Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Since our main focus is the correctional system, we haven't blogged in depth about the Oscar Grant shooting and its aftermath. However, the broad nature of our correctional crisis makes all stages of the criminal process - including policing - inexorably linked to each other. Therefore, we thought that some updates may be interesting to our readers.
Today, NOBLE (the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives) published its scathing review of BART police management, training and procedures. The full report can be downloaded here.
Among other things, the report points out to antiquated policing techniques, such as an emphasis on car patrols and very low visibility on the trains, tracks, and parking lots. Training is abysmal, there are no specialized units such as a SWAT team, and the protocols for use of force are sorely deficient.
If anyone is interested in hearing more, the report will be the subject of a public meeting at 9 a.m. Thursday in the BART board room, Kaiser Center 20th Street Mall, Third Floor, 344 20th St., Oakland. I called NOBLE this morning, and they seem to be interested in helping make things better.
Here's the full schedule for the event, 10a-6p Sat 10/3 at UC-Hastings, 198 McAllister St., SF:
10:00am Registration/Free Breakfast
10:30-12:00 2 Panels: Transgender Advocacy & SF Police Interrogation of Immigrant Youth feat. SF Supervisor David Campos
12:00-1:00 Free Lunch
1:00-2:30 2 Panels: Alien Tort Claims Act & Everything You Wanted to Know About Fellowships
3:00-4:30 Key Note Speaker John Burris (attorney for the family of Oscar Grant)
4:30-6:00 Reception with free food/drinks
Facebook invite here. Note that CLE credits are available for both afternoon panels.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Monday, September 28, 2009
Every sex offender on active parole has GPS monitoring as part of their supervision requirements. Any sex offender parolee who entered the fair zone set off an alarm notifying parole agents of their whereabouts. Once a notification was received, on-site CDCR parole agents tracked an offender's movement and investigated if any law, parole violation or any public safety issue existed. During the various runs of the fairs, CDCR parole agents received numerous zone alerts, which culminated in parolee arrests for violations of special conditions of parole.
"When it comes to the supervision of sex offenders, we cannot and will not compromise public safety," said Marvin Speed, District Parole Administrator. "Operation Eagle Eye was so beneficial to enhancing public safety that we will replicate the operation at other venues."
According to the California Attorney General's Criminal Justice Statistics Center, in 2005 the state of California incarcerated juveniles at a rate of 23.8 per 100,000 at-risk population, compared to 131.9 for adults. In particular, in 2005 California arrested juveniles for drugs at a rate of 486.9 per 100,000 at-risk population, versus 1173.5 adults.
Minors are arguably the most vulnerable members of our prison population. In a recent post, California Corrections Crisis points out that Zimbabwe has just decided to release all minors from all prisons to reduce overcrowding. Since California is having trouble finding 40,000 inmates to release, perhaps we should consider releasing all inmates under 18 years age.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
While the CCPOA's political power and relationship with governors since the 1980s has been criticized by some as a major contributor to the ratcheting up of sentencing, and their involvement in funding political campaigns (such as the Three Strikes Law and the No on 5 campaign) a source of concern, I think they should be commended for funding this documentary, as well as for their public support for a sentencing commission.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Thursday, September 24, 2009
The new SFPD chief, George Gascon, is a man on a mission. Having been shocked by drug trafficking in the Tenderloin , he has announced a mission of aggressive policing in the area in an attempt to curb the drug trade. The SFPD enforcement efforts have Today's paper focuses on mass arrests conducted near schools as a result of buy-bust operations.
While some believe this attention is necessary, others are less optimistic. The Public Defender's office wonders about the effect massive arrests (300 by Sep. 3 and counting!) will have on the court system. Others are cynical about the possible outcomes. I'm mostly reminded of the fourth season of David Simon's masterpiece series The Wire, in which police commanders are subject to inquiries and humiliation in their weekly COMPSTAT meetings. Much as they try to juke the stats, crime rates don't go down. Until Bunny Colvin decides to quietly and clandestinely legalize drugs in his district.
