. The state has cut crime, costs and the numbers in jail to such an extent it has just shut a high-security prison for the first time in history.
What makes this prison revolt even more unexpected is that it is led by some of the most conservative figures in politics. They have decided – correctly – that an expensive prison system repeatedly locking up the same people is a sign of failure. As a result, they have endorsed policies traditionally seen as liberal to keep people out of jail.
The right in Britain should take note as our prison population hits record highs. Just as in this country, politicians in Texas were desperate to be seen as being tough on crime. There was reckless rhetoric and endless headline-grabbing legislation, including the ludicrous three-strikes law that led to life sentences for a third offence – even when that was stealing a slice of pizza.
Inevitably, prison populations and spending soared. The costs of incarceration rose fourfold in two decades. America now accounts for a quarter of all prisoners on the planet – and two-thirds of new inmates are recidivists.
Then Texas decided enough was enough. Four years ago, it was told to spend another $2bn on 17,332 new prison places. Instead, the state opted to invest in halfway houses to help those leaving prison and schemes to aid addicted and mentally ill offenders. Since then, taxpayers have saved a billion dollars, violent crime has fallen to its lowest level for three decades, and the right has seen the light on criminal justice. More than a dozen states have made similar moves, with some of the most doughty bastions of conservatism softening sentencing policies and shifting emphasis to treatment, training, early release and community-based punishments. A campaign called Right On Crime has been launched to promote the idea, supported by conservative standard-bearers such as Jeb Bush and Newt Gingrich.
The driving force was financial. But it makes perfect sense for the right. As the group's website says, turning law-breakers into law-abiding citizens should be a conservative priority because it advances public safety and the rule of law. The cause unites libertarians wanting to scale back the state, fiscal conservatives seeking to reduce spending, social conservatives concerned by family breakdown, and a religious right that believes in redemption.
Is it too much to hope for a similar outbreak of common sense in Britain? Among the biggest disappointments of the Blair and Brown governments was their pandering to the right on crime, with 28 criminal justice bills. The coalition has tried to adopt a more evidence-based approach, with an emphasis on rehabilitation and payment by results, but is wobbling in the face of fury on the backbenches and in the media."
"Hang 'em high Texas is not the first place you might look for lessons in criminal justice. The lone star state prides itself on
its toughness, with more executions and fewer bleeding hearts than
elsewhere in America, the most hardline state in a nation that locks
up more miscreants than anywhere else in the world. But it is the unlikely centre of a revolution in prison reform sweeping the US, overthrowing decades of failed polices and sterile debate driven by politicians scared of being seen as soft. The state has cut crime, costs and the numbers in jail to such an extent it has just shut a high-security prison for the first time in history.
What makes this prison revolt even more unexpected is that it is led by some of the most conservative figures in politics. They have decided – correctly – that an expensive prison system repeatedly locking up the same people is a sign of failure. As a result, they have endorsed policies traditionally seen as liberal to keep people out of jail.
The right in Britain should take note as our prison population hits record highs. Just as in this country, politicians in Texas were desperate to be seen as being tough on crime. There was reckless rhetoric and endless headline-grabbing legislation, including the ludicrous three-strikes law that led to life sentences for a third offence – even when that was stealing a slice of pizza.
Inevitably, prison populations and spending soared. The costs of incarceration rose fourfold in two decades. America now accounts for a quarter of all prisoners on the planet – and two-thirds of new inmates are recidivists.
Then Texas decided enough was enough. Four years ago, it was told to spend another $2bn on 17,332 new prison places. Instead, the state opted to invest in halfway houses to help those leaving prison and schemes to aid addicted and mentally ill offenders. Since then, taxpayers have saved a billion dollars, violent crime has fallen to its lowest level for three decades, and the right has seen the light on criminal justice. More than a dozen states have made similar moves, with some of the most doughty bastions of conservatism softening sentencing policies and shifting emphasis to treatment, training, early release and community-based punishments. A campaign called Right On Crime has been launched to promote the idea, supported by conservative standard-bearers such as Jeb Bush and Newt Gingrich.
The driving force was financial. But it makes perfect sense for the right. As the group's website says, turning law-breakers into law-abiding citizens should be a conservative priority because it advances public safety and the rule of law. The cause unites libertarians wanting to scale back the state, fiscal conservatives seeking to reduce spending, social conservatives concerned by family breakdown, and a religious right that believes in redemption.
Is it too much to hope for a similar outbreak of common sense in Britain? Among the biggest disappointments of the Blair and Brown governments was their pandering to the right on crime, with 28 criminal justice bills. The coalition has tried to adopt a more evidence-based approach, with an emphasis on rehabilitation and payment by results, but is wobbling in the face of fury on the backbenches and in the media."
Friday, November 18, 2011
Youngstown News, Mental health courts: A good idea then and even better now
Youngstown News, Mental health courts: A good idea then and even better now
"Ohio Supreme Court Justice Eve- lyn Lundberg Stratton and Attorney General Mike DeWine are once again collaborating in the important work of breaking a pattern that too often ends with mentally ill people facing criminal charges and ending up in jail or prison.
Nearly a decade ago, Justice Stratton was working her way around the state touting federal legislation that had been authored by then-U.S. Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, and U.S. Rep. Ted Strickland, D-6th, that encouraged development of mental health courts. At the time, we urged Mahoning County to pursue establishment of one, and it did so.
Today, Mahoning County Common Pleas Judge Maureen A. Sweeney presides over the court, which is one of 37 in the state. The court works with mental health agencies in the county to provide a better, cheaper and more just alternative than jail for nonviolent offenders who are battling mental health issues.
The movement toward recognizing the need for intervention and an alternative to incarceration followed the deinstitutionalization movement and the closing of state mental health facilities decades ago. The motives of that movement may have been pure and even necessary in an age when too many people were too easily confined to institutions. But the effect was also to put many people on the streets who still had mental health issues and who were, for a variety of reasons, not receiving treatment or medication.
