Tuesday, October 21, 2014
street news, views and stories of justice and injustice
Follow me on Twitter

Search WitnessLA:

Recent Posts

Categories

Archives

Meta

Zero Tolerance and School Discipline


School Discipline, LAPD Chief’s Difficult Decision About Controversial Detective, Prop 47, and Vote!

October 20th, 2014 by Taylor Walker

THIS AMERICAN LIFE TAKES A CLOSER LOOK AT SCHOOL DISCIPLINE PRACTICES

This past weekend, in a show called “Is This Working?” American Public Radio’s This American Life broadcast a story about school discipline—two different methods in particular—and whether or not they work for kids.

The TAL episode begins by exploring racial disparity in school suspensions and expulsions for infractions like “disrespect” and “willful defiance,” and the school-to-prison pipeline.

Reporter Chana Joffe-Walt talks with writer Tunette Powell and her sons JJ (5) and Joah (4), who have received eight suspensions between them (and whose story we shared here).

And in the second half of the program, host Ira Glass and Joffe-Walt tell of two completely different endeavors to change the way schools discipline kids.

The first is a system of charter schools tailored to poor and minority kids. The charter schools first started popping up around 20 years ago, and boasted strict, methodical discipline coupled with long school days, and a slogan telling kids to “sweat the small stuff.”

The first generation of kids to enter these schools are now adults, and one of these students, Rousseau Mieze, shares his experiences, good and bad, with TAL. For instance, he was suspended on his second day for celebrating a perfect score on a math test, and was frequently disciplined thereafter for talking out of turn. Half of the first class dropped out before the end of the school year, but Rousseau went on to graduate college and is now a teacher at charter school that applies similar discipline methods.

Conversely, another discipline movement has been slowly sweeping through schools across the nation: restorative justice, a model based on healing and conflict resolution between students and their teachers and peers.

The full episode is quite good and worth listening to, even if you are familiar with school discipline issues.


LAPD CHIEF CHARLIE BECK FACES TRICKY DECISION ABOUT DETECTIVE’S FATE

While speaking at an LAPD training class, Detective Frank Lynga went on a vulgar tirade that included, among other things, calling black civil rights attorney Carl Douglas a “little Ewok,” saying a female captain was “swapped around,” and calling a certain lieutenant a “moron.”

Now Chief Charlie Beck must choose whether to merely punish Lynga, or fire him, as a department board of rights panel has recommended. And it’s a complicated decision because whichever way Beck moves, there will be constituencies who are upset. It is further complicated by the fact that Chief Beck did not fire officer Shaun Hillman who allegedly pulled a gun on a man and used a racial slur during a bar fight (which critics presume was because of his high profile uncle, a former LAPD deputy chief).

The LA Times’ Kate Mather and Richard Winton have this complex story. Here’s a clip:

Frank Lyga claimed that he drove his Jeep in the carpool lane at 100 mph, called a prominent black civil rights attorney an “ewok,” quipped that a female LAPD captain had been “swapped around a bunch of times” and described a lieutenant as a “moron.”

Then he recalled his fatal 1997 shooting of a fellow officer, an incident that sparked racial tensions within the department because Lyga is white and the slain officer was black.

“I could have killed a whole truckload of them, and I would have been happy doing it,” Lyga recounted telling an attorney representing the officer’s family.

Nearly a year after Lyga gave his controversial training lecture, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck must choose whether to follow a disciplinary panel’s recommendation issued this week to fire the detective or reduce his punishment and let him keep his job.

The decision presents the chief with one of his biggest tests since his August reappointment to a second five-year term and is likely to reignite criticism of how he handles officers’ discipline. Beck has clashed with his civilian bosses and rank-and-file officers on the issue, with some accusing him of being inconsistent.

On Friday, black civil rights advocates called on Beck to fire Lyga, saying that the narcotics detective’s comments were racist and sexist and should not be tolerated. Meanwhile, Lyga’s supporters say that he is genuinely remorseful, and note that Beck recently rejected another disciplinary panel’s recommendations to fire a well-connected officer who was caught uttering a racial slur.

“This is a police chief’s nightmare,” said Merrick Bobb, a policing oversight expert.


FURTHER PROP 47 READING: ENDORSEMENTS AND CRITICISMS FROM NEWSPAPERS AND JUSTICE SYSTEM LEADERS

A former Santa Barbara County Superior Court judge, George Eskin, urges voters to pass prop 47. In an op-ed for the Santa Barbara Independent, Eskin, who is also a former assistant DA in SB and Ventura, says that “wobblers”—charges that could be designated as either misdemeanors or felonies—are often filed as felonies by DAs and are later reduced to misdemeanors, creating a needlessly expensive legal process. Here’s a clip from his case for Prop 47:

I was a prosecutor and a defense attorney for 35 years before serving a decade as a judge on the Santa Barbara County Superior Court. In these experiences, I have seen how far we have strayed from sound criminal sentencing policies.

This is especially true of low-level offenses, many of which can be prosecuted as either a felony or a misdemeanor. District attorneys decide which classification to file, and a judge has no authority to influence their decision. DAs routinely file these cases as felonies, even though they are likely to conclude with a misdemeanor disposition.

The end result of this costly process, a misdemeanor conviction, does not justify the financial expense and the valuable resources invested by police, prosecutors, and the courts, and the ability to investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate serious and violent crimes is compromised.

And even if a felony conviction stands for these nonviolent offenses, the “felon” label will serve as an impediment to future employment and education opportunities, not to mention the obvious loss of employment and interruption of education and family life while someone is on trial or incarcerated.

UT San Diego, however, is urging voters not to pass 47, saying that while the state’s prison population and recidivism rates do need to be reduced, and our “tough-on-crime” policies did not work, Prop 47 will not solve these problems. Here’s a clip:

Stealing any handgun worth less than $950, now a felony, would automatically be a misdemeanor — and nearly all stolen handguns are worth less than $950; the language is so loose it would even make possession of date-rape drugs a misdemeanor; and the provisions for shoplifting and bad checks could cost retailers and consumers millions.

Finally, the prison money that would be saved and diverted to treatment programs, schools and crime victims — Lansdowne estimated it at $100 million to $200 million — is peanuts for a state the size of California. Which means thousands of criminals would be back on the streets where they would still not get treatment for their mental health disorders or their addictions.

Another former Superior Court judge, Harlan Grossman, who is also a former prosecutor and an FBI agent, in an op-ed for the Contra Costa Times, calls the measure “long overdue” and says it will help the state meet prison population reduction goals as well as save much-needed court resources to use on more serious criminal cases. Here are some clips:

Realignment significantly reduced overcrowding in our state prisons, but the number of inmates has been creeping back up over the past two years.

Without some additional sentencing changes, we will fall short of the goal of prioritizing jail and prison space while also making our justice system more equitable and fair. Fortunately, Proposition 47 could move us forward toward that goal.

[SNIP]

Another benefit of making these offenses misdemeanors is that it should lead to a quicker resolution of these cases, freeing up scarce resources to address the more serious offenses that threaten the safety of our communities.

KPCC has a short and sweet Prop 47 FAQ list with bullet points on what the measure would do, if passed, and why it’s different from current laws.


REGISTER! VOTE!

By the way, today, October 20, is the cut-off to register to vote in the November 4 election. Go register! Quick! You can fill out the online application here.

Posted in LAPD, race and class, Restorative Justice, School to Prison Pipeline, Sentencing, Zero Tolerance and School Discipline | 5 Comments »

State Urged to Intervene at Two More LA High Schools, Kern County School Discipline Lawsuit, Prop 47′s LA Savings, and PPOA Interviews McDonnell

October 17th, 2014 by Taylor Walker

TWO MORE LA HIGH SCHOOLS NOT GIVING KIDS NEEDED CLASSES, STATE CALLED ON TO STEP IN

On the same day that beleaguered LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy announced his resignation, the ACLU and Public Counsel filed a report at Alameda County Superior Court urged the state to intervene at two more LAUSD schools—Dorsey and Fremont—for failing to educate students.

Last week, Alameda County Superior Court Judge George Hernandez Jr. ordered LAUSD to work with the state to come up with a plan to fix Jefferson High School’s scheduling system that was giving kids filler classes and sending them home early with minimal instruction. (Read that story, here.) On Tuesday, the state board of education approved the school district’s $1.1 million plan to fix the Jefferson crisis.

Jefferson and Fremont high schools are named in a class action lawsuit filed by the ACLU and Public Counsel, Cruz v. California, challenging the state’s failure to provide an adequate education to kids attending nine schools in LA, Compton, Contra Costa, and Oakland.

KPCC’s Annie Gilbertson has more on the new action. Here’s a clip:

Judge George Hernandez Jr. ordered state and local officials to intervene at Jefferson High School on Oct. 8. Less than a week later, Los Angeles Unified officials presented a plan to reschedule students, add more classes and lengthen the school day a half hour so students could catch up on lost time.

The state board on Tuesday approved $1.1 million to pay for the fixes.

The ACLU and Public Counsel found students Dorsey and Fremont high schools are also enrolled in courses they already passed, working as aides or going home early rather than being challenged academically.

In a status report filed in Alameda County Superior Court Thursday, attorneys argued Los Angeles Unified officials haven’t done enough to identify students losing learning time and haven’t clearly stated how they’ll fix the problem.

“Plaintiffs are further investigating the remaining high schools in this litigation and will be taking steps to seek prompt relief for all students at these schools, who like students at Jefferson, have been and continue to be deprived of instruction time due to assignment to course periods with no content or failure to finalize an appropriate master schedule in advance of the school year,” according to the filing.


AND OVER IN KERN COUNTY…A LAWSUIT AGAINST HARSH DISCIPLINE FOR MINORITY KIDS

Last year, we shared Susan Ferriss of Center for Public Integrity’s stories about Latino kids (many English-learners) and black kids in Kern County receiving disproportionate punishment and transfers to remote alternative schools and independent study.

Late last week, a lawsuit against Kern County School District was filed on behalf of a number of the kids in Ferriss’ stories. The suit says the district declined to fix racially disparate practices in accordance with California’s new discipline reforms.

