Reason Magazine - Topics > Punishment/Prisons

At Home He Feels Like a Jurist

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:14:00 EDT

From an interesting true-crime tale in The Washington Monthly:

In the previous year, nearly twenty defendants in other Baltimore cases had begun adopting what lawyers in the federal courthouse came to call "the flesh-and-blood defense." The defense, such as it is, boils down to this: As officers of the court, all defense lawyers are really on the government's side, having sworn an oath to uphold a vast, century-old conspiracy to conceal the fact that most aspects of the federal government are illegitimate, including the courts, which have no constitutional authority to bring people to trial. The defendants also believed that a legal distinction could be drawn between their name as written on their indictment and their true identity as a "flesh and blood man."

Judge Davis and his law clerk pored over the case files, which led them to a series of strange Web sites. The flesh and blood defense, they discovered, came from a place far from Baltimore, from people as different from [black defendant] Willie Mitchell as people could possibly be. Its antecedents stretched back decades, involving religious zealots, gun nuts, tax protestors, and violent separatists driven by theories that had fueled delusions of Aryan supremacy and race war in gun-loaded compounds in the wilds of Montana and Idaho.

How were such ideas transmitted from the radical right to the black underclass? The Monthly's writer, Kevin Carey, points to the prison system:

Some collected the documents [the Montana-based separatists] the Freemen filed during their trial and began offering them for sale via advertisements in "America's Bulletin," a newsletter espousing Posse-style anti-government theories that is widely distributed throughout the prison system by white supremacists.

In October 2004, a prisoner named Michael Burpee arrived at the Maryland Correctional Adjustment Center in downtown Baltimore. Burpee had recently been convicted in Florida of trafficking PCP to Maryland. Hoping for leniency, he pled guilty, only to receive a twenty seven-year prison sentence dictated by harsh federal sentencing guidelines. Desperate for a way out, he began listening to someone--presumably a fellow prisoner--who explained how the charges were all part of a secret government conspiracy against him. Then Burpee was brought up on new federal drug charges in Maryland, and shipped north. He carried with him a pile of documents that were remarkably similar to those that had been filed by the Montana Freemen....

Like the Midwestern farmers before them, the Baltimore inmates were susceptible to the notion that the federal government was engaged in a massive, historic plot to deprive them of life, liberty, and property. Such suspicions are prevalent in certain pockets of the black community--that year, a study from the Rand Corporation found that over 25 percent of African Americans surveyed believed the AIDS virus was developed by the government, and 12 percent thought it was released into the population by the CIA. And black separatist groups like the Nation of Islam--also fond of conspiracy theories--have long cultivated members through the prison system; some of these groups have explicitly adopted the language of constitutional fundamentalists. Given these developments, Levitas told me, "I'm surprised this didn't happen sooner."

That's a fascinating conveyer belt. I'm not sure it was the only one. This is not the first time conspiracy theories identified with far-right groups, including white supremacists, have found their way into black America. I've heard similar ideas, for example, from some offshoots of the Moorish Science Temple. And while that was recent enough to have possibly been influenced by Burpee, it isn't my only enounter of that kind.

In the late '90s, when I was writing a lot about pirate radio, I met several black radicals who defended their right to operate unlicensed stations using "sovereign citizen" arguments that I had seen, in almost identical form, in the right-wing fringes of the libertarian movement. Still earlier in the '90s, I stumbled on the curious cultural zone where black militants intersected with the militia milieu, which I then described in an article for Chronicles. (Unfortunately, the only copy of that story that I can find online is a garbled version someone posted to a UFO list, with all the paragraph breaks missing, the last line removed, and who knows how many other screwups in the transcription.) I've seen evidence suggesting that similar ideas were traveling from white populists to black populists -- or, if you prefer, being adapted and reconfigured by black populists -- even earlier.

The really interesting thing about the Monthly story is that when Mitchell tried to use those ludicrous homebrewed legal theories, they may have...worked. Sort of.