And in that environment, those people ended up arrested, in court and, often, in prison. Back in 2000, the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction said it was housing 6,393 mentally ill inmates, 3,051 of whom were classified as severely mentally disabled. Five years later, mentally ill inmates were still an enormous burden on the Department of Corrections, with $64 million spent in 2006 on mental health care for inmates — more than was spent on food for all inmates."
"Ohio Supreme Court Justice Eve- lyn Lundberg Stratton and Attorney General Mike DeWine are once again collaborating in the important work of breaking a pattern that too often ends with mentally ill people facing criminal charges and ending up in jail or prison.
Nearly a decade ago, Justice Stratton was working her way around the state touting federal legislation that had been authored by then-U.S. Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, and U.S. Rep. Ted Strickland, D-6th, that encouraged development of mental health courts. At the time, we urged Mahoning County to pursue establishment of one, and it did so.
Today, Mahoning County Common Pleas Judge Maureen A. Sweeney presides over the court, which is one of 37 in the state. The court works with mental health agencies in the county to provide a better, cheaper and more just alternative than jail for nonviolent offenders who are battling mental health issues.
The movement toward recognizing the need for intervention and an alternative to incarceration followed the deinstitutionalization movement and the closing of state mental health facilities decades ago. The motives of that movement may have been pure and even necessary in an age when too many people were too easily confined to institutions. But the effect was also to put many people on the streets who still had mental health issues and who were, for a variety of reasons, not receiving treatment or medication.
And in that environment, those people ended up arrested, in court and, often, in prison. Back in 2000, the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction said it was housing 6,393 mentally ill inmates, 3,051 of whom were classified as severely mentally disabled. Five years later, mentally ill inmates were still an enormous burden on the Department of Corrections, with $64 million spent in 2006 on mental health care for inmates — more than was spent on food for all inmates."
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Quebec Justice minister challenges senator over anti-crime bill
Quebec Justice minister challenges senator over anti-crime bill
"QUEBEC — Justice Minister Jean-Marc Fournier issued a challenge Wednesday to Senator Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu, after the Conservative senator said Quebec is “soft on crime,” to come up with scientific evidence that Ottawa’s proposal for stiffer sentences will work better.
“Give us one document,” Fournier told reporters, calling Boisvenu’s position “demagogic.”
“I can give you until Friday,” the minister added.
“If they are right, they will not be afraid to have a debate with scientific studies in the name of victims in Quebec and across Canada.”
Fournier is incensed that the Harper government is ignoring his advice and pushing ahead with C-10, the Safe Streets and Communities Act, an omnibus bill calling for mandatory and longer sentences, with sweeping amendments to the Criminal Code and related laws.
“Stop the C-10 express and give us time to do things properly,” Fournier told reporters.
Boisvenu said at an Ottawa news conference that Fournier’s assessment of C-10 is wrong.
Boisvenu’s daughter Julie was kidnapped, raped and murdered in 2002 by a 27-year-old man out of prison on parole after being convicted of a sexual offence.
The Quebec minister objects that changes in C-10 to the Youth Criminal Justice Act, to treat some young offenders as adults, would undo Quebec’s practice of counselling and rehabilitating minors who commit crimes so they do not become repeat offenders.
Boisvenu said only three per cent of young offenders would be effected by C-10, those committing violent crimes, such as murder or aggravated sexual assault."
Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Quebec+Justice+minister+challenges+senator+over+anti+crime+bill/5722274/story.html#ixzz1dyqf1Tzj
"QUEBEC — Justice Minister Jean-Marc Fournier issued a challenge Wednesday to Senator Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu, after the Conservative senator said Quebec is “soft on crime,” to come up with scientific evidence that Ottawa’s proposal for stiffer sentences will work better.
“Give us one document,” Fournier told reporters, calling Boisvenu’s position “demagogic.”
“I can give you until Friday,” the minister added.
“If they are right, they will not be afraid to have a debate with scientific studies in the name of victims in Quebec and across Canada.”
Fournier is incensed that the Harper government is ignoring his advice and pushing ahead with C-10, the Safe Streets and Communities Act, an omnibus bill calling for mandatory and longer sentences, with sweeping amendments to the Criminal Code and related laws.
“Stop the C-10 express and give us time to do things properly,” Fournier told reporters.
Boisvenu said at an Ottawa news conference that Fournier’s assessment of C-10 is wrong.
Boisvenu’s daughter Julie was kidnapped, raped and murdered in 2002 by a 27-year-old man out of prison on parole after being convicted of a sexual offence.
The Quebec minister objects that changes in C-10 to the Youth Criminal Justice Act, to treat some young offenders as adults, would undo Quebec’s practice of counselling and rehabilitating minors who commit crimes so they do not become repeat offenders.
Boisvenu said only three per cent of young offenders would be effected by C-10, those committing violent crimes, such as murder or aggravated sexual assault."
Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Quebec+Justice+minister+challenges+senator+over+anti+crime+bill/5722274/story.html#ixzz1dyqf1Tzj
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Lying on the Internet could soon be a federal crime
Lying on the Internet could soon be a federal crime
"The US Department of Justice wants to make it a federal crime to violate the “terms of service” of any website, reports Declan McCullagh at CNet. According to this interpretation, breaching the terms of service of websites — which can be done by simply using a fake name on Facebook, lying about your weight on a dating site, or using Google if you’re under the age of 18 — could make you a criminal.
According to a leaked statement that Richard Downing, the DoJ’s deputy computer crime chief, will reportedly deliver to Congress on Wednesday, the DoJ will argue that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) — an amendment to the Counterfeit Access Device and Abuse Act generally used to prosecute hacking and other serious cyber-crimes, and which went into effect way back in 1986 — must give prosecutors the ability to charge people “based upon a violation of terms of service or similar contractual agreement with an employer or provider.”
According to Downing, the expansion of this law is necessary for law enforcement to prosecute individuals for identity theft, privacy invasion or the misuse of government databases, among other infractions. Limiting “prosecutions based upon a violation of terms of service… would make it difficult or impossible to deter and address serious insider threats through prosecution,” Downing is expected to say.