Kern is also accused of misreporting expulsions as transfers, as well as “tricking” and “coercing” parents into waiving kids’ due process rights, allowing the school to immediately transfer disciplined students to alternative schools.

The suit was filed by a number of non-profit and advocate groups including, California Rural Legal Assistance and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund [MALDEF].

Here’s a clip from Susan Ferriss’ latest story on the issue:

…the suit accuses the Kern High School District of failing to comply with new state discipline policies and adopt alternative practices designed to diffuse problems without resorting to kicking kids out.

The suit also accuses the district of labeling students that its regular campuses kick out as “involuntary” or “voluntary transfers” instead of expulsions that must be reported to state and federal databases.

The suit notes that the district — under scrutiny after media reports — did cut its expulsions from 2,040 in 2011 to 256 students in 2013. But the groups argue that enrollment has not declined at alternative schools because of continuing transfers of students that parents — many of them limited English speakers — agree to authorize without fully understanding other options.

The district, the suit alleges, “has implemented a ‘waiver’ system, under which students and parents are convinced through intimidation, coerced or tricked into waiving the due process protections accompanying formal discipline and accepting immediate placement in alternative schools.”

The suit also argues that stark ethnic disparities persist among kids officially expelled from Kern’s high schools.

During the 2012-2013 school year, according to the suit, 67 percent of black students who were expelled were kicked out for infractions that did not include physical injury, possession of drugs or weapons. Only 42 percent of white students expelled were removed for similarly less serious infractions.


MORE PROP 47 STATISTICS ON COUNTY SAVINGS, AND MORE

The Center for Juvenile and Criminal Justice has issued a new report on estimated savings and jail population reductions each California county can expect if Prop 47 passes next month. (If you’ve forgotten, Prop 47 would reclassify certain low-level drug and property offenses from felonies to misdemeanors, incurring punishments like probation and treatment, or a max of one year in jail, instead of more lengthy prison sentences.)

The CJCJ brief says Los Angeles would likely save between $100-$175 million, free between 2,500 and 7,500 jail beds, and affect nearly 10,000 offenders.

For further Prop 47 reading, the San Jose Mercury News’ Tracy Kaplan has more on the measure’s proponents, which include three three county district attorneys, Newt Gingrich, and a retired SD Police Chief, as well as opponents, which include other DAs and peace officer associations.


PPOA INTERVIEWS LA SHERIFF CANDIDATE JIM MCDONNELL

A new 33 minute interview by Brian Moriguchi, the president of the Professional Peace Officers Association (PPOA), with Los Angeles Sheriff-hopeful, LBPD Chief Jim McDonnell, addresses questions about issues like civilian oversight, leadership, transparency, and field deputy positions. The interview is the first installment in a three-part interview with McDonnell. Watch the entire first video above.

Posted in ACLU, Jim McDonnell, LASD, LAUSD, Sentencing, Zero Tolerance and School Discipline | 6 Comments »

Gov. Signs Law Eliminating Expulsions for “Willful Defiance” But Vetoes Drone Bill…LASD Restricts Association With Convicted Dept. Members…. No More Prisoner of the War on Drugs…Running the Homeboy 5 K

September 29th, 2014 by Celeste Fremon


GOVERNOR SIGNS FIRST IN NATION LAW TO LIMIT “WILLFUL DEFIANCE” SCHOOL SUSPENSIONS & EXPUSIONS

On Saturday, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law AB 420, a bill that limits suspensions and eliminates all expulsions for the catch-all category of “willful defiance,” which—until now—could have kids tossed out of school for such minor misbehaviors as talking back, failing to have school materials and dress code violations.

According to a statement issued by Public Counsel, the pro bono law firm that is one of the bill’s sponsors, the new law makes California the first state in the nation to put such limits on the use of willful defiance.

Brown’s signing of AB 420 is the culmination of several years worth of work by juvenile advocates, education reformers and others who have led the recent movement away from the zero tolerance discipline policies that were dominant since the 1980′s, and toward positive discipline and accountability approaches that been found to keep children in school. The issue of willful defiance has been a particularly intense focus for reformers in that the elastic designation accounts for 43% of suspensions issued to California students, and is the suspension category with the most significant racial disparities.

“In just a few short years, school discipline reform has become an important education policy priority in California because the stakes are very high,” said Assemblyman Roger Dickinson (D-Sacramento), who authored the bill. “Research has shown that even one suspension can make it five times more likely that a child will drop out of school and significantly increase the odds they will get in trouble and head into our juvenile delinquency system.”

While, AB 420 doesn’t do away with willful defiance altogether, it is considered an important step in that, as a compromise measure, it has gotten agreement from people who were initially reluctant to ax the category completely. like Gov. Brown, and certain state legislators. (The law eliminates all willful defiance suspensions for children in grades K-3 and bans all expulsions for the category for all grades. It is to be reviewed in 3.5 years.)

It should be noted that the Los Angeles Unified School District banned all suspensions for willful defiance spring.

The new law was co-sponsored by Public Counsel, Children Now, Fight Crime Invest in Kids, and the ACLU of California and supported by a statewide coalition of organizations.


BROWN VETOES BILL LIMITING LAW ENFORCEMENT USE OF DRONES SAYING IT WENT TOO FAR

The bill, which would have required law enforcement to obtain warrants before using surveillance drones, got a thumbs down from Governor Brown on Sunday night, one of about a dozen bills that Jerry nixed on Sunday.

The LA Times Phil Willon and Melanie Mason have more details on the story. Here’s a clip:

Brown, in his veto message, said that although there may be some circumstances when a warrant is appropriate, the bill went too far.

The measure appeared to impose restrictions on law enforcement that go beyond federal and state constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizures and the right to privacy, the governor stated.

The bill, AB 1327, would have required the government to secure a warrant from a judge before using surveillance drones except in cases of environmental emergencies such as oil or chemical spills. Three other states have placed a moratorium on drone use by state and local agencies

Assemblyman Jeff Gorell (R-Camarillo), the bill’s author, had argued that the expanded use of drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles, by law enforcement has pushed the boundaries of the public’s reasonable expectation of privacy, triggering a need for protection.


SHERIFF SCOTT SAYS NO ASSOCIATION WITH CONVICTED LASD MEMBERS WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION

On Friday, Los Angeles County Sheriff Scott sent out two official messages to department members regarding the conviction of seven current and former LASD members, and last week’s sentencing of six of the seven defendants.

(Deputy James Sexton was convicted in a retrial earlier this month, but will not be sentenced until December 1. Sexton’s first trial resulted in a 6-6 hung jury.)

In the first message, Scott wrote of emotional reactions to Tuesday’s sentencing of the six to prison terms ranging from 21 to 41 months, that “have left many Department members stunned,” he wrote. “The six defendants in this case were our co-workers and friends.”

It was clear, Scott wrote, that the convictions and lengthy sentences were, “in part, the result of failed leadership” at various levels of the LASD.

“The question that burns in the hearts of many is whether those who were the most responsible have been held accountable for their actions…”

The second announcement, headlined “FEDERAL CONVICTIONS AND PROHIBITED ASSOCIATIONS POLICE” clarified one of the sad artifacts of the convictions of the seven LASD defendants: All department members are aware that they are not allowed to associate with convicted felons. But this rule suddenly became confusing and in need of sorting out with the conviction of the seven LASD defendants, each of whom have long time friends—and in many cases best friends—among their former colleagues still working for the sheriff’s department.

So the following was sent out on Friday:

With respect to personally associating with the individuals who were convicted, the policy requires:

*A written request for authorization, directed to the unit commander

*Unit Commander response, whether approved or denied, to be documented in writing

*Both documents to be filed in the requesting employee’s personnel file.

The statement further instructed that the policy doesn’t prevent donations of funds to the defendants or their families. But it split hairs by stating that department members may not attended fundraisers for those convicted.

The policy prohibits doing favors for or associating with persons where the association would be detrimental to the image of the Department, such as in cases of persons adjudged guilty of a felony crime.

Therefore, Department members are prohibited from attending fundraising events for the individuals who have been convicted, whether the individuals are present or not.

Unit Commanders are not authorized to make exceptions with respect to this aspect of the situation involving the recent Federal convictions.


NO LONGER A PRISONER OF THE DRUG WAR

A wonderful longread by the LA Times’ Jenny Deam paints a journalistic portrait of Billy Ray Wheelock, who is an example of the kind of inmate that, in the last three decades, has filled the nation’s prisons to overflowing as a consequence of our ill-considered war on drugs. In the case of Wheelock, however, the story has a happy ending—even though that happy ending is very belated.

Here are two clips:

Wheelock had been sent to prison in 1993 at age 29 during an era of no-mercy drug sentencing. At the height of the country’s war on drugs, crack cocaine offenders were locked away by the tens of thousands, often with no key in sight.

Most were men, most were poor, most were black.

Wheelock was all three.

His story embodies what many, including judges and former prosecutors, now see as a judicial system gone wrong. He is the first to admit he was guilty and deserved to do time. He had been arrested three times on crack charges.

But he says he was never violent and never owned a gun. He says he only sold a bit of rock sometimes to make ends meet. “For that I got life? Life?”

Years passed and Wheelock waited, sure someday someone would see that his punishment did not fit his crime.

Here’s when such draconian sentencing began:

In 1986, Congress created a mandatory drug sentencing law and took aim squarely at crack cocaine. Under the law, a person convicted of possessing 5 grams of crack would get the same five-year sentence as someone selling 500 grams of powder cocaine.

Since 1980, there have been an estimated 45 million drug arrests in this country. The number of people in U.S. prisons for all crimes has quadrupled from about 500,000 in 1980 to 2.2 million now, “and that growth was disproportionately driven by the drug war,” said Marc Mauer, executive director of the Sentencing Project, a Washington research and advocacy group.

