|
|
|
|
|
Prison 2006 News & Views |
|
|
|
|
|
Prison 2006 News & Views |
|
|
|
Current News & Views Click Headline for Full Story
December 2006 Bush Pardons 16 Minor Criminals
12-22-06 -- President Bush gave a pre-Christmas gift to 17 minor criminals, but even after adding these pardons and one sentence commutation to his record he remains one of the stingiest presidents for such federal forgiveness. . . . Six of the federal offenses involved in the 16 pardons and one commutation issued Thursday were drug crimes, while others included bank fraud, mail fraud, the acceptance of a kickback, a false statement on a loan application and conspiracy to defraud the government over taxes. . . . Seven of the 17 weren't even sent to prison or jail, getting probation, small fines or other penalties instead. The longest sentence was nine years, for aiding cocaine distribution, followed by a six-year term for conspiracy to possess marijuana.
Does separation equal suffering? Some state inmates spend years in solitary. Critics say that is cruel and unusual.
12-17-06 -- Ian Manuel had just turned 14 when he went to prison for shooting a woman in a botched robbery on a Tampa sidewalk. Mouthy and disobedient, he was sent to solitary confinement a year and a half later. . . . That was in 1992. He has been there ever since. . . . Now 29, Manuel has spent half his life in a concrete box the size of a walk-in closet. His food comes through a slot in the door. He never sees another inmate. Out of boredom he cuts himself just to watch the blood trickle. . . . Attorneys who advocate on behalf of prisoners call Manuel "the poster boy" for the ill effects of solitary confinement. . . . There are 3,500 inmates in solitary confinement in Florida prisons. More than 1,400 of them are held under the strictest conditions, like Manuel. . . . They are not allowed out of their cells except for three quick showers a week and five hours in an empty outdoor cage that resembles a dog run. . . . They are not allowed to stand at their doors and look out the narrow plexiglass window in their cells, bathe in their sinks when it's hot, or use their blankets as a wrap when it's cold. . . . They are not allowed to call out chess plays from cell to cell or read anything but legal and religious materials. If they violate any of these rules, their time in solitary is extended.
Prisoners' Right to Internet Materials ContestedBans on inmate mail generated from the Net are triggering lawsuits
12-26-06 -- The Internet age -- and all its legal complications -- has finally come to prisons. . . . When Danny Williams, a Georgia prisoner serving a life sentence for murder, wasn't allowed to receive legal materials downloaded from the Internet in his mail, he filed a pro se suit challenging the ban. . . . Brooke Savage, an associate in the Atlanta office of Holland & Knight, took over the suit in early 2004 shortly after joining the firm, which had been appointed by the court. Williams v. Donald, No. 5:01-CV-292-2 (M.D. Ga.). . . . "It was something that just stood out as being contrary to the First Amendment, a complete and seemingly arbitrary ban on a prisoner's mail solely because it is generated from the Internet," she said. . . . The Georgia Department of Corrections policy prohibits a prisoner from receiving mail from the Internet unless it is from the prisoner's lawyer or the Web site's publisher. Williams' girlfriend at the time had sent the materials. . . . Prisoners do not have access to the Internet. Cases about inmates' rights in the digital world have focused on whether prisoners should be allowed to receive correspondence originating from the Internet. Prisoners' advocates have said that receiving the material in the mail is a free speech right protected by the First Amendment. . . . Opponents have brought up an array of safety and security concerns, such as the possibility that the materials could include contraband. In Williams' case, state officials said that Internet printouts may increase the risk of inmates getting their hands on dangerous information, such as instructions on making a pipe bomb, according to court documents. Ga. Supreme Court rejects teen's appeal in sex case
12-15-06 -- The Georgia Supreme Court has turned down an appeal from a teen who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for having sex with a 15-year-old. . . . In a ruling released Friday, the court denied a motion for reconsideration filed by lawyers for Genarlow Wilson, who was 17 when he and the 15-year-old engaged in consensual oral sex. He was sentenced for aggravated child molestation. . . . Wilson's case was one of two cases that were cited earlier this year when lawmakers passed a law that otherwise strengthened penalties for sex offenders, but reduced the penalty from a felony to a misdemeanor for some teenagers convicted of sodomy.
