Sunday, July 5, 2015
street news, views and stories of justice and injustice
Follow me on Twitter

Search WitnessLA:

Recent Posts

Categories

Archives

Meta

juvenile justice


Locked Up & Alone: Should CA Ban Solitary for Kids? – by Kelly Davis

July 3rd, 2015 by Celeste Fremon


EDITOR’S NOTE:
On Tuesday, California took a large step closer to banning the use of solitary confinement for the state’s youth when SB 124 passed out of the assembly’s Public Safety committee, clearing the way for a vote in the assembly itself. (The committee vote divided along party lines with five democrats voting “yes,” two republicans voting “no.”)

The bill has already been passed by the state senate. So if it is passed by the assembly it goes to Governor Brown for his signature.

An impressive list of supporters, including the LA County Board of Supervisors, have gotten behind the passage of SB 124. Yet the bill also has its strong opponents.

As a consequence, the conversation about the use of solitary confinement for juveniles is bound to heat up as the crucial assembly vote nears. With this in mind, in her excellent story below reporter Kelly Davis digs deeply into what we know and don’t know about the issue of kids and solitary.


This story first ran in an earlier version at The Crime Report— where you can find the latest in national criminal justice news daily.



LOCKED UP & ALONE

What Do We Really Know About Solitary for Kids?

by Kelly Davis


How do you define solitary confinement? That question is at the core of a California debate over ending the practice in state- and county-run juvenile detention facilities, which are estimated to house roughly 9,000 individuals at any given time.

The debate intensified earlier this year with the introduction of a bill sponsored by state Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), which would ban the use of solitary confinement as punishment. Under the bill, young people who pose a safety risk can be confined to their rooms—but for no longer than four hours.

Despite three previous attempts to pass similar legislation, Leno believes the bill will succeed, given the increased scrutiny nationwide on the use of solitary confinement.

In May, Illinois became the 20th state to ban the practice in juvenile detention facilities.

“I don’t believe there’s any data that even begins to suggest that there is anything beneficial to this practice,” Leno said in an interview with The Crime Report. “The idea that taking a troubled youth with behavioral problems and putting that youth in solitary confinement—whether for 10 hours or 23 hours—and thinking the behavior is going to improve, is completely irrational.”

The Leno bill defines solitary confinement as “the placement of an incarcerated person in a locked sleep room or cell alone with minimal or no contact with persons other than guards, correctional facility staff, and attorneys.

The state’s influential prison-guard and probation unions have opposed the bill—-and its predecessors—arguing that solitary confinement is an inaccurate description of current practice in juvenile facilities. They say that isolation of juveniles is used sparingly, and is regulated by California’s Minimum Standards for Juvenile Facilities, which were recently revised to urge limited use of room confinement.

Nevertheless, youth advocates—who want to see a ban enshrined in state law—-point to recent examples that they claim could not be described otherwise than “solitary confinement.”


A GAME CHANGER IN CONTRA COSTA

Last month, Contra Costa County, located just east of San Francisco, agreed to settle a lawsuit brought by two public-interest law firms, Disability Rights Advocates and Public Counsel. The lawsuit claimed young people with psychiatric and developmental disabilities were being kept in 12-by-12-foot cells for up to 23 hours a day in the country’s juvenile hall.

Although Contra Costa County’s Office of Education and its Probation Department denied any wrongdoing, the county committed itself under the settlement to ensure that the maximum period of confinement for any youth will be four hours, and only if he is considered a danger to others—which in fact mirrors the language of the Leno bill.

Leno described the Contra Costa settlement as a “game-changer” when it comes to enacting a statewide ban on punitive solitary confinement.

In another case, the Youth Law Center, a San Francisco-based national advocacy group,- has filed a complaint against San Diego County with the Department of Justice, based on an investigation launched in 2013 into reports of excessive use of pepper spray in the county’s juvenile detention facilities. In the course of that investigation, attorneys found examples of young people, some of them suicidal, being confined to their rooms for up to five days—-despite county inspection reports saying that room confinement was never used.

A spokesperson for San Diego County declined to comment—-citing “pending legal action”—–on whether YLC’s complaint prompted any policy changes.


A DISCIPLINARY TOOL OR A SOURCE OF TRAUMA?

Amid the growing national debate over ending youth solitary confinement, California is an example of the disconnect between law enforcement authorities who cling to isolation as a disciplinary tool and experts who say confinement beyond a few hours can cripple a young person’s development.

“Even short term, especially if a young person has an underlying mental health issue, that creates serious consequences,” Jennifer Kim, director of programs for the San Francisco-based Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, a supporter of Leno’s bill, said in an interview with The Crime Report.

“The impact that has on that person’s emotional and physical well-being is going to be exacerbated, whether it’s 72 hours or two months.”

Further obscuring the issue, advocates say, are the variety of terms for the practice. Before a Justice Department investigation shuttered Mississippi’s Columbia Training School, for instance, young female detainees were confined to dark, bare rooms in what was called the “Special Intervention Unit.”

“People call it all sorts of things inside juvenile facilities,” says Dana Shoenberg, deputy director of the Washington D.C.-based Center for Children’s Law and Policy.

“They call it reflection time, they call it segregation, they call it medical isolation. But if you lock a kid alone in a room for a sustained period of time, the effects are still the same.”

While a locked room in a San Diego County facility might be a far cry from something like the Columbia Training School, the effects of isolation in either setting, experts say, can undermine rehabilitation and exacerbate mental illness. A 2009 national study commissioned by the Justice Department found that of the 79 detainees who committed suicide in juvenile detention centers between 1995 and 1999, nearly two-thirds had a history of room confinement.

Roughly half committed suicide while in isolation.

In a report last year, the American Civil Liberties Union concluded it was nearly impossible to pin down how many young people are subjected to isolation, why and for how long, since data collection is not required on the state or federal level.

Kim said the semantics of solitary confinement has made it difficult to really measure the scope of the problem in California.

“If you have different counties and the state using different names to refer to the same practice, it provides a way for people to create confusion around how much something is happening,” she said.

“One of the issues this bill is trying to correct is the fact that this practice is happening with very little accountability and very little transparency,” she added.


DATA MATTERS

Getting accurate data is a key hurdle.

“A lot of it is just not being able to objectively see that what you’re doing falls in that definition of solitary confinement,” says Sue Burrell, a staff attorney for the Youth Law Center, a national advocacy group. “For so long, everyone in juvenile justice has dealt with disciplinary problems by locking kids in their rooms.”

Punitive isolation is frowned upon by the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative, a project of the Annie E. Casey Foundation that seeks to set national standards. Yet a 2014 survey by the California Association of Probation Institution Administrators found that of the 53 percent of county facilities that responded, all of them used separation as a disciplinary tool.


ITS NOT ABOUT THE SYMPTOMS

Barry Krisberg, a UC Berkeley professor who has studied the use of solitary confinement, said punitive isolation is considered to be counterproductive since it fails to address what made the youth act out in the first place.

“I think that’s sort of the fundamental issue,” Krisberg told The Crime Report. “(Isolation) doesn’t solve the underlying problem. If there’s an issue having to do with mental illness, then you’ve got to have a response to that.

“Putting someone away in a room for a period of time is not a solution.”

The lack of federal guidelines on juvenile solitary confinement could be one reason the system has been so slow to change, youth advocates say. The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA), established in 1974 to set standards and provide funding for juvenile justice programs, has not been reauthorized since 2002.

On April 30, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) introduced legislation to reauthorize the JJDPA. The 2015 version would add nearly 30 pages to the Act and would require states to create plans to eliminate solitary confinement in juvenile facilities and offer training and technical assistance to “minimize the use of dangerous practices, unreasonable restraints, and isolation.”

Schoenberg of the Children’s Law and Policy Center says the legislation “could have a meaningful impact,” especially the bill’s requirement that facilities collect data on the use of isolation.

She adds: “Folks who examine their data are in a strong position to begin making changes.”


Kelly Davis is a 2015 John Jay/Langeloth Mental Health & Justice Reporting Fellow and a freelance reporter in San Diego who writes about the criminal justice system and vulnerable populations. This spring she launched a successful IndieGogo campaign to help support her fine criminal justice reporting


Photo of two kids is courtesy of the Ella Baker Center’s #EndYouthSolitary campaign @EllaBakerCenter

Posted in juvenile justice, LA County Board of Supervisors, solitary, torture, Youth at Risk | No Comments »

LA County Counsel Resigns After 8 Months, a Unique SF Drug Abuse Program for Teens, Public Input on LA Child Safety…and More

June 16th, 2015 by Taylor Walker

LA COUNTY COUNSEL MARK SALADINO UNEXPECTEDLY ANNOUNCES RESIGNATION AFTER 8 MONTHS IN OFFICE

Late last week, just eight months after taking office, Los Angeles County Counsel Mark J. Saladino startled nearly everyone by announcing his resignation.

Saladino was hired last October on the recommendation of then-CEO William Fujioka, who some considered a controversial figure in the county.

Supe. Mark Ridley-Thomas, the only board member who voted against hiring Saladino, said there had not been enough of a search for competitors, the board had not agreed to a list of requirements for candidates, and Saladino’s prior legal experience was in corporate finances, lending, taxation and related areas. In fact, in 2013, Saladino had not practiced law in approximately 15 years, since he had taken over the position of county treasurer-tax collector in 1998.

Saladino will be returning to the Department of Treasurer and Tax Collector.

LA County Board of Supervisors had a special meeting Monday, that included public comment, as a step toward appointing an interim County Counsel.

Metropolitan News-Enterprise has the story. Here’s a clip:

Saladino hadn’t practiced law since being appointed county treasurer-tax collector in 1998. State Bar records showed that he took inactive status in 2002 and returned to active status on June 27 of last year, eight days after then-County Counsel John Krattli made public his plans to retire.

Prior to becoming treasurer-tax collector, Saldino was a deputy county counsel, having joined the office in 1990. His prior experience was at large law firms in New York and Los Angeles, in the fields of public finance, corporate finance and securities, bank lending, real estate, taxation and other transactional matters for public and private clients.

A spokesperson for Board of Supervisors Chair Michael Antonovich said the supervisor had no prior notice of Saladino’s intent to resign. Requests for comment from the other four supervisors produced no responses, although longtime board employees said it was virtually unprecedented for a department head to resign without prior notice.

Saladino’s successor will be the ninth person to occupy the post of county counsel since DeWitt Clinton retired in 1998 after 15 years.