In the beginning, many in the judicial system were true believers, certain that if a person knew harsh sentencing awaited him he might think twice about selling drugs. But as the millennium turned, judges began to complain that their discretion had been stripped away by mandatory sentencing. Lawmakers also questioned not only the fiscal responsibility of keeping so many locked up for so long but also the humanity of such a stark racial divide, since crack cocaine disproportionately imprisoned minorities.

Calls for reform were bipartisan. In 2010, Congress showed rare unity and passed the Fair Sentencing Act to reduce the disparity between crack and powder cocaine sentences.

Read on to discover more about Wheelock’s story.


HOMEBOY 5K: “EVERY ANGELENO COUNTS”

If you’ve got an interest in getting excellent exercise with crowd of interesting and varied companions, doing the aforementioned for an important LA cause—and coming away with a snazzy t-shirt—-the annual Homeboy Industries 5K on October 18 is likely the perfect event for you.

The race starts at 8 a.m., on Saturday, October 18, at Homeboy Industries (130 W. Bruno Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012) with registration and packet pick-up from 6 to 7:30 a.m.

If you’d like to register in advance, Wed. Oct 1 is the cutoff. But you can still show up early on the day of the race and pay a last minute registration fee ($45), to run, jog, or walk with the crowd.

The purpose of the race, as you might imagine, is to raise money for Homeboy Industries, which serves more than 12,000 former gang members each year and offers full time employment to 200 men and women in an 18-month program that allows them to redirect the trajectories of their lives and “re-identify who they are in the world.”

With this in mind, the yearly 5K is designed as more than merely a fundraiser. Here’s how the Homeboy folks explain it:

The Homeboy Industries “Every Angeleno Counts” 5k is an opportunity for us to walk, run, and stand with thousands of former gang-members whose lives are being completely transformed. Every Angeleno can help dispel the myth that some lives matter less than others.

So grab your running shoes and com’on down.


Posted in Edmund G. Brown, Jr. (Jerry), Homeboy Industries, Jim McDonnell, LA County Jail, LASD, Sheriff John Scott, Trauma, Zero Tolerance and School Discipline | 4 Comments »

Groundbreaking for New “LA Model” Youth Probation Camp….CA’s Racial Divide in School Truancy…. Does Childhood “Toxic Stress” Fuel Poverty?

September 15th, 2014 by Celeste Fremon



FRIDAY CEREMONY KICKS OFF WORK ON A NEW MODEL FOR HELPING LAW-BREAKING KIDS IN LA AND BEYOND

“Rehabilitative, not punitive. That’s the message,” said Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky at Friday’s groundbreaking ceremony for the demolition and replacement of Camp Vernon Kilpatrick.

The now-closed camp, located in the rural hills above Malibu, will be rebuilt as a new kind of juvenile facility that, if all goes as hoped, will not only positively redirect the lives of the kids it serves, but will also fundamentally reboot the direction of LA County’s juvenile probation as a whole.

Camp Kilpatrick is the county’s oldest juvenile camp, and its most run down. So when Probation (with the approval of the LA County Board of Supervisors, and aided by a $29 million state grant) began to develop ambitious plans to completely rethink and rebuild one of its juvenile facilitates, the half-century-old, 125-bed camp Camp Kilpatrick was an obvious choice.

The idea is to transform the aging Malibu facility—which, at present looks like a series of dilapidated prison barracks— into a cluster of homelike cottages that sleep a maximum of 12. Thus both the structure and the programmatic strategy of the new facility will be designed to promote a relationship-centric, therapeutic and educational approach to helping kids, rather than simply trying to control their behavior.

The $48 million project will borrow some elements from the famed “Missouri Model”—-developed by the State of Missouri, and long held up as the most widely respected juvenile justice system for rehabilitating kids in residential facilities. Planners also looked at innovative programs in Santa Clara County, and Washington D.C..

Yet, nearly everyone present on Friday was quick to emphasize that Los Angeles has a particularly diverse youth population, and so needs its own specially-tailored approach.

The goal, therefore, is to create a unique “LA Model,” which borrows from other successful programs, but imagines into being its own original strategy. Ideally, it is hoped that this LA Model will be comprehensive enough that it can be replicated throughout the county system and, with any luck, serve as a model for the state and the nation.

That is, of course, a tall order.

Probation Chief Jerry Powers pointed out that the project—which he calls “a blueprint for our future”—is an unusually collaborative one, with a planning committee that includes juvenile advocates like the Children’s Defense Fund (among others), along with the LA County Office of Education (LACOE), the Department of Mental Health, the Los Angeles Arts Commission, the Juvenile Court Health Services, the Department of Public Works, and so on.

There are even two formerly incarcerated youth who are part of the planning group.

Plus, in the end, it is probation’s project.. And, finally, there is the LA County Board of Supervisors, which has say-so over probation.

Getting this diverse array of people, agencies, and interests to agree on a coherent direction, without that direction becoming hopelessly homogenized, has reportedly been—and still is—challenging, and there have been a plethora of delays. (The new Kilpatrick is set to be completed in late 2016 and open in January 2017.)

All that said, a genuine sense of optimism and we-can-do-it commitment seemed to rule the day on Friday in Malibu.

“If we are going to remove young people from their homes and schools and community at a pivotal time in their development, we better get it right,” said Carol Biondi, of the Los Angeles Commission for Children and Families. Biondi is part of the planning group and was one of the day’s speakers. “There will be no warehousing in the LA Model because we know children do not thrive in storage.”

Indeed they do not.

Alex Johnson, the new head of California’s Children’s Defense Fund, put the optimism of the afternoon in context. “Today’s initiation of demolition efforts at Camp Kilpatrick marks an important step forward for Los Angeles County’s juvenile justice system,” he saidy. “However, much work remains to ensure that all justice system-involved youth are treated humanely and fairly. We applaud the County’s leadership and vision on this initiative, and look forward to continuing to work together to make sure that the Camp Kilpatrick project becomes a springboard for system wide reform.”

Naturally, WLA will be reporting a lot more on this high importance, high stakes project as it progresses.


NEW STATE REPORT SHOWS CALIFORNIA’S DRAMATIC RACIAL DIVIDE WHEN IT COMES TO SCHOOL TRUANCY

On Friday, California Attorney General Kamala Harris released her 2nd annual report on school truancy. This time she also broke the numbers down according to race and income.

The results showed that african American students are chronically truant at a rate that is nearly four greater than California students as a whole. Researchers flagged poverty and school suspensions as significant causal factors.

The report also noted that this attendance crisis has largely remained hidden, simply because the critical data has not previously been tracked. And although the causes of the racial divide require further study, we do know, wrote the researchers, “that African-American children experience many of the most common barriers to attendance—including health issues, poverty, transportation problems, homelessness, and trauma_–in greater concentration than most other populations.”

Julie Watson of the AP has more. Here’s a clip:

The report by the California attorney general’s office is the first time the data has been broken down according to race and income levels. Officials say such data is needed to address the problem.

It comes as new research from the U.S. Education Department’s civil rights arm earlier this year has found racial disparities in American education, from access to high-level classes and experienced teachers to discipline, begin at the earliest grades.

Black students are more likely to be suspended from U.S. public schools — even as tiny preschoolers, according to the March report by the Education Department’s civil rights arm.

The Obama administration has issued guidance encouraging schools to abandon what it described as overly zealous discipline policies that send students to court instead of the principal’s office. And even before the announcement, school districts have been adjusting policies that disproportionately affect minority students. Overall, the data show that black students of all ages are suspended and expelled at a rate that’s three times higher than that of white children. Even as boys receive more than two-thirds of suspensions, black girls are suspended at higher rates than girls of any other race or most boys.

The data doesn’t explain why the disparities exist or why the students were suspended.

In California, the study found 37 percent of black elementary students sampled were truant, more than any other subgroup including homeless students, and about 15 percentage points higher than the rate for all students.

Overall, more than 250,000 elementary school students missed 10 percent or more of the 2013-2014 school year or roughly 18 or more school days. The absences were highest at the kindergarten and first-grade levels when children learn to read, according to experts.

Statewide, an estimated 73,000 black elementary students were truant last school year.


TOXIC STRESS: THE WAY POVERTY REGENERATES

The New York Times Nicholas Kristoff and Sheryl WuDunn have an op-ed essay on the effects of “toxic stress” in a child’s early life, how it helps fuel the cycle of poverty, and what can be done about it.

It’s not a cheery read, but it’s an interesting and makes some important points. Below are a couple of clips to get you started, but it’s really worth it to read the whole thing.

AS our children were growing up, one of their playmates was a girl named Jessica. Our kids would disappear with Jessica to make forts, build a treehouse and share dreams. We were always concerned because — there’s no polite way to say this — Jessica was a mess.

Her mother, a teen mom, was away in prison for drug-related offenses, and Jessica had never known her father. While Jessica was very smart, she used her intelligence to become a fluent, prodigious liar. Even as a young girl, she seemed headed for jail or pregnancy, and in sixth grade she was kicked out of school for bringing alcohol to class. One neighbor forbade his daughter to play with her, and after she started setting fires we wondered if we should do the same.

Jessica reminded us that the greatest inequality in America is not in wealth but the even greater gap of opportunity. We had been trying to help people in Zimbabwe and Cambodia, and now we found ourselves helpless to assist one of our daughter’s best friends.

[BIG SNIP]

The lifelong impact of what happens early in life was reinforced by a series of studies on laboratory rats by Michael Meaney of McGill University in Canada. Professor Meaney noticed that some rat mothers were always licking and grooming their pups (baby rats are called pups), while others were much less attentive. He found that rats that had been licked and cuddled as pups were far more self-confident, curious and intelligent. They were also better at mazes, healthier and longer-lived.

Professor Meaney mixed up the rat pups, taking biological offspring of the licking mothers and giving them at birth to the moms who licked less. Then he took pups born to the laissez-faire mothers and gave them to be raised by those committed to licking and grooming. When the pups grew up, he ran them through the same battery of tests. What mattered, it turned out, wasn’t biological parentage but whether a rat pup was licked and groomed attentively.

