« "A Critical Assessment of the First Step Act’s Recidivism-Reduction Measures" | Main | Event at Villanova this week follows up Federal Sentening Reporter issue on "Drug Testing and Community Supervision" »
May 20, 2024
Notable new accounting of parole practices in Virginia
The digital magazine Bolts has this new article about parole in Virginia under the headline, "Under Glenn Youngkin, Parole in Virginia Has Nearly Vanished." The full piece has all sorts of detailed stories and some data about old and new parole practices in the Old Dominion state. Here are short excerpts from a lengthy piece:
Under past Democratic administrations, Virginia already had one of the harshest parole systems in the nation, with single-digit annual approval rates. But parole grants have declined even further since Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin began to overhaul the parole board in 2022, dipping to an approval rate of just 1.6 percent in 2023. So far this year, Youngkin’s parole board has approved only eight of the 628 applications it considered, a grant rate of 1.3 percent, according to Mother Jones’ and Bolts’ analysis. In March, ... the board approved only 2 out of the 117 cases it considered....
Parole board decisions could soon at least become less opaque in Virginia. Last year, Youngkin signed a bipartisan transparency bill into law that the ACLU touted as “the biggest reform of Virginia’s parole system since 1994.” Under the new law, which takes effect in July, the board will have to publish more regular detailed reports with individualized reasons on grants and denials, and parole review hearings will be required to include interviews with candidates themselves. The bill also gives parole applicants and their attorneys access to all of the information being considered by the board.
May 20, 2024 at 01:19 PM | Permalink
Comments
Does anyone have any explanation for the conduct of this parole board or why Glenn Youngkin is not a completely spineless panderer with no morality? Does Federalist or his Bill stick up for this policy. What in the hell is wrong with or system? It seems as ’victims or victims’ families have way too much influence or Republicans are pandering to idiots who lack the background to understand that the brain changes, and we are keeping way too many people in prison who just don’t need to be there. That seems a simple enough proposition, and it is really disgusting how someone like Youngkin utterly family rather than demagogue the issue. It is crazy to say that a reformed prisoner after decades cannot be released because that would diminish the seriousness of the crime. WTF? The crime was decades ago, and the prisoner has served decades behind bars. Why so much catering for victims or victims’ who can’t grasp that? The point of the system is not to give some condescending sop to victims. It is about rehabilitation as well. Anybody disagree with this?
Posted by: Mark | May 21, 2024 6:46:26 AM
Mark --
"The point of the system is not to give some condescending sop to victims."
Quite often, the defense bar and defense-oriented groups like to pretend they respect and care about victims, but now you come along to set the record straight. I appreciate the honesty.
Posted by: Bill Otis | May 21, 2024 5:12:16 PM
Mark,
By my preference the vast majority of felons would not even get the opportunity for parole. Their appeals would run and they would have a prompt date with the executioner.
Posted by: Soronel Haetir | May 21, 2024 9:25:32 PM
I'm with ya, SH, but you made me curious.
So here are some stats from the BOP. I sorted them by percentage (decreasing).
44.4% Drug Offenses
21.9% Weapons, Explosives, Arson
12.7% Sex Offenses
4.9% Burglary, Larceny, Property Offenses
4.7% Immigration
4.1% Extortion, Fraud, Bribery
3.4% Homicide, Aggravated Assault, and Kidnapping Offenses
2.6% Robbery
0.6% Miscellaneous
0.5% Courts or Corrections
0.2% Continuing Criminal Enterprise
0.1% Banking and Insurance, Counterfeit, Embezzlement
0.0% National Security
https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_offenses.jsp
So I dont care about waxing the junkies, thats not a problem. But there HAVE to be a lot of people in that second category who are just regular folks whose 2nd Amendment rights have not been recognized under Democrat laws. President Trump should be pardoning them, so I would wait to impose your policy until he has a chance to.
Presumably all the sex offenses are child molesters.
Some people blanch at the death penalty for "property offenses" (even not counting arson, which is up there with the 2nd Amdmenemt crimes), but personally, nah I aint got a problem with it.
Miscellaneous. Courts or Corrections. WTF are these? More BS Democrat laws? It is surely not right to execute people for things that shouldnt even be crimes.
"Continuing Criminal Enterprise" sounds like RICO to me. Okay. Depends how its used.
"Banking and Insurance, Counterfeit, Embezzlement". Bye bye Sam Bankman-Fried LOL
"National Security". Well that'd be Edward Snowden and Julian Assange if we could ever get these traitors back onto U.S. soil! I hope President Trump will authorize Special Operations to retrieve these guys. Assange in particular is one Cheryl Bentov away from a Mordecai Vanunu honeytrap hahahaha. Snowden is tougher. He seems to be really disiplined. If anyone can make a deal with Putin for him, President Trump can.
Much as I like seeing people fry, I think I'd wait on this, SH, until Pres Trump is back in office. Biden's BOP would whack a lot of people who don't deserve it. Keep in mind we have Jan 6 patriots locked up right now.
Dictator from day one! MAGA
Posted by: MAGA 2024 | May 22, 2024 2:38:32 PM
Mark,
Your disdain for victims is duly noted.
You don’t even acknowledge that the system was almost as strict under Dems and that Youngkin is getting something done the Dems didn’t do, increasing transparency to the point even the ACLU is giving him credit.
The demagogue is you.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 23, 2024 3:39:28 PM
"and we are keeping way too many people in prison who just don’t need to be there."
Perhaps, if we just look at incarceration in an "incapacitation" light, but two things: (1) Identifying which people should stay in and (2) there are "just desserts" for some of these people.
Posted by: federalist | May 24, 2024 10:06:11 AM
federalist,
Bingo.
Deciding who will commit more crime is always the main question.
One side needs to bear the burden of such decisions.
Should we put that burden on society or the criminals? I prefer allowing the criminal to shoulder it. Keeping them in too long is better than not long enough.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | May 24, 2024 10:44:33 AM
But do not forget, Master Tarls, that federalist (sometimes?) believes that if we keep certain persons in prison too long, they have a (constitutional?) right to start attacking prison guards.
Posted by: Doug B | May 24, 2024 2:58:16 PM