Los Angeles County and the Office of the County Counsel are also currently in the middle of a legal battle against the ACLU and civilian watchdog Eric Preven, who are demanding that County Counsel disclose exact dollar amounts paid to private law firms in lawsuits filed against the LASD and its personnel. (Read more about that: here.)


SAN FRANCISCO SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROGRAM HELPS ADDICTED KIDS GRADUALLY CURB DRUG USE THROUGH JUDGMENT-FREE, “HARM-REDUCTION” APPROACH

San Francisco’s Bayview Hunters Point Youth Foundation helps kids ease out of substance abuse, in a neighborhood beset by violence, where 39% of residents live below the poverty line.

The Foundation’s program, Youth Moving Forward, provides counseling and substance abuse treatment to kids 13-17, using innovative “harm-reduction” strategies that focus on preventing harm that results from drug abuse, rather than specifically targeting the drug use.

The program provides a judgment-free, safe space for kids and connects them with free sports programs and other activities as alternatives to drug use.

Youth Today’s Sarah Zahedi has more on the program, which is funded by the SF Department of Health. Here’s a clip:

“Our goal is for them to reduce their use,” said counselor Julia Barboza. “So instead of [their] smoking five times, we say, ‘How about you do it four times?’ We meet them where they are at so to not have them totally quit but to reduce their use. In the process, they are not aware that they are actually going to stop.”

Johnson agreed she did not even know she was in a substance abuse treatment program when she was going to talk to her counselor.

“They don’t call it a drug treatment program. They just tell us that they are there for us to talk to,” Johnson said. “It was just a safe space and seeing it that way helped because it doesn’t scare you away.”

For this reason, youth services program director James McElroy said the counselors make it a point to avoid calling Youth Moving Forward a drug treatment program.

“We don’t want these youth to walk around thinking something is wrong with them if they decide to take part in our services,” he said. “We aren’t here to judge. We are here to help them achieve what they are trying to achieve in life.”

To do so, the program also makes a point of referring youth to social activities such as sports, exercise and field trips as an alternative to drug use.

“A lot of the times, the youth’s substance abuse problem comes from the kid not having anything else to do,” McElroy said. “We want to make sure we promote activities a youth is interested in so they can do something productive with their time at no cost.”

The program’s five counselors serve approximately 80 clients per year. Barboza said their success is due to the bond each counselor shares with the youth.

“We call them our kids versus our clients because they spend most of their time with us,” Barboza said. “At a lot of agencies, you don’t see that, kids just come in and out. Here, we do more than counsel kids and just sit in an office to help them reduce their use. We cook for them when they are hungry, we clothe them when they need clothes, we shelter them when they need shelter.”


CHILD WELFARE CZAR HOLDS MEETING IN COMPTON TO GATHER INPUT FROM PUBLIC ON BOOSTING CHILD SAFETY

The Los Angeles County Office of Child Protection held a meeting in Compton for members of the public (72 in attendance) to brainstorm and give input on a strategic plan to boost child safety and welfare in LA County.

The strategic plan was one of 163 recommendations made by a Blue Ribbon Commission on Child Protection convened to jumpstart reform efforts in the county child welfare system.

Among the ideas submitted by community members was a child safety mobile app.

The Chronicle of Social Change’s Holden Slattery has the story. Here’s a clip:

Attendees included employees and directors of numerous government agencies and local nonprofit organizations. The groups focused on the pantheon of child welfare goals: child maltreatment prevention, finding permanency for children in the system, safety and well-being. After they posted their objectives on the wall, attendees used stickers to vote on their favorites—the ones they would like to see in the strategic plan.

That strategic plan, itself, was one of the 163 recommendations made by the BRC in its 2014 report, which scored numerous headlines for decrying the county’s child welfare system as “in a state of emergency.”

But the Office of Child Protection wants more recommendations—ones that reflect the voices of people in locations throughout the county, according to Interim Child Protection Director Fesia Davenport.

“We know that the Blue Ribbon Commission recommendations are going to pre-populate many areas of the strategic plan, so we’re looking for ideas for the gaps,” Davenport said.


STATE SEES RESULTS AFTER INVESTING IN REDUCING CRIME IN VIOLENCE-PLAGUED OAKLAND

The $2 million California spent on crime-reduction efforts in Oakland last year appears to have paid off. According to 2014 end of year crime reports, homicides in Oakland were down 11%, shootings down 13%, and burglaries and robberies dropped a combined 30%.

The $1.3 million of the state money has beefed up existing anti-recidivism programs, but a portion was also spent launching new pilot programs.

Oakland Local’s A. Scot Bolsinger has the story. here’s a clip:

In a report recently submitted to the city council, Sara Bedford, director of Oakland Unite, said the funds have impacted a wide number of programs.

“It has augmented existing services and allowed for more individuals impacted directly by intense violence to receive important support services,” Bedford wrote.

The money was dispersed among a wide group of service providers and programs that include employment training for formerly incarcerated young adults, academic support for youth on probation, crisis counseling and legal help for domestic violence victims, street outreach and Ceasefire case management, among other programs, according to Beford’s report.

Though the lion’s share of the money went to existing programs, the grant required some funds — not to exceed $340,000 — be used to enter into agreements with new partners, according to Bedford’s report.

Halpern-Finnerty highlighted some of the pilot programs funded, like academic assistance for youth on probation through the East Bay Asian Youth Center.

“It got off to a good start and went well. This summer kids got interested, so we’re looking into something that is worth funding in the next cycle,” she said.

Halpern-Finnerty said the request for proposal funding process under the recently passed Measure Z encourages innovative new projects that may not have been situated to benefit from the one-time funding grant. On Friday, Oakland Unite submitted plans for a new innovation fund under Measure Z that would create a foothold for new ideas and innovation to reduce violence.

Posted in Foster Care, juvenile justice, LA County Board of Supervisors | 5 Comments »

Solitary and Life on the Outside, Reauthorizing the JJDPA, Trial Date Set for Tanaka/Carey Case, More Reactions to LA Police Commission’s Ezell Ford Decision, and Tamir Rice

June 12th, 2015 by Taylor Walker

STATES RELEASE INMATES FROM SOLITARY CONFINEMENT BACK INTO THEIR COMMUNITIES, WHERE THEY STRUGGLE TO ACCLIMATE, AND OFTEN RETURN TO LOCK-UP

A new collaborative investigation released Thursday between the Marshal Project and NPR gathered and analyzed data from every state on inmates released from solitary confinement directly onto the streets.

Last year, 24 states dumped over 10,000 solitary confinement prisoners, who often need the most reentry assistant, right back into their communities. The other 26 states, along with the feds, either did not track or could not provide data on such releases.

The investigation has particular significance in the wake of Kalief Browder’s suicide. Browder spent three years on Rikers Island, the majority of which he spent in solitary confinement, without a trial. Browder came out of Rikers and isolation and struggled for three years with mental illness and the aftereffects of prolonged solitary confinement. Browder tried to kill himself several times before succeeding last Saturday.

These inmates who often need the most help, pre-release and post-release, get the least amount of help. For instance, inmates that remain in isolation until they are released, generally do not get to participate in re-entry classes. And in some states, including Texas, these inmates are often released without supervision. Due, in part to the mental deterioration that happens during prolonged isolation, and without much-needed help, inmates released directly from solitary often find themselves jobless, homeless, in mental hospitals, or back in prison.

The Marshall Project follows the story of Mark, young man with schizoaffective disorder and developmental disabilities who spent the majority of his teenage years in isolation, and lasted just four months on the outside, before he was locked up again. Here’s a clip:

In Mark’s home state of Texas, 1,174 prisoners were freed straight out of administrative segregation — prison jargon for solitary units housing suspected gang members or others deemed a threat to prison security — in fiscal year 2014. More than 60 percent of them emerged without any supervision, compared to only 14 percent of other prisoners released that year.

Prisoners who go straight to the street pose a danger to public safety. Analysts for the Texas Legislative Budget Board found that more than 60 percent of state prisoners released from solitary were rearrested within three years, compared with 49 percent of overall prison releases. Similar studies in Washington and California found people coming out of segregation cells had recidivism rates as much as 35 percent higher than those leaving the general population.

[SNIP]

Dealing with the other kids at one of the juvenile facilities, Crockett State School, seemed to overwhelm him. He often retreated to his cell to pace, talk to himself, and cut his arms. His behavior was not new. In the year before his sentencing, Mark made nine trips to state mental hospitals in Austin and San Antonio for cutting and other psychotic episodes. Mark also picked up a new conviction for assaulting a guard, for which he was given three years to be served concurrently. After evaluating him three months before his 18th birthday, psychologists at Crockett concluded: “It is recommended that he be provided therapy….[and] would benefit from a program to learn independent/daily life skills.”

Instead, Mark was soon moved to a maximum-security adult prison, the Telford Unit in New Boston, Texas. And within six months, he landed in a segregation cell for allegedly threatening to escape.

Mark had told his mother that he was nervous around the older prisoners, particularly his cellmate. He had stopped taking his Seroquil and Abilify for schizophrenia, because he said they made him groggy and unable to stay alert and on guard. The other prisoners referred to him as “Crazy Boy.”

Mark was initially relieved when he was moved to solitary, thinking he would be safer. But as his mother observed, solitary was no place for people who “live in their mind.” Mark’s learning disabilities made it difficult for him to fill the time reading books or writing letters. So he paced his cell and listened to the radio. Without any other distractions, his anger and depression worsened. “You have nobody to talk to but yourself,” Mark said. “All I remember doing was just thinking about the people who hurt me.”

During their monthly, no-contact visits, Garcia saw Mark’s behavior change. He began swearing at her, flipping her off, and telling her not to come. “He wasn’t like that when he went in,” she said. She tried to pacify him by recalling happier times — their yearly trips to Disney World, the birthday parties she threw for him. But Mark could not remember any of it.

NPR focuses on Brian Nelson, a man who had similar experiences to Mark, but has managed—sometimes just barely—to rebuild his life on the outside. Nelson is now a paralegal and prisoner’s advocate at the Uptown People’s Law Center in Chicago. Here’s a clip:

When Nelson’s mother picked him up at the distant supermax prison in Tamms, Ill., he told her how he was given a television during his last year of solitary and kept seeing ads for a fast-food ice cream…

On the drive home, they stopped for a Blizzard at a Dairy Queen.