The licking and grooming seemed to affect the development of brain structures that regulate stress. A rat’s early life in a lab is highly stressful (especially when scientists are picking up the pups and handling them), leading to the release of stress hormones such as cortisol. In the rats with less attentive mothers, the cortisol shaped their brains to prepare for a life of danger and stress. But the attentive mothers used their maternal licking and grooming to soothe their pups immediately, dispersing the cortisol and leaving their brains unaffected.

A series of studies have found similar patterns in humans

[SNIP]

Dr. Jack P. Shonkoff, founder of the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University, has been a pioneer in this research. He argues that the constant bath of cortisol in a high-stress infancy prepares the child for a high-risk environment. The cortisol affects brain structures so that those individuals are on a fight-or-flight hair trigger throughout life, an adaptation that might have been useful in prehistory. But in today’s world, the result is schoolchildren who are so alert to danger that they cannot concentrate. They are also so suspicious of others that they are prone to pre-emptive aggression.

Dr. Shonkoff calls this “toxic stress” and describes it as one way that poverty regenerates. Moms in poverty often live in stressful homes while juggling a thousand challenges, and they are disproportionately likely to be teenagers, without a partner to help out. A baby in such an environment is more likely to grow up with a brain bathed in cortisol.

Fortunately, a scholar named David Olds has shown that there are ways to snap this poverty cycle.

Posted in Education, juvenile justice, LA County Board of Supervisors, Los Angeles County, Probation, School to Prison Pipeline, Zero Tolerance and School Discipline | No Comments »

How LA County’s Pricey Jail Plan Fails the Mentally Ill, LA’s LGBTQ Foster Kids Report Mistreatment by DCFS, Medical Board Investigating Doctors Giving Foster Kids Psych Drugs, and Willful Defiance

August 29th, 2014 by Taylor Walker

LA WEEKLY QUESTIONS RUSHED $2 BILLION JAIL PLAN AND ABSENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH DIVERSION

Phillip Cho, a man suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, was arrested for attempted commercial burglary after trying to purchase a $2,000 case of cigars while in the midst of an elaborate delusion regarding newly acquired wealth. Cho was jailed in Twin Towers for three months, causing his mental health to further deteriorate. Cho’s caseworker assured him that he would be moved out of jail to a residential treatment facility within two weeks, but the waiting list turned out to be months long.

Instead of receiving the therapeutic care he needed, Cho says he suffered abuse at the hands of Twin Towers jailers, as well as psychologically damaging solitary confinement in a silent, padded room. Cho has been released and re-incarcerated several times, not unlike many mentally ill offenders in LA. Cho has written a book about his encounters with the criminal justice system, and his time in the Towers.

Twin Towers jail was built in 1997 specifically as an upgraded facility to better address the needs of mentally ill inmates. Sound familiar? In May, LA County Board of Supervisors hastily approved a $2 billion plan to replace the dilapidated Men’s Central Jail. A staggering 3,200 out of 4,860 beds are reserved for the mentally ill.

In a crucial investigative story, the LA Weekly’s Chris Walker brings up some very important questions about the jail-replacement plan and why Los Angeles seems to be bent on warehousing people with mental illnesses instead of diverting them into treatment.

While the board was gearing up to vote on the $2 billion replacement plan, it was also working out the plans for a women’s facility in Mira Loma, for which the state’s funding of $100,000 was about to expire.

The Supervisors rushed into a vote on Men’s Central Jail plans, it seems, with the idea that they were working against the clock to secure the Mira Loma money. While the money for the women’s facility had nothing to do with the men’s facility, the Supervisors had the construction consulting firm lump the two plans together.

Here’s a clip from Walker’s assessment of the situation:

Could the vote by the Board of Supervisors — which some critics call a nod to the past that could negatively affect tens of thousands of lives — have been forced by an obscure fiscal deadline?

The Weekly’s request for public records concerning the vote and events leading up to it, made to the office of outgoing County Chief Executive Officer William Fujioka, shows that the five supervisors faced a use-it-or-lose-it deadline to secure $100 million in state funding for a women’s detention center in Mira Loma — which has nothing to do with Men’s Central Jail.

The state money, made available through Assembly Bill 900, is set to expire later this year. County officials didn’t want to lose the huge sum. For reasons that remain murky, the far more complicated proposals to replace Men’s Central Jail were lumped together with the Mira Loma facility plan in the documents prepared by Vanir Construction.

In a March 18 memo to the Board of Supervisors obtained by the Weekly, CEO Fujioka told the supervisors they had to pass one of the five Vanir proposals for replacing Men’s Central Jail in order to secure the state money for Mira Loma.

Were there other reasons for rushing the vote? At the time, all but one candidate for sheriff urged the board to wait to make a decision until after a new sheriff was in place. And Los Angeles DA Jackie Lacey had launched a task force of 70 mental health professionals to look into alternatives to locking up the mentally ill. Lacey was informed of the particulars of the jail plan the day before the vote was to happen. She put together and presented to the board an early report, explaining that her task force had found better ways to work with the mentally ill and bring down the recidivism rate. Apparently, the neither the board nor Lacey were informed of the other’s work until it was too late. Neither were the Supes briefed on a trip LASD officials took to Miami to see the county’s hugely successful mental health diversion program in action.

The die was already cast, and the board voted in favor of a massive and costly new jail.

Miami-Dade, San Francisco, and Nashville, all in the same boat as LA County at one time, are now seeing major success with mental health diversion programs. Miami-Dade cut their recidivism rate for mentally ill inmates down to 20%, compared with LA County, where 75% of mentally ill offenders return to jail.

Why were the Supes not informed of the Miami trip—one in which LASD attendees received actual “how-to” guides for replicating mental health diversion in their own county?

It…raises serious questions about an $18,000 trip taken last October by a group of L.A. County law enforcement officials, including Sheriff Cmdr. David Fender, who flew to Miami and saw firsthand its success in diverting mentally ill arrestees into treatment — part of the group’s “best practices” tour around the nation. Documents obtained by the Weekly show that L.A. Sheriff’s officials met with Miami’s top brass and received detailed “how-to” guides explaining the steps required to establish a comprehensive mental health diversion program from the ground up.

Yet nothing came of what the group learned in the other cities.

Assistant DA Bill Hodgman, who was on that fact-finding trip, delivered the how-to reports to his boss, Lacey, galvanizing her mental health task force to push for change in Los Angeles.

Yet the Board of Supervisors never received the documents from the DA or the Sheriff’s Department.

Supervisor Yaroslavsky, who voted against the new jail, complained about not being briefed. “I think I have been, as a member of this board, somewhat shortchanged by not having that information available to me as I’m being asked to make a decision — a $2 billion decision.”

This fall, DA Lacey will present another task force report, at which time the Supes are expected to vote on allocating $20 million for mental health diversion. But that doesn’t change the $2 billion jail rebuild.

Steve Fields of San Francisco’s Progress Foundation, whose diversion program treats the mentally ill for a fraction of the price of jailing them, asks what’s holding LA back:

According to California’s Administrative Office of the Courts, the yearly cost to support an individual with mental illness in a housing program in Los Angeles is $20,412.

It costs about $60,000 a year to jail him.

“I don’t know what is taking [Los Angeles] so long,” Fields says. “Counties that wanted to do this in California have had access to state funding for a long time.”


LA’S LGBTQ FOSTER KIDS (20% OF FOSTER POPULATION) MORE LIKELY TO REPORT MISTREATMENT BY THE SYSTEM

LGBTQ kids in Los Angeles County’s foster care system are twice as likely to report being mistreated by the system, a new study by UCLA’s Williams Institute. The study found that one in five foster kids (1,400) identify as LGBTQ, twice that of kids in LA’s general population, and that 86% of LGBTQ-identifying kids were a racial minority.

Researchers also found that, on average, LGBTQ kids had more placements than other foster kids, were more than twice as likely to live in a group home, and three times as likely to have been hospitalized for emotional reasons.

This is the first study to put a number on LGBTQ foster population in any child welfare system—let alone Los Angeles, which houses the largest foster care system in the nation. It was commissioned by the Los Angeles LGBT Center and funded by a federal grant.

The LA Times’ Hailey Branson-Potts has more on the study. Here’s a clip:

“People refer to it as the ‘dirty little secret’ that there are so many LGBTQ kids in foster care, but nobody’s been able to document it,” said Lorri L. Jean, chief executive of the Los Angeles LGBT Center, which commissioned the study.

“We need to know who these kids are because only if we know who they are can we help them,” she said.

In any given month, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services has about 7,400 youths between the ages of 12 and 21 in out-of-home care, according to the study. Of those, about 1,400 identify as LGBTQ.

The study, funded by a federal grant, is the first of its kind quantifying sexual orientation and gender identity of youths in any foster system, its authors say.

Despite their large numbers in the foster care system, LGBTQ youths have been “relatively invisible,” the study said. Many do not feel safe telling their foster families or social workers about having same-sex attractions or questioning their gender identity.

[SNIP]

“We have seen decreases in overt homophobia in the foster care system, but that doesn’t mean it’s not subtly still present,” [the executive director of the Children's Law Center of California, Leslie Starr] Heimov said. One recent case involved a child who was adopted and kicked out after her parents learned she was a lesbian.

The Williams Institute study noted that most of the LGBTQ foster youths in L.A. County were, like their straight counterparts, racial minorities. The study found that 83% of LGBTQ youths in foster care were Latino or black.

Bianca Wilson, a Williams Institute researcher and author of the study, said many of these youths can face added discrimination for “being both sexual minorities and ethnic and racial minorities.”

The California Report’s Rachael Myrow spoke with Williams Institute researcher and author of the study, Bianca Wilson, who said:

“We found that LGBTQ…were moved around more, were more likely to be in group homes, experiencing emotional distress. And these are all seen as barriers to finding permanent homes.”


CA MEDICAL BOARD INVESTIGATING DOCTORS PRESCRIBING PSYCH MEDICATIONS TO FOSTER KIDS

Earlier this week, Karen de Sá’s alarming investigative report in the San Jose Mercury News exposed the excessive use of psychotropic medications to treat California kids in the foster care system. It has spurred state lawmakers into planning legislation to curb the over-medication.