None of these arguments had a prayer of overturning the charges. But they had an impact nonetheless. They made a long, complex trial longer and more complex still. Seeking the death penalty is rightfully arduous--it requires legal justifications for the penalty itself, enhanced scrutiny over jury selection, an additional penalty phase after a conviction, and so on. Conspiracy charges create further legal burdens. And the way Mitchell et al chose to deal with their attorneys--not dismissing them outright, but asking them to sign a peculiar "contract" that would essentially prohibit them from mounting a defense--created more problems. If the defendants weren't dealt with carefully, they might be able to appeal by claiming that they had been inadequately represented....

By mid-2007, the federal prosecutors were starting to run low on a vital resource: time. As years go by, memories fade, police officers retire or transfer, informants change their mind, and juries wonder why, if the case is so straightforward, it took so long to make. On September 6, 2007, prosecutors withdrew the death penalty for all four defendants.

[Via Matt Kaune.]

Under the Bridge

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:11:00 EDT

Details writer Ian Daily visits the underside of the Miami bridge that's home to a community of exiled sex offenders:

Fourteen men, ranging in age from 30 to 83, call this place home. Some sleep in cars among the pilings, others in grimy Wal-Mart tents wedged beneath the bridge. Martin, who spent two years in jail after being convicted of exposing himself to a 16-year-old girl when he was 19 or 20 (a crime he says he didn't commit), no longer has to wear the black GPS monitoring device that many of his neighbors do. He finished his five-year probation in 2006, but he can't find a place to live that complies with the county's residency laws. So Martin is forced to live here—in a colony under an overpass where the amenities include a generator, a composting toilet, and a workout area with a bench and free weights—indefinitely, because he and the other men were ordered here by law-enforcement authorities.
"Take a picture if you want," says Martin, showing off his driver's license. The address next to his photo reads UNDER THE JULIA TUTTLE CAUSEWAY.

I first blogged about the sex offender bridge in April of last year.

Kerry Howley and Jacob Sullum have also looked at policies aimed at exiling sex offenders.

First, Group Showers--Now, No Cornbread?

mriggs@reason.com (Mike Riggs) — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 10:27:00 EDT

Polk County, Fla., needs to save a little money, so it's putting the inmates of the Polk County jail—many of whom are behind bars for making, selling, or possessing crystal meth—on a diet:

Cornbread to crackers - Instead of serving cornbread 3 times per week, inmates are now served 3 packs of crackers per week. This represents a cost savings of $33,304 per year.

Tea and juice to water - All tea and juice products have been eliminated. Inmates are instead served water. This represents a cost savings of $56,630 per year.

Two slices of bread to one - Instead of serving each inmate 2 slices of bread for breakfast each day, he or she receives 1 slice of bread for breakfast each day. This represents a cost savings of $25,116 per year.

Fresh eggs to egg patties - Instead of serving 2 fresh eggs to each inmate per week, inmates are served with one egg patty per week. This represents a cost savings of $24,545 per year.

PBJ to meat - Instead of serving peanut butter & jelly sandwiches, inmates are served meat sandwiches. This represents a cost savings of $11,076 per year.
Carton milk to Non-fat dry milk - By switching from cartons of fresh milk to non-fat dry powdered milk, PCSO will save $10,545 per year.

The Polk County Sheriff's Office's list of "Inmate Rights and Responsibilities" includes "nutritious meals" as a right, but Polk County Sheriff (and Head Good Ole' Boy) Grady Judd says that if inmates want to eat food that is nutritious and tasty, "They need to behave, quit violating the law, and stay out of the county jail."

Polk County isn't the only place cutting back. Call it the Shawshank effect (empathizing with prisoners), but I think that as long as we continue to incarcerate people for committing victimless crimes, we should feed them well—Leona Helmsley's dog has it better, for christ's sake.

Editor Jacob Sullum argued for incarcerating fewer people here.

Piling on Georgia

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:21:00 EDT

Apropos of Kerry Howley's post below, Georgia's Supreme Court today encouragingly ruled that once convicted felons have done their time and have been released from prison, judges can't banish them from the state.

However, the court did rule that judges may exile said criminals to a single county.

Seems like a great way to encourage recidivism.