“And I’m standing there and a guy walked behind me. And I was not used to people being that close to me. And I started cussing. I turned around, I’m ready to fight because I thought I don’t know if he’s going to attack me,” Nelson recalls. “I have prison mentality in my mind. And then I looked up and saw my mom crying, like ‘Oh my God, what have they done to him?’ You know, because I couldn’t handle being around people.”

That was five years ago. It’s still hard for Nelson, 50, to be around people.

[SNIP]

The Department of Justice estimates that about 80,000 prisoners in the U.S. are in solitary confinement. The system drastically expanded in the past 30 years as the U.S. prison population grew. Corrections officials built supermax prisons and added other new programs to isolate the inmates who were considered the most dangerous.

“The United States is unique and this is a relatively new experiment,” says Alan Mills, who is Nelson’s boss at the Uptown People’s Law Center. “And now we’re dealing with people who have spent a decade in solitary and are getting out. Mental health professionals don’t know how to deal with it. And don’t have treatment for it yet. It’s a brand new world and unfortunately it’s one that we as a society have created for ourselves.”

Mills says, at the least, prisons need to take inmates out of solitary months before they leave prison and give them mental health treatment, job training and other help to get them ready to go back home.

A few states, and the federal prison system, have started doing that.

Unlike most prisoners who are given parole when they are released, inmates in solitary are less likely to get supervision. That’s because they “max out” their sentence and fall outside the parole system.

Be sure to listen to part two, which airs on Friday (today) on Morning Edition.


NEW US BILL TO UPDATE AND REAUTHORIZE JUVENILE JUSTICE DELINQUENCY AND PREVENTION ACT

On Thursday, US Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) introduced a bill that would revamp and reauthorize the aging Juvenile Justice Delinquency and Prevention Act. The JJDPA was first enacted in 1974 (and hasn’t been successfully reauthorized since 2002).

The JJDPA gives states funding (into the millions) for compliance with these four requirements: do not detain kids for status offenses, work to reduce disparate minority contact with the justice system, keep kids out of adult facilities (with a few exceptions), and when kids do have to be kept in adult prisons, keep them “sight and sound” separated from adults.

Scott’s new bill, the Youth Justice Act of 2015, is modeled after Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)’s bipartisan reauthorization bill introduced late last year.

The Youth Justice Act would strengthen the JJDPA’s objectives and add some new functions, including removing those exceptions to keeping kids away from adults in detention facilities, as well as the exceptions that allow kids who have committed certain status offenses to be isolated for up to 24 hours.

Education Week’s Lauren Camera has more on the issue. Here’s a clip:

In addition, the bill would phase out various confinement practices that some consider dangerous, such as isolation that lasts longer than a few hours.

The measure would also create a new grant program for communities to plan and implement evidence-based prevention and intervention programs specifically designed to reduce juvenile delinquency and gang involvement.

“We have documented the power evidence-based policies have in both reducing crime and saving money, and we have realized the role that trauma plays in the lives of our disengaged youth and what it takes to get them back on the right track,” said Scott. “The Youth Justice Act builds on the strong framework of our colleagues in the Senate, and takes suggestions from our nation’s leading juvenile justice advocates on how we can make our system even safer and more responsive to our youth.”


US DISTRICT JUDGE SETS DATE FOR TANAKA – CAREY TRIAL

U.S. District Judge Percy Anderson has set the date for November in the federal trial of former LA County Undersheriff Paul Tanaka and ex-captain Tom Carey. Defense attorneys originally agreed on January.

The federal prosecutors are scheduled to try several other use-of-force cases in advance of the two former LASD leaders. The Tanaka/Carey trial is expected to take around two weeks.

Baldwin Park Patch’s Mirna Alfonso has the story. Here’s a clip:

The case was initially set for trial next month, but Anderson ordered attorneys for both sides to meet and agree on a later date. Federal prosecutors in the Tanaka/Carey case are scheduled in the coming months to try three separate use-of-force cases involving current or former sheriff’s deputies, along with the trial of a deputy U.S. marshal facing civil rights homicide and obstruction of justice charges.

The Tanaka/Carey case is expected to take at least two weeks, lawyers said.

Evidence to be delivered to the defense includes a Web-searchable database and 4,000 pages of transcripts from a previous related trial, according to Assistant U.S. Attorney Margaret Carter.

Tanaka — who is on a leave of absence as mayor of Gardena — and Carey, who oversaw an internal sheriff’s criminal investigations unit, have denied the charges contained in a five-count indictment returned May 13 by a federal grand jury.


LAPD CHIEF RECORDS VIDEO THAT COMMISSION FINDS UPSETTING AFTER THEIR DECISION REGARDING THE DEATH OF EZELL FORD

On Wednesday, after the LA Police Commission’s decision that actions taken during the incident that led to the death of Ezell Ford were unjustified, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck recorded a video message to express his support for the rank and file…

The video riled the LA Police Commission because in it, Chief Beck tells officers that they have the support of their chief, Mayor Eric Garcetti, and “the vast majority of the people of Los Angeles.” The Police Commission was not included in the list of supporters. The LA Times interviewed the president of the commission, Steve Soboroff, and Chief Beck about the video. Here’s a small clip:

Soboroff bristled at any suggestion that the commission didn’t support officers. “To intimate that I don’t care or don’t have the best interests of officers — it’s hurtful but it’s so untrue,” Soboroff said. “It’s so outrageous and so against anything that I feel or that I’ve ever displayed.”

Beck told Soboroff that it was not his intention to suggest that commissioners didn’t back the officers.

“It was not intended to infer lack of support by the Police Commission,” Beck later told The Times. “I have viewed it [the video] several times and I don’t believe it is reasonable to come to that conclusion based on the content.”

The LA Police Protective League (LAPPL) issued a statement Thursday in support of Chief Beck, calling the commission’s decision “self-serving” and “irresponsible.” Here’s a clip:

Surprisingly, the Police Commission, who was privy to the same facts as Chief Beck, came away with a different conclusion. It unanimously reached a finding that left many, including the LAPPL, scratching their heads and wondering how the Commission could let the usual protesters and external political forces influence their decision on this extremely important matter. Beyond being self-serving, the decision was downright irresponsible and has the potential to put the officers that protect this city at risk by signaling to criminals that it is OK to reach for an officer’s weapon depending on the situation.

The Commission got this wrong. Instead of focusing on the multiple forms of hard evidence, including the fact that Ford was a known gang member with a lengthy criminal history of violent crimes, the Commission cited and stretched thin the “objectively reasonable” standard established in the 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case of Graham v. Connor. A standard that the court later noted should not be the primary driver determination, noting that “reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments—in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving—about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation.”

LAPPL President Craig Lally also spoke to the Times about the video, saying that if Chief Beck had included the commission in the list of supporters, it would have discredited the entire video. “You can’t say that you support the cops and make a decision like that,” said Lally.

We will continue to track this story, which is clearly far from over.


JUDGE RECOMMENDS CHARGING CLEVELAND OFFICERS IN THE DEATH OF 12-YEAR-OLD TAMIR RICE

On Thursday, nearly 200 days after the fatal shooting of 12-year-old Tamir Rice in Cleveland, Municipal Court Judge Ronald Adrine ruled that there was probable cause to prosecute the two officers involved in the 12-year-old’s death. (If you need a refresher: Tamir Rice was playing with a toy gun outside of a recreation center with his sister when he was shot by Officer Timothy Loehmann.)

A group of activists and clergy filed affidavits asking the court to arrest Loehmann and another officer, Frank Garmback. The ruling is essentially a recommendation to Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy McGinty and city prosecutors, as the case will automatically go before a grand jury, according to Ohio law. Judge Adrine recommended charging Loehmann with murder, involuntary manslaughter, reckless homicide, negligent homicide and dereliction of duty, and Garmback of negligent homicide and dereliction of duty.

McGinty says he is investigating the shooting.

The Atlantic’s David Graham has the story. Here’s a clip:

In response to a petition from citizens, under an obscure and little-used provision of Ohio law, Municipal Court Judge Ronald Adrine agreed that Officer Timothy Loehmann should be charged with several crimes, the most serious of them being murder but also including involuntary manslaughter, reckless homicide, negligent homicide and dereliction of duty. Adrine also found probable cause to charge another officer, Frank Garmback, with negligent homicide and dereliction of duty. He rejected aggravated murder charges against both officers. (The Guardian has the full order here.) Referring to the “notorious” video of Rice’s death, the judge wrote, “This court is still thunderstruck at how quickly this event turned deadly.”

But Adrine did not order the two men to be arrested. He stated that because the law under which the affidavits were filed had been amended in 2006, judges no longer have the authority to issue warrants themselves in such cases.

Instead, Adrine forwarded his opinion to city prosecutors and Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy McGinty, who says he is currently investigating the case. And he took pains to note that prosecutors are required to apply a different standard before filing charges, determining that it is more probable than not that a reasonable “trier of fact” would hold the officers accountable for any alleged crimes.

The affidavit filed Monday was intended to jumpstart the process of prosecution; it’s been more than 200 days since Rice, a 12-year-old black boy, was shot and killed in a city park. Adrine’s finding of probable cause may increase pressure on McGinty. But since all murder prosecutions have to go through a grand jury under Ohio law, Adrine’s order just funnels the case back to where it was before—waiting for McGinty to act.

It’s been 199 days since Tamir Rice was shot to death by a Cleveland police officer. And for a group of community leaders in the Forest City, that’s too long to wait for prosecutors to charge the officers involved in the shooting. Instead, they went to a municipal court judge Tuesday morning and asked him to issue a warrant for the officers on charges of murder, aggravated murder, involuntary manslaughter, reckless homicide, negligent homicide, and dereliction of duty.

If that sounds confusing, it’s not just you. The activists made the request under an obscure provision of Ohio law that entitles citizens to file an affidavit demanding an arrest.

Posted in Charlie Beck, Eric Garcetti, juvenile justice, LAPD, LASD, Paul Tanaka, prison policy, Reentry, solitary | 13 Comments »

The Breaking of Kalief Browder: 1993-2015

June 8th, 2015 by Celeste Fremon


In October 2014, The New Yorker ran a shattering story by staff writer Jennifer Gonnerman
about a young Bronx man named Kalief Browder who, just before he turned sixteen years old, was arrested then locked up on Riker’s Island. There he remained for the next three years, without a trial, until finally the prosecutors who brought the charges, then dragged their collective legal feet with 36 months worth of unexplained continuances, simply dropped the case.