Ohio Whistleblower Gets 8 Years For Criticizing Judge 12-20-06 -- Government critic and judicial whistleblower Elsebeth Baumgartner has been sentenced to eight years in prison for writing e-mails to a 76-year-old retired visiting judge who is still sitting on the bench adjudicating matters although the Ohio Constitution mandated his removal from the bench when he reached age 70. . . . In an apparent attempt to position herself and the Cuyahoga County prosecutor's office for Baumgartner's expected constitutional challenge to both the sufficiency and lawfulness of the charges levied against her as well as the procedures exercised in gaining the convictions, Cuyahoga Common Pleas Court Judge Shirley Strickland Saffold said that she wasn't sentencing Baumgartner for the content of her speech but rather for her act of exercising that speech. . . . Although Baumgartner was arrested and prosecuted for allegedly intimidating and retaliating against Markus because he refused to disqualify himself from adjudicating matters against her, retiring visiting judge Richard Markus, who has exhibited an extraordinary ego and conceit as well as overwhelming bias against Baumgartner, said last month that he hadn't been intimidated by her.
Amicus Curiae Briefs Filed In Prison Phone Appeal
12-29-06 -- Over 50 individuals, 38 organizations and 15 elected officials have moved for permission to file "friend of the court" briefs with the Court of Appeals in support of the pending appeal by the friends, family members, and attorneys of New York State Prisoners. CCR also filed the reply brief in the case, Walton v. New York State Department of Correctional Services, completing the parties' briefing schedule before the high court. . . . The Center for Constitutional Rights is representing the plaintiffs. . . . "This brings us one step closer to ending the unlawful kickback contract between MCI/Verizon and the Department of Correctional Services", CCR attorney Rachel Meerpol said. "The amicus briefs filed show that support for ending the contract and creating just rates for prison families is broad and deep: we hope that the court will take notice, but also that the new Governor will do the right thing and put a stop to this unlegislated, backdoor tax as one of his first priorities." . . . The lawsuit seeks an order prohibiting the State and MCI/Verizon from charging exorbitant rates to the family members of prisoners to finance a 57.5% kick back to the State. MCI is currently charging these family members a 630% markup over regular long distance consumer rates to receive a collect call from their loved ones, the only method of calling from a DOCS institution.
12-22-06 -- State Sen. John Whitmire says Tyrone Brown may be the "most recent poster child" for his campaign to make Texas justice smart as well as tough. . . . One of the problems, says the Houston lawmaker who chairs the Senate's Criminal Justice Committee, is judges who revoke probation for insufficient cause, filling $40,000-a-year prison beds with people who don't belong there. . . . One Harris County judge, he says, has a policy that any probationer who is more than 15 minutes late for a monthly meeting with his probation officer will be thrown in jail. . . . "A lot of these guys are on probation for driving under the influence," Whitmire said. "They can't drive, and public transportation isn't always reliable. They're going to be late." . . . Victim stunned by sentence / But that policy pales compared to the case of Tyrone Brown. Back in 1990 a Dallas district judge, Keith Dean, revoked Brown's probation and sentenced him to life for failing one urine test. . . . Because he smoked a joint, Brown, who was a teenager at the time of his crime, has been in prison ever since. . . . Brown was on probation because he had pleaded guilty to joining a friend in a hold-up. One of the youths — it's not clear which — held a gun while demanding the wallet of a worker leaving a restaurant. . . . They took $2 from the wallet. When the victim asked for the wallet back, they returned it to him and left. Prosecutors had sought a 5-year sentence. . . . The Dallas Morning News told Brown's story six months ago, which led to a piece by ABC's 20/20. . . . The robbery victim, reached in Virginia by the Morning News and told Brown was in prison for life, said, "Goodness gracious. You have got to be kidding me. ... Nobody touched me at all."