Just to reiterate, in case you didn’t catch that sly turn of legalese, the DoJ is saying that not allowing them to prosecute people for violating websites’ terms of service would make it “more difficult or impossible” to scare people with the threat of prosecution. Yay, America!
Of course, if the DoJ is permitted to act upon the CFAA in the way they want, a vast number of Internet users would be in violation of federal law, especially because almost nobody even reads terms of service, let alone follows them to the letter. Fortunately, some very smart and authoritative people will be present to argue this very fact.
Orin S. Kerr, professor of George Washington University Law School, will testify against the Department of Justice, arguing that the DoJ’s interpretation of the CFAA is “extraordinarily broad.”
For example, Kerr explains that Google’s terms of service stipulate that if ““you are not of legal age to form a binding contract with Google,” you are forbidden from using any of its sites or services. Seeing as the legal age of contract in most states is 18, “a 17-year-old who conducts a Google search in the course of researching a term paper has likely violated Google’s Terms of Service. According to the Justice Department’s interpretation of the statute, he or she is a criminal,” writes Kerr."
"The US Department of Justice wants to make it a federal crime to violate the “terms of service” of any website, reports Declan McCullagh at CNet. According to this interpretation, breaching the terms of service of websites — which can be done by simply using a fake name on Facebook, lying about your weight on a dating site, or using Google if you’re under the age of 18 — could make you a criminal.
According to a leaked statement that Richard Downing, the DoJ’s deputy computer crime chief, will reportedly deliver to Congress on Wednesday, the DoJ will argue that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) — an amendment to the Counterfeit Access Device and Abuse Act generally used to prosecute hacking and other serious cyber-crimes, and which went into effect way back in 1986 — must give prosecutors the ability to charge people “based upon a violation of terms of service or similar contractual agreement with an employer or provider.”
According to Downing, the expansion of this law is necessary for law enforcement to prosecute individuals for identity theft, privacy invasion or the misuse of government databases, among other infractions. Limiting “prosecutions based upon a violation of terms of service… would make it difficult or impossible to deter and address serious insider threats through prosecution,” Downing is expected to say.
Just to reiterate, in case you didn’t catch that sly turn of legalese, the DoJ is saying that not allowing them to prosecute people for violating websites’ terms of service would make it “more difficult or impossible” to scare people with the threat of prosecution. Yay, America!
Of course, if the DoJ is permitted to act upon the CFAA in the way they want, a vast number of Internet users would be in violation of federal law, especially because almost nobody even reads terms of service, let alone follows them to the letter. Fortunately, some very smart and authoritative people will be present to argue this very fact.
Orin S. Kerr, professor of George Washington University Law School, will testify against the Department of Justice, arguing that the DoJ’s interpretation of the CFAA is “extraordinarily broad.”
For example, Kerr explains that Google’s terms of service stipulate that if ““you are not of legal age to form a binding contract with Google,” you are forbidden from using any of its sites or services. Seeing as the legal age of contract in most states is 18, “a 17-year-old who conducts a Google search in the course of researching a term paper has likely violated Google’s Terms of Service. According to the Justice Department’s interpretation of the statute, he or she is a criminal,” writes Kerr."
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Few Felons Should Have Guns - Room for Debate - NYTimes.com
Few Felons Should Have Guns - Room for Debate - NYTimes.com
"Laws that strip felons of their right to vote after they have served their sentences are bad public policy. I see no public interest in denying individuals their voting rights. Such policies can encourage discriminatory criminal justice policies and worsen the mistrust many minority communities feel toward law enforcement.
In contrast, there is a clear public interest in restricting the ability of felons to possess firearms. Michael Luo’s investigative report in The Times clearly demonstrates the harmful effects of allowing felons to have guns. As Luo reports, research has shown that denying handgun purchases to people convicted of serious misdemeanors reduces the risk of committing new violent crimes by 20 to 30 percent. Restoring felons’ right to legally possess firearms comes at a cost: more gun violence and innocent lives lost.
Although there is a division of opinion in the U.S. about guns generally, polls show overwhelming support for policies designed to keep guns from people with a history of criminality. And public opinion is consistent with the data on ex-convicts and crime. Individuals convicted of crimes, even nonviolent misdemeanors, are on average many times more likely than law-abiding citizens to subsequently commit acts of violence."
"Laws that strip felons of their right to vote after they have served their sentences are bad public policy. I see no public interest in denying individuals their voting rights. Such policies can encourage discriminatory criminal justice policies and worsen the mistrust many minority communities feel toward law enforcement.
In contrast, there is a clear public interest in restricting the ability of felons to possess firearms. Michael Luo’s investigative report in The Times clearly demonstrates the harmful effects of allowing felons to have guns. As Luo reports, research has shown that denying handgun purchases to people convicted of serious misdemeanors reduces the risk of committing new violent crimes by 20 to 30 percent. Restoring felons’ right to legally possess firearms comes at a cost: more gun violence and innocent lives lost.
Although there is a division of opinion in the U.S. about guns generally, polls show overwhelming support for policies designed to keep guns from people with a history of criminality. And public opinion is consistent with the data on ex-convicts and crime. Individuals convicted of crimes, even nonviolent misdemeanors, are on average many times more likely than law-abiding citizens to subsequently commit acts of violence."
Thursday, November 10, 2011
N.J. launches program to help veterans in criminal justice system | State | NewJerseyNewsroom.com -- Your State. Your News.
N.J. launches program to help veterans in criminal justice system | State | NewJerseyNewsroom.com -- Your State. Your News.
"The state government has teamed up with federal, and Atlantic County officials to launch a pilot program in in the county aimed at identifying and providing community-based services to veterans and active duty military personnel who become involved in the criminal justice system.
State Attorney General Paula T. Dow announced Wednesday in Mays Landing that a two-year Veterans Pilot Initiative will attempt to provide community-based programs such as mental health and substance abuse treatment, anger management and family counseling to eligible veterans and active duty military personnel who find themselves in trouble with the law and the crime appears related to a substance abuse or mental health issue.