He Could've Beat Those Dirty Lakers

mriggs@reason.com (Mike Riggs) — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:20:00 EDT

Twenty-two years ago yesterday, University of Maryland star forward Len Bias died of a cocaine overdose. In the wake of his death, Congressman James C. Wright, Jr. (D—Texas), proposed the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act—which, in the course of "providing strong Federal leadership in establishing effective drug abuse prevention and education programs," and "halting international drug traffic," established minimum sentences for the possession or sale of illicit substances.

Wright resigned from Congress in ~~1986~~ 1989, disgraced after committing an ethical faux pas or two, and the University of Maryland has a new (decent) power forward to worry over in Landon Milbourne, but the federal minimum sentencing laws are still around.

It's a crying shame that Bias, who signed with the Celtics two days before he died and likely could've been part of the dynasty that beat those dirty Lakers, is remembered more as the impetus for draconian drug laws than as a hoopster with a heart of gold and a sick inside game.

Check out Senior Editor Jacob Sullum's article on minimum sentencing here, and those of you who aren't too old to engage in "social networking" can check out reason's new Facebook page here.

Terrorized by the Supreme Court

schapman@tribune.com (Steve Chapman) — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:00:00 EDT

A lot of people who strongly believe in the war on terror are not above sowing a little terror of their own. From the reaction to last week's Supreme Court decision on Guantanamo, you would think the detainees were all going to be trained, armed and set free at Ground Zero, with free shuttle service to the nearest airport.

John McCain denounced the ruling, which said inmates may ask for federal court review under a procedure known as habeas corpus, as "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country." Former Bush Justice Department official John Yoo warned that henceforth, captured enemy fighters will be read their Miranda rights. The irrepressible Wall Street Journal had a cartoon with a judge atop a cage labeled "Gitmo" watching masked inmates stream out wearing suicide vests and lugging AK-47s.

All this outrage builds on the dissent registered by Justice Antonin Scalia. The court's decision "will make the war harder on us," he thundered. "It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed."

Well, it won't have that effect unless it leads to inmates being released—which it has not, will not anytime soon, and may not ever. If and when it does, he may have a point, though not necessarily a powerful one.

Anytime you let someone out of prison, even if he's innocent, you create the possibility that he will someday kill someone. Scalia makes much of the supposed fact that 30 of the detainees freed from Guantanamo "have returned to the battlefield." Just because they were later captured or killed, however, doesn't mean they "returned" to the war.

Some of them may have been victims of mistaken identity, which could explain why those softhearted folks at the Pentagon let them go. But stick a blameless unfortunate in a cage for six years, abusing him in the process, and when he comes out, he may seek revenge. The only way to eliminate the risk is to keep all the detainees locked up forever.

Even the Bush administration has not gone that far. It was happy to free more than 500 inmates over the years. When it did, by the way, nobody accused the president of causing more Americans to be killed.

Besides, any releases are only speculative right now. To have a chance at freedom, a prisoner will have to make a plausible case that he's innocent. The administration had already planned to try 80 of the detainees before military commissions, which suggests it has abundant evidence of guilt.

Presumably the Defense Department has information to show that many, if not all, of the others were connected to al-Qaida or other enemy forces. If the government presents incriminating evidence that the inmate can't refute, a habeas corpus petition will be about as useful to him as a snowboard.

Nor are the courts likely to let the American Civil Liberties Union draw up the standards for release. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing the majority opinion, indicated the judiciary will err on the side of caution.

"Habeas corpus proceedings need not resemble a criminal trial," he stipulated, for those worried about Miranda warnings. Though inmates have rights, he noted, "it does not follow that a habeas corpus court may disregard the dangers the detention in these cases was intended to prevent."

Let's suppose there's an inmate whom the Pentagon thinks was fighting for al-Qaida but lacks any supporting evidence it can use in court. Does he now have a get-out-of-Gitmo-free card? Not necessarily.

In that case, says Northwestern University law professor Ronald Allen, the government could classify him as a prisoner of war—who, like POWs in previous wars, may be held until the hostilities cease. The trouble, from the administration's point of view, is that he would then be entitled to standard POW protections, such as being treated humanely and not being punished for refusing to answer questions. But at this point, that's a small price to pay.

