March 31, 2011
Budget issues prompt big talk of big prisoner release in Alabama
As detailed in this local article, headlined "3,000 Alabama inmates may be released," budget realities may mean that a tide of prisoners may soon be rolling out of cells in Alabama. Here is how the article starts:
The state finance director said Wednesday that 3,000 Alabama prison inmates convicted of nonviolent crimes will have to be released if the Legislature adopts the General Fund budget proposed by Gov. Robert Bentley.
State Finance Director David Perry, who was appointed by Bentley, told a joint meeting of the House and Senate judiciary committees that the cuts required in the governor's budget will force a reduction in the number of prison inmates.
Perry made the dramatic announcement as members of the two judiciary committees were discussing a package of more than 20 bills supported by Chief Justice Sue Bell Cobb that are aimed at reforming Alabama's sentencing procedures and reducing the number of prison inmates.
The overall message of the day: Through budget cuts, sentencing reform or both, the state's prison census needs to come down. "The governor's budget assumes there will be a lower inmate count. One way to do that is to apply some of these reforms," Perry said. He told committee members that releasing prisoners because of sentencing reform would be "more responsible" than letting them go because of budget cuts.
Perry said the governor's office has examined the prison rolls and found about 4,000 prison inmates who committed nonviolent crimes and are not sex offenders, who are within 12 months of their release date. The Alabama Department of Corrections had charge of 31,911 inmates altogether in November 2010, the most recent statistical report on the department's website.
March 31, 2011 at 09:14 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Budget issues prompt big talk of big prisoner release in Alabama:
"...who committed nonviolent crimes and are not sex offenders"
This implies that there are sex offenders whom are also non-violent. This is definitely indicative that all crimes are not created equal in the eyes of constitutional authority.
Posted by: Eric Knight | Mar 31, 2011 12:30:49 PM
The sex-offender laws in this country are as barbaric as the stoning of adulterers in Muslim countries. If someone doesn't think so, I would like to point out that they are overbroad, non-specific, age of consent in contrast with sexual maturity, one size fits all, you name it. Many of these laws were written so that prosecutors did not need to demonstrate consent, willingness (even initiation) on the part of the "victim", or the mental state or maturity of defendents. Force, coercion, incapacitation, threats or other means and motives which are crucial to defining proportionality for other crimes are thrown out of sex crime laws. That is why many ot the outcomes and sentences lack any sense of proportionality.
John Walsh (that icon of sympathy) admitted that he was a sex addict on Larry King but that's OK because it was legal sex (forget that adultery is an unprosecuted felony in many states). Mark Foley doesn't have an interest in teen males (I have a bridge to sell you). The NCMEC actually does some good (never have, never will) but spreads myths and lies but receives millions from the federal government. Why?
Pandering politicians to soccer moms, helicopter parents, education unions (captive, indoctrinated audience) who fail to teach anything worthwhile which contributed to the decline of wisdom and intelligence in our country.
We are so dumbed-down. That is also why we are bankrupt!
Posted by: albeed | Mar 31, 2011 5:52:33 PM
This is human experimentation. So, the results should be tracked.
The original charges, not the fictional pled, adjudicated charges should be classified as non-violent in the release candidates.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Apr 1, 2011 8:47:26 AM
It's a sad day that those inmates within Alabama's Correctional Facilities will be released back into society only to fail again. Alabama has not addressed the necessary rehabilitation for those inmates to be successful upon returning home. Far too many of those inmates are illiterate, unable to obtain a GED, certification of a skill/trade, no support system in place for them or adequate housing. The only thing Alabama will assist is Food Stamps. It has become a thriving business, now a tax-payers burden. The question to be addressed is, what can be done to prepare those inmates prior to release back into society a successful re-entry? In addition, many companies are not allowing those non-violent offenders a second chance in becoming gainfully employed. "Our comapny does not hire ex-felons, it's against company policy." Then, what is that individual to do? Revert back to their old habits.
Posted by: Timothy M. White | Apr 3, 2011 4:19:25 PM
there are so many inmates that turely are very remorseful and have turely realize the mistakes they made i beleave its about giveing people a second chance god said we must forgive he also said vengence would be his.none of us are perfect .i am a wife to a man who has done 30 years in the alabama system my husband is truely remorseful and turely sorry he allow his self to take this horrible path he took.today he is a very different man and i as his wife feel he deserves a second chance.today he has serious medical problems i am praying the parole board will allow him a new start.none of us no what path we will go down or the path our kids will take befor our life ends.these inmates have mothers and fathers and wives and kids there is only one god and turely he sees all and he will judge all.we all need to remember god said vengence will be his. judgement day is comeing for us all.
Posted by: Elaine gosha | Jan 17, 2012 10:56:01 PM
hi i would like to share a young man that i meet in alabama
that is in prison and if you read his paper work you will
would probably said what is this they give a witness 13 month
continue and let hem out without paying any kind of bond for
a revoked probatrtion and the he lie about giving evdencen to
the detective and then sing a report saying just what he said
he did not do then the forensice scientist was first told by
the state and thr publice defendent befor taking the stand
that his evdencen was not coincide he could not fine envelope
he left endencen that the court ask hem for he did not have
that had witness that said that they were then they find out
that they were not there and still used there statement how
that had a witness that you could not made out what he was
talking about they had a witness that statement that he take
evdencen to the police station but did not o there is so
much going with this case that you would really have to
read for your self THEN TWO WEEKS LATER THERE WAS
A YOUNG MAN KILLED AND ONE OF THE YOUNG MAN FROM
THE OTHER CRIME WAS AT THAT CRIME BUT AT THE POLICE
STATION THAT CASE WAS CLOSED BECAUSE THEY SAID IS WAS
JUSTIFIED HOMICIDE BECAUSE THEY SAID HE HAD A GUN BUT
THERE WAS NO GUN FIND AND THERE WAS JUST SOME PEOLPE
THAT THEY TAKE TO BUT PEOLPE THAT WANT TO TALK TO THEM THEY
WOULD NOT TALK TO THEM YES THIS IS IN BLACK AND WHITE
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY WOULD ALABAMA WOULD TAKE THE TAX
PAYER MONEY FOR THINGS LIKE THIS IF YOU WORNG YOU ARE WORNG
BUT IF YOU ARE RIGHT YOU ARE RIGHT
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY DO ALABAMA COURT
TAKE TAX PAYER MONEY AND JUST JAG IT OFF IF YOU ARE
Posted by: INTELLIGENT YOUTH | Mar 26, 2012 10:10:20 PM