Vt. woman is an unlikely peace activist
12-18-06 -- Meet the anti-war movement‘s newest folk hero: 69-year-old Rosemarie Jackowski, whose arrest during an anti-war protest has made her a cause celebre. . . . A prosecutor‘s plan to retry her for blocking traffic while protesting the Iraq war is turning the feisty 4-foot-10 inch former schoolteacher into a darling of the dove crowd. "She‘s not a loony toon by any means," said Andrew Schoerke, 73, a retired U.S. Navy U.S. Navy captain who was arrested with her. "She‘s a very down to earth, sensible, caring person with some very strong convictions." . . . "It was really hard for me to stand there and just hold my sign," she said in an interview. "I came from a strict ethnic, religious background. I was taught to never ever be disobedient to anyone — teacher, parent, policeman. That was my very first act of disobedience to anyone." . . . To police, it wasn‘t funny. . . . "It wasn‘t about the war in Iraq," said police Lt. Paul Doucette, who ordered the arrests at the scene. "It was public safety at risk. This whole scene could‘ve turned very ugly very quickly. So we did what was best. Now all of them have paid the price, except this one." . . . She appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court, her attorney insisting that the disorderly persons charge could only stick if it were proven she intended to disrupt traffic. . . . Last week, Bennington County State‘s Attorney William Wright said he would seek to try her again.
'Jailhouse Lawyer' Lectures Harvard Law Students Thomas 'Chris' O'Bryant Seeks to End the Types of Legal Mistakes that Landed Him Behind Bars for Life
12-18-06 -- Students at Harvard Law School learn from some of the finest legal minds in the world. But they can't always learn in a classroom the concrete ways their future work as attorneys may affect people's lives. . . . That's why they are riveted by a perspective in Professor Charles Ogletree's class delivered by a guest lecturer by speakerphone. He is speaking to them from prison, where he will remain for the rest of his life. . . . The voice belongs to Thomas "Chris" O'Bryant, inmate 124004 in the Florida Department of Corrections, who is a "jailhouse lawyer." . . . He taught himself the law so well that when he sent a handwritten submission to the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Review, its editors were blown away by his legal acumen. They published his article earlier this year. . . . Now he lectures law students about what "life inside" is like, and how justice is actually administered. . . . "You see the newspaper about prison life, but I think it's probably different actually hearing from someone who's dealing with it on a day to day basis, " O'Bryant says.
Re: Warped justice ruins yet another man's life, 12-14-06 -- Congratulations for the excellent editorial. As a conservative Republican, law-and-order and even hard-nosed, I am outraged by Circuit Judge Ric Howard's grossly inappropriate sentences in each of the three cases described. . . . The sentencing in the case of William Thornton is the most egregious example of judicial bad judgment I have ever heard of. Thirty years in prison for an accident? That is shameful. For God's sake, it was an accident! My understanding of the Thornton case is as follows: - William Thornton was 17 years old, a good student with a part-time job and had never been in trouble before. He was not drinking or on drugs and it was not a hit and run. ---- He topped a hill and skidded into an intersection that has since had a warning sign installed before the crest of the hill, indicating negligence by the county at the time of the accident because there was no sign. ---- - The driver of the other vehicle was legally drunk (0.1102, that's far above the legal limit of 0.0800), which may have prevented him from taking evasive action. --- - Most important, weren't the deceased not killed by the impact, but died when they were thrown from their vehicle? And they illegally did not have their seat belts fastened, which would have protected them. --- - Were the deceased too drunk to fasten their seat belts or did they deliberately violate the law by leaving them unbuckled? Wouldn't they have survived the accident if they had buckled up, as the law requires, and what would the sentence have been if they had lived? Surely not 30 years.
‘Large’ number of postponed trials cause changes, concern
Judge's outburst brings lawsuit Inmate sues William Carter for $2 million, alleging treatment in court caused him pain, suffering
12-13-06 -- An inmate whose complaint about mistreatment resulted in City Court Judge William Carter being disciplined is now suing Carter for $2 million, claiming pain, suffering and a lasting fear of the judiciary. . . . Acting as his own lawyer, Talib Alsaifullah, 46, filed the civil rights violation lawsuit on Monday in U.S. District Court. He is serving a sentence for assault at Albany County Correctional Facility. . . . The state Commission on Judicial Conduct censured Carter in September for two outbursts, including one in which he stormed off the bench, shed his robes and eyeglasses, and confronted Alsaifullah. . . . A witness to the November 2004 courtroom confrontation testified that Carter, a former State Police officer and assistant district attorney, rushed the defendant, asking, "You want a piece of me?" . . . Carter didn't touch Alsaifullah or the officer who intervened to block him. He told officials he didn't recall making the verbal challenge, but did not refute the allegations.