The program will offer eligible criminal defendants who are veterans and/or active duty military personnel with a substance abuse problem or mental health illness the opportunity to receive counseling or treatment under strict guidelines and in lieu of incarceration. Prosecutors will work with licensed treatment professionals in identifying viable participants and with both public and private defense counsel on plea agreements that ensure compliance with a treatment regimen.
“The collaboration among the agencies involved in the initiative reflects growing awareness of the strains our men and women in uniform experience when they return home from war,” Dow said. “Unfortunately, this can result in drug or mental health issues that result in criminal activity. For those who serve in our armed forces, where we can, and where it is appropriate, the justice system should marshal its resources to help get them back on the right path.”
“I am proud that this initiative will be led by the men and women in Atlantic County for the next two years,” Atlantic Prosecutor, Theodore F.L. Housel said. “This office has always understood the issues facing veterans. Those of us who were Assistant Prosecutors in the late 1970’s and 1980’s vividly remember the Vietnam veterans who became involved with the criminal justice system because of experiences that occurred overseas. Like those individuals, the men and women who have served our country in Iraq and Afghanistan deserve our understanding and help. Combat-related trauma can have devastating effects on the physical and mental well-being of our soldiers for years following deployment; this program is designed to ameliorate some of those effects.”
As part of the program, if a person who is charged with committing a crime in Atlantic County is a veteran, a member of the reserve or active duty military personnel, he or she will be screened and evaluated by a licensed clinician from Jewish Family Services, a contracted service provider in Atlantic County."
"The state government has teamed up with federal, and Atlantic County officials to launch a pilot program in in the county aimed at identifying and providing community-based services to veterans and active duty military personnel who become involved in the criminal justice system.
State Attorney General Paula T. Dow announced Wednesday in Mays Landing that a two-year Veterans Pilot Initiative will attempt to provide community-based programs such as mental health and substance abuse treatment, anger management and family counseling to eligible veterans and active duty military personnel who find themselves in trouble with the law and the crime appears related to a substance abuse or mental health issue.
The program will offer eligible criminal defendants who are veterans and/or active duty military personnel with a substance abuse problem or mental health illness the opportunity to receive counseling or treatment under strict guidelines and in lieu of incarceration. Prosecutors will work with licensed treatment professionals in identifying viable participants and with both public and private defense counsel on plea agreements that ensure compliance with a treatment regimen.
“The collaboration among the agencies involved in the initiative reflects growing awareness of the strains our men and women in uniform experience when they return home from war,” Dow said. “Unfortunately, this can result in drug or mental health issues that result in criminal activity. For those who serve in our armed forces, where we can, and where it is appropriate, the justice system should marshal its resources to help get them back on the right path.”
“I am proud that this initiative will be led by the men and women in Atlantic County for the next two years,” Atlantic Prosecutor, Theodore F.L. Housel said. “This office has always understood the issues facing veterans. Those of us who were Assistant Prosecutors in the late 1970’s and 1980’s vividly remember the Vietnam veterans who became involved with the criminal justice system because of experiences that occurred overseas. Like those individuals, the men and women who have served our country in Iraq and Afghanistan deserve our understanding and help. Combat-related trauma can have devastating effects on the physical and mental well-being of our soldiers for years following deployment; this program is designed to ameliorate some of those effects.”
As part of the program, if a person who is charged with committing a crime in Atlantic County is a veteran, a member of the reserve or active duty military personnel, he or she will be screened and evaluated by a licensed clinician from Jewish Family Services, a contracted service provider in Atlantic County."
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
10 convicts are offered last chance in new police program
10 convicts are offered last chance in new police program
"It was an intervention of community proportions — with the added muscle of local, state and federal law enforcement and criminal justice agencies — for 10 of the worst repeat violent offenders in Madison.
And at least some of those who earned the distinction were glad to be part of the first call-in Tuesday for a new Madison Police Department initiative whose message rang out repeatedly from representatives of the FBI to the City Attorney’s Office to community members.
“Your violence will no longer be tolerated in this community,” Madison Police Chief Noble Wray told the 10. “Consider yourself under a microscope.”
Christopher Cole of the FBI said: “We know who you are. We’re watching,” referring to the agency’s surveillance and wiretapping.
But along with the promise of swift arrest and prosecution — in federal court for gun, drug and even tax offenses — and the full force of the law crashing down on them came offers of help in finding a job and housing, getting counseling and earning a GED.
“I’m glad I came,” said Carlton Harris, 30, of Madison, who got out of prison in May after serving six years for possession of firearms. “The resources was what I liked the most.”
Once involved in gangs, Harris said he plans to get married Nov. 25 and hopes to find a better job, further his education and benefit from mentoring.
“I think that it’s a very good thing,” his fiance, Angela Jadoo, said of the program."
Read more: http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime_and_courts/convicts-are-offered-last-chance-in-new-police-program/article_03baa4df-9f22-5397-aa26-cbe59ad93b1c.html#ixzz1dE5luaRu
"It was an intervention of community proportions — with the added muscle of local, state and federal law enforcement and criminal justice agencies — for 10 of the worst repeat violent offenders in Madison.
And at least some of those who earned the distinction were glad to be part of the first call-in Tuesday for a new Madison Police Department initiative whose message rang out repeatedly from representatives of the FBI to the City Attorney’s Office to community members.
“Your violence will no longer be tolerated in this community,” Madison Police Chief Noble Wray told the 10. “Consider yourself under a microscope.”
Christopher Cole of the FBI said: “We know who you are. We’re watching,” referring to the agency’s surveillance and wiretapping.
But along with the promise of swift arrest and prosecution — in federal court for gun, drug and even tax offenses — and the full force of the law crashing down on them came offers of help in finding a job and housing, getting counseling and earning a GED.
“I’m glad I came,” said Carlton Harris, 30, of Madison, who got out of prison in May after serving six years for possession of firearms. “The resources was what I liked the most.”
Once involved in gangs, Harris said he plans to get married Nov. 25 and hopes to find a better job, further his education and benefit from mentoring.