And now, at Sen. Ted Lieu’s request, the state medical board says it has launched an investigation into whether doctors are prescribing medication to change behavior, rather than treat mental illness, and thus, “operating outside the reasonable standard of care.”

Karen De Sá has the update. Here’s how it opens:

With pressure on California’s foster care system to curb the rampant use of powerful psych meds on children, concern is mounting about the doctors behind the questionable prescribing.

For months, the state has adamantly refused to release data that this newspaper sought to expose which physicians are most responsible. Now, in response to a request from state Sen. Ted Lieu, California’s medical board is investigating whether some doctors are “operating outside the reasonable standard of care.”

The action comes after this newspaper’s investigation “Drugging Our Kids” revealed doctors often prescribe risky psychotropic drugs — with little or no scientific evidence that they are safe or effective for children — to control behavior, not treat serious mental illness. Many of these drugs are approved only for schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and other relatively rare mental illnesses.

To examine the problem, the newspaper spent nine months negotiating with the state Department of Health Care Services to release a decade of prescribing data that did not identify individual patients.

The numbers the state finally provided showed that almost 1 in 4 adolescents in the California foster care system have been prescribed psychotropic medications over the past decade. Of the children on medications, almost 60 percent are being prescribed antipsychotics, a powerful class of drugs with serious side effects.


ON AIRTALK, KPCC’S LARRY MANTLE DISCUSSES CALIFORNIA BILL TO END “WILLFUL DEFIANCE” EXPULSIONS

Earlier this month, the California Senate passed a bill, AB 420, that would eliminate “willful defiance” as grounds for expulsion in any grade, and suspension in grades K-3. The bill, authored by Assemblyman Roger Dickinson, is now headed for Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk.

On Thursday’s AirTalk, host Larry Mantle talked about the legislation with Brad Strong, Senior Director of Education at Children Now, the organization co-sponsoring the bill, as well as Joshua Pechthalt, President of the California Federation of Teachers (which took a neutral stance on the measure).

Take a listen.

Posted in DCFS, Foster Care, LA County Board of Supervisors, LA County Jail, LGBT, mental health, Zero Tolerance and School Discipline | 7 Comments »

Los Angeles School Police Announce Important Reforms to Decriminalize School Discipline….& More

August 20th, 2014 by Celeste Fremon



TELLING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STUDENT MISBEHAVIOR AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

In a drastic change in approach when compared to the policies and protocols that ruled the day in the Los Angeles Unified School District as recently as three years ago, the head of the district’s school police, Chief Steven Zipperman, announced on Tuesday that his force will no longer criminalize the less serious forms of school rule breaking—a move that is expected to significantly reduce student contact with the criminal justice system.

Instead, multiple categories of student actions that previously would have led to citations or arrests, will be now be handled by referring the student to rehabilitative forms of intervention by school officials.

These newly re-classified behaviors include such infractions as tobacco possession, alcohol possession, possession of small amounts of marijuana, minor damage to school property (under $400), trespassing on school property, and most fights between students, which usually account for 20 percent of school arrests.

The policy of treating non-serious student misbehavior as criminal behavior was part of the zero-tolerance mania that came into fashion 25 years ago when fear about youth gang violence was hitting its apex, then continued to ramp up further in the panic after school shootings like Columbine in 1999.

The new policy, said Zipperman, “contains clear guidelines” that will help LASP officers “in distinguishing school discipline responses to student conduct from criminal responses.”


HARD WON CHANGES

Tuesday’s reforms are the latest in a series of hard-won changes that began to gain traction after national reports showed that the broad-brush of zero-tolerance did not, in fact, make schools safer, and that contact with police was a strong predictor of school performance and whether a kid would graduate from high school or drop out. (A single arrest doubles a student’s chances of dropping out of school.)

Significant progress was made in Los Angeles in 2012, when police agreed to dial back much of the disastrously punitive policy of truancy ticketing, in which thousands of students per year were issued $250 tickets, often resulting court fees on top of them, for being late or absent from school. Instead, students with chronic absences began being referred to school counselors, rather than courts.


CONCERN OVER RACIAL INEQUITIES

The urgency for reform was further recognized after data surfaced showing that school arrests and school suspensions in California consistently cut disproportionately against students of color and those with disabilities. In 2013, in Los Angeles, for example, LA School Police made nearly 1,100 arrests, 94.5 percent of those arrests involved students of color.

That same year, black students represented just 10 percent of the student population, but accounted for 31 percent of the LASP arrests.

Manuel Criollo, Director of Organizing for the Strategy Center’s Community Rights Campaign, called Tuesday’s announcement a “civil rights breakthrough” that would help “curb the school to prison pipeline in Los Angeles.”

Supervising Juvenile Court Judge Donna Groman put it another way.. “Juvenile court should be the last resort for youth who commit minor school-based offenses,” she said in a statement. “The education system is better equipped to address behaviors displayed at the school level through restorative justice and other alternative means.”

Groman, along with presiding judge of the LA Juvenile Courts Michael Nash, was among the prominent players who actively supported California-based pro-bono law firm, Public Counsel, and the Community Rights Campaign, in their two years of negotiation for Tuesday’s changes.

“There are enough studies that show bringing them into the justice system is really more of a slippery slope that leads to negative outcomes and poor futures,” Judge Nash told the New York Times this week. “The people who are in these schools need to deal with these issues, not use the courts as an outlet. We have to change our attitude and realize that the punitive approach clearly hasn’t worked.”


A NATIONAL MODEL?

The LA School Police joined Oakland, San Francisco and Pasadena in enacting these much-needed reforms.

However, with more than 640,000 students and nearly 1,100 schools, the LAUSD is the second largest school district in the nation. (New York’s system is the largest.) And its school police force is America’s largest, As a consequence advocates hope that Tuesday’s reforms will lead the way for similar reforms statewide and elsewhere in the U.S.

“If fully implemented,”said Laura Faer, Statewide Education Rights Director for Public Counsel, “this policy will move Los Angeles in the right direction to becoming a nationwide leader in putting intervention and support for struggling students before arrests and juvenile court time.”

May it be so.



AND IN OTHER NEWS:

NEW U.C. IRVINE STUDY SAYS HAVING A FATHER OR MOTHER LOCKED UP CAN BE MORE DETRIMENTAL TO A CHILD’S HEALTH THAN DIVORCE OR THE DEATH OF A PARENT

In a startling new study just released by UC Irvine, Assistant Professor of Sociology Kristin Turney finds that children’s emotional and health disadvantages are an overlooked and unintended consequence of mass incarceration. “In addition,” says Turney, “given its unequal distribution across the population, incarceration may have implications for racial and social class inequalities in children’s health.”

The study will appear in the September edition of the Journal of Health & Social Behavior, a publication of the American Sociological Association.

Here’s a clip from the ASA’s pre-publication write-up:

With more than 2 million people behind bars, the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world. This mass incarceration has serious implications for not only the inmates, but their children, finds a new University of California-Irvine study. The study found significant health problems, including behavioral issues, in children of incarcerated parents and also that, for some types of health outcomes, parental incarceration can be more detrimental to a child’s well-being than divorce or the death of a parent.

“We know that poor people and racial minorities are incarcerated at higher rates than the rest of the population, and incarceration adversely affects the health and development of children who are already experiencing significant challenges,” said study author Kristin Turney…

[SNIP]

The likelihood of having an incarcerated parent is especially high in certain groups. “Among black children with fathers without a high school diploma, about 50 percent will experience parental incarceration by age 14, compared with 7 percent of white children with similarly educated fathers,” Turney said.

Compared to divorce, parental incarceration is more strongly associated with both ADD/ADHD and behavioral problems in children; compared to the death of a parent, parental incarceration is more strongly associated with ADD/ADHD….


IN THE JOURNALISTIC COMMUNITY WE ARE REELING FROM THE MURDER OF JAMES FOLEY

A veteran war reporter, American freelance journalist, James Foley repeatedly went deep into conflict zones to bring back stories of the suffering and hardship of people most affected by the conflicts. He went to bear witness. Then he disappeared into Syria nearly two years ago on Thanksgiving Day 2012.

On Tuesday, the Islamic extremist group ISIS released a video appearing to show Foley’s execution.

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) at least 69 other journalists have been killed in Syria since the fighting there began.

Posted in American voices, campus violence, children and adolescents, Civil Rights, Education, juvenile justice, LAUSD, School to Prison Pipeline, Zero Tolerance and School Discipline | 12 Comments »

Using Risk Assessment in Sentencing…Protecting Kids Whose Parents are Being Arrested…and More

August 1st, 2014 by Taylor Walker

AG ERIC HOLDER OPPOSES USING RISK ASSESSMENT TO CALCULATE DRUG SENTENCES

US Attorney General Eric Holder has come out against states using certain “big data” risk assessment tools to help determine drug sentences. Holder says that sentences should match the crime, and that using things like a person’s work history, education, and what neighborhood they’re from to determine their likelihood of reoffending, and thus, how long they should remain in prison, may have an adverse impact on minorities and poor people.

Supporters of risk assessment say that the data helps lower the prison population, recidivism, and money spent on incarceration. Many states use big data in corrections, but the federal government does not. A bipartisan bill to adopt risk assessment at the federal level is making its way through legislature, and is expected to make it to President Obama’s desk.

California uses risk assessment by way of “sentencing enhancements” that add time onto sentences, and are grossly skewed against minorities and contribute to our overstuffed prisons.

Times’ Massimo Calabresi interviewed AG Holder and has more on the issue. Here’s a clip:

Over the past 10 years, states have increasingly used large databases of information about criminals to identify dozens of risk factors associated with those who continue to commit crimes, like prior convictions, hostility to law enforcement and substance abuse. Those factors are then weighted and used to rank criminals as being a high, medium or low risk to offend again. Judges, corrections officials and parole officers in turn use those rankings to help determine how long a convict should spend in jail.