Petty criminal's sentence should be commuted
12-12-06 -- For Tyrone Brown, it never should have come to this. . . . Mr. Brown never should have been sentenced to life in prison after being busted for a $2 armed robbery and a marijuana violation. . . . He should not have suffered because his family could not afford a lawyer. It should not have taken a Dallas Morning News investigation to expose the unequal justice that was meted out when Mr. Brown was locked up for life while a well-connected man who shot an unarmed prostitute in the back walked free. . . . And Mr. Brown should not be relying on Gov. Rick Perry to take the rare step of commuting his sentence. Unfortunately for Mr. Brown, it has come to this. . . . We have urged a second look at this excessive punishment. And Dallas County District Attorney Bill Hill now is asking the governor to free Mr. Brown.
A clemency case not even President Bush can ignore -- or can he?
12-11-06 -- THE SUPREME Court this week declined to review the case of Weldon Angelos, leaving in place his obscene sentence of 55 years in prison for small-time marijuana and gun charges. The high court's move is no surprise; the justices have tended to uphold draconian sentences against constitutional challenge. But it confronts President Bush with a question he will have to address: Is there any sentence so unfair that he would exert himself to correct it? . . . So far, Mr. Bush hasn't found one. He has commuted only two sentences, both of inmates who were about to be released anyway. Mr. Angelos, by contrast, is a young man and a first-time offender who is now likely to spend the rest of his life in prison. His crime? He sold $350 in marijuana to a government informant three times -- and carried, but did not display, a gun on two of those occasions. Police found other guns and pot at his house. The U.S. district judge who sentenced him in Utah, Paul G. Cassell, declared the mandatory sentence in this case "unjust, cruel, and even irrational." He noted that it is "far in excess of the sentence imposed for such serious crimes as aircraft hijacking, second degree murder, espionage, kidnapping, aggravated assault, and rape." And in an extraordinary act, he explicitly called on Mr. Bush to use his clemency powers to offer what he as a judge could not: justice. Judge Cassell recommended that Mr. Bush commute the sentence to 18 years, which he described as "the average sentence recommended by the jury that heard this case." Religion for a Captive Audience, Paid For by Taxes
12-11-06 -- Life was different in Unit E at the state prison outside Newton, Iowa. . . . The toilets and sinks — white porcelain ones, like at home — were in a separate bathroom with partitions for privacy. In many Iowa prisons, metal toilet-and-sink combinations squat beside the bunks, to be used without privacy, a few feet from cellmates. . . . The cells in Unit E had real wooden doors and doorknobs, with locks. More books and computers were available, and inmates were kept busy with classes, chores, music practice and discussions. There were occasional movies and events with live bands and real-world food, like pizza or sandwiches from Subway. Best of all, there were opportunities to see loved ones in an environment quieter and more intimate than the typical visiting rooms. . . . But the only way an inmate could qualify for this kinder mutation of prison life was to enter an intensely religious rehabilitation program and satisfy the evangelical Christians running it that he was making acceptable spiritual progress. The program — which grew from a project started in 1997 at a Texas prison with the support of George W. Bush, who was governor at the time — says on its Web site that it seeks “to ‘cure’ prisoners by identifying sin as the root of their problems” and showing inmates “how God can heal them permanently, if they turn from their sinful past.” . . . One Roman Catholic inmate, Michael A. Bauer, left the program after a year, mostly because he felt the program staff and volunteers were hostile toward his faith. . . . “My No. 1 reason for leaving the program was that I personally felt spiritually crushed,” he testified at a court hearing last year. “I just didn’t feel good about where I was and what was going on.” . . . For Robert W. Pratt, chief judge of the federal courts in the Southern District of Iowa, this all added up to an unconstitutional use of taxpayer money for religious indoctrination, as he ruled in June in a lawsuit challenging the arrangement.
Punishing prisoners at all costs California's prisons are in crisis because of harsh sentencing laws that don't treat violent and nonviolent criminals much differently.