It's also a small price to say that if the executive wants to capture someone, treat him as an unlawful enemy combatant and hold him for the rest of his life, it should have to justify that decision to someone other than itself. Critics of this decision are terrified that the courts will have the power to free innocent men. But really, the alternative is a lot scarier.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

Pay No Attention to the Man Holding Jumper Cables

mriggs@reason.com (Mike Riggs) — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:08:00 EDT

Right on the heels of the U.S. Supreme Court Guantanamo Bay case, Physicians for Human Rights released a study today documenting torture by U.S. forces:

In a 121-page report, the doctors' group said that it uncovered medical evidence of torture, including beatings, electric shock, sleep deprivation, sexual humiliation, sodomy and scores of other abuses.

The group's expectations, however, are a little tame in light of its findings:

Based on its investigation, the report calls on the U.S. government to issue a formal apology to detainees subject to torture and ill treatment by the military since fall 2001 in Afghanistan, Iraq, Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere.

Physicians for Human Rights is also calling for the Bush Administration to "Repudiate all forms of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment." Three cheers for toothless resolutions!

Contributing Editor Cathy Young on the logic of torture here.

One Place Where Crime Isn't Getting Any Better

mriggs@reason.com (Mike Riggs) — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:28:00 EDT

The FBI's most recent report says that violent crime rates are going down; everywhere but Liberty City, that is. Turns out Grand Theft Auto IV's cops suck at their jobs:

"I was shot 14 times on my way to work today, including twice by police," said one Algonquin-area resident. "That is unacceptable."
Many blame the LCPD directly for the increase in criminal activity, citing the department's lax procedure for arresting criminals, which involves taking 10 percent of the suspect's money, confiscating his weapons, and simply releasing him from custody later that day. Outraged citizens say this is not enough, especially in a city where assault rifles can be found on factory roofs and grenade caches are located under the globe at the old World's Fair site.
"The police just let them go, and 20 minutes later they're shooting at the very same criminals from helicopters," veteran crime reporter Mike Whiteley said. "That is not proper law enforcement. We may be seeing a return to the bad old days of 2002, when the police, the FIB, and even Army tank battalions would leave countless bodies on the streets while attempting to capture just one man on some sort of joyful mass-destruction spree."

In related news, it looks like DC police have picked up a lesson or two from Liberty City cops. And the LCPD aren't the only ones with itchy trigger fingers.

RIP, Emperor's Club VIP

mriggs@reason.com (Mike Riggs) — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:19:00 EDT

With all the fuss over what to do with Eliot Spitzer, rubber-neckers almost forgot about the state's punitive plans for the folks who arranged the governor's good times:

The petite madam at the center of the prostitution ring that brought down Eliot Spitzer is expected to plead guilty as soon as this week and dish dirt in an ongoing federal probe centered on the former governor.
Cecil "Katie" Suwal, 23, agreed yesterday to come clean on her role in the million-dollar Emperor's Club VIP ring, according to a statement by her lawyer, Alberto Ebanks.
"Ms. Suwal agreed to come to terms with the government and will accept responsibility for her involvement in the operations of the Emperor's Club VIP," Ebanks said. "She is contrite and she is determined to right her wrongs in a manner that is just and fair."
A source said Suwal has agreed to testify for the feds in a grand-jury investigation that could lead to criminal charges against Spitzer.

Sewal's and others' testimonies are going to be used in the probe against Spitzer, but one can't help but wonder what will be left of these people and the callgirls they employed when the feds are finished with them. I bet Spitzer's hoping he can quietly sneak back to suburbia without facing any charges. If he makes it out of this without having to wear a state-issued onesy, will he have the balls/integrity to lobby on behalf of the people who are likely to get locked up for providing him with a remedy for his libido-less marriage?

For more reason coverage of Spitzer's downfall, see here, here, here, and here.

The Death Ship

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 11:49:00 EDT

There's a species of libertarian who dreams of finding liberty at sea. There are other Americans who may have more authoritarian designs for the oceans:

The United States is operating "floating prisons" to house those arrested in its war on terror, according to human rights lawyers, who claim there has been an attempt to conceal the numbers and whereabouts of detainees.

Details of ships where detainees have been held and sites allegedly being used in countries across the world have been compiled as the debate over detention without trial intensifies on both sides of the Atlantic. The US government was yesterday urged to list the names and whereabouts of all those detained.