Kalief was accused of stealing a backpack, an accusation that was fuzzy from the beginning. The youngest of seven children and reportedly well liked at school, Kalief insisted that he was innocent, repeatedly refusing to take the deals the prosecutor offered, even the last one, which would have let him out for time served.

No, he had said. He would go to trial. “I did not do it.”

But the approximately 800 days he spent in solitary confinement during those three years in Rikers took a terrible toll on a once-upbeat boy’s psyche. And, in addition to the damage caused by the isolation, there was also also the beat down by at least one guard, maybe more than one, and another brutal beating by gang members that reportedly ran the area of the jail where Kalief was located—that is when he wasn’t shut up in a 12′ X 8′ solitary cell.

The New Yorker obtained surveillance footage of some of the beating incidents.

As months then years passed in Rikers with no seeming end in sight, Kalief began to emotionally decompensate. He tried suicide twice when he was locked up, and again a couple more times when he was finally released.

Gonnerman and others who knew Kalief felt that, for a while this spring, things seemed to be getting better for the young man who had grown so fragile after the ordeal that took away half of his teenage years.

Then, on Saturday, she got the news that Kalief had hanged himself.

On Sunday, the New Yorker ran one more, unutterably sad story by Gonnerman about the boy whom she’d gotten to know named Kalief.

The primary takeaway from Gonnerman’s fine reporting is this: Kalief Browder was a young man who could have been my son, could have been yours, who was failed and brutalized by multiple levels of the American justice system, and who—this weekend—succumbed to the effects of that 3-year-long psychological beating.

Here’s a clip from Jennifer Gonnerman’s story:

….Late last year, about two months after my story about him appeared, he stopped going to classes at Bronx Community College. During the week of Christmas, he was confined in the psych ward at Harlem Hospital. One day after his release, he was hospitalized again, this time back at St. Barnabas. When I visited him there on January 9th, he did not seem like himself. He was gaunt, restless, and deeply paranoid. He had recently thrown out his brand-new television, he explained, “because it was watching me.”

After two weeks at St. Barnabas, Browder was released and sent back home. The next day, his lawyer, Paul V. Prestia, got a call from an official at Bronx Community College. An anonymous donor (who had likely read the New Yorker story) had offered to pay his tuition for the semester. This happy news prompted Browder to re-enroll. For the next few months he seemed to thrive. He rode his bicycle back and forth to school every day, he no longer got panic attacks sitting in a classroom, and he earned better grades than he had the prior semester.

Ever since I’d met him, Browder had been telling me stories about having been abused by officers and inmates on Rikers. The stories were disturbing, but I did not fully appreciate what he had experienced until this past April when I obtained surveillance footage of an officer assaulting him and of a large group of inmates pummeling and kicking him. I sat next to Kalief while he watched these videos for the first time. Afterward, we discussed whether they should be published on The New Yorker’s Web site. I told him that it was his decision. He said to put them online.

He was driven by the same motive that led him to talk to me for the first time, a year earlier. He wanted the public to know what he had gone through, so that nobody else would have to endure the same ordeals. His willingness to tell his story publicly—and his ability to recount it with great insight—ultimately helped persuade Mayor Bill de Blasio to try to reform the city’s court system and end the sort of excessive delays that kept him in jail for so long.

Browder’s story also caught the attention of Rand Paul, who began talking about him on the campaign trail. Jay Z met with Browder after watching the videos. Rosie O’Donnell invited him on “The View” last year and recently had him over for dinner. Browder could be a very private person, and he told almost nobody about meeting O’Donnell or Jay Z. However, in a picture he took alongside Jay Z, who draped an arm around his shoulders, Browder looked euphoric.

Last Monday, Prestia, who had filed a lawsuit on Browder’s behalf against the city, noticed that Browder had put up a couple of odd posts on Facebook. When Prestia sent him a text message, asking what was going on, Browder insisted he was O.K. “Are you sure everything is cool?” Prestia wrote. Browder replied: “Yea I’m alright thanks man.” The two spoke on Wednesday, and Browder did seem fine. On Saturday afternoon, Prestia got a call from Browder’s mother: he had committed suicide…..


The photo of Kalief Browder is a screen shot of an ABC7 broadcast that was then put through WLA’s art process.

Posted in juvenile justice, solitary | 2 Comments »

Ex-Gang Member’s Life Does a 180 After He Joins Los Ryderz – by Sarah Zahedi

June 8th, 2015 by Celeste Fremon

EDITOR’S NOTE: Programs that are effective at helping gang-involved kids and others to reroute the trajectories of their lives, come in a variety of packages—as illustrated by a program known as Los Ryderz Bike Club, profiled by reporter Sarah Zahedi in the story below. Yet all such programs have certain elements in common—namely, a caring and accepting community, a safe place to hang out, and some activity to engage in that builds skill, knowledge, discipline, and self worth. Los Ryderz has all that and more.

Riding His Way Out of Gang Life

How a Young Watts Gang Member Found a Different Kind of “Family” Through an Unusual Community Bike Club

by Sarah Zahedi



Riding his bike through the barren projects of Watts — the sidewalks of which are scattered with used heroin needles and double-sided razor blades — 21-year-old William Fabian is enjoying himself. He is exploring his neighborhood with friends from Los Ryderz, a biking club for youth who are struggling to escape gang activity.

Today, Fabian (pictured front and center in the photo above) feels free to ride across gang-territory lines into new neighborhoods he hadn’t seen before, but just a short time ago he would not have dared.

Three years ago, Fabian walked the halls of Alain Leroy Locke High School in Watts, proud of his reputation as a gang member.

“The gang gave me attention — I had their back and they had mine,” Fabian said. “It made me feel good inside to have people look at me like I was something.”

No one had ever told Fabian he would amount to anything. Although he had felt support from his mother throughout his life, his relationship with his father has always been rocky.

“My mom has always been there for me, my dad — not as much I could say,” Fabian said. “The stress of my family problems got to me and fighting and causing trouble was my way of relieving myself of that.”

Fabian got heavily involved in gang-related fights when he started going to Santee Education Complex in south Los Angeles. Then, in 2010, he moved to Watts and began attending Locke. There, he stayed involved in gang activity.

“I was already known in Locke to people for my reputation at Santee,” Fabian said. “I hung out with people I met who looked up to me.”

The youngest of four siblings and the only first-generation American in his family, Fabian was introduced to gang activity and culture at an early age. Fabian’s two eldest brothers, who emigrated from Mexico and attended Belmont High School, were regularly involved in gang-related fighting in school. When he began school in Watts, William Fabian followed his brothers’ example.

“I didn’t dedicate myself to my schoolwork but I dedicated myself to fighting and being a troublemaker,” Fabian said.

Not succeeding in class and continually getting cited for fighting at school, Fabian was finally kicked out of Locke in 2012.

It was then that he knew he had to make a change. Walking along 103rd street a few blocks from his house in Watts, Fabian happened upon the Yo! Watts Youth Center. At the time it housed the Inspire Research Academy, a nonprofit that allows young adults 18 to 25 to earn their high school diploma in small classes at the center.

In 2012, he began classes at the center. In the same room where his classes were held was the Los Ryderz bike club headquarters. There, Fabian met Los Ryderz founder Javier “JP” Partida.


THE BIRTH OF LOS RYDERZ

Partida, who worked as a football coach from 1999-2007 at various local high schools, founded Los Ryderz in May 2012 to give endangered youth the opportunity to go on weekly bike rides all over Los Angeles. He paid for many of the bikes himself; others were donated. About 50 bikes are stored at the Los Ryderz headquarters. He teaches club members how to fix and maintain the bikes and provides them for members to use during rides for free.

When Partida first met Fabian, he encouraged him to join the club. He noticed Fabian’s hesitance, partly fueled by the fear of being shot off his bike if rival gang members saw him in their neighborhood and partly by his uncertainty about what being a part of the club would be like.

“He still had the gang mentality when I first met him,” Partida said. “It took me a while to convince him that it was worth his time.”

“I didn’t get the point, it didn’t catch my attention,” Fabian said. “But little by little, JP would just encourage me to come out and experience what it’s like to be a part of the club and finally I was convinced.”

For Fabian, the first ride made all the difference. Los Ryderz biked from the Yo Watts! Center to Ted Watkins Memorial Park and proceeded onto a 6-mile ride through the neighborhood.

“I felt good,” Fabian smiled. “We were just a group of people rolling down the street on bikes and cars were honking at us in support, people were cheering for us, yelling ‘Hey man, keep on riding!’ I just kept coming back.”

Fabian said he was particularly thrilled to go to areas of his community he had not previously felt comfortable about going to before.

“It’s amazing … I’m always seeing people from different neighborhoods on my rides … people that — I’m not even going to lie — people that I didn’t get along with,” Fabian said. “Now they see me riding, doing something positive. They don’t mess with me no more.”

Since that first ride, Fabian has dedicated himself to bike riding.

“I go every night at least for one 2- to 3-mile ride to myself and that’s it,” Fabian said. “It feels great just to cruise a little bit and not worry about anything else.”


DARKNESS AND LIGHT

Although he said his peers and friends made fun of him when he first joined the bike club, he only gets support from them today, especially now that he has a leadership role in the club as sergeant at arms, or youth leader of the club.

“They would laugh at me, make jokes that I was wasting my time but people didn’t know how useful it is,” Fabian said. “Now they see me, with my vest and my leadership position and know I’m doing something good … they’re proud of me.”

Gang-interventionist groups like Los Ryderz, which incorporate exercise into their programs, are some of the most effective in reducing gang activity, according to UCLA School of Public Affairs faculty member Michelle Talley. This is because such groups work both mentally and physically.

“It’s so powerful on so many levels. It’s an alternative to gang involvement that builds both physical and emotional strength,” Talley said. “It’s a way to cope, to build self-esteem and self-confidence.”

Because all age groups can enjoy bike riding, it is a model example of a constructive gang-interventionist activity in the long term, she said. Talley is a licensed clinical social worker whose main focus is working with youth and families as it relates to public child welfare, including youth dealing with criminal issues.

“What is an appropriate activity for a 10-year-old is different from what’s appropriate for a 15-year-old and a 19-year-old because they are going through various developmental stages,” Talley said. “Activities like biking can be appropriate at all these stages.”