,
author of "Cruel Justice: Three Strikes and the Politics of Crime in
America's Golden State," is senior fellow in criminal justice at the
USC Annenberg Institute for Justice
Warped justice ruins yet another man's life
12-04-06 -- Another young man guilty of committing serious offenses appears before Circuit Judge Ric Howard fully expecting to pay for his actions but also, naively, believing that he will be treated fairly. Instead, he receives a punishment that meets the basic rules for a legal sentence but fails the test for true justice. . . . In an all-too-familiar scenario last week in the Citrus County courthouse, Howard - who lives in Hernando County and is elected by voters of the five-county 5th Judicial Circuit - again imposed a cruel punishment on a young man who was foolish enough, or poorly advised, to put himself at the mercy of a judge who has demonstrated that that trait is in short supply. . . . Jason Aron Hill of Beverly Hills admitted that he had sex several times with his girlfriend. This became a crime because Hall is 19, an adult, and the girl is 15, a minor. Also, after smoking marijuana and being bored, the two set paper towels on fire and nearly burned to the ground a gazebo belonging to the Beverly Hills Recreation Association. . . . Make no mistake, these are serious offenses. Hall, a high school dropout, should have known better than to have sex, even consensual, with a 15-year-old. Plus, he violated his pretrial release orders to stay away from her. And he initially denied to authorities that the two had been intimate. . . . Hall was also 20 minutes late to his court appearance, which incensed the judge. . . . The Jan. 25 fire caused about $25,000 in damage. The group's insurance rates doubled as a result, putting the association in such dire financial straits that four part-time workers had to be laid off. . . . Clearly, the association deserved to be made whole again financially, and Howard ordered Hall to pay restitution. The judge admitted it was unlikely that Hall, a fast food worker, would ever be able to come up with that kind of money. Then he made certain that Hall would never be able to repay that debt by sending him to prison. . . . Hall, who had no prior criminal offenses cited at his court appearance, certainly deserves punishment for his irresponsible acts. Howard could have ordered probation with the requirement that he get counseling for his behavioral problems and that he become a virtual indentured servant to the Beverly Hills Recreation Association, working off his restitution through several hundred hours of community service. . . . Such a sentence could have resulted in turning around the life of a young man whose parents told the court that he was irresponsible and immature. But Howard told the audience that he views the primary mission of the justice system as punishing, not helping, people. Federal Judges Fear Dangers of Online 'Rat' Site
12-01-06 -- Police and prosecutors are worried that a Web site claiming to identify more than 4,000 informants and undercover agents will cripple investigations and hang targets on witnesses. . . . The Web site, WhosaRat.com, first caught the attention of authorities after a Massachusetts man put it online and named a few dozen people as turncoats in 2004. Since then, it has grown into a clearinghouse for mug shots, court papers and rumors. . . . Federal prosecutors say the site was set up to encourage violence, and federal judges around the country were recently warned that witnesses in their courtrooms may be profiled online. . . . "My concern is making sure cooperators are adequately protected from retaliation," said Chief Judge Thomas Hogan, who alerted other judges in Washington's federal courthouse. He said he learned about the site from a federal judge in Maine. . . . The Web site is the latest unabashedly public effort to identify witnesses or discourage helping police. "Stop Snitching" T-shirts have been sold in cities around the country and popular hip-hop lyrics disparage or threaten people who help police. . . . In 2004, NBA star Carmelo Anthony appeared in an underground Baltimore DVD that warned people they could be killed for cooperating with police. Anthony has said he was not aware of the DVD's message. Such threats hinder criminal investigations, said Ronald Teachman, police chief in New Bedford, Mass., where murder cases have been stymied by witness silence and "Stop Snitching" T-shirts were recently for sale. November 2006
What You Should Know If You're Accused Of A Crime
"Reprinted from the 5th edition of Joyce David’s handbook (originally published in 1986). You may copy this book and share it with your family and friends as long as you include the copyright notice; do not make any changes; and do not sell copies." 11-20-06 -- Anyone confronting the bewildering and, to many, the intimidating and nerve shattering complexities of the New York State criminal justice system for the first time in his or her life, will find Joyce David's handbook outlining the ABC's of the system an invaluable tool in dealing with them. . . . A highly-respected attorney with a wealth of first-hand experience in all aspects of criminal law, Ms. David's thorough, step-by-step description of what a criminal case is all about, written in language readily understood by the average layman, unschooled in legal procedures and terminology, will do much to ease the pain of that first encounter with the law. . . . Ms. David, expertly and concisely, spells out just what he or she may expect at every stage of the case, explaining just what will happen and why. . . . As she points out correctly in her own introduction, those exposed for the first time to the criminal justice system often feel as though they are in a foreign country, with strange new rules, procedures and language.