Information about the operation of prison ships has emerged through a number of sources, including statements from the US military, the Council of Europe and related parliamentary bodies, and the testimonies of prisoners.

The analysis, due to be published this year by the human rights organisation Reprieve, also claims there have been more than 200 new cases of rendition since 2006, when President George Bush declared that the practice had stopped.

Reprieve has more here.

Rock and Roll Ain't Noise Pollution

info@reason.com (Damon W. Root) — Thu, 29 May 2008 13:04:00 EDT

In a fascinating post at the New Yorker's Goings On blog, Alex Ross describes how music has been used as a means of psychological warfare and torture from World War II to the present. A few examples:

At the end of 1989, when Manuel Noriega was barricaded inside the Papal Nuncio's residence in Panama City, American troops set up loudspeakers and subjected him to an unending stream of rock music, with a playlist favoring heavy metal. In 1993, during the siege of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, the F.B.I. blasted Tibetan chants and other allegedly annoying sounds in an effort to break the will of the cult. The efficacy of these strategies is open to question; in the case of Waco, they were adopted against the advice of negotiators, and may only have hardened the cult's resolve.

Since the beginning of American operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, music has routinely been used during interrogations at Guantánamo and elsewhere. The playing of loud music, customarily hip-hop or heavy metal, is part of a standard procedure that the Department of the Army describes as "futility": "[The] collector convinces the source that resistance to questioning is futile. This engenders a feeling of hopelessness and helplessness on the part of the source."

Whole thing here.

I Can Recall a Familiar Smile

matt.welch@reason.com (Matt Welch) — Tue, 27 May 2008 13:56:00 EDT

Arnold Schwarzenegger, a big disappointment as Golden State governor (to me, anyway), has at least enriched the lives of one class of Californians: state employees.

The state of California's payroll is skyrocketing, even as its budget deficit has grown to billions of dollars in recent months.
In Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's first four years, the total bill for state workers' salaries jumped by 37 percent, compared with a 5 percent increase in the preceding four years under then-Gov. Gray Davis, a Chronicle analysis of state payroll records shows.
One month before Schwarzenegger took office in November 2003, just eight state employees earned more than $200,000 a year working in the core state government, which excludes universities and the Legislature. In April of this year, there were nearly a thousand, according to records.
And the number of state employees making six-figure salaries has more than doubled since 2003, to nearly 15,000. Meanwhile, the number of state workers has grown by 26,000 under Schwarzenegger after being cut by Davis, who was recalled from office in the midst of a severe budget crisis.

Big San Francisco Chronicle blowout here. Davis' budget deficit in his recall year was $38 billion. Schwarzenegger's deficit this year is being estimated at $15-20 billion, on an overall budget of around $100 billion, up from Davis' outgoing $77 billion.

Link via Mickey Kaus. reason on Schwarzenegger here.

'30 Years of Failure'

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Fri, 23 May 2008 15:00:00 EDT

It May Shock You. It Might Even Horrify You.

info@reason.com (Damon W. Root) — Thu, 22 May 2008 09:45:00 EDT

Writing in yesterday's New York Sun, National Review ‘s Andrew Stuttaford surveys some of the carnage and perversity featured in the intriguing new book Lenin's Brain and Other Tales from the Soviet Archives. From Stuttaford's review:

The saga begins with the removal of [Lenin's] brain in the immediate aftermath of its owner's death, to be poked and prodded, examined and venerated. From there it went on a long, strange trip from skull to jar to slide, ending up divided into 30,953 carefully selected slices. (I am unclear whether this total includes the portion that was dispatched to Berlin's Kaiser Wilhelm Institute.) A German brain specialist was put in charge of the project for a while, but he proved unacceptably foreign and irritatingly independent. In the end, however, Stalin's Politburo got the result it wanted from a team of more biddable experts, "proof" that Lenin was smarter than just about anybody else—a mixture of pseudoscience and elitism that was all too typical of the Bolshevik project. As the episode reminds us, the Soviet leadership believed that the masses were inherently unreliable: Without an "enlightened elite to manage [them], there would never be a peasant-worker paradise. By this logic, the creators of this dictatorship must themselves be head and shoulders above the rest."

Whole thing here.