“I think that it’s a very good thing,” his fiance, Angela Jadoo, said of the program."
Read more: http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime_and_courts/convicts-are-offered-last-chance-in-new-police-program/article_03baa4df-9f22-5397-aa26-cbe59ad93b1c.html#ixzz1dE5luaRu
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
U.S. Supreme Court rejects killer's appeal - Houston Chronicle
U.S. Supreme Court rejects killer's appeal - Houston Chronicle
"The U.S. Supreme Court today rejected Houston killer Duane Buck's request that it review his death sentence - a punishment handed down despite former Texas Attorney John Cornyn's assessment that it might have been tainted by racial considerations.
The high court stopped Buck's Sept. 15 execution in order to decide whether to take up the case. Buck, 48, was sentenced to die for the July 1995 murders of his former girlfriend, Debra Gardner, and her friend, Kenneth Butler. Buck also shot his sister, Phyllis Taylor, in the chest at point-blank range, but she survived and later argued that the killer should be spared.
The approaching execution of Buck, an African American, brought other pleas for mercy, including one from a former Harris County assistant district attorney who had assisted in his prosecution.
At issue was testimony in the trial's punishment phase from psychologist Walter Quijano, who, on cross-examination, said being black could contribute to the killer's "future dangerousness" in prison. Future dangerousness is a key factor jurors consider before assessing a death sentence.
Cornyn in 2000 identified Buck's case as one of six that may have been compromised by Quijano's testimony The other five convicted killers ultimately received new punishment hearings and again were sentenced to death."
"The U.S. Supreme Court today rejected Houston killer Duane Buck's request that it review his death sentence - a punishment handed down despite former Texas Attorney John Cornyn's assessment that it might have been tainted by racial considerations.
The high court stopped Buck's Sept. 15 execution in order to decide whether to take up the case. Buck, 48, was sentenced to die for the July 1995 murders of his former girlfriend, Debra Gardner, and her friend, Kenneth Butler. Buck also shot his sister, Phyllis Taylor, in the chest at point-blank range, but she survived and later argued that the killer should be spared.
The approaching execution of Buck, an African American, brought other pleas for mercy, including one from a former Harris County assistant district attorney who had assisted in his prosecution.
At issue was testimony in the trial's punishment phase from psychologist Walter Quijano, who, on cross-examination, said being black could contribute to the killer's "future dangerousness" in prison. Future dangerousness is a key factor jurors consider before assessing a death sentence.
Cornyn in 2000 identified Buck's case as one of six that may have been compromised by Quijano's testimony The other five convicted killers ultimately received new punishment hearings and again were sentenced to death."
U.S. Supreme Court rejects killer's appeal - Houston Chronicle
U.S. Supreme Court rejects killer's appeal - Houston Chronicle
"The U.S. Supreme Court today rejected Houston killer Duane Buck's request that it review his death sentence - a punishment handed down despite former Texas Attorney John Cornyn's assessment that it might have been tainted by racial considerations.
The high court stopped Buck's Sept. 15 execution in order to decide whether to take up the case. Buck, 48, was sentenced to die for the July 1995 murders of his former girlfriend, Debra Gardner, and her friend, Kenneth Butler. Buck also shot his sister, Phyllis Taylor, in the chest at point-blank range, but she survived and later argued that the killer should be spared.
The approaching execution of Buck, an African American, brought other pleas for mercy, including one from a former Harris County assistant district attorney who had assisted in his prosecution.
At issue was testimony in the trial's punishment phase from psychologist Walter Quijano, who, on cross-examination, said being black could contribute to the killer's "future dangerousness" in prison. Future dangerousness is a key factor jurors consider before assessing a death sentence.
Cornyn in 2000 identified Buck's case as one of six that may have been compromised by Quijano's testimony The other five convicted killers ultimately received new punishment hearings and again were sentenced to death."
"The U.S. Supreme Court today rejected Houston killer Duane Buck's request that it review his death sentence - a punishment handed down despite former Texas Attorney John Cornyn's assessment that it might have been tainted by racial considerations.
The high court stopped Buck's Sept. 15 execution in order to decide whether to take up the case. Buck, 48, was sentenced to die for the July 1995 murders of his former girlfriend, Debra Gardner, and her friend, Kenneth Butler. Buck also shot his sister, Phyllis Taylor, in the chest at point-blank range, but she survived and later argued that the killer should be spared.
The approaching execution of Buck, an African American, brought other pleas for mercy, including one from a former Harris County assistant district attorney who had assisted in his prosecution.
At issue was testimony in the trial's punishment phase from psychologist Walter Quijano, who, on cross-examination, said being black could contribute to the killer's "future dangerousness" in prison. Future dangerousness is a key factor jurors consider before assessing a death sentence.
Cornyn in 2000 identified Buck's case as one of six that may have been compromised by Quijano's testimony The other five convicted killers ultimately received new punishment hearings and again were sentenced to death."
Monday, November 7, 2011
Crime victim rights advocates seek constitutional amendment - chicagotribune.com
Crime victim rights advocates seek constitutional amendment - chicagotribune.com
"Years after her 11-year-old daughter was sexually assaulted, Denise Rotheimer wants the right to sue the Lake County prosecutors who sent the offender to jail, saying they defamed her child by telling the judge that the girl "had issues."
In Cook County, Maria Ramirez believes prosecutors violated her rights by refusing to let her file a complaint after she was threatened by relatives of a juvenile charged with her son's 2006 murder.
Both women found that — after floundering through a complex criminal justice system that critics say is weighted toward ensuring the rights of the accused — their rights as crime victims were unenforceable.
Victims of violent crimes "are not the people you want to further victimize or betray," said Rotheimer, who along with her daughter, Jasmine Jimenez, now 21, has filed a federal lawsuit against the Lake County's state's attorney and the state of Illinois. She hopes it leads to a precedent that prosecutors can be held legally accountable.
"I am saying, let's have a right to be able to hold accountable a person who violates or denies you your rights to justice, prosecutor or not," Rotheimer said.