The experiment is successful on many levels, though it does have some ill effects. The new district, affectionately called "Hamsterdam" by its inhabitants, mostly regulates itself, the occasional act of violence notwithstanding. Social service providers appear on the scene with condoms, syringes and medication. And everything seems to work, more or less, until the secret is revealed, and the giant machine of the War on Drugs is unable to contain and accept it.
Less arrests, less trials, and the drugs move away from the community. But even if Chief Gascon was willing to consider a Hamsterdam alternative, is there any area in the city which we would feel comfortable ceding to the drug trade?
Some folks are considering other possible regimes for legalization. One group of advocates for such solutions includes LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition). Last night I had a chance to hear Norm Stamper, former Chief of Police in Seattle, speak about the harms of the war on drugs and the need to end it. Rather than advocating a free drug market, Stamper advocates a state monopoly on growth, manufacturing and sales, and taxation. I'm not sure a state monopoly system is realistic, but his ideas are interesting.
Your thoughts and comments appreciated.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Meeting: September 29th Tuesday 6:00pm Tenderloin Police Station Community Room, 301 Eddy St .
This will surely be a fascinating evening, especially in light of the new agressive police tactics in the tenderloin, propagated by new police chief Gascon but met with skepticism by the neighbors.
Monday, September 21, 2009
It has certainly been a dramatic year for corrections, and the main issues on our agenda were the most pressing ones: overcrowding and the medical system. These two issues became inexorably linked with each other as the year progressed. Early this year we followed on the struggles between the CDCR and the federally-appointed Receivership around issues of quality of care, and, of course, money. These struggles, and the continued deterioration of the system, led eventually to the three-judge-panel's Plata/Coleman decision, ordering population reduction as the primary means to remedy the health system. And we have seen the state's reluctance not only to comply with the order, but also to comprehend the necessity for change: appealing the order, violating its requirements, and, in the legislative arena, severe limitations on the ability to transcend party lines and slogans to provide an effective solution.
A complicating factor has been the financial crisis, which exposed the cost of relying on a mammoth correctional apparatus as the primary means to solve social problems. Hidden from the public eye, hundreds of millions of dollars are poured in through taxes paid for by Californians to imprison their fellow Californians. The exposure of the frightening impact of these expenditures has led our criminal justice system to pursue some techniques that were not in use, and were certainly not publicly propagated, since the emergence of the new law-and-order paradigm in the Nixon days. We have seen the revival of the marijuana decriminalization debate; prosecutorial prioritizing of charging; sentencing reform ideas; jurisdiction stat-juking; critique of broad parole practices; a National Crime Commission; and even, perhaps, discourse heralding a questioning of the death penalty (though, perhaps, premature in CA). While we still pay tribute to the discourse of public safety, and advocate these changes using a discourse of scarcity, this may be an opportunity--so far only partly utilized--to challenge the status quo and engage the public imagination in designing better alternatives.
We were also following various agents of change and their struggles about the appropriate models of justice. We saw the Public Defense coping with cuts, and the Community Justice Center take its first controversial steps. We witnessed an increasing reliance on technology-based non-custodial alternatives and discussed their promise and pitfalls.
During the 2008 elections, and the months that followed, we had an opportunity to examine our patchwork sentencing structure, as well as our approaches to drug crime and to victim involvement in the criminal process. These provided a lens through which the partisan politics of corrections could be examined.
We read and reported on some new, and less new, books documenting and discussing different aspects of the correctional process.
Oh, and we had a major conference at UC Hastings, in which the major actors in the political and economic drama that is CA corrections came together to discuss different aspects of the problems we face.
Finally, we occasionally glanced beyond state lines to frame the crisis in national, and sometimes international, terms, seeing the idiosyncrasies of California, but also its role within the broader American correctional malady.
