Sunday, April 12, 2020

Reducing the Prison Population

Incarceration, Studies, and ALEC

REDUCING INCARCERATION





In the United States, it is evident we need to reduce the inmate population.
In Oklahoma, we are 100% overcapacity, despite sentencing reforms.1 Our state is not addressing problems of education, re-entry, and recidivism. Legislators remain divided on the answer.
     A 2011 survey conducted by the VERA Institute estimated the total prison cost of 40 states was $39 billion, not sustainable.2.  Our lawmakers have led us into this crisis with the war on drugs, which led to partnerships with bill mills such as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Large corporations fund ALEC, and many members are American lawmakers. Lawmakers and corporations often vote on and edit these bills before they make it to the public.  ALEC was responsible for providing boilerplate legislation to state lawmakers to present across the country.  One of ALEC’s most significant contributors is the private prison industry, legislation such as the “Truth in Sentencing Act,” and the “Three Strikes Laws.” It is apparent we have corruption currently in statehouses. ALEC created the need and the customers for their donors’ prisons.
     One of the most obvious ways to start reducing the number of people incarcerated is to begin assessing inmates for release, which are: (1) over the age of 60, (2) non-ambulatory, (3) terminally ill, (4) Incarcerated on technical violations, (5) eliminate “Truth in Sentencing” and (6) inmates who have served 1/3 of their sentence.  Studies show that after the age of 60, recidivism is almost non-existent in all offender categories, including violent offenders.3 If these inmates are not a risk,  help them apply for community services and transition, the state will save money, and we reduce the number of inmates. It would be a great start, but by no means is this a solution.  


1. Barry A. Krisberg, Marchionna, S., &; Hartney, C. J. (2019). American Corrections Concepts and Controversies 2nd Edition (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
2. Press, A. (2020, Feb 28). US News and World Reports. Retrieved Jan 29, 2020, from usnews.com: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/oklahoma/articles/2020-01-29/oklahomas-prison-population-falls-but-system-still-crowded
 3. Laub, J. L.,R.J. Sampson (2006). SHARED BEGINNINGS, DIVERGENT LIVES :Delinquent Boys To Age 70. In J. L. Laub, & R. J. Sampson, SHARED BEGINNINGS, DIVERGENT LIVES :Delinquent Boys To Age 70 (pp. 110-113). First Harvard University Press.