The Illinois Constitution already provides 10 rights for crime victims, including that they be treated with respect, given notice of court hearings and be allowed to attend trials and present victim-impact statements.
But if those rights are violated, there's no mechanism for a crime victim to appeal to a higher court, said Cindy Hora, who heads the Illinois attorney general's crime victim services division. And Illinois is the only state whose constitution specifically prohibits victims from seeking legal remedy through an appeal, Hora said."
"Years after her 11-year-old daughter was sexually assaulted, Denise Rotheimer wants the right to sue the Lake County prosecutors who sent the offender to jail, saying they defamed her child by telling the judge that the girl "had issues."
In Cook County, Maria Ramirez believes prosecutors violated her rights by refusing to let her file a complaint after she was threatened by relatives of a juvenile charged with her son's 2006 murder.
Both women found that — after floundering through a complex criminal justice system that critics say is weighted toward ensuring the rights of the accused — their rights as crime victims were unenforceable.
Victims of violent crimes "are not the people you want to further victimize or betray," said Rotheimer, who along with her daughter, Jasmine Jimenez, now 21, has filed a federal lawsuit against the Lake County's state's attorney and the state of Illinois. She hopes it leads to a precedent that prosecutors can be held legally accountable.
"I am saying, let's have a right to be able to hold accountable a person who violates or denies you your rights to justice, prosecutor or not," Rotheimer said.
The Illinois Constitution already provides 10 rights for crime victims, including that they be treated with respect, given notice of court hearings and be allowed to attend trials and present victim-impact statements.
But if those rights are violated, there's no mechanism for a crime victim to appeal to a higher court, said Cindy Hora, who heads the Illinois attorney general's crime victim services division. And Illinois is the only state whose constitution specifically prohibits victims from seeking legal remedy through an appeal, Hora said."
Friday, November 4, 2011
Katy Welter: Smart Criminal Justice Policies Gain Momentum in Chicago's Cook County
Katy Welter: Smart Criminal Justice Policies Gain Momentum in Chicago's Cook County
"County and city officials have taken bold yet prudent steps toward sensible, cost-effective public safety policies. The county has expanded use of electronic monitoring and the city is now considering issuing a fine in lieu of arrest for marijuana possession -- a move many suburbs have already made.
Both plans aim to relieve the mounting fiscal, political, and humanitarian costs imposed by crowded jails and overburdened police and courts. They also represent incremental steps toward fundamental, systemic reform.
These policy changes will save taxpayers tens of millions of dollars. The Chicago Reader recently reported that city and county officers made approximately 28,000 arrests for marijuana possession last year.
The vast majority of these cases were ultimately dismissed, but not before racking up the substantial processing costs of paperwork and preliminary court hearings. In the case of felony arrests, many defendants who are unable to meet even modest bail requirements spend days or weeks in the county's notoriously crowded jail only to have their cases dismissed.
Electronic monitoring provides a cost-effective alternative to imprisoning a non-violent defendants while their case is pending in court. Offenders wear GPS devices that ensure high rates of compliance and safety.
Since 2009, the county has increased the number of defendants on EM from fewer than 100 to 865 today. That number is now scheduled to jump since County Board President Preckwinkle awarded Sheriff Dart $1 million in October for expansion of the EM program. This is money well spent. EM costs about $65 a day -- less than half of the daily cost to confine someone in Cook County Jail.
Taking a different approach to excessive criminal justice costs, Chicago's City Council this week will consider reducing the penalty for possession small amounts of marijuana possession. Under the proposal, individuals caught with 10 grams (approximately 1/3 of an ounce) or less will be fined $200. Presently, possession of 10 grams or less is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail."
"County and city officials have taken bold yet prudent steps toward sensible, cost-effective public safety policies. The county has expanded use of electronic monitoring and the city is now considering issuing a fine in lieu of arrest for marijuana possession -- a move many suburbs have already made.
Both plans aim to relieve the mounting fiscal, political, and humanitarian costs imposed by crowded jails and overburdened police and courts. They also represent incremental steps toward fundamental, systemic reform.
These policy changes will save taxpayers tens of millions of dollars. The Chicago Reader recently reported that city and county officers made approximately 28,000 arrests for marijuana possession last year.
The vast majority of these cases were ultimately dismissed, but not before racking up the substantial processing costs of paperwork and preliminary court hearings. In the case of felony arrests, many defendants who are unable to meet even modest bail requirements spend days or weeks in the county's notoriously crowded jail only to have their cases dismissed.
Electronic monitoring provides a cost-effective alternative to imprisoning a non-violent defendants while their case is pending in court. Offenders wear GPS devices that ensure high rates of compliance and safety.
Since 2009, the county has increased the number of defendants on EM from fewer than 100 to 865 today. That number is now scheduled to jump since County Board President Preckwinkle awarded Sheriff Dart $1 million in October for expansion of the EM program. This is money well spent. EM costs about $65 a day -- less than half of the daily cost to confine someone in Cook County Jail.
Taking a different approach to excessive criminal justice costs, Chicago's City Council this week will consider reducing the penalty for possession small amounts of marijuana possession. Under the proposal, individuals caught with 10 grams (approximately 1/3 of an ounce) or less will be fined $200. Presently, possession of 10 grams or less is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail."
Thursday, November 3, 2011
The Senate's Latest (Unnecessary) Scandal: A Criminal-Justice Commission - Andrew Cohen - Politics - The Atlantic
The Senate's Latest (Unnecessary) Scandal: A Criminal-Justice Commission - Andrew Cohen - Politics - The Atlantic
"Another month, another dismaying example of a smart measure stymied in Congress by Republican intransigence. This time, 43 GOP members of the Senate blocked passage of legislation that would have created a new National Criminal Justice Commission, a bipartisan group designed to help figure out how to bring some order to the chaos that currently exists in the nation's criminal justice systems. The cops supported the bill.
The American Civil Liberties Union supported it. But Senate Republicans wouldn't even allow a merits vote on it. On October 19th, they filibustered.