For this reason, surrounding law enforcement has taken notice of Los Ryderz and its success. Officer Ron Harrell serves as the senior lead officer in the Los Angeles Police Department’s community safety partnership program for the Imperial Courts housing project in Watts. After seeing Los Ryderz’ bike rides through Watts and visiting club headquarters to see how Partida worked with endangered youth, Harrell said he was immediately impressed.

“Today, a lot of kids don’t do physical activities like kids did in the past,” Harrell said. “They feel good because they are seeing improvements in their stamina, they are actually physically doing something and getting to know their community while they do it.”

In a neighborhood where gangs are prevalent throughout nearly every square inch, Harrell said community organizations like Los Ryderz help create a different image of Watts within the community.

“These kids are being seen and they’re doing something positive instead of something negative and a lot of people see Watts in a negative way,” Harrell said. “Where there is light though, there can be no darkness.”

This positive image of Watts is in line with a recent drop in crime in the area. According to the LAPD, since 2010 violent crime is down by 57 percent in Imperial Courts, 54 percent in the Jordan Downs project in Watts and 38 percent in the Nickerson Gardens project in Watts. Harrell said community organizations, which aim to prevent gang activity, have contributed to dropping crime rates.

“Community organizations are taking back the community,” Harrell said. “So many kids are just trying to find something different and get out of a gang. If they find an activity they enjoy, they keep coming back.”

While he still lives within gang territory, Fabian no longer feels compelled by his peers to take part in gang activity. Talley noted that many times, gang members will be allowed to leave their gangs if they show skill and potential for success in another area like bike riding.

“A lot of the times youth can get permission from a gang to not be a part of it anymore because they’re going to be somebody, if they show they are really good at something,” Talley said.

When youth become aware that they can excel outside a gang, Talley said the youth are able to see themselves in a new, positive light.

“These kids are not just gang members. Being a part of a gang is just one aspect of how these kids define themselves,” Talley said. “If we define them as just gang members, that’s the message they get and it’s harder for them to make a change.”


THE POWER OF RELATIONSHIPS

In Fabian’s case, Partida played a significant role in helping him to see himself as more than just a gang member and a troublemaker.

“I’ll always remember when he told me that I was something,” Fabian said. “He would say, ‘You’ll always be something in life, even if you think you are not.’ No one had ever told me that.”

A positive, strong relationship between a gang-interventionist and a youth at risk of getting into trouble, like that between Fabian and Partida, is vital for a program’s success, in Talley’s experience.

“Youth are more likely to be active in programs where they have a strong relationship with the interventionist, when they know the interventionist is always there for them.”

And through the past three years he has been with Los Ryderz, Fabian has come to help or go on rides from the club headquarters almost six days a week. He said he has grown close to Partida and looks to him as a mentor.

“If it wasn’t for JP, I probably would have never joined a club like Los Ryderz,” Fabian said. “I gained JP’s trust and respect with my involvement and he’s gained mine by always being there for me. He’s taught me so much about life and how to live positively. He’s my mentor … one of my role models.”

Growing up in South Central Los Angeles and being involved with gangs himself as a youth, Partida knows the negative impact of gang activity on an adolescent’s lifestyle firsthand. Having lost friends to gang-related violence, Partida said he is thrilled to see youth such as Fabian evolve and turn their lives around through Los Ryderz.

“I wanted to make a difference,” Partida said. “This club doesn’t charge a penny. The only thing we ask for is loyalty and commitment from the members and in return the kids come out with skills they didn’t have before and something positive to do with their time.”

Because of Los Ryderz, Fabian said he has been able to become a more open and happy person.

“I changed a lot,” he said. “Right now, you see me … I like to laugh, to talk, to smile. Back then I wasn’t like that. I used to be serious all the time. I wouldn’t talk to anybody except my friends.”

Knowing how much the club helped him change his life, he said he now wants to encourage other youth to do the same.

“I talk to other kids. They know I’m a good friend so they tell me their problems at home or at school,” Fabian said. “I advise them to go to the bike club so they can have a place to relieve their stress with biking, a place where they can enjoy themselves.”

The bike club has even become like a family to him.

“No one messes with you, everyone is cool and nice to each other,” Fabian said. “All we care about is riding and having a good time.”

Just having completed an internship to be a custodian at John Ritter Elementary School, he hopes to go to culinary school one day or study sociology.

“I like working with people and am starting to think of college for the first time in my life,” Fabian said. “Los Ryderz really helped me to get to this point. It’s magical.”


This story first appeared in Youth Today.


All photos (except the very first one) by Sarah Zahedi

Posted in Gangs, juvenile justice | No Comments »

Alleged Abuse at a Boot Camp for LA-Area Kids….Disclosing LA County’s Legal Bills….LAUSD Program Re-Enrolls Kids Exiting Juvie Detention….Fight in Men’s Central Jail

June 4th, 2015 by Taylor Walker

SEVEN KIDS SAY THEY WERE ABUSED DURING A BOOT CAMP PUT ON BY HUNTINGTON PARK AND SOUTH GATE POLICE DEPARTMENTS

Out of 36 kids who attended the Leadership Empowerment and Discipline (LEAD) boot camp program in May, seven say they were punched, slapped, stepped on, and beaten by officers running the program. LEAD is sponsored by the Huntington Park and South Gate Police Departments.

The program, which purportedly teaches discipline and leadership to 12 to 16-year-olds, ran for 20 weeks, seven days of which were spent at Camp San Luis Obispo, an Army National Guard base. The kids said that officers, especially two men known as “the Gomez brothers,” verbally and physically abused them, stepping on them as they did push-ups.

The program leaders would take them into a “dark room,” where the they would hold kids against the wall by their necks, and punch them in the sides, stomach, ribs, and face, according to Gregory Owen, the attorney representing the children’s families. One boy allegedly suffered broken fingers from an officer stepping on his hand.

The kids said those responsible threatened physical harm if the kids broke their silence.

The San Luis Obispo Sheriff’s Department says it is investigating the allegations. The Gomez brothers have been suspended from the kids’ program, but are still on patrol, according to lawyers.

KTLA’s Ashley Soley-Cerro, Eric Spillman, Christina Pascucci, and Melissa Palmer have the story. Here are some clips:

Bridget Salazar said her 13-year-old son was punched, slammed up against a wall and choked.

“He just couldn’t stop crying,” Salazar said. “Right there, I knew something happened.”

Araceli Pulido said her daughters, aged 12 and 14, were among the seven alleging abuse. There are more campers who were hurt but they are too scared to come forward, Pulido said.

The children were allegedly told they were worthless and their parents did not love or want them, and that the camp was three months long rather than a week, according to Owen.

The “Gomez brothers” were primarily responsible for the mistreatment, the children reported.

“Many of the children are suffering from nightmares and other emotional trauma because the Gomez brothers are out on the streets. They are afraid the Gomez brothers will come after them,” Owen’s news release stated.


EDITORIAL: COUNTY SHOULD DISCLOSE TO TAXPAYERS $$ AMOUNTS SPENT ON PRIVATE LAW FIRMS FOR LAWSUITS AGAINST LASD

Last June, a Superior Court judge ruled in favor of civilian watchdog Eric Preven and the SoCal ACLU in a lawsuit demanding the Los Angeles Office of County Counsel release information on the exact dollar amounts paid to private law firms in lawsuits filed against the LASD and its personnel (particularly the ones alleging LASD misconduct, abuse, and excessive use of force that typically drag on for a year, or three, presumably while the meter is running).

But this April, an appeals court agreed with the county that any information between lawyer and client, including invoices, is confidential. Last week, Preven and the ACLU petitioned the CA Supreme Court to reverse the appeals court decision.

An LA Times editorial says the Supes answer to the public, and should be forthcoming with how much taxpayers are forking over for these lawsuits, and preferably before the Supreme Court has to deal with it. Here’s a clip:

Eric Preven is one such county resident, and he sought the invoices for a handful of cases under the California Public Records Act. When the county rejected much of his request, he and the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California sued. A judge ruled in Preven’s favor a year ago, but in April an appeals court sided with the county, accepting its argument that billing records — indeed, anything at all that passes between a lawyer and client — are protected from disclosure.

That’s an unduly expansive reading of the attorney-client privilege, which is widely understood to apply to a lawyer’s advice, a client’s directives and other substantive communications made in the scope of the lawyer’s representation, but not to billing records of the type sought by Preven and the ACLU, cleansed of sensitive information. In the case of Los Angeles County, where voters or residents might understandably believe they are collectively the clients and ought to have access to relevant information, the privilege protects not them but their elected representatives, the Board of Supervisors.

The public should be pleased that Preven and the ACLU are not taking the ruling lying down. Last week, they petitioned the state Supreme Court to overturn the decision.

As intriguing as the legal issue is, however, it should not obscure the basic fact that the supervisors, as the client, have the authority to waive the privilege and release the documents right now — but have opted instead to fight.


PROGRAM RE-ENROLLS AND RE-ENGAGES LAUSD HIGH SCHOOLERS WHEN THEY ARE RELEASED FROM JUVENILE DENTENTION FACILITIES

As of last year, California law mandates juvenile justice systems connect with school systems to keep kids who are released from juvenile detention facilities from slipping through the cracks. According to the Youth Law Center in San Francisco, more than 80% of kids leaving lock-up are not enrolled in school within the first month of their release.

An LA Unified School District counseling program works to catch those kids and help them re-enroll in school and keep up with classes, and also to direct them to other important services.

More than 100 LAUSD kids are released from lock-up every month. In fact, there are more LAUSD kids cycling in and out of the detention centers than in any other school district. But because of budget cuts, the program cannot sustain enough counselors to meet the needs of every justice system-involved kid.

And when the counselors do reach out, those kids have to be receptive to the idea of returning to (and completing) high school. Some are not.

KPCC’s Annie Gilbertson has more on the program.

Gilbertson’s story follows two formerly incarcerated high school kids, one who completes high school and moves on to community college while working for Homeboy Industries, the other who, unfortunately, does not triumph over the statistics. Here are some clips:

When 19-year-old Liliana Flores was in fifth grade, her parents immigrated into the United States from El Salvador. Her family was fleeing gang violence, but it only followed them to Los Angeles.

“I never had a happy home,” she said.

Social workers thought Flores would be safer in foster care. She was tossed from group home to group home packed with troubled teens.

“I started doing the same things they were doing,” Flores said.