Judge gives Mobile man the max -- again Ordered to recalculate sentencing guidelines, Pensacola jurist opts anew for lengthier prison term for Jessie Scott
11-20-06 -- A Mobile man facing the maximum punishment for threatening a federal judge won a new sentencing hearing earlier this year, but on Monday, he learned he had gained nothing. . . . Senior U.S. District Judge Lacey Collier, brought to Mobile from Pensacola to preside over the case after the local federal judges recused themselves, stunned the courtroom last year when he ignored the sentencing guidelines and ordered Jessie Scott to prison for 10 years -- the maximum allowed by law -- for threats he made against the judge who sentenced him in another case. . . . The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the sentence in March, ruling that Collier had failed to properly calculate the punishment Scott faced under the guidelines.
C.A. Revives Inmate’s Contract Claim Against Former Attorney
11-02-06 -- A convicted defendant did not have to prove he was actually innocent in order to sue his former attorney for negligently failing to obtain the return of property he was entitled to recover, and for unearned legal fees, this district’s Court of Appeal has ruled. . . . Reversing a summary judgment order by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Andria K. Richey, Div. One on Monday reinstated a lawsuit by John S. Brooks against Century City attorney Joseph Shemaria. . . . Brooks had retained Shemaria in April 2001 at a cost of $50,000 to defend him against a single drug manufacturing charge. The lawyer had allegedly agreed to refund to Brooks any unused portions of the retainer fee, which was to cover both the cost of representation through trial and of seeking the return of his seized property. . . . In June 2002, Brooks was convicted and sentenced to 10 years in prison after pleading no contest to the charge and admitting a special allegation of transportation, sale, or distribution of a controlled substance. . . . The following year, Richey heard Brooks’ motion for the return of personal property that had been seized by the authorities. Granting it in part, she directed the return of all paperwork except for his drug-manufacturing instructions but ordered the destruction of several seized firearms, although two guns that the judge found belonged to other people were ordered returned. . . . Although Brooks moved for reconsideration of the order as to the firearms, the motion was taken off calendar when Shemaria twice failed to appear on his behalf. . . . Not knowing that Brooks had been incarcerated, the Ventura County Sheriff’s Department wrote to him at his last known address to inform him he could retrieve certain items of seized property including his financial records, computer and electronic storage media, cell phone and pager. When the letter was returned, the sheriff disposed of the property. . . . The rest of the property that had been ordered returned to Brooks was also destroyed because it was never retrieved. Actual Innocence . . . Representing himself, Brooks in December 2003 sued Shemaria for breach of contract due to his failure to refund unused portions of the retainer fee, and for professional negligence concerning the seized property. . . . Richey granted Shemaria’s summary judgment motion as to both claims, based on case law which says that to recover for malpractice, a convicted defendant must first obtain the reversal or vacatur of the conviction and then prove in the tort action that he or she was actually innocent. . . . That trial judge was in error, the Court of Appeal said, because the case law does not apply to fee disputes or to other collateral matters such as return of property. . . . As to the contract claim, Justice Frances Rothschild explained for the court: . . . “The primary right Brooks seeks to vindicate is the right to be billed in accordance with the terms of the retainer agreement, i.e., to have Shemaria’s compensation governed by those terms. It has nothing to do with the quality of Shemaria’s representation or with Brooks’ guilt or innocence. The actual innocence requirement therefore does not apply.” COLORADO How America's Most Dangerous Criminals Mix With A Who's Who Of The Global Jihad In A Colorado Prison