The blog has given us an opportunity to reach a broad audience of parties to the correctional enterprise. We hear often, by email or by phone, from CDCR employees, inmate advocates, victim organizations, lawyers, activists, and of course the population who is most affected by the crisis--inmates and their families. You have contacted us; brought our work to the attention of the mainstream media; sent us books and materials; informed us about the realities of living affected by the California prison system; involved us in your efforts for reform; and have been honest, forthright, and generous, in sharing your experiences, even when they left you uncomfortable or pained. This blog is for you, and it would not exist without you. Thank you.
We invite you to stay with us for another year, as we continue bringing to light one of the weak and shameful links in our social chain: how we treat each other when we transgress. Please keep emailing and commenting; what we know is up to us, and understanding is the first step toward systematic, evidence-based reform.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Friday, September 18, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Props to Tal Niv for alerting me to this interesting tidbit.
[T]he plan California officials will submit by midnight Friday will fall short of meeting the 40,000-inmate reduction ordered last month by the federal panel, state prison officials said in a briefing Wednesday to various parties, including legislative staffers who work on prison issues.
. . .
The state officials did not tell by how much their plan would fall short but said they may revise it before they submit it Friday, sources said. The officials also said they expect the judges to find the state in contempt for failing to meet the demand, one source said.
If the judges decide the state deliberately violated their order, they could hold the defendants - Schwarzenegger, Corrections Secretary Matthew Cate and state Controller John Chiang - in contempt. The court would have the power to send any or all of them to jail until they complied with the order, but that's unlikely in light of events earlier in the case.
What complicates matters, of course, is the "rival plan" approved by the Assembly, which we discussed elsewhere, and which falls short of generating any serious systematic change through sentencing reform. Given the disappointing scope of this plan, the State's argument against Federal judicial involvement in prison management becomes significantly weaker. Stay tuned for tomorrow's developments.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Critics claimed that the original plan would have sparked crime sprees across the state. Done properly that would not have been likely, but the scare tactic carried the day.
That simply guarantees next year's session will be much more difficult because more severe changes must come.
A three-member federal judge panel ordered the state to reduce its inmate population by 40,000 in two years and the state has until Friday to come up with the plan. The state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and asked for a delay of that order, but, as expected, it lost.
The state is in this corner because it has put itself there. It is the consequence of inaction — years of inaction.
This attention to the crisis in Contra Costa County is quite notable. As some readers may remember, the downscaling in charges, stemming from budgetary cuts to the DA's office in Contra Costa, has drawn critique from the police and the community. Nevertheless, the local newspaper does a good job aiming at raising awareness to the crisis. A few days ago, the newspaper reported on prison overcrowding, focusing on Chino, in the aftermath of the riots, as an example.A gymnasium is a sea of bunk beds. The 213 inmates inside are quarantined on this day, the result of worries about a swine flu outbreak. In a room such as this, there is nowhere for a virus to go but directly to another inmate never more than a foot or two away. The basketball hoops and theater stage are reminders that this decaying part of the prison was never meant to house prisoners.
. . .
The situation ensures the spotlight will remain on prisons such as Chino's, which has operated at or near 200 percent of its intended capacity, brimming with nearly 6,000 inmates in a facility designed 70 years ago for half that.
Even the stretches of this prison actually designed to house inmates appear bleakly overtaxed. Inside Madrone Hall, two inmates jam into 6-by-11-foot cells meant for a single bed. A second bed chained to the wall during the day is dropped to the floor at night, flat and tin-looking to earn the name "cookie sheet bed."
The overcrowding also is causing predictable chaos. Indeed, just four days after the federal court order, it was the Chino prison that erupted in violence. And while the Aug. 8 riot was linked to race-related tensions, it underscored how incendiary it can be to run a prison so overstuffed with inmates.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
First, the gutted prison reform plan, that will lead to the release of 17,000 inmates and the transfer of minor parole violators to local jails, has passed and is moving forward, for the Governor's signature.