She got into drugs, and it led to a series of stints in juvenile detention centers scattered throughout Los Angeles County. In between her time away, she attended continuation high schools filled with other at-risk students struggling to stay within the law.

[SNIP]

Even after her incarceration, Flores wears a uniform: a long-sleeve, button-down shirt with a neat collar.

It conceals the tattoos climbing her arms, inked across her chest and spread around her scalp. On her neck, a tattoo she got when she was 14 years old says “f— love” in swirling letters.

Valli Cohen, a nurse practitioner, is taking a laser to Flores’ tattoo at the Homeboy Industries medical office, which specializes in gang tattoo removal…

It’s hard to tell if the attempt to track students exiting juvenile detention is having an impact. LAUSD declined to provide the numbers of students who re-enroll and go on to graduate.

But Flores said it is working for her…

“Right now, I’m taking Criminal Justice I, and I’m taking Criminal Justice II,” she said.

Flores plans to transfer to University of California, Santa Cruz, and eventually become a probation officer. Her report card is full of Bs and she said the fact that she’s undocumented is her motivation.


FIGHT BETWEEN 80 INMATES AT MEN’S CENTRAL JAIL

At 12:30p.m. on Wednesday, a fight broke out between around 80 inmates in Men’s Central Jail in downtown LA. Deputies succeeded in quelling the disturbance in about ten minutes. One inmate was stabbed and three others were wounded in the fight. There were no serious injuries. Both Men’s Central and Twin Towers jails, which are across the street from each other, were placed on lockdown.

CBS has more on the incident.

Posted in ACLU, California Supreme Court, children and adolescents, Education, jail, juvenile justice, LA County Board of Supervisors, LASD, LAUSD, law enforcement | 2 Comments »

LASD Deputy to Donate Liver to Partner….a Misused Federal Sentence Enhancement…and More

June 3rd, 2015 by Taylor Walker

LASD DEPUTY FINDS HE IS COMPATIBLE TO DONATE PARTIAL LIVER TO HIS DYING TWIN TOWERS PARTNER

On Thursday, LA County Sheriff’s Deputy Javier Tiscareno will donate part of his liver to save the life of his deputy partner, Jorge Castro, whose own liver is failing.

After numerous unsuccessful treatments, and learning that none of his family members were a match for a liver transplant, Castro was placed on a waiting list.

California is not an ideal place to live if you need a liver transplant. Once you’re on the UNOS (United Network for Organ Sharing) waiting list, the wait in the golden state is commonly 12-36 months. (With this in mind, Apple founder Steve Jobs got on the list in Tennessee, instead of California.)

When Castro, told his partner about his health issues, Tiscareno decided to get tested for liver donation. The two deputies were a match.

At a press conference outside Twin Towers jail, where both men are correctional officers, Tiscareno said, “He told me he would be dead by the end of the year. That was unacceptable to me.”

A partial liver transplant is considered a relatively safe procedure for the donor, but it is still a major surgery, and complications do sometimes occur. Tiscareno said, regarding his decision, “I’m not going to a funeral knowing I could have helped.”


OP-ED: FED PROSECUTORS MANIPULATING A 45-YEAR-OLD STATUTE TO FORCE LOW-LEVEL DRUG OFFENDERS TO TAKE UNFAIR PLEA DEALS

Enacted in 1970, statute “851″ was originally intended to give federal prosecutors the ability to seek double or more the usual sentences for serious drug dealers, while exempting those with lower-level drug charges from the sentencing “enhancement” that 851 provided.

But that’s not how things turned out.

Mona Lynch, a professor of criminology, law, and society at UC Irvine, says federal prosecutors have severely misused 851, employing it, instead, as a tool to force low-level drug offenders to take plea deals.

By filing the 851 enhancement against defendants with prior convictions, prosecutors can turn what would normally be a 10-year mandatory minimum into life without parole in the most extreme cases.

Lynch says this weapon federal prosecutors use to coerce plea deals must be eliminated.

Here’s a clip from Lynch’s op-ed for the NY Times:

I have conducted in-depth qualitative research and interviews in four federal districts; in each, the 851 threat loomed for nearly everyone with the eligible prior record. In the words of one of my interviewees, “the 851 is the ultimate lever” used by prosecutors to force a guilty plea. And it almost always worked: Defendants were compelled to waive their rights and plead guilty to ensure that their sentences were not doubled, or worse.

What happens to the defendant who doesn’t go along? The threat becomes a reality. Take the case of a former defendant whom I’ll call Brandon.

Brandon may not have been squeaky clean when he landed in federal court on drug charges, but he certainly was no drug kingpin. A week or two before his arrest, he reignited a friendship with a high school classmate — I’ll call him Frank — at the time a relatively large-scale crack dealer. After reconnecting, Brandon went for a drive with Frank and Frank’s girlfriend on a single drug-supply run, something the couple did on a weekly basis.

On the way home, a state trooper pulled over Frank’s car, searched it, retrieved the drugs and arrested them. Each was charged with conspiracy to distribute hundreds of grams of crack cocaine.

All three had prior drug convictions, so the 851 threat loomed. Frank and his girlfriend succumbed to the pressure and pleaded guilty. But Brandon had a strong case. By all accounts, including law enforcement’s, he was neither Frank’s partner nor involved in any continuing conspiracy with the couple.

So Brandon went to trial. And the prosecutor played her ace card, filing the 851 on the eve of trial. He was convicted. At sentencing, Frank received 20 years in prison and his girlfriend received probation. Brandon, who chose to exercise his right to trial, received a life sentence with no possibility of parole.

[SNIP]

Between 1992 and 2012, about 2,300 black men have been sentenced to life for federal drug convictions, 72 percent of whom had asserted their right to trial. While data cannot pinpoint the 851 as the trigger of those life sentences, it does indicate that 96 percent were subject to drug mandatory minimums at sentencing.


LEGAL EXPERT GIVES 40 REASONS WHY POOR AND MINORITY PEOPLE MAKE UP SUCH A LARGE PORTION OF THE US JAIL POPULATION

Bill Quigley, Director of the Law Clinic and the Gillis Long Poverty Law Center at Loyola University New Orleans and Associate Legal Director at the Center for Constitutional Rights, put together a noteworthy list of 40 reasons why jails across the US are full of racial minorities and poor people. Here’s a clip:

One. It is not just about crime. Our jails and prisons have grown from holding about 500,000 people in 1980 to 2.2 million today. The fact is that crime rates have risen and fallen/a> independently of our growing incarceration rates.

Two. Police discriminate. The first step in putting people in jail starts with interactions between police and people. From the very beginning, Black and poor people are targeted by the police. Police departments have engaged in campaigns of stopping and frisking people who are walking, mostly poor people and people of color, without cause for decades. Recently New York City lost a federal civil rights challenge to their police stop and frisk practices by the Center for Constitutional Rights during which police stopped over 500,000 people annually without any indication that the people stopped had been involved in any crime at all. About 80 percent of those stops were of Black and Latinos who compromise 25 and 28 percent of N.Y.C.’s total population. Chicago police do the same thing stopping even more people also in a racially discriminatory way with 72 percent of the stops of Black people even though the city is 32 percent Black.

Three. Police traffic stops also racially target people in cars. Black drivers are 31 percent more likely to be pulled over than white drivers and Hispanic drivers are 23 percent more likely to be pulled over than white drivers. Connecticut, in an April 2015 report, on 620,000 traffic stops which revealed widespread racial profiling, particularly during daylight hours when the race of driver was more visible.

Four. Once stopped, Black and Hispanic motorists are more likely to be given tickets than white drivers stopped for the same offenses.

Five. Once stopped, Blacks and Latinos are also more likely to be searched. DOJ reports Black drivers at traffic stops were searched by police three times more often and Hispanic drivers two times more often than white drivers. A large research study in Kansas City found when police decided to pull over cars for investigatory stops, where officers look into the car’s interior, ask probing questions and even search the car, the race of the driver was a clear indicator of who was going to be stopped: 28 percent of young Black males twenty five or younger were stopped in a year’s time, versus white men who had 12 percent chance and white women only a seven percent chance. In fact, not until Black men reach 50 years old do their rate of police stops for this kind of treatment dip below those of white men twenty five and under.

Six. Traffic tickets are big business. And even if most people do not go directly to jail for traffic tickets, poor people are hit the worst by these ticket systems. As we saw with Ferguson where some of the towns in St. Louis receive 40 percent or more of their city revenues from traffic tickets, tickets are money makers for towns.

Posted in jail, juvenile justice, LASD, Prosecutors, racial justice, Sentencing, War on Drugs | 8 Comments »

The Power of “Freedom Schools” to be in 7 Juvenile Probation Camps in Alameda & LA Counties, But Will Probation Staff Fully Buy In?

June 1st, 2015 by Celeste Fremon

Freedom School Program Liberates Kids in Probation Camp from Mark Ridley-Thomas on Vimeo.

This summer, the kids in seven California juvenile probation camps located in LA and Alameda counties will experience something called Freedom School—a combination literacy enrichment program and self-esteem building strategy that is the brain child of the Children’s Defense Fund.

For decades, Freedom school has been used to improve literacy and a love of learning for kids in communities around the nation, through the use of some unique strategies including a sort of noisy, high-energy pep rally called the Harambee (Swahili for Let’s Pull Together) that occurs at the beginning of each school session.

Eight years ago, CDF brought the program to juvenile justice facilities in four states: Minnesota, Texas, Maryland, and New York. Then, in the summer of 2013, with the sponsorship of LA County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, LA County Probation agreed to try out Freedom School in two of the county’s juvenile probation camps on a pilot basis—Fred C. Miller Camp in the hills of Malibu and Afflerbaugh Camp in the LaVerne.

Although there was initial resistance from some of the probation staff at the LA camps, particularly during the morning Harambee—which featured cheering, singing, energetic jumping and dancing—the two-camp pilot was deemed a success.

When a team from UCLA, USC and Vital Research evaluated the before and after effect of Freedom School on the camps probationers in the two camps, researchers found that the kids’ reading scores went up an average of 51 points. Their love of/interest in reading increased as well, as did their own anecdotal ratings of their reading ability.

But, the researchers noted that one of the areas was in need of improvement. There was a lack of “buy-in,” they said, by many of the probation officers in the two camps. “The role of Probation Officers was observed as being limited…only sticking to their traditional roles of disciplining and monitoring students,” wrote the evaluators.