Flashback: Eric Rudolph?s Long Run Ends Highway 50 runs straight as a pool cue from Pueblo, Colo., through 23 miles of rangeland and piñon flats before offering an exit to the scruffy little city of Florence (pop. 3,795). Like Flint, Mich., or Orlando, Fla., Florence is a company town. The industry here is prisoners, and the company is the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Twenty years ago, the people of surrounding Fremont County ponied up $160,000 to buy some open land outside Florence, hoping to entice the bureau to build a prison complex as a way to boost the town's economy. Corrections had long been a mainstay in Fremont County; the high desert valley was already home to more than half a dozen prisons. But in the end, Florence got a little more than it bargained for. . . . The 600-acre Federal Correctional Complex, which was completed in 1994 on the outskirts of town, is a virtual theme park of penal experiences, ranging from a minimum-security camp for inside-traders and small-time pot dealers to the concrete fortress that was built to be the most secure prison in the country: the Administrative Maximum U.S. Penitentiary, or ADX for short. The inmates in ADX Florence include drug kingpins, gang leaders, hit men, snipers and, lately, more and more, international terrorists, including al-Qaeda shoe bomber Richard Reid; mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing Ramzi Yousef and at least seven of his accomplices; and four men convicted of involvement in the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa. There are American terrorists too. Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, spent time there before being transferred to Indiana, where he was executed in 2001. His accomplice, Terry Nichols, is still at ADX, as is Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber. The common thread running through the crimes committed by these men accounts for the nickname given to the highest-security section of the prison: Bombers Row. . . . Until now, almost nothing has been written about the inner workings of the ADX. Since 9/11, journalists have been routinely denied access to the facility, its staff and inmates. But Eric Robert Rudolph, who is serving life without parole at the prison for the fatal bombings at the Atlanta Olympics and an abortion clinic in Alabama, has written letters to me, the author of a book about his case, and to his mother Patricia Rudolph, who has shared them with me. These missives offer a unique first-hand account of life on Bombers Row.
$127,000 in Fees Are Voided for Former Prison Journalist
11-06-06 -- A former prison journalist does not have to pay the $127,000 in court costs that a state district judge assessed him last year, the state’s Third Circuit Court of Appeal ruled on Friday. . . . The district judge, David A. Ritchie, lacked the legal standing to seek the recovery of some of the money, Judge Sylvia R. Cooks wrote in the appeals court decision. Also, because Louisiana law requires parishes to pay court expenses, Judge Ritchie had no authority to seek payment of court costs, Judge Cooks wrote. The parish must do so, she said. . . . The former prisoner, Wilbert Rideau, served 44 years in prison for killing a bank teller in 1961. . . . He was convicted of murder three times, but each time an appeals court threw out the verdict, citing misconduct by the government; at a new trial in January 2005, he was convicted of manslaughter. He was sentenced to the maximum 21 years in prison. Judge Ritchie gave him credit for time served, making him eligible for immediate release. . . . Also, Judge Ritchie ordered Mr. Rideau “to pay all court costs associated with these proceedings,” but did not initially detail those costs. In March 2005, Judge Ritchie ordered Mr. Rideau to pay itemized court costs and indigent defendant fees totaling $127,905.
Is a trial unfair if accused can't confront accuser? The Supreme Court looks at the conviction in a 1988 child-abuse trial. One possible outcome is a flood of appeals.
11-02-06 -- In 1988, Marvin Bockting was accused of sexually abusing his 6-year-old stepdaughter. The little girl told her mother and a police detective about the alleged abuse, but she became too upset to testify at Mr. Bockting's trial in Nevada. . . . Instead, the girl's mother and the detective testified about what she had told them of the alleged sexual assault. Bockting was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. . . . Now, 18 years later, Bockting is seeking to overturn his conviction based on a 2004 US Supreme Court decision in a case called Crawford v. Washington. In that case, the Supreme Court strongly reaffirmed the constitutional right to confront one's accusers in court. At the same time, the court struck down a rule that had allowed the introduction at trial of testimonial statements made by a potential witness prior to the trial. . . . Bockting says his trial was unfair because his jury was never allowed to gauge the veracity of his stepdaughter's accusations through the crucible of cross-examination in open court. . . . Wednesday, the Supreme Court takes up Bockting's case to decide whether the high court's 2004 ruling should be applied retroactively to his 1988 child-abuse trial.