Predictably, the primary sponsor of the measure, Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), was furious. One of the more conservative members of the Democratic caucus, and someone with legitimate street cred when it comes to law and order, Webb took to the Senate floor Tuesday and delivered these biting remarks:
Mr. President, eleven days ago all but four of the Republicans in this body filibustered a common-sense piece of legislation that would have created a national commission designed to bring together some of the best minds in America to examine our broken and frequently dysfunctional criminal justice system, and to make recommendations as to how we can make it more effective, more fair, and more cost-efficient.
This legislation was the product of more than four years of effort. It was paid for. It would have gone out of business after 18 months. It was balanced philosophically. It guaranteed equal representation among Democrats and Republicans in its membership. I must say that at first I was stunned at the filibuster at the hands of 43 Republicans. But on the other hand, Mr. President, it is impossible not to notice, over the past two years, the lamentable decline in bipartisan behavior in this body, even in addressing serious issues of actual governance. I say this with a great deal of regret, both personally and politically.""
"Another month, another dismaying example of a smart measure stymied in Congress by Republican intransigence. This time, 43 GOP members of the Senate blocked passage of legislation that would have created a new National Criminal Justice Commission, a bipartisan group designed to help figure out how to bring some order to the chaos that currently exists in the nation's criminal justice systems. The cops supported the bill.
The American Civil Liberties Union supported it. But Senate Republicans wouldn't even allow a merits vote on it. On October 19th, they filibustered.
Predictably, the primary sponsor of the measure, Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), was furious. One of the more conservative members of the Democratic caucus, and someone with legitimate street cred when it comes to law and order, Webb took to the Senate floor Tuesday and delivered these biting remarks:
Mr. President, eleven days ago all but four of the Republicans in this body filibustered a common-sense piece of legislation that would have created a national commission designed to bring together some of the best minds in America to examine our broken and frequently dysfunctional criminal justice system, and to make recommendations as to how we can make it more effective, more fair, and more cost-efficient.
This legislation was the product of more than four years of effort. It was paid for. It would have gone out of business after 18 months. It was balanced philosophically. It guaranteed equal representation among Democrats and Republicans in its membership. I must say that at first I was stunned at the filibuster at the hands of 43 Republicans. But on the other hand, Mr. President, it is impossible not to notice, over the past two years, the lamentable decline in bipartisan behavior in this body, even in addressing serious issues of actual governance. I say this with a great deal of regret, both personally and politically.""
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Eric E. Sterling: Congress on Speed: Partisan Conflict Led to Many Problems in 1986 Drug Law
Eric E. Sterling: Congress on Speed: Partisan Conflict Led to Many Problems in 1986 Drug Law
"Today, the 112th Congress is stalled, mired in partisan conflict. Last week, the votes of 43 Republican senators blocked the proposal of Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) to create a National Criminal Justice Commission to study and recommend improvements to the criminal justice system. But in the 111th Congress, the proposal passed the House on a voice vote in 2010. This proposal, endorsed by the National Sheriffs Association, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, and the ACLU, had bi-partisan support last year. This year, however, partisan conflict has blocked the measure.
Other times, partisanship has led Congress to move too fast, and that produced trouble. Twenty-five years ago last Thursday (Oct. 27), President Reagan signed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, after less than ninety days of jockeying between the Democratic House and Republican Senate.
The political wrangling was triggered by the cocaine death of Maryland basketball star Len Bias on June 19, 1986 as he celebrated signing with the Boston Celtics. In the media blitz following his tragedy, House Speaker "Tip" O'Neill from Boston spotted political opportunity for Democrats to claim anti-drug leadership in time for the election. Eager to complete a package before the August campaigns, the bills were very hastily written. Having spent many hours in the Speaker's conference room helping to write the law as counsel to the House Crime Subcommittee, I was invited to the White House twenty-five years ago. I've followed the results of that law closely.
The law's best known blunders were the long sentences for small amounts of drugs. Congress finally acknowledged the unfairness of crack sentencing and its racial disparity when it passed the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. But many other features of the 1986 law were also bad policy.
The Drug-Free Schools program of 1986 got about $12 billion over twenty years. Every evaluation found it did not reduce drug use. The Administration finally eliminated this waste last year when the proof of its ineffectiveness at last overcame its political attractiveness -- $500 to 600 million per year in contracts and salaries.
The "designer drug" law we wrote in 1986 prohibited classes of drugs before they could even be invented and before they could be found to be beneficial or harmful. The presumption behind this ban, that any new drug would be "dangerous" and "bad," stigmatizes and deters discovery of new potentially beneficial drugs. Like most of the other provisions of the 1986 law, this one failed to do anything to prevent the spread of "ecstasy," synthetic cannabis such as "spice" and "K2," and stimulants marketed as "bath salts."
The National Forest System Drug Control Act of 1986 was supposed to protect the National Forests from marijuana cultivation. It was a fine idea, but the "protection" was not thought through. Expanded surveillance of urban electricity usage and scanning for temperature anomalies by drug agents encouraged by the potential riches from property forfeitures led to large-scale and destructive marijuana plantations over-running more than 61 National Forests by 2009."
"Today, the 112th Congress is stalled, mired in partisan conflict. Last week, the votes of 43 Republican senators blocked the proposal of Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) to create a National Criminal Justice Commission to study and recommend improvements to the criminal justice system. But in the 111th Congress, the proposal passed the House on a voice vote in 2010. This proposal, endorsed by the National Sheriffs Association, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, and the ACLU, had bi-partisan support last year. This year, however, partisan conflict has blocked the measure.
Other times, partisanship has led Congress to move too fast, and that produced trouble. Twenty-five years ago last Thursday (Oct. 27), President Reagan signed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, after less than ninety days of jockeying between the Democratic House and Republican Senate.
The political wrangling was triggered by the cocaine death of Maryland basketball star Len Bias on June 19, 1986 as he celebrated signing with the Boston Celtics. In the media blitz following his tragedy, House Speaker "Tip" O'Neill from Boston spotted political opportunity for Democrats to claim anti-drug leadership in time for the election. Eager to complete a package before the August campaigns, the bills were very hastily written. Having spent many hours in the Speaker's conference room helping to write the law as counsel to the House Crime Subcommittee, I was invited to the White House twenty-five years ago. I've followed the results of that law closely.