More specifically, although some of the staff seemed to embrace the program, others declined to participate in any of the group activities and instead stood off to the side frowning, barking at kids for minor pretexts.

With the idea of improving staff “buy-in,” in preparation for this summer’s expanded Freedom School, the California Children’s Defense Fund (CA-CDF) brought a larger than ever group of probation officers, teachers and others involved in the program, to the week-long preparatory, Harambee-heavy training that began over the weekend in Knoxville, TN, and which featured superstar civil rights attorney Bryan Stevenson as one of the weekend’s kick-off speakers.

And this year, the event in Knoxville includes special juvenile justice training sessions, during which those working with the programs inside youth justice facilities can exchange ideas.

“In the CDF Freedom Schools program children learn to fall in love with reading and are engaged in activities that develop their minds and bodies and nurture their spirits,” said Marian Wright Edelman, Founder and President of the Children’s Defense Fund. “The children are encouraged to dream about college and set goals for themselves, and for many of them, the program is a life-changing experience.”

The same appeared to be true in 2013 for many of the kids at LA County’s Camps Afflerbaugh and Miller.

“I used to get Ds and Fs in school,” said one sixteen-year-old who participated in the Freedom School pilot at Camp Afflerbaugh. “Now I want my family to know I get Bs and Cs. And I want to go to college and become a counselor so I can help other kids learn how to read.”

Posted in Education, juvenile justice, Juvenile Probation, LA County Board of Supervisors, Probation | No Comments »

LA County Selected for 1st Round of MacArthur $75 Million Jail Reform Challenge (This is a Very Good Thing)….& Holding on to Humanity at Pelican Bay

May 28th, 2015 by Celeste Fremon



LA COUNTY ONE OF 20 SELECTED OUT OF 200 ENTRANTS IN $75 MILLION NATIONAL CHALLENGE TO REFORM U.S. JAILS

On Monday, Los Angeles County received news that it has been chosen as one of 20 jurisdictions in the nation that will take part in the MacArthur Foundation’s ambitious Safety and Justice Challenge, a $75 million initiative that hopes to “reduce over-incarceration by changing the way America thinks about and uses jails.”

This is very good news.

The 20 areas selected for this first phase of the challenge include New York City, New Orleans, LA, Pima County, AZ, Harris County, TX, Pennington County, SD, and the entire state of Connecticut. (Full list below.) The idea is for these cities and counties (and one state) to be mentored by the nation’s experts in such things through the process of creating and refining a plan to reform their respective jail systems.

Then in phase two of the Justice Challenge, the 20 jurisdictions, will be whittled down to ten. Those fortunate ten will receive a second round of mentoring plus funding of between $500,000 and $2 million annually to implement their respective plans for reform.

In other words, those who are part of the 20 are, by their participation, committed to a real, no-kidding substantive plan for jail reform, which will include strategies to reduce the jail system’s population and more. Then if they’re chosen to be one of the ten, they’re committed to implementing that plan, and will get an infusion of cash to better make that implementation possible.

(The 20 that were recently selected have jails systems that range in size from 239 beds in Mesa County to LA County’s 21,951 bed system, so for the second phase, the yearly funding for the remaining ten, will depend on the size of the jurisdiction’s jail system.)

According to MacArthur, the criminal justice organizations that will provide “technical assistance and counsel” to the 20 jurisdictions as they design and prepare their “comprehensive plans for local reform” are the Center for Court Innovation, the Institute for State and Local Governance at the City University of New York, the Justice Management Institute, Justice System Partners, the Pretrial Justice Institute, and the Vera Institute of Justice.

The Vera institute of Justice in particular, has been deeply involved in MacArthur’s jail reform initiative with two MacArthur-funded studies released this year that both illuminate problems in the nation’s jail systems and point toward the way toward solutions.

For instance, we learned from this month’s study by Vera that U.S. jails are draining a lot more dollars from our public coffers than most people think. And in February of this year, another Vera study, Incarceration’s Front Door: The Misuse of Jails in America, showed the ways that the nation’s jail policies can do harm.

Vera’s February study makes clear that jails serve an important function in local justice systems, both for short term incarceration, and to hold those charged with crimes who are either deemed too dangerous to release pending trial, or who are considered flight risks unlikely to turn up for trial.

Yet, according to what the study’s authors found, the above categories no longer represent what jails primarily do or whom they hold. Instead, Vera reported, three out of five people in jail are unconvicted of any crime, yet are simply too poor to post even a low bail in order to be released while their cases are being processed.

For instance, in 2013 in New York City, more than 50% of the jail inmates who were held until their cases were settled, stayed in jail solely because they couldn’t afford bail of $2,500 or less. Most of these inmates were arrested on misdemeanor cases.

All of this time spent in jail purely for fiscal reasons, the report states, has collateral consequences in terms of lost wages, lost jobs, loss of a place to live, and loss of time spent with spouses and children, producing further harm and destabilization of those incarcerated and, by extension, their families and communities.

Moreover, nearly 75 percent of both pretrial detainees and sentenced offenders are in jail for nonviolent traffic, property, drug, or public order offenses—some of which could be more successfully handled through diversion programs that utilize community based services. “Underlying the behavior that lands people in jail,” write the Vera authors, “there is often a history of substance abuse, mental illness, poverty, failure in school, and homelessness.”

(The report notes that, in Los Angeles County, they found that the single largest group booked into the jail system consisted of people charged with traffic and vehicular offenses.)

It is these problems and others that the Justice Challenge of which LA County is now a part hopes to help cure.

The fact that jails can do harm is, of course, a fact with which LA is very familiar, what with the scathing report on our jails delivered in September 2012 by the Citizen’s Commission on Jail Violence, the looming federal consent decree pertaining to the way the mentally ill are treated in LA’s jails, and the recent landmark settlement of “Rosas v. Baca,” the giant federal class action lawsuit brought by the So-Cal ACLU that has resulted in a court enforceable roadmap to correct the use of force policies inside the jail that led to a pattern of brutality by sheriffs deputies against inmates.

Back in February, when the challenge was first announced we spoke to one of the MacArthur people, and also to one of the Vera study authors, both of whom said they hoped very much that LA County—the home of the nation’s largest jail system—would be one of those jurisdictions that applied.

To its credit LA County—which, in this instance, means the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Departmentdid apply and, as we know now, was selected.

We look forward to hearing about LA’s strategy for reform of its massive system as that plan evolves.

And, of course, but we cannot help but hope that LA will be one of the final ten that get MacArthur bucks to put their stellar plans into action.

The full list of jurisdictions selected for the first round of Justice Challenge is as follows:

· Ada County, ID
· Charleston County, SC
· Cook County, IL
· Harris County, TX
· Los Angeles County, CA
· Lucas County, OH
· Mecklenburg County, NC
· Mesa County, CO
· Milwaukee County, WI
· Multnomah County, OR
· New Orleans, LA
· New York City, NY
· Palm Beach County, FL
· Pennington County, SD
· Philadelphia, PA
· Pima County, AZ
· St. Louis County, MO
· Shelby County, TN
· Spokane County, WA
· State of Connecticut


AND IN OTHER NEWS…..A USC DEAN OF SOCIAL WORK ENCOUNTERS MEN WORKING HARD TO HOLD ON TO HUMANITY IN CALIFORNIA’S PELICAN BAY PRISON

In the Chronicle of Social Change, Wendy Smith, an Associate Dean and Clinical Associate Professor at the University of Southern California’s School of Social Work has written an extraordinary story about her trip to Pelican Bay Prison to meet with men who were incarcerated for crimes they’d committed as teenagers.

Smith traveled to Pelican Bay with a group of lawyers, advocates, and law students with the purpose of talking to 250 of these inmates convicted as juveniles about California’s Senate Bill 260, a law passed and signed in 2013, which allows youth offenders given life sentences, the possibility of a new type of parole hearing at their 15th, 20th or 25th year of incarceration.

But the trip was much more than simply an imparting of information. In many instances, it was a walk back into humanity with men who were terrified that humanity was lost to them.

Here are some clips. But be sure to read the whole thing. It’s more than worth it.

During the small groups, we learned that some men had not been to the visiting room to receive a visitor for a long time; some had never been there. Some had exchanged no conversation with anyone but another prisoner or a guard in months or years. During the groups, described in the evaluations by many as the best part of the workshops, some men spoke and asked questions readily; others did not speak at all.

In the insight groups, some struggled with the distinction between excuses and explanations of crime, wondering if there was one. We spoke of examining and reflecting on the people and events in their early lives, and the environments in which they grew up as steps along the road that led to the crime and to where they are now.

Several men recognized aloud that they did not know how to begin this work. They wondered if there could be someone to ask the questions that could help them see into their own lives, to see the boy who was and the man who might yet be. Hope had entered the room, bringing with it fear and worry about how to make a turn from habitual ways of feeling and being, and especially, how to conceive of such a turn without help.

And then here’s a section from her meeting with men in solitary:

I told them that their crime was not the total of the person they were, and asked them to try to remember the very first illegal act they ever committed. In a moment or two, they all did. Most told me they were eight, nine, 10, or 11 at the time. A few were five or six, and a few were teenagers. All were old enough to remember a self that existed before that first act. I asked them to remember the boys they were before the crime.

We talked about how to begin to remember and piece together what happened after that, trying to dig deep to include the many steps along the road to the moment of a crime, and the decisions they made at the time and since. We acknowledged together the difficulty and shame of thinking and talking about their crimes.

In the SHU, as in the general population the day before, many men told me that they wished there were someone they could speak with on a regular basis to be able to do this work—they could not imagine how they would be able to do it. Some believed their inability to put things into words would make it impossible, now and at any parole hearing in the future.

Our conversations were brief and constantly interrupted by movement – our own as we rotated among the groups, and those of the guards and inmates, as bathroom trips and meal and water deliveries were made, as men were taken back to their cells and new groups of men were brought in.

Somehow, amid the locking and unlocking of cells and cuffs, and the congestion in narrow halls crowded with our group and guards, conversations continued. It became clear that for many of these men, we were the first people other than prison personnel or other inmates that they had spoken with in years. Some were nevertheless able to engage with little apparent difficulty, asking questions, enjoying the opportunity to interact with us.

For others, speech came slowly or not at all, and for some, even eye contact was too much to manage. These men spend all their time alone, in their cells or in the exercise area. The solitude of their confinement is absolute. Many had been there for five or ten years. Some had been there 20 years or more.