Holder says if such rankings are used broadly, they could have a disparate and adverse impact on the poor, on socially disadvantaged offenders, and on minorities. “I’m really concerned that this could lead us back to a place we don’t want to go,” Holder said on Tuesday.

Virtually every state has used such risk assessments to varying degrees over the past decade, and many have made them mandatory for sentencing and corrections as a way to reduce soaring prison populations, cut recidivism and save money. But the federal government has yet to require them for the more than 200,000 inmates in its prisons. Bipartisan legislation requiring risk assessments is moving through Congress and appears likely to reach the President’s desk for signature later this year.

Using background information like educational levels and employment history in the sentencing phase of a trial, Holder told TIME, will benefit “those on the white collar side who may have advanced degrees and who may have done greater societal harm — if you pull back a little bit — than somebody who has not completed a master’s degree, doesn’t have a law degree, is not a doctor.”

Holder says using static factors from a criminal’s background could perpetuate racial bias in a system that already delivers 20% longer sentences for young black men than for other offenders. Holder supports assessments that are based on behavioral risk factors that inmates can amend, like drug addiction or negative attitudes about the law. And he supports in-prison programs — or back-end assessments — as long as all convicts, including high-risk ones, get the chance to reduce their prison time.

But supporters of the broad use of data in criminal-justice reform — and there are many — say Holder’s approach won’t work. “If you wait until the back end, it becomes exponentially harder to solve the problem,” says former New Jersey attorney general Anne Milgram, who is now at the nonprofit Laura and John Arnold Foundation, where she is building risk-assessment tools for law enforcement. Some experts say that prior convictions and the age of first arrest are among the most power­ful risk factors for reoffending and should be used to help accurately determine appropriate prison time.


NEW LAW ENFORCEMENT GUIDELINES FOR TAKING CARE OF KIDS WHOSE PARENTS ARE BEING ARRESTED

The Department of Justice and the International Association of Chiefs of Police are taking crucial steps toward protecting kids from avoidable trauma by rolling out guidelines and training at the local, state, and federal levels on how to care for children whose parents are being arrested. The guidelines include asking suspects if they have dependent kids during their arrest (a California Research Bureau report found that only 13% of California officers ask this), placing kids with relatives instead of taking them into child welfare custody, and postponing arrests so that kids are not present, if possible.

USA Today’s Kevin Johnson spoke with Deputy AG James Cole about the new guidelines. Here’s a clip:

Few law enforcement agencies have policies that specifically address the continuing care of children after such arrests, despite an estimated 1.7 million children who have at least one parent in prison, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The number of children jumps to about 2.7 million when parents detained in local jails are included….

Justice and the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the nation’s largest organization of police officials, are beginning to roll out guidelines to agencies across the country. It is an unusual attempt to shield children — often forgotten in the chaotic moments before and after arrests — from unnecessary “trauma” related to their parents’ detention.

While there is little reliable data to indicate how many children each year are in need of emergency placement because of parental arrests, [Deputy Attorney General James] Cole indicated that thousands of children could require such care.

“In addition to the legal consequences, protection of a child in these and related situations should also be viewed as an ethical, moral and pragmatic responsibility that serves the short-term and long-term interests of both law enforcement … and the communities they serve,” the IACP concluded in a report outlining the proposed guidelines to thousands of member police officials.

And here are some of the guidelines:

• Officers and agents should be required to determine the whereabouts of children during parental arrests.

A California Research Bureau report, cited by the IACP, found that only 13% of officers in California agencies routinely asked whether suspects had dependent children during arrests. Nearly two-thirds of state departments, according to the bureau, did not have policies to guide them on how or when to take responsibility of children during or after arrests.

• Children in need of emergency care, whenever possible, should be placed with other family members or close family friends, rather than social service agencies or police.

“Custody by a law enforcement agency or (child welfare systems) can have a significant negative emotional impact on a child, adding to the trauma of parent-child separation that the arrest may cause and possibly creating an enduring stigmatization,” the IACP report stated.

• Law enforcement and child welfare authorities should have agreements in place to assist in cases when emergency placement is necessary. In advance of police raids, child welfare officials should be part of pre-arrest planning when it is likely that children will be present at targeted locations.

“In some cases, where timing is not a critical concern,” the IACP report suggests, “an arrest may be postponed so that it will not be conducted in the presence of the child. If delay is not possible, arrangements should be made in advance to have additional law enforcement officers and or representatives from (child welfare services) … at the scene or on call.”


AND WHILE WE’RE ON THE ISSUE OF TRAUMA IN CHILDREN…

Nearly half of kids across the nation have experienced at least one trauma—an Adverse Childhood Experience (ACE)—according to a new report by the Child Trends research institute. The report used data from 95,000 households, and tallied eight different ACEs, including having a parent behind bars, economic hardship, witnessing violence at home, and divorce. Nationwide, 11% of kids experienced more than three ACEs (and 9% of kids in California).

KPCC’s Deepa Fernandes has more on the findings. Here’s a clip:

Experts say chronic early stress – or “adverse experiences” – in children’s lives can alter their emotional responses, their impulse control and even harm their developing brains.

For the study, researchers analyzed interviews from the 2011-12 National Survey of Children’s Health with more than 95,000 adults who had a child in their household…

Economic hardship was the most commonly reported stress children nationwide faced.

Child Trends has been compiling data about children’s well-being for years, but this is their first time using a large enough nationwide sample to make state-by-state comparisons.


THE REALITY OF THE SCHOOL-TO-PRISON-PIPELINE

At a commencement speech in a corrections facility, Gloria Ladsen-Billings (Kellner Family Chair of Urban Education at University of Wisconsin-Madison) once asked inmates how many of them had been suspended as a child. Every single one of them raised their hands.

Ladsen-Billings, in a talk with HuffPost’s Marc Lamont-Hill about racial disparity in suspensions, used this story to help illustrate how harsh school discipline creates a school-to-prison-pipeline, affecting kids into adulthood.

Here’s a clip from the accompanying text, but do click over to Huffpost and watch the video, which is part of a larger discussion that included Tunette Powell, the mother whose two toddlers have received a whopping 8 suspensions between them:

She explained that schools’ disproportionately large percentages of black student suspensions has less to do with white teachers not understanding the behavior of black students, and more to do with fear they bring into the classroom with them.

“The majority of suspensions are linked to what is called ‘non-contact behavior,’” she told Hill. “Kids get suspended for wearing a hat. Kids get suspended for rolling their eyes. Some of the referrals will say they were ‘disrespectful.’”

Billings explained that the danger of discrepancy between the severity of a punishment and the nature of the transgression plays out in students’ later lives.


LATEST IN THE NY TIMES MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION SERIES

In case you are following the New York Times’ editorial series about ending marijuana prohibition at the federal level, here is the latest offering.

Posted in juvenile justice, law enforcement, racial justice, School to Prison Pipeline, Sentencing, The Feds, Trauma, Zero Tolerance and School Discipline | 3 Comments »

Compromise Bill to Limit Willful Defiance, Two Preschoolers Suspended 8 Times, LASD Missed the Mark on Metro Policing Objectives, and Former Foster Kids Struggle to Get Health Care

July 25th, 2014 by Taylor Walker

GOV BROWN HELPS AMEND BILL THAT WOULD LIMIT USE OF “WILLFUL DEFIANCE” FOR SUSPENSIONS, EXPULSIONS

Governor Jerry Brown and advocates have come to an agreement on a bill to eliminate “willful defiance” as grounds for expelling a student. A version of the bill with broader limits on “willful defiance”—a vague term for most anything that can pass as disruptive behavior—passed through legislature last year, but was vetoed by Brown.

This bill would also prohibit school staff from suspending young children (up to third grade) for willful defiance. The compromise bill will sunset at the end of 2018, so that Brown and legislators can reassess.

In the 2012-2013 school year, “willful defiance” accounted for 43% of suspensions and 5% of expulsions. And while black children make up 9% of the student body, they amassed 16% of “willful defiance” suspensions. Back in May 2013, the LAUSD banned suspensions for “willful defiance.” (Read about it here.)

Ed Source’s Susan Frey has more on the issue. Here’s a clip:

Under the new agreement, no student can be expelled for being willfully defiant or disruptive of school activities. That subjective category has come under fire because it has been disproportionately used statewide to discipline African-American students and, in some districts, Latino students. In addition, under the amended bill, administrators would no longer be able to suspend K-3 students and send them home for being willfully defiant.

The law will sunset on Dec. 31, 2018, when legislators will have a chance to revisit the issue.

“Advocates for change would very much like to go further,” Dickinson said, “but we realize the governor’s willingness to agree to take steps at all is a significant move.”

A bill that put more limits on the use of willful defiance passed the Assembly and Senate last year. But that bill was vetoed by the governor, who said he thought disciplinary decisions should be made by local administrators. Jim Evans, a spokesman for the governor, said Brown declined to comment because the legislation is pending.

[SNIP]

Laura Faer of Public Counsel, a public interest law firm based in Los Angeles, said her group sees this agreement as a first step forward. She said she appreciates that “the governor is willing to walk with us on this” and sees the sunset clause as an invitation for more dialogue that will eventually lead to the elimination of willful defiance as a reason to suspend or expel.

“Students, parents, teachers and community members around the state are working passionately for this change,” Faer said. “Nobody’s giving up, nobody’s going away.”

The revised bill will go before the state Senate in August.


AND WHILE WE’RE ON THE TOPIC OF THE RACIALLY DISPARATE SUSPENSION OF KIDS YOUNGER THAN NINE…

Author, motivational speaker, and cofounder of a nonprofit for those affected by fatherlessness, Tunette Powell, has an excellent story for the Washington Post about how her two generally well-behaved preschoolers have collected eight(!) suspensions between them.

Here’s how it opens:

I received a call from my sons’ school in March telling me that my oldest needed to be picked up early. He had been given a one-day suspension because he had thrown a chair. He did not hit anyone, but he could have, the school officials told me.

JJ was 4 at the time.

I agreed his behavior was inappropriate, but I was shocked that it resulted in a suspension.