And second, the Supreme Court has declined to grant a stay to the State with regard to the Plata/Coleman order. The State's arguments have been rejected, albeit not on the merits (that will be decided on appeal). CDCR will therefore have to come up with a decrowding plan for 40,000 inmates by Sep. 18.
We will elaborate later on the possible connection between these two events.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Friday, September 4, 2009
- a reasonable probability that four Justices will consider the issue sufficiently meritorious to . . . note probable jurisdiction;
- a fair prospect that a majority of the court will conclude that the decision below was erroneous; and
- a likelihood that "irreparable harm" will result from the denial of a stay.
- In close cases, the Court is called upon to do a balancing act of harms and interests.
- The importance and drastic scope of the three-judge-panel's relief will probably merit jurisdiction. The Federal interference in this case is unprecedented and the injunctive relief is dramatic. Questions of law concerning the PLRA will be raised (see our previous post on this) as well as issues of federalism and judicial restraint.
- Overcrowding is not the "primary cause" for the constitutional violations; a myriad other factors that have to do with prison administration and personnel are also to blame. Even if overcrowding is the main factor in the violations, decrowding will not necessarily result in solving the problem (note that the State does not disagree that there are constitutional violations and the state is to blame! Also note that the gravity of the problem, and the fact that even overcrowding will not solve it, is offered as an argument on behalf of the State!). In addition (this, IMHO, is the strongest point in this brief), the court has not justified its decision to set the reduction level at 137.5%. There are also some procedural issues that might work on the State's behalf, such as the fact that no district court has ordered reduction.
- Obeying the order will create irreparable harm by diverting necessary resources to the decrowding plan (this is rather odd in light of the expected savings!) and by putting communities at risk;
- Finally, the brief argues, if this is a close case - which it isn't - then there's good reasons to weigh factors in favor of a stay. Since decrowding will probably take two years, there is less harm in waiting than there is in going ahead with the plan.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Ironically, California may be suffering because it's trying to confront this problem with a Democratic majority. The turning point for Texas' prison system came in 2003, when Republicans found themselves in charge of both chambers of the Texas Legislature for the first time since Reconstruction. That year, Speaker Tom Craddick named Ray Allen from Grand Prairie House Corrections chair, and Allen was immediately confronted with projections that Texas' already full prisons would require billions in new construction to keep up their astronomical growth rate.
[R]educing incarceration by diverting offenders to probation and keeping more of them there until they're off supervision - became the central strategy Texas employed to reduce incarceration growth. In 2005, Jerry Madden became House Corrections chair and - along with the Democratic Criminal Justice Chairman in the Senate, John Whitmire - sponsored legislation to revamp probation in order to provide more meaningful supervision (especially through reduced caseloads) and alternatives to incarceration, but leaving sentence lengths, at least on the books, alone.
I wonder whether a Republican majority in the CA legislature would be the ticket to resolve this; that is, whether such a majority would have a sense of responsibility for responding to the crisis and therefore come up with good solutions. We have seen quite a few examples of nonpartisan initiatives to save system costs by avoiding death row expansion, legalizing marijuana, and the like. The thing to remember is that the big architects of large-scale historical decarceration efforts have been, traditionally, conservative politicians. I strongly recommend reading Kathlyn Taylor Gaubatz's interesting book Crime in the Public Mind, which mentions, among many other interesting things:
Few may remember, however, that Ronald Reagan was not always the standard bearer of the get-tough movement. In an account of changes in California's criminal justice system, Caleb Foote writes that "during Ronald Reagan's tenure as governor, his administration first ordered the [Adult] Authority, as an economy measure, to reduce prison population by increasing parole release rates, a policy which enabled the state to close one prison and underpopulate San Quentin and some other prisons. Then the Reagan administration, attacked from the southland for being soft on crime . . ., reversed course and ordered the Authority to tighten ship." We know that the tides of public opinion began their harsh upswing during the years of Reagan's first governorship, and here is a revelation that his actions as a political leader were not always oriented to a crackdown on crime.
Good morning, and good luck.