The Soviet horror show that particularly sticks in my brain is described in Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago. The scene is a district Party conference in Moscow Province. Stalin wasn't there, but of course he was celebrated at the close of proceedings. The applause was thunderous.

However, who would dare be the first to stop? The secretary of the District Party Committee could have done it. He was standing on the platform, and it was he who had just called for the ovation. But he was a newcomer. He had taken the place of a man who'd been arrested. He was afraid! After all, NKVD men were standing in the hall applauding and watching to see who quit first. And in that obscure, small hall, unknown to the Leader, the applause went on—six, seven, eight minutes! They were done for! Their goose was cooked! They couldn't stop now till they collapsed with heart attacks. At the rear of the hall, which was crowded, they could of course cheat a bit, clap less frequently, less vigorously, not so eagerly—but up there with the presidium where everyone could see them?

R.J.'s Law

dweigel@reason.com (David Weigel) — Tue, 13 May 2008 12:00:00 EDT

Sixteen years ago, R.J. Feild was born to a heroin-addicted welfare mother in Southern California. Brought into the world underweight and premature, he has trouble walking, and his bad eyesight makes it hard for him to read. He was, however, able to enter an essay contest sponsored by Assemblyman John Benoit (R-Palm Desert) called “There Oughta Be a Law,” in which the winner’s proposed bill would be brought to the floor of the California legislature. Feild’s essay suggested giving random drug tests to welfare recipients and stripping benefits from people who tested positive.

He won the contest. “You can’t make up this story,” says Assemblyman Benoit. “The beauty of this bill is that it comes from a real-life, lovable young man who’ll the suffer rest of his life for mistakes of his mother. When you see him make this argument, you can’t help be sympathetic to it.”

“R.J.’s Law,” as submitted by Benoit, is actually a little less strict than what the 16-year old proposed. It offers people who fail the drug test a choice between losing their benefits and entering rehab, although if they test positive in rehab they’ll be out of luck. “I live in a political world,” Benoit explains. “We should give these people a chance to walk down the right path. Of course, if they walk off that path, then we can’t help them.”

Benoit’s detractors point out that welfare program managers are already empowered to test recipients if they suspect they’re using drugs. Benoit doesn’t think that’s enough. “The average lady behind a counter is not trained to recognize the symptoms of drug addiction,” he says. “You need occasional random sampling. It works for professional baseball players, it works for the clerks at Wal-Mart, and it will work here.”

R.J.’s Law might not pass the Democrat-dominated legislature, but Benoit is optimistic. He is pondering another “There Oughta be a Law” contest this fall, when kids return to school.

Now Playing at Reason.tv: Mississippi Drug War Blues—The Case of Cory Maye

Thu, 08 May 2008 07:00:00 EDT

...

Incarceration Nation

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:13:00 EST

Ron Bailey beat me to the punch on the new Pew study showing that 1 in 99 American adults are behind bars.

A few thoughts:

It's a staggering figure that by far and away leads the world, both in the total number and in the percentage of the population in prison.

And while there's certainly some truth to the theory that throwing lots of people in jail is in part responsible for the drop in violent crime over the last 15 years, the story's a bit more complicated than that. As the Washington Post explains in the article linked above, a state like Florida, which has been giddily locking people up for two decades, has experienced only a slight drop in crime over that period. New York, on the other hand, has experienced a substantial drop in crime since the early 1990s, but the state's prison population is the lowest its been in 15 years.

The violent crime rate has also inched back upward the last few years, even as prison populations have continued to soar.

Strangely enough, the Washington Post story on the study says (correctly, I think) that we're finally starting to see reform in sentencing law, as well as some consternation from elected officials about our shamefully high incarceration levels. But not because our political leaders are suddenly concerned about civil rights, or the humanity of keeping one percent of the country in lockup. It's more because supporting a prison system that's bursting at the seams has become a drain on state budgets.

Whatever it takes, I guess. It'll also be interesting to see what happens when the nonviolent drug offenders we locked up in the 1980s with mandatory minimums start getting released.