NYS Bar Delegates to Consider "Collateral" Impact of Crime
11-02-06 -- Roughly one-third of the people arrested in New York are never convicted of anything, but are nonetheless hindered by job and housing discrimination and essentially punished - sometimes in perpetuity - for an offense they did not commit, according to a New York State Bar Association report. "The great number of people who are arrested but never convicted of any crime are still 'punished' - i.e, their reputation is damaged-by the mere fact of having been charged with a crime," according to the state bar's Special Committee on Collateral Consequences of Criminal Proceedings, chaired by Peter. J.W. Sherwin of Proskauer Rose. "Over 36 percent of all arrests in New York in 2004 did not result in conviction." However, the committee's report said that "the fact of an arrest is now more readily known than ever due to the ready access to computer databases." It said 80 percent of large corporations now perform background checks on applicants, up from 51 percent just eight years ago, and 69 percent of small employers do the same. Additionally, it said landlords routinely run background checks.
The state bar began studying the issue in December 2004, under the leadership of then-president Kenneth G. Standard. Its report, and several others, are available at the Columbia Law School Web site, www2.law.columbia.edu/fourcs/.
Judge Tells Baumgartner She Can't Review Own Case File
11-3-06 ---In the wake of one of her defense attorneys being suspended from practicing law as he was preparing motions to present in the myriad of criminal charges against her, former Ohio attorney and pharmacist Elsebeth Baumgartner has asked Cuyahoga County Commons Pleas Court Judge Shirley Strickland Saffold to recuse herself. . . . Revealing highly biased and prejudicial statements allegedly made against her by Saffold in the presence of other attorneys and disclosing the unconstitutional order issued by Saffold that she cannot have access to her own court file, Baumgartner says that judicial canons require Saffold to remove herself from the case. . . . She also says that the record will support that Saffold has egregiously violated her constitutional rights in a case which is based on free speech issues and an individual's right to criticize public officials and post comments on their own blog.
Viewing child porn not a crime, panel rules
11-3-06 ---Just looking at child pornography on the Internet is not a crime under Pennsylvania law, a state Superior Court panel ruled yesterday. . . . For prosecutors to charge someone with illegally possessing child porn, they must show the person knowingly saved the images, according to the three-judge panel. . . . If the state Legislature wants to criminalize the mere viewing of child porn on Web sites, then it needs to change the law, the panel ruled. . . . The case, which marked the first time the court addressed the issue, involved a Delaware County man who admitted knowingly viewing 370 child-porn images online. But the judges ruled he could not be convicted of possessing child porn because he did not know his computer was storing the photos. . . . Computers automatically save images viewed on a Web site to a cache on the computer's hard drive. Anthony R. Diodoro, 26, of Milmont Park, Delaware County, admitted intentionally viewing the child-porn images, but said he was unaware they were being saved.
You can access the ruling at this link. A key passage from the unanimous three-judge pane's opinion states, "Although the pornographic images were automatically saved to an internet cache file on the computer's hard drive, there is no evidence that Diodoro knew that the images were saved. Therefore, the issue is whether merely viewing child pornography on the internet without intentionally saving or downloading any of the images constitutes 'knowing possession' of child pornography under section 6312(d). We conclude that it does not."
Federal judge says inmate saved his life, cuts sentence Judge sides with inmate over mail 2003 Bureau of Prisons limits on materials deemed unconstitutional
10-28-06 -- An inmate at the nation's most secure prison has won a lawsuit challenging the Bureau of Prisons' restrictions on the types of reading materials inmates are allowed to receive by mail. . . . Mark Jordan, 30, who is expected to be released in 2048 from the "Supermax" prison for bank robbery and the June 1999 stabbing death of a fellow inmate at the U.S. Penitentiary in Florence, sued the agency in 2003, claiming his rights were violated when certain materials he was sent by mail were denied to him. . . . He claimed a 2003 prison regulation was unconstitutional, and on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Phillip Figa agreed, saying it was too broad. OHIO Prison 'a Financial Plan' for Ohio Robber
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
