« A long round-up of sentencing news and commentary before a long weekend | Main | New GOP Prez candidate DeSantis pledges to repeal FIRST STEP Act »
May 27, 2023
"Voices Of Redemption: A National Survey Of People With Records"
The title of this post is the title of this notable recent report from the Alliance for Safety and Justice. Here is its executive summary:
States across the nation continue to grapple with the need for changes in our criminal justice and public safety systems. There is increasing recognition that over-reliance on incarceration without enough prevention and treatment locks communities into cycles of crime.
The voices and experiences of people who are impacted by crime and incarceration are critical to informing the urgent debate on public safety and defining the best path forward to stop the cycle of crime and promote safety and justice.
Understanding the short and long-term impacts of these policies, however — particularly the impacts of post-sentencing policies on people with records — has been alarmingly limited.
To help decision-makers understand these impacts, in March, 2023, Alliance for Safety and Justice commissioned a first-of-its-kind National Survey of People with Records. A nationally representative sample of 4,060 people across the country were contacted. From that pool, 554 people who had been arrested, convicted, or incarcerated were interviewed about their experiences with, and impacts of contact with the criminal justice system.
The 2023 National Survey of People with Records reveals that the majority of people with records have suffered significant barriers to economic mobility as a result of their record, nearly all have been victims of crime who did not receive support in the aftermath of harm, and most experienced crisis prior to arrest.
The following key findings from this survey point to opportunities for further research and reform to advance policies that balance accountability, prevention, rehabilitation, and second chances that keep all communities safe.
May 27, 2023 at 10:07 AM | Permalink
Comments
1. Any fact-check or even minimal follow up on these self-serving "I'm-actually-the-hero" stories? Didn't think so. But we're supposed to buy them whole cloth. Would anyone with half a brain do that?
2. Any similar "National Survey of People Victimized by People with Records"? Didn't think that either. But since victims are human garbage both to criminals (a/k/a "People with Records") and their spokesmen, the total lack of interest is only to be expected.
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 27, 2023 11:08:12 AM
I’m a Steelers fan. I hate the Purple Browns (Ravens).
Go figure.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 27, 2023 5:21:25 PM
The "criminal justice system", owned and operated by the 'tough on crime mob', seems to be failing - failing not only the criminal (who were in their grasp), but also our society, and most importantly, those victimized by those former prison inmates released back into our communities.
The owners/operators of this system now sit back and defensively point their collective fingers at everyone but themselves. Why do they refuse to take ANY responsibility for their roles in these failures and shortcomings?
Recidivism rates are their "report cards". What grade have they earned? Certainly not an "A".
Posted by: SG | May 27, 2023 8:36:32 PM
SG --
What utter baloney.
"The "criminal justice system", owned and operated by the 'tough on crime mob', seems to be failing..."
Tell us again who owns it? The feds -- owned by leftist Dems. New York -- same. California -- same. Pennsylvania -- same. Illinois -- same. New Jersey -- same. Massachusetts -- same.
What's the point of your lying when the truth is so easy to find?
"...failing not only the criminal..."
It's not the system's responsibility to avoid committing crime. It's the individual's (who after all is the one who commits it in the first place). Where on earth did you get the preposterous notion that it's up to the government to supply you with a conscience? Even an unlimited government (of the kind you not-so-secretly want) couldn't do that.
"Recidivism rates are their "report cards". What grade have they earned? Certainly not an "A".
It's not up to criminals and druggies and their henchmen to be handing out report cards. It's up to them to show some humility for once and understand that it's THEIR greedy and malicious behavior, and not the big, bad system, that needs improvement.
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 28, 2023 1:14:10 PM
SG,
As I have stated before, these aren’t good people who turned bad because of the CJS. For most of them, their lives were determined long before seeing a judge.
The police chief in DC said that murderers there have been arrested an average of 13 times before killing. It sure doesn’t sound like a “tough on crime mob” situation to me.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 28, 2023 5:20:09 PM
SG,
The percentage of African-Americans in prison in the 1930’s-1950’s was much lower than today. Roughly half.
Was the chain gang system back then less “tough on crime” than today? More or fewer programs?
If not, what happened?
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 28, 2023 5:25:38 PM
Mr. Otis, you wrote:
> But since victims are human garbage both to criminals (a/k/a "People
> with Records") and their spokesmen, the total lack of interest is
> only to be expected.
Like millions of others, I'm a person with a record who is not
a criminal.
I've never heard anyone suggest that "victims are human garbage."
Unlike you, I care about victims of free-lance criminals *and* about
victims of your beloved system. It's plain to me that your system
has done far more victimization than all free-lance criminals put
together.
Do you seriously doubt that report's conclusion that people with
records have a much harder time getting jobs and housing? If so,
where's your evidence that that's wrong? Do you truly believe
that no employers or landlords give any credence to such records?
And if you don't disagree with that report, then how does it benefit
*anyone* to continue to punish people with records after they've "paid
their debt to society"? I'm very fortunate that when I got out of
prison after my wrongful conviction 45 years ago, I had lots of
support from family, friends, and even the crime victim, who had proof
of my innocence. Without such support my only choices would have been
to slowly starve to death, start a life of crime, or commit suicide.
Which of those three things would you have preferred I had done?
You've said I should have gone to trial, even though my
court-appointed lawyer was either unwilling or unable to defend me.
Do you think I would have won a pro se case? I was in jail, hence had
no ability to investigate and discover the proof of my innocence. All
I could have done is get on the stand and truthfully swear that I didn't
do it.
> It's not the system's responsibility to avoid committing crime.
> It's the individual's (who after all is the one who commits it in
> the first place).