For weeks, it seemed as if JJ was on the chopping block. He was suspended two more times, once for throwing another chair and then for spitting on a student who was bothering him at breakfast. Again, these are behaviors I found inappropriate, but I did not agree with suspension.

Still, I kept quiet. I knew my history. I was the bad preschooler.

I was expelled from preschool and went on to serve more suspensions than I can remember. But I do remember my teachers’ disparaging words. I remember being told I was bad and believing it. I remember just how long it took me to believe anything else about myself.

And even still, when my children were born, I promised myself that I would not let my negative school experiences affect them. I believed my experience was isolated. I searched for excuses. Maybe I was just a bad kid. Maybe it had something to do with my father’s incarceration, which forced my mother to raise me and my brothers alone.

So I punished JJ at home and ignored my concerns. Then, two months later, I was called to pick up my 3-year-old son, Joah. Joah had hit a staff member on the arm. After that incident, they deemed him a “danger to the staff.” Joah was suspended a total of five times. In 2014, my children have received eight suspensions.

Just like before, I tried to find excuses. I looked at myself. What was I doing wrong? My children are living a comfortable life. My husband is an amazing father to JJ and Joah. At home, they have given us very few problems; the same goes for time with babysitters.

I blamed myself, my past. And I would have continued to blame myself had I not taken the boys to a birthday party for one of JJ’s classmates. At the party, the mothers congregated to talk about everyday parenting things, including preschool. As we talked, I admitted that JJ had been suspended three times. All of the mothers were shocked at the news.

“JJ?” one mother asked.

“My son threw something at a kid on purpose and the kid had to be rushed to the hospital,” another parent said. “All I got was a phone call.”

One after another, white mothers confessed the trouble their children had gotten into. Some of the behavior was similar to JJ’s; some was much worse.

Most startling: None of their children had been suspended.

Read on.


REPORT SAYS LASD FALLING SHORT OF CRIME REDUCTION GOALS ON METRO LINES

As Metro Transportation Authority officials are considering a new three year security contract with the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Dept., a report on the previous MTA-LASD contract shows that the LASD fell short of Metro policing goals. For instance, while the department was supposed to reduce crime on the transit system by 8% each year of the contract, crime rose by 28% in 2012, and another 8.5% in 2013. From 2010 to 2013, aggravated assault and robberies jumped 75% and 43%, respectively.

The LA Times’ Laura Nelson has more on the report. Here’s a clip:

The report, written by an outside firm and commissioned by Metro officials, found other management and safety problems over the last five years of contracted Sheriff’s Department service that had cost the transit agency more than $365 million. The criticisms come as officials weigh awarding a three-year security contract expected to cost about $400 million.

“We can have more effective law enforcement than we have right now,” Los Angeles Mayor and Metro Chairman Eric Garcetti said. The audit “raises a lot of fair questions,” he said.

The Sheriff’s Department was tasked with reducing crime on the Metro system by 8% a year, but total reported assaults, robberies and other crimes increased 28% in 2012 and 8.5% in 2013, according to audit data. Over a four-year study period, aggravated assaults climbed 75% to 280 in 2013, while robberies increased 43% to 407, according to FBI statistics included in the study.

Violent crime statistics reported to the FBI were as much as 22% higher than figures the Sheriff’s Department reported to Metro, according to the audit. The difference, the audit said, is that federal statistics require that multiple victims of assault and theft be reported as separate crimes, while Metro does not. The figures reported to Metro and the FBI also do not include crimes handled by other local police agencies.


FORMER FOSTER KIDS HAVE TROUBLE SIGNING UP FOR HEALTH CARE

Former California foster kids are allowed to stay on Medi-Cal until they turn 26, but many young kids aging out of the system are finding themselves unable to sign up for healthcare through Covered California. Child welfare advocates say the Covered California website is unequipped to enroll former foster youth, and employees are not aware of the law allowing these young adults to retain health insurance past age 18.

KQED’s April Dembosky has the story. Here are some clips:

For most young people, The Affordable Care Act allows them to stay on their parents’ insurance until they turn 26. But when California foster youth age out of the system between ages 18 and 21, they often have no one. So federal lawmakers added a special provision to the health law that allows these young adults to stay on Medicaid — called Medi-Cal in California — until age 26, regardless of their income.

“Former foster youth are extremely vulnerable,” says Jessica Haspel a policy associate at the advocacy nonprofit Children Now. She says any obstacles or delays to enrollment are especially problematic for foster youth. Many have special health needs stemming from a history of abuse or neglect and may rely on important medication for things like diabetes or anxiety. Studies show nearly one in three former foster youth exhibit signs of post-traumatic stress disorder — which is itself about twice the rate of American war veterans.

[SNIP]

She says the Covered California website isn’t programmed properly to identify former foster youth. And call center employees aren’t educated about the new provision. As a result, some youth are being told they don’t qualify when they do, or they are put in a queue when they should be fast-tracked into coverage.

Posted in Foster Care, racial justice, Zero Tolerance and School Discipline | 18 Comments »

2 Jurors Replaced at LASD Fed Trial…SCOTUS Clears Way for Conversion Therapy Ban….Booker & Smith Introduce Better Options for Kids Act

July 1st, 2014 by Celeste Fremon



REPLACEMENT OF 2 JURORS MEANS PATH TO VERDICT IN LASD TRIAL GETS LONGER

Jurors began deliberations last Tuesday on the obstruction of justice trial in which six members of the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department are accused of deliberately getting in the way of a federal grand jury investigation into widespread brutality and corruption in the LA County jail system.

By Friday afternoon, attorneys and trial watchers speculated optimistically that the jury might have the end of its deliberations at least in sight, and thus could possibly produce a verdict some time Monday.

Then Monday rolled around and all optimism vanished when two jurors were replaced alternates.

The first juror, a woman, was replaced Monday morning after she sent the judge a note resulting in a series of lengthy sidebars between Judge Percy Anderson and the two groups of attorneys involved, the prosecution and the defense.

Although Anderson sealed the content of the note, the reason that the juror needed or wanted to be replaced appeared to be something singular enough that it required animated discussion on the part of judge and lawyers prior Anderson making a final decision on the matter. Hence the sidebars.

Finally at 9:45 a.m., Anderson called the remaining eleven jurors back in and announced to them that an alternate was to replace one of their number. This meant, he explained, that they were now a brand new jury and must begin deliberating all over again as if their previous deliberations had never occurred.

The eleven who’d been at this for more than four days did not look thrilled at this “start your deliberations anew” set of instructions, but they filed out dutifully.

After about a half hour of deliberations the “new” jury sent a note to Anderson wanting to know if they could change their lunch location, which seemed to suggest that they had not yet gotten into any kind of deliberative stride.

Then at 12:30 or so, yet another note. This time from a second juror (also a woman) who, because of some kind of emergent personal situation, needed to be excused permanently right away. The juror appeared to be controlling distress and Judge Anderson excused her without much fuss after thanking her formally but warmly, for her time and service.

In came the rest of the jury members who were, again, told that one of their group was being replaced. This time the alternate juror was a man, disrupting the previous six-six split of males to females on the panel.

The jury was informed that it was now a new new jury, and thus must again “start your deliberations anew…” and so on.

If the panel members looked uncheery before, at this second set of instructions to totally reboot they looked visibly grim. Yet, they also still looked, for the most part, reasonably willing and determined.

With the exception of one last jury note that had something to do with a juror whose boss was getting irritated that he or she had been out so long, the rest of the afternoon was uneventful….

….and without a verdict.


U.S. SUPREME COURT SAYS NO TO HEARING APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA LAW BANNING GAY CONVERSION THERAPY

California’s first-of-its-kind law banning “reparative therapies,” which are designed to turn gay kids straight, was passed by the state legislature and signed into law by governor Jerry Brown in fall 2012, but it has yet to take effect because of court challenges by those opposed to the statute.

In August 2013, the 9th Circuit ruled that the practice, which is not supported by the scientific mainstream and has been shown to be damaging to youth, often producing depression and suicidality, was not protected by the First Amendment nor could it be challenged on religious grounds.

The law’s opponents then tried the Supreme Court, which on Monday refused to hear the challenge, thus opening the path for the important ban to finally take effect.

Lisa Leff of the Associated Press has the story Here’s a clip:

The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way Monday for enforcement of a first-of-its-kind California law that bars psychological counseling aimed at turning gay minors straight.

The justices turned aside a legal challenge brought by supporters of so-called conversion or reparative therapy. Without comment, they let stand an August 2013 appeals court ruling that said the ban covered professional activities that are within the state’s authority to regulate and doesn’t violate the free speech rights of licensed counselors and patients seeking treatment.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that California lawmakers properly showed that therapies designed to change sexual orientation for those under the age of 18 were outside the scientific mainstream and have been disavowed by most major medical groups as unproven and potentially dangerous.

“The Supreme Court has cement shut any possible opening to allow further psychological child abuse in California,” state Sen. Ted Lieu, the law’s sponsor, said Monday. “The Court’s refusal to accept the appeal of extreme ideological therapists who practice the quackery of gay conversion therapy is a victory for child welfare, science and basic humane principles.”


SENATORS COREY BOOKER & CHRIS MURPHY INTRODUCE BILL TO INCENTIVIZE STATES TOWARD BETTER YOUTH JUSTICE POLICIES USING EXISTING FEDERAL $$$

Last week, U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) introduced something called the Better Options for Kids Act, a bill designed to “incentivize states to replace overly harsh school disciplinary actions and juvenile court punishment with bipartisan, evidence-based solutions that save money, enhance public safety, and improve youth outcomes.”

Interestingly, the bill uses existing funding streams to reward states that adopt policies that replace a purely punitive approach with those that improve youth outcomes. As examples, the bill lists:

Limiting court referrals for school-based non-criminal status offenses (truancy, curfew violations, et al)

Incentivizing school district to have clear guidelines regarding the arrest powers of school resource officers on school grounds

Providing training or funds training for school districts to use non-exclusionary discipline. (NOTE: “Exclusionary discipline” means suspensions, expulsions, and other disciplinary practices that keep students out of the classroom.)