The law's best known blunders were the long sentences for small amounts of drugs. Congress finally acknowledged the unfairness of crack sentencing and its racial disparity when it passed the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. But many other features of the 1986 law were also bad policy.
The Drug-Free Schools program of 1986 got about $12 billion over twenty years. Every evaluation found it did not reduce drug use. The Administration finally eliminated this waste last year when the proof of its ineffectiveness at last overcame its political attractiveness -- $500 to 600 million per year in contracts and salaries.
The "designer drug" law we wrote in 1986 prohibited classes of drugs before they could even be invented and before they could be found to be beneficial or harmful. The presumption behind this ban, that any new drug would be "dangerous" and "bad," stigmatizes and deters discovery of new potentially beneficial drugs. Like most of the other provisions of the 1986 law, this one failed to do anything to prevent the spread of "ecstasy," synthetic cannabis such as "spice" and "K2," and stimulants marketed as "bath salts."
The National Forest System Drug Control Act of 1986 was supposed to protect the National Forests from marijuana cultivation. It was a fine idea, but the "protection" was not thought through. Expanded surveillance of urban electricity usage and scanning for temperature anomalies by drug agents encouraged by the potential riches from property forfeitures led to large-scale and destructive marijuana plantations over-running more than 61 National Forests by 2009."
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Flaws in the criminal justice system help fugitives cross borders - chicagotribune.com - start
Flaws in the criminal justice system help fugitives cross borders - chicagotribune.com - start
"Justice Department officials say they are capturing more international fugitives than ever. But breakdowns at every level of law enforcement enable uncounted numbers of suspects to flee across the U.S. border and then hamper their apprehension.
County prosecutors
Local prosecutors prepare voluminous extradition packages that are sent to the Justice Department and then to foreign governments. County officials can be overwhelmed by the complex paperwork and the costs of translators, outside counsel and even airline tickets for sheriffs and returning fugitives. The Tribune identified more than 60 Cook County fugitives law enforcement traced to Mexico, yet the Cook County state’s attorney’s office said they are actively seeking the extradition or deportation of only 12 of those suspects.
Example: Among those not on the county’s active list is career criminal Juan Jacquez (Tribune summary), wanted on charges of killing a South Side man in 2002. Months later, a family informant provided Chicago detectives with Jacquez’s exact address in Santiago Papasquiaro, Mexico, but no visible progress has been made in the case.
County judges
At cursory bond hearings, judges gave some murder and rape suspects the keys to their own escape by setting low bonds or failing to limit the travel of foreign-born and dual-nationality citizens by confiscating their passports or imposing other restrictions.
Example: Chicago maintenance mechanic Dimitrios Amasiadis (Tribune summary) posted a cash bond of just $1,000 after being charged in 1998 with sexuallyassaulting his 10-year-old stepdaughter over a period of years. Born in Guatemala to a Greek father, Amasiadis mortgaged his house to raise more than $30,000 and then fled to Greece, where he remains today. Amasiadis was convicted in absentia. His sister Patricia Echeverria professes his innocence and told the Tribune that Amasiadis is "still happily married" and raising a new family. "He’s not looking over his shoulder," she said.
Illinois law
A family exemption in Illinois law bars authorities from charging close relatives with harboring or aiding fugitives. There is no deterrent against family helping suspects flee by driving them to bus stations and airports, providing cash or withholding information from police.
Example: In 2005, after 21-year-old Muaz Haffar was charged with murdering a university student with a bike lock, he fled to Syria. Haffar’s father in the Chicago area helped arrange his trip and a brother accompanied Haffar on part of his journey out of Chicago, according to law enforcement sources. Muaz Haffar remains at large."
"Justice Department officials say they are capturing more international fugitives than ever. But breakdowns at every level of law enforcement enable uncounted numbers of suspects to flee across the U.S. border and then hamper their apprehension.
County prosecutors
Local prosecutors prepare voluminous extradition packages that are sent to the Justice Department and then to foreign governments. County officials can be overwhelmed by the complex paperwork and the costs of translators, outside counsel and even airline tickets for sheriffs and returning fugitives. The Tribune identified more than 60 Cook County fugitives law enforcement traced to Mexico, yet the Cook County state’s attorney’s office said they are actively seeking the extradition or deportation of only 12 of those suspects.
Example: Among those not on the county’s active list is career criminal Juan Jacquez (Tribune summary), wanted on charges of killing a South Side man in 2002. Months later, a family informant provided Chicago detectives with Jacquez’s exact address in Santiago Papasquiaro, Mexico, but no visible progress has been made in the case.
County judges
At cursory bond hearings, judges gave some murder and rape suspects the keys to their own escape by setting low bonds or failing to limit the travel of foreign-born and dual-nationality citizens by confiscating their passports or imposing other restrictions.
Example: Chicago maintenance mechanic Dimitrios Amasiadis (Tribune summary) posted a cash bond of just $1,000 after being charged in 1998 with sexuallyassaulting his 10-year-old stepdaughter over a period of years. Born in Guatemala to a Greek father, Amasiadis mortgaged his house to raise more than $30,000 and then fled to Greece, where he remains today. Amasiadis was convicted in absentia. His sister Patricia Echeverria professes his innocence and told the Tribune that Amasiadis is "still happily married" and raising a new family. "He’s not looking over his shoulder," she said.
Illinois law
A family exemption in Illinois law bars authorities from charging close relatives with harboring or aiding fugitives. There is no deterrent against family helping suspects flee by driving them to bus stations and airports, providing cash or withholding information from police.
Example: In 2005, after 21-year-old Muaz Haffar was charged with murdering a university student with a bike lock, he fled to Syria. Haffar’s father in the Chicago area helped arrange his trip and a brother accompanied Haffar on part of his journey out of Chicago, according to law enforcement sources. Muaz Haffar remains at large."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)