"It is Well That War is So Terrible...."

bdoherty@reason.com (Brian Doherty) — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 20:16:00 EST

Via Wired.com, and from the collection of psychologist Philip Zimbardo who was a defense expert witness for one of the guards, some more gruesome photos from Abu Ghraib. Some are pretty similar to the classic hooded figure one, some of them defensible on some level as weird black humor, but for the most part showing some very dark behavior seemingly motivated from some of the very dark feelings generated by life during wartime.

[Tip via reader John-David Filing.]

Homecoming

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 11:25:00 EST

New frontiers in prison privatization.

The ACLU's Demands of the Attorney General Nominee

bdoherty@reason.com (Brian Doherty) — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:41:00 EDT

Here's what Michael Mukasey has to do to win the ACLU's love. An excerpt:

The Senate should refuse to confirm Michael Mukasey or any nominee unless the nominee promises under oath to take the following four steps within the first thirty days in office:
Turn over to the Judiciary Committee all documents in the Justice Department's possession concerning the authorization to monitor any phone call in the United States without a warrant, and concerning the use of national security letters to obtain documents anywhere in America.
Turn over to the Judiciary Committee all documents in the Justice Department's possession authorizing the use of any interrogation or detention practices that are not authorized by the Army Field Manual on Interrogations, as well as any documents interpreting or analyzing any legal prohibitions on torture or cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.
Appoint an outside special counsel for the investigation and, if appropriate, prosecution of any person who violated federal laws protecting detainees against torture and abuse, or who violated federal laws against wiretapping within the United States without a warrant.
Create a blue-ribbon committee of civil rights advisors to focus on restoring the Civil Rights Division to its historic role as the nation's premier and nonpartisan civil rights enforcement agency.

I question the use of "blue-ribbon committee" type operations, but the rest of it is a good start in ensuring the new guy sees his job as more protecting and defending the Constitution than protecting and defending his boss's behind.

$100 Million to Wrongfully Incarcerated

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:01:00 EDT

Yesterday, a federal judge ordered the U.S. government to pay more than $100 million to four men who were wrongfully imprisoned for 35 years. The court found that the FBI had withheld evidence proving the men's innocence for decades. The Justice Department actually argued that the FBI has no duty to share evidence with state prosecutors, even if not sharing will result in a wrongful conviction.

Thankfully, the judge disagreed. Two of the four men have died. Their share will go to their heirs.

Self-Love Is a Battlefield

jblanks@reason.com (Jonathan Blanks) — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:34:00 EDT

A Florida judges adds 60 days in jail to a convicted robber's 10-year sentence. The crime?

A Broward prisoner accused of committing a sex act while he was alone in his jail cell was found guilty Tuesday of indecent exposure...
In reaching the guilty verdict, jurors found that an inmate's jail cell is ''a limited access public place'' where exposing oneself is against the law.

The judge sentenced [Terry Lee] Alexander, of Lauderdale Lakes, to 60 days in jail, on top of the 10-year sentence he is currently serving for armed robbery.

While punishing a prisoner for exposing himself seems reasonable, the guard who brought the charges is not:

Alexander's attorney argued that the prison cell was a private place and that what Alexander was doing was perfectly normal.

''Did other inmates start masturbating because of Mr. Alexander?'' [Defense attorney Kathleen] McHugh asked [BSO Deputy Coryus Veal, the officer who brought the charges]. ``Did you call a SWAT team?''

''I wish I had,'' Veal answered...
Veal, who has charged seven other inmates with the same offense, insisted that she was not against the act itself -- just the fact that Alexander was so blatant about it.

As if this case weren't silly enough:

Defense attorney Kathleen McHugh faced 17 prospective jurors and asked point-blank who among them had never done that particular sex act.

No hands went up.

If BSO Veal can't find a way to discipline prisoners for this behavior outside of the court system, perhaps she should find a new line of work.