Again, you assume your absurd conclusion, that every convicted person
is guilty. That report that you're criticizing seems to do the same.
(I only skimmed it, but I confirmed that it doesn't contain terms such
as "innocent," "innocence," "not guilty," "wrongful," "exoneration,"
"exonerated," or "falsely.")
It's the system's responsibility to avoid convicting the innocent. To
say that it fails at this is as much an understatement as to say that
the ocean fails at being dry.
As for the actually guilty, again I ask, what are they supposed to do
after they've served their sentence, if nobody is willing to give them
a job or to rent an apartment to them? That goes double if they're on
a permanent sex-offender list hence not allowed to live or work anywhere
near a school, playground, school bus stop, or other facility used by
children?
If a criminal without a conscience knows that his life will be just as
thoroughly destroyed if he gets caught for his minor crime than if he
is caught for murder, then why wouldn't he reduce his chances of being
caught by murdering his victim? Or murdering any cop who questioned him?
I've heard that in some parts of the US you can end up on the sex
offender list if someone sees you urinating outdoors. If so, I wonder
if any cops have been killed because they approached someone who was
doing that, someone who didn't want their life destroyed. Maybe elderly
men with prostate problems should simply avoid ever going outdoors if
they don't want their life destroyed.
> It's not up to criminals and druggies and their henchmen to be
> handing out report cards. It's up to them to show some humility for
> once and understand that it's THEIR greedy and malicious behavior,
> and not the big, bad system, that needs improvement.
"But the thing is, you don't have many suspects who are innocent of
a crime. That's contradictory. If a person is innocent of a crime,
then he is not a suspect." -- Your former boss, US Attorney General
Edwin Meese. In other words, you're the good guys because you're the
*government*. Anyone you lock up, or even "suspect" is a bad guy,
because you're their enemy, and you're the good guys.
In another thread a month ago, I wrote "I regard the government as
nothing but an especially powerful and hypocritical criminal gang,
with absolutely no moral authority whatsoever, and I wouldn't lift a
finger to save it if it were imperiled. I have no preference whether
the tyrants I am ruled by live in Washington, Beijing, or Moscow."
To which you replied, "A more candid statement of the quality of
'patriotism' on the pro-defense side is difficult to conceive. Still,
at least the January 6 defendants have found a kindred spirit.
I meant to respond to that at the time, but was busy with other
things. So I'll do so now.
I'm not on the "pro-defense" side. I'm on the side of truth and
justice, which are sometimes on the defense side and sometimes on the
prosecution side. Some defendants lie. But all police lie -- it's
a job requirement. Since I'm on the side of truth and justice, I'm
*not* on the side of the American way. The American way is lies and
injustice, except in comic books and in civics textbooks used on
gullible children. (Look up the "Reid technique.")
I'm definitely *not* on the side of the January 6th defendants, except
those, if any, who are falsely accused. I have no idea whether the
2020 election was stolen. You don't know either.
And I've never claimed to be a patriot. I do support the Bill of
Rights and the ideas behind the American Revolution, but those have
little to do with the present US. One of the few freedoms we still
have left is freedom of speech. So I'm using it. If you want to lock
me up for it, you'll have to frame me for something. We both know you
can. We both know you want to.
Several times you've asked for an example of an innocent person who
was executed in the US in the past few decades. You've gotten several
answers. A few days ago I read, in the Washington Post, of another,
Freddie Lee Wright, executed in Alabama in 2000. Donald Siegelman,
former governor of Alabama, is convinced of his innocence and regrets
not pardoning him.
Presumably you'll say Mr. Siegelman, being a Democrat, lies. And that
the Washington Post lies, hence is misquoting him anyway. And that I
lie, hence am misquoting the Washington Post. And that everyone who
disagrees with you about anything lies. Sure.
Posted by: Keith Lynch | May 28, 2023 5:55:14 PM
A recent example of a former felon who has turned around his life is Damon Davis, who spent 4.5 years in Federal prison for dealing drugs and a gun. He learned to do legal research and write briefs in prison, and decided to become an attorney following his release. Despite being homeless and having only $26 upon release from prison, he worked 12 hour shifts in a Lexington, Ky. factory (which offered tuition reimbursement) and attended the University of Kentucky for his bachelor's degree. Later, he received a scholarship to the University of Cincinnati College of Law. He was the first former felon admitted to practice law in Ohio in more than 10 years, and was sworn in this month (May 2023). He is working as a public defender (with one of his Adjunct Professors) and has already obtained 3 acquittals in bench trials.
Posted by: Jim Gormley | May 28, 2023 6:20:04 PM
Mr. Otis wrote (above), in respect to the Crim. Just. System:
"Tell us again who owns it? The feds -- owned by leftist Dems. New York -- same. California -- same. Pennsylvania -- same. Illinois -- same. New Jersey -- same. Massachusetts -- same...What's the point of your lying when the truth is so easy to find?"
Bill, really. You gotta be kidding. That is laughable. The feds/states criminal justice systems are owned and operated by LIBERALS?? The words "specious", "disengenuous", and "B.S." come to mind. What in the name of God are u smoking, Bill?
Desperate attempts to distance you and your kind from any responsibility for the failings of the justice system (of which you were certainly an advocate, lobbyist, cheerleader and loyal soldier) is (how can I put this delicately) -cowardly?
I had expected so much better from you, Bill.
Posted by: SG | May 28, 2023 7:09:46 PM
SG --
An accusation of cowardice from the guy who keeps his name hidden directed to the guy who signs his name to everything he writes.
Any morw questions about why I find further conversation with you pointless?
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 29, 2023 12:42:07 PM