One man had spent the previous four months “debriefing,” telling what he knew about the gang life he had decided to renounce. Debriefing is the primary avenue by which inmates can obtain transfer out of solitary confinement. It is dangerous, as gang members often retaliate when someone leaves.

Those who debrief must be isolated from other inmates and their locations kept secret. For this reason, each of us met individually with this man in a separate visiting corridor. It was a relief to have the relative quiet of this space and a full twenty minutes in which my focus could be undivided.

He had been incarcerated at 17, already the father of two very young children. Now he is 41 and a grandfather. We spoke little about his crimes—he lived the gang life both before and during his imprisonment—but rather about the rocky course of his marriage over many years and how his wife helped him to get sober and to find the religious faith that strengthened his will to leave the gang life.

His eyes filled as he described his hopes for the future and his pain over how he had lived his life. Only lately had he begun to understand the impact of events of his early life: the loss of his baby brother, his mother’s wild grief that led her to cruelly abuse him, habitually pouring scalding water over his hands and body.

We wept together. There was much more he needed to say, but already the next advocate was waiting to meet and speak with him, and another group of inmates waited around the corner for me. It was awful to leave him with only the hope that he had found comfort in the humanity of those few shared moments….

Posted in ACLU, juvenile justice, LA County Jail, LASD, Los Angeles County, LWOP Kids, prison, prison policy | No Comments »

Arresting Kids Under 12, Hidden Costs of Running Jails, Pell Grants for Inmates, Body Cams, and Freddi Gray

May 22nd, 2015 by Taylor Walker


CALIFORNIA ARRESTS 93% FEWER KIDS AND PRE-TEENS THAN 30 YEARS AGO, BUT TWO CITIES DO NOT LINE UP WITH THE TREND

Arrest rates for California’s kids under the age of twelve have experienced a steep decline over the last 30 years, according to a new report from the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice. The number of young arrestees dropped a whopping 93%. The decrease appears to be due, in part, to a drop in child crime between the late 70′s and now, but it may also be attributable to local efforts to decriminalize kids. Two cities, however, have not gotten their act together with regard to child and pre-teen arrests.

Statewide, almost 14,000 kids under twelve were arrested in 1978, nearly a third of whom were younger than ten. Thirty-five years later, in 2013, when the number of kids under twelve had risen by 40%, just under 1,400 kids younger than twelve (219 under ten) were arrested.

Most of California’s 58 counties mirrored the state trend, but eleven did not. Nine of those counties were tiny. No kids were arrested in those counties spanning the three decades. But two small counties experienced higher arrest rates, but those counties’ only arrested between zero and four kids. Stockton and the city of San Bernardino broke from the pack. In both cities, school district officers are allowed to arrest young kids, and they do arrest them—a lot. Stockton only has 1% of the state’s total number of kids under ten, those kids account for 26% of the state’s total arrests of kids in that age group.


NON-BUDGET JAIL SPENDING NOT CALCULATED BY COUNTIES, COULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM IF COUNTIES WOULD TRACK THE $$$

The US spent $22.2 billion on jails in 2011. And that price tag is much lower than if it included costs not covered in the official jail budgets—for example, employee benefits, inmate health care, capital costs, administrative costs, legal costs, and inmate services—, according to a new survey and study from the Vera Institute of Justice.

Vera researchers surveyed 35 jail systems (including Alameda County) in 18 states, holding 9% of the US jail population. The study found that many jail systems had difficulty calculating the total cost (incurred by taxpayers) of running their jails. And if jails don’t track those costs, and taxpayers do not know how much they are truly spending on locking people up in local jails, and neither do the policymakers pushing criminal justice reform.

According to the Vera survey, eight of the jail systems spent non-budget dollars equaling more than 20% of their budget. Twelve of jail systems surveyed could not come up with their non-budget costs.

Here’s a clip from the study:

…in addition to the $1.1 billion spent by the City of New York Department of Correction in 2014, other city agencies spent an additional $1.3 billion for jail employee benefits, health care and education programs for incarcerated people, and administration, bringing the total cost to $2.4 billion.

Because reported jail costs are too often incomplete, policymakers and the public are seldom aware of the full extent of their community’s financial commitment to the jail. As policymakers focus on justice reform at the local level, they need to understand how much the community is actually spending. To this end, researchers at the Vera Institute of Justice developed a survey to help counties tally the actual price of their jails.

The only way to safely reduce the cost of jail is to limit the number of people in the jail, because the cost largely comprises expenses for staff and the number of staff is dictated by the population of incarcerated people. In fact, the inmate population is such a key cost driver that it is possible for “expensive” jails (meaning those with a high average per-inmate cost) to be the least costly to taxpayers.

Consider the example of two counties of similar size: Johnson County, Kansas, and Bernalillo, New Mexico. By comparing the average cost per inmate, the jail in Johnson County appears to be more than twice as expensive as the jail in Bernalillo County ($191.95 per day versus $85.63 per day in 2014). But taxpayers in Johnson County actually spend less on the jail than taxpayers in Bernalillo County do, because the incarceration rate in 2014 was more than three times lower (121 per 100,000 versus 369 per 100,000). As a result, the annual cost of jail in Johnson County is $49 million ($82 per county resident), versus $78 million ($113 per county resident) in Bernalillo County.


PELL GRANTS MAY BE EXTENDED TO SOME INMATES…US DEPT. OF EDUCATION, MAY OVERTURN A PORTION OF A SHORT-SIGHTED 1994 BILL

The US Department of Education is expected to lift a portion of a punitive 1994 ban on inmate eligibility for Pell Grants to attend college while they are behind bars.

A RAND study found that for every dollar spent on education for inmates, the state would save $5, and greatly reduce recidivism rates.

PBS’ Paul Fain has more on the issue, including what ending the Pell Grant ban would look like from a financial standpoint. Here’s a clip:

If the project is successful, it would add to momentum for the U.S. Congress to consider overturning the ban it passed on the use of Pell for prisoners in 1994.

“The idea is under consideration,” a department spokesperson said.

Sources said the Obama administration backs the experiment, and that it would be unveiled this summer.

A likely scenario would be for state and federal prison education programs from a handful of colleges to become eligible for Pell Grants. Various restrictions might apply, such as for participating students to be eligible only if they are scheduled for release within a specific number of years.

Even a limited experiment will provoke controversy. Spending government money on college programs for convicted criminals is an easy target for conservative pundits and for some lawmakers from both political parties.

For example, last year New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo dropped his proposal to use state funds for prison education programs after the plan received immediate and fierce opposition.

Yet advocates for removing the federal ban point to evidence that supporting educational opportunities for prisoners pays off for students, for government coffers and for society on the whole.

[SNIP]

Some Republican state lawmakers support prison education programs, experts said, because they like the clear return on investment.

“It is financially wise,” said John Dowdell, coeditor of The Journal of Correctional Education. “It’s time to get over the emotional bias and do what the data says.”


LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES GRAPPLE WITH HOW MUCH ACCESS PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE TO BODY CAM FOOTAGE

In LA and around the country, law enforcement agencies are purchasing and implementing police body cameras as a means of increasing accountability to the public. But so far, police forces (including the LAPD) have argued that privacy for both officers and the people they come in contact with, and maintaining investigation integrity, outweigh the public’s desire for department transparency.

In April, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck said that officers could review their body cam footage before writing reports. Chief Beck also said that for the most part, captured video will be treated as evidence, and will not be made public. (The LA County Sheriff’s Dept. requires the officers to provide statements before viewing footage.)

The LA Times’ Richard Winton sheds some light on the controversy and the difficulty in finding a middle ground. Here’s how it opens:

Cameras mounted inside patrol cars captured every moment.

With their guns drawn, Gardena police officers screamed instructions at three men on the sidewalk. The officers warned them to keep their hands above their heads, mistakenly believing that they had been involved in a robbery.

Exactly what happened next is in dispute, but what is undisputed is that the men were unarmed when police opened fire, killing one and seriously wounding another.

Afterward, the Gardena Police Department allowed the officers — over the objection of a sheriff’s investigator — to review video of the incident. But the department has refused to make the videos public, even after the city agreed to pay $4.7 million to settle a civil rights lawsuit over the shooting.

Across the country, law enforcement agencies are equipping police and patrol cars with cameras to capture interactions between officers and the public. But many of those police forces, like Gardena’s, do not release the recordings to the public, citing concerns about violating the privacy of officers and others shown in the recordings and the possibility of interfering with investigations.

That approach has drawn criticism from some civil rights activists who say that the public release of recordings is crucial to holding police accountable — especially if the officers involved in the incidents are allowed to view the videos.

Gardena Police Chief Ed Medrano defended his department’s position as consistent with that of other law enforcement organizations around the country. He added that it was intended to protect the integrity of investigations as well as the privacy of officers and those who come into contact with police.

“The general public does not have an unfettered right to see every video that is taken by law enforcement,” Medrano said in an email. “Thus, absent a court order to the contrary, many agencies across the country, including Gardena, do not intend to release videos to the public.”


FREDDIE GRAY UPDATE: FED. GRAND JURY INDICTS OFFICERS

On Thursday, a grand jury chose to indict six officers allegedly connected to the death of Freddie Gray in Baltimore.

The Baltimore Sun has the story. Here’s how it opens:

Baltimore grand jury returned indictments against the six officers charged earlier this month in the in-custody death of Freddie Gray, State’s Attorney Marilyn J. Mosby announced Thursday.

Prosecutors presented evidence to the grand jury over the course of two weeks, Mosby said. Reckless endangerment charges were added against all six officers, while false imprisonment charges against three were removed. The remaining charges are largely the same ones her office filed May 1, following an independent investigation.

“As our investigation continued, additional information has been discovered, and as is often the case during an ongoing investigation, charges can and should be revised based upon the evidence,” Mosby said at a news conference.

The case now moves to Baltimore Circuit Court, where the officers will be arraigned July 2. All remain free on bail.

Gray, 25, was arrested April 12 after running from officers patrolling the Gilmor Homes area of West Baltimore. His death seven days later led to widespread protests that gave way to citywide rioting, deployment of the National Guard and institution of a curfew.

Thrust into a national debate over cases of police brutality, Mosby stunned many when she moved swiftly to bring charges against the officers that included second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter.

Posted in Education, jail, juvenile justice, LAPD, School to Prison Pipeline, Youth at Risk | 21 Comments »

« Previous Entries