Monday, April 6, 2020

CHILDREN SERVING LIFE


Juvenile Justice LWOP





On March 29th, 2020, I watched the Frontline video "When Kids Get Life." It is disturbing this country has ceased to look at mitigating factors such as abuse, trauma, and mental capacity. It is disappointing to realize as a society, we have decided our youth are incapable of redemption. Judicial hearings are no longer necessary in some jurisdictions to determine whether to charge a child as a juvenile or an adult. The stories in this video are alarming.
            In modern times juveniles are treated harsher than in the past. The Supreme Court ruled in Miller v. Alabama; juveniles cannot be sentenced to mandatory life without parole for murder. However, over 2,000 inmates convicted as juveniles are still serving LWOP. Inmates may even be re-sentenced, but repeatedly denied parole. If you were an outsider, it would appear the United States has an obsession with vengeance.
            In a civil society, we must maintain order and public safety, and there is no question about that. Punishment and retribution are legitimate goals of the justice system, but rehabilitation should be the primary focus after public safety. Juveniles are often victims themselves, as we see in the video. Perhaps we need to stop calling children delinquents. Justice involved child is a more appropriate term. Sentencing children to LWOP as a standard is like saying we have throw-away children. It is similar to sending your new Mercedes to the junkyard because of a busted headlight.
            Anyone can sympathize with the family member of a victim, but lifelong vengeance and justice are not the same things. Why did the offender commit the crime is a valid question in deciding the action to be taken: the mental capacity, abuse, age, illness, and trauma endured need to be considered. Our system fails children every day. Jacob Ind is an example of a child left behind by the system. How does a 15-year-old child process his stepfather throwing him in a bathroom, hitting, masturbating in his face, ejaculating on him, calling the child dirty, and to take a shower? Jacob's brother reported the abuse, and his mother ignored it. Who knows how long this kind of sexual violence took place. Who can say what they would do in that situation, especially given the fact the brain of a child that age has not fully developed? I think it is pretty cold not to consider all the mitigating factors.
            15-year-old Nathan Ybanez murdered his mother after his friend came to pick him up after work. It didn't appear to be pre-meditated and was likely acting out due to repeated mental and sexual abuse by his mother. Nathans mother would tell him he didn't love her if he wanted to spend time with friends; she followed him at all hours of the night like she had an obsession with him. Nathan's mother sexually molested him. Erik Jensen, 16 years old, shared his suspicions with his parents; he suspected sexual abuse after overhearing an odd phone call with the mother. The parents contacted authorities, and social services said the most they could do was take a report. Social services told the Jensens, "they did not have the resources to look out for after teenage boys that should be able to look out for themselves." I look at Nathan as a victim, not a delinquent.
One night Erik went to pick up Nathan after he left work. Nathan told Eric to check on him if he was not out in 20 minutes. After Nathan did not come back out, Eric knocked on the door, Nathans mother let him in, and Erik waited in his troubled friends' room. While waiting for Nathan, Erik could hear a violent fight taking place in the other room. Nathan called for Erik to bring him bags. Erik was not in the room when the murder took place, but admits and believes he fainted when Nate handed him the bloody tongs used to beat his mother and then choke her until she expired. I don't think there was a plan. The boys called, Brett, a friend to help clean up, involving more individuals, is never wise when committing a crime. The actions of these children do not show premeditation.
            Nathan was apprehended and charged with murder; afterward, Erik and Brett were arrested and charged as accessories to murder. In exchange for immunity, Brett implicated Erik in the vicious killing. Nathan and Erik are charged as adults and sentenced to LWOP. I believe Erik was in the wrong place at the wrong time, and that Brett implicated him to avoid prison. Erik was present and now serving LWOP and didn't kill anyone, yet convicted of felony murder.
            Abuse reported to authorities was not investigated or acted upon in these children's cases. The parents, social workers, and the system failed these so-called Juvenile delinquents before they committed any crime. We cannot hold children to the same standards as an adult, especially when they do not have equal power. Society doesn't believe these children are capable of voting, smoking, drinking, military service, entering contracts, controlling inheritance, quitting school, playing little league, getting married, having abortions, or making medical decisions. Children lack adult rights and should not have to face adult consequences. It is vital society find the answer to why these things happened. The study of these matters is needed.  The frontal lobe is still developing until the age of about 25, which is the part of our brain responsible for impulse control. This group cannot appreciate the consequences of their actions or the long term consequences. One must wonder what happened to these children's abusers to make them engage in this abuse. I wonder if they were not victims in the past in some capacity? Hopefully, as a society, we can be open to exploring these problematic issues and questions.
Short Opinion Blog Post by Shad Hagan




Sunday, April 5, 2020

Governor Stitt Failing Oklahoma



Covid-19 and Prison




     Oklahoma's response to COVID-19 has been slow. Our Governor is afraid to act for some reason. Healthcare workers are at risk of being exposed to infected patients in hospitals. Hospitals are in a short supply of masks and protective gear, having to reuse safety equipment such as masks and gowns. I realize many people, in the beginning, were claiming we don't have that many cases, and this will pass like the Flu. First, the danger needs to be made clear. Coronavirus infection is not the primary concern. Coronavirus is more contagious than the Flu and will infect more people. Most people can recover but may need to be in the hospital and require a ventilator. Second, the hospitals do not have the number of masks, gowns, and respirators for a mass amount of infect patients. We should have shut the state down much sooner so we could get back to business as usual, but the Governor was afraid to act.
Prisons are a hotbed for infectious disease. During my incarceration, many people had Hepatitis, HIV, and the Flu was a real concern. The prisons should have been making masks long before they started or quarantined shifts of guards in the facility. Advocates called wardens to donate masks made by the public and turned down. It sounds extreme, but look where we are now. I made several posts about masks when people were calling for release because I know Governor Stitt is a do-nothing Legislator. He created a reform task force, and we released some inmates to reduce a number, and well, that is it: small changes, but nothing substantial to change the system or help people. Everyone, if we want real change, we have to change the legislators, we keep voting the same people in. We can only hope it will not be someone we know in prison that will pay the price because our leader was more worried about re-election than lives. Inmates are going to be infected by the staff; they are the outside variable. What the Governor needs to be working on now is how fast he can get rapid tests or evaluate who has a stable household that can be released to home confinement to mitigate the death toll. Perhaps he should start with the elderly and non-violent inmates, people with less than six months left. It is time for the Governor to grow up. Oklahoma is in a real crisis, and lives are on the line. Just my opinion

Shad Hagan