Update on Oregon's Butt-Grabbing Middle Schoolers

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:05:00 EDT

Score one for the Intertubes. It looks like public attention and online outrage has nudged the case in a more sensible direction:

Based on his experience in similar cases, Berry said it's unlikely the boys, if convicted, would be sentenced for the maximum jail time for each of the counts. "That type of sentence has never been imposed in my county or in any county that I know of for these types of offenses," he said.
Berry said he, too, was inundated with calls and e-mails from readers who complained that charging the boys with 10 counts of sex abuse and harassment was an overreaction, as their parents maintain. Lawyers for the boys say each count could bring a year in confinement and mandatory registration as sex offenders.
Berry said a judge could lift the registration requirement after it was imposed. "These youths can petition the court relatively quickly for relief from that," he said.
The boys' families said they were furious at what appeared to be backpedaling on Berry's part.
"It makes us angry that they can overcharge . . . and make us think this could happen," said Tracie Mashburn, Cory's mother. "Why would they do that and threaten us with that if they're not going to do it?"
"He's just doing damage control," added Joe Cornelison, Ryan's father. "I want to ask Brad Berry, what kind of due process is this?"

Berry's explanation also doesn't explain why he initially charged the boys with felony sex abuse. And if he doesn't think the maximum sentence for these particular charges is appropriate, he shouldn't be bringing them.

The good news is, the worldwide attention to the case over the last two days may help the families' financial burden in fighting the charges.

Negra and Lawrence said the Mashburn and Cornelison families received so many offers of financial assistance that they moved Monday to set up a fund to cover legal expenses. Readers from as far away as Germany also contacted The Oregonian to comment or ask how they could contribute.

[...]

Tony Wood, a photographer in Pennsylvania, e-mailed the newspaper Monday after he read the story online. Wood said he planned to send a check to the fund.

"I would actually send a check to these parents because I am totally blown away by this. It's like something out of colonial times or the crusades," he said. "There are real issues out there, and this is not one of them."

"I am very thankful. I can't believe it," said Joe Cornelison, who is a press operator at the McMinnville newspaper. "It's been really hard. I'm behind on bills and have a hard time sleeping because I'm worried about my son, and his life has really been changed by this."

[...]

"I've just been crying all morning because of the way people are supporting us," said Tracie Mashburn.

Some people objected to my original headline that this kind of horseplay is just part of growing up. Fair enough, though I seem to remember quite a bit of butt-slapping and bra-strap snapping in middle school (not to mention adolescent boys' habit of continually kicking, punching, and flicking one another in the nuts). These incidents resulted in scoldings, detention, or, in the worst cases, suspensions. Never incarceration.

Bringing criminal charges was a gross overreaction, and typical of our tendency to turn to the criminal justice system to solve our problems. That the judge "could" set aside the sex offender registry requirement is beside the point. Either this DA thinks these boys should be forced to register as sex offenders for life, or he doesn't. If he does, he should say as much. If he doesn't, he should never have brought the charges. He shouldn't be permitted to pass the buck to the judge.

That the he initially brought felony charges is in itself reason to vote him out of office.

Better Commutations

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 08:48:00 EDT

Over at Families Against Mandatory Minimums, a list of people more deserving of presidential mercy than Scooter Libby.

Via David Boaz.

Free the New Youth 4!

bdoherty@reason.com (Brian Doherty) — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:37:00 EDT

Egypt's Daily Star reports on Internet efforts to raise consciousness and eventually free four young Chinese political prisoners. And yes, the story does have some local Egyptian color:

Arab and Chinese youth activists will be joining forces in a new Internet campaign calling for the release of imprisoned Chinese bloggers and demanding greater freedom of expression in China.
The campaign “New Youth 4” received its name after the case of the four young Chinese activists Jin Haike, Xu Wei, Yang Zili and Zhang Honghai, who in 2003 were charged with “subverting state power and the overthrowing of the socialist system” and sentenced to prison for setting up the Internet discussion group the “New Youth Society;” a forum allegedly advocating social and democratic reform.
The Beijing Intermediate People’s Court sentenced the men to long prison terms in spring 2003 ranging between eight to ten years; a verdict that has been subject to strong criticism from international rights groups, including Amnesty International and Committee to Protect Journalists.
The campaign, accessible at www.newyouth4.org, is inspired and hosted by the Free Kareem Coalition — an online project launched by Arab activists in support of the imprisoned Egyptian student blogger Kareem Amer who earlier this year was sentenced to four years in prison for defaming Islam and President Mubarak on his weblog.

The Free Kareem site, still (alas) active.

The FAQ about the Chinese New Youth 4, and what you can do if you want to help.