Shifting funding formerly dedicated to secure detention for minors into community-based alternatives for incarceration

Adopting a reentry policy for youth leaving correctional facilities that ensures educational continuity and success.

“This bill represents a serious leap forward in the fight to dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline, and to build a smarter, more effective, and more compassionate juvenile justice system” said Cory Booker in a statement announcing the bill’s introduction.

Murphy also stated strong sentiments. “When we lock up a child, not only are we wasting millions of taxpayer dollars, we’re setting him or her up for failure in the long run,” he said. “We need to quit being so irresponsible and facilitate better outcomes for youth.”

After he was elected U.S. Senator, former Newark New Jersey mayor Booker promised to make juvenile justice reform one of his top priorities. The Better Options for Kids Act looks like a promising step in that direction.

We’ll keep an eye on the bill’s progress.

Posted in Civil Liberties, FBI, jail, juvenile justice, LA County Jail, LASD, LGBT, School to Prison Pipeline, Youth at Risk, Zero Tolerance and School Discipline | 15 Comments »

SWAT Raid Study, Restraining and Isolating Students as Punishment, Settlement in Wrongful Death Suit Against LASD, and New Gay Marriage States

June 27th, 2014 by Taylor Walker

POLICE MILITARIZATION AND THE WAR ON DRUGS

The ACLU released a report this week detailing the extreme militarization of police forces in the US. According to the report—which compiled data on 800 SWAT raids by 20 local, state and federal agencies between 2011-2012—62% of raids were conducted in search of drugs. Only 7% of SWAT deployments were for hostage, barricade, or shooter situations (the original function of SWAT teams when they began at the LAPD).

Nearly 80% of deployments were to serve a search warrant, predominantly for drugs, something the ACLU says can and should almost always be done by regular officers—not a paramilitary team.

And in at least 36% (but as high as 65%) of drug search raids, no contraband was found.

SWAT raids also disproportionately affect minorities. Of the raids executed to serve a search warrant, 42% targeted African Americans, and 12% targeted Latinos.

Here’s a clip from the ACLU’s website:

There are an estimated 45,000 SWAT raids every year. That means this sort of violent, paramilitary raid is happening in about 124 homes every day – or more likely every night – not in an overseas combat zone, but here in American neighborhoods. The police, who are supposed to serve and protect communities, are instead waging war on the people who live in them.

Our new report, War at Home: The Excessive Militarization of American Policing, takes a hard look at 800 of these raids – or at least what state and local law enforcement agencies are willing to tell us about them. We found that almost 80% of SWAT raids are to search homes, usually for drugs, and disproportionately, in communities of color. During these drug searches, at least 10 officers often piled into armored personnel carriers. They forced their way into people’s homes using military equipment like battering rams 60 percent of the time. And they were 14 times more likely to deploy flashbang grenades than during SWAT raids for other purposes.

Public support for the failed War on Drugs is at its lowest ever, and yet police are still using hyper-aggressive tactics and heavy artillery to fight it. This paramilitary approach to everyday policing brutalizes bystanders and ravages homes. We reviewed one case in which a young mother was shot and killed with her infant son in her arms. During another raid, a grandfather of 12 was killed while watching baseball in his pajamas. And we talked with a mother whose toddler was covered in burns, shot through with a hole that exposed his ribs, and placed into a medically induced coma after a flashbang grenade exploded in his crib. None of these people was the suspect. In many cases like these, officers did not find the suspect or any contraband in the home.

Even if they had found contraband, the idea of cops-cum-warriors would still be deeply troubling. Police can – and do – conduct searches and take suspects into custody without incident, without breaking into a home in the middle of the night, and without discharging their weapons. The fact is, very few policing situations actually require a full SWAT deployment or a tank. And simply having drugs in one’s home should not be a high-risk factor used to justify a paramilitary raid.

This militarization has occurred without oversight to speak of, and with minimal data-collection.

Here’s a clip from the report’s recommendations:

…State legislatures and municipalities should impose meaningful restraints on the use of SWAT. SWAT deployments should be limited to the kinds of scenarios for which these aggressive measures were originally intended – barricade, hostage, and active shooter situations. Rather than allowing for a SWAT deployment in any case that is deemed (for whatever reason the officers determine) to be “high risk,” the better practice would be for law enforcement agencies to have in place clear standards limiting SWAT deployments to scenarios that are truly “high risk.”

SWAT teams should never be deployed based solely on probable cause to believe drugs are present, even if they have a warrant to search a home. In addition, SWAT teams should not equate the suspected presence of drugs with a threat of violence. SWAT deployment for warrant service is appropriate only if the police can demonstrate, before deployment, that ordinary law enforcement officers cannot safely execute a warrant without facing an imminent threat of serious bodily harm. In making these determinations it is important to take into consideration the fact that use of a SWAT team can escalate rather than ameliorate potential violence; law enforcement should take appropriate precautions to avoid the use of SWAT whenever possible. In addition, all SWAT deployments, regardless of the underlying purpose, should be proportional—not all situations call for a SWAT deployment consisting of 20 heavily armed officers in an APC, and partial deployments should be encouraged when appropriate. Local police departments should develop their own internal policies calling for restraint and should avoid all training programs that encourage a “warrior” mindset.

Finally, the public has a right to know how the police are spending its tax dollars. The militarization of American policing has occurred with almost no oversight, and greater documentation, transparency, and accountability are urgently needed.

A requirement that SWAT officers wear body cameras would create a public record of SWAT deployments and serve as a check against unnecessarily aggressive tactics.

In his book, Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces, Radley Balko
outlines the history of the over-militarization civilian police forces
and how disastrously unsafe it can be for citizens and law enforcement, particularly in smaller municipalities.


RAMPANT (AND LEGAL) PHYSICAL RESTRAINING AND ISOLATION OF KIDS WHO ACT OUT IN SCHOOL

ProPublica’s Heather Vogell turned an investigative spotlight on all-to-common and punitive use of physical restraint and isolation on kids in schools across the nation.

In 2012, schools recorded 163,000 instances of physical restraint. Straps or handcuffs were used 7,600 of those times. And kids were placed in isolation rooms or “scream rooms” around 104,000 times.

At least 20 kids died between 1989 and 2009 allegedly due to being restrained or locked in isolation at school.

(Vogell’s story is co-published with NPR.) Here’s a clip:

Restraining and secluding students for any reason remains perfectly legal under federal law. And despite a near-consensus that the tactics should be used rarely, new data suggests some schools still routinely rely on them to control children.

The practices—which have included pinning uncooperative children facedown on the floor, locking them in dark closets and tying them up with straps, handcuffs, bungee cords or even duct tape—were used more than 267,000 times nationwide in the 2012 school year, a ProPublica analysis of new federal data shows. Three-quarters of the students restrained had physical, emotional or intellectual disabilities.

Children have gotten head injuries, bloody noses, broken bones and worse while being restrained or tied down—in one Iowa case, to a lunch table. A 13-year-old Georgia boy hanged himself after school officials gave him a rope to keep up his pants before shutting him alone in a room.

At least 20 children nationwide have reportedly died while being restrained or isolated over the course of two decades, the Government Accountability Office found in 2009.

“It’s hard to believe this kind of treatment is going on in America,” says parent and advocate Phyllis Musumeci. A decade ago, her autistic son was restrained 89 times over 14 months at his school in Florida. “It’s a disgrace.”

The federal data shows schools recorded 163,000 instances in which students were restrained in just one school year. In most cases, staff members physically held them down. But in 7,600 reports, students were put in “mechanical” restraints such as straps or handcuffs. (Arrests were not included in the data.) Schools said they placed children in what are sometimes called “scream rooms” roughly 104,000 times.

Those figures almost certainly understate what’s really happening. Advocates and government officials say underreporting is rampant. Fewer than one-third of the nation’s school districts reported using restraints or seclusions even once during the school year.

Schools that used restraints or seclusions at all did so an average of 18 times in the 2012 school year, the data shows. But hundreds of schools used them far more often—reporting dozens, and even hundreds, of instances.

[SNIP]

More than four years ago, federal lawmakers began a campaign to restrict restraints and seclusions in public schools, except during emergencies. Despite a thick stack of alarming reports, the legislation has gone nowhere.

Opponents of the legislation say policy decisions about the practices are best left to state and local leaders. The federal government’s role, they say, should be limited to simply making sure districts have enough money to train staff to prevent and handle bad behavior.

But states and districts have shown they won’t create enough safeguards on their own, say advocates and other supporters of the legislation. Despite years of public concern about the practices, schools in most states can still restrain kids even when imminent danger doesn’t exist.

This February, timed with the re-introduction of legislation to limit the practices, Senate staffers released a report concluding that dangerous use of restraints and seclusion is “widespread” in public schools. Neither practice, the report said, benefits students therapeutically or academically.

“In fact, use of either seclusion or restraints in non-emergency situations poses significant physical and psychological danger to students,” it warned.

ProPublica also has a podcast on this issue that’s worth listening to.


FAMILY OF UNARMED MAN KILLED BY LASD DEPUTY TO SETTLE WITH COUNTY FOR $1.5M

A settlement of $1.5 million will be awarded to the family of 22-year-old Arturo Cabrales, who was fatally shot while unarmed by LA County Sheriff’s Deputy Anthony Paez.

Paez allegedly forcibly entered Cabrales’ property, after telling Cabrales that he didn’t need a warrant. Cabrales turned and ran, at which point the deputy allegedly shot him six times in the back and the side.

The suit accuses Paez and his partner Julio Martinez of trying to cover up the incident by planting a firearm in a neighbor’s yard and filing false police reports claiming Cabrales pointed a gun at the officers before throwing it over a fence.

Paez and Martinez were both fired in February 2013 after being charged with planting guns at a marijuana dispensary in order to falsely arrest two men. The ex-deputies face more than seven years each behind bars, if convicted.

LA Weekly’s Gene Maddaus has the story. Here’s a clip:

The suit alleged that Paez and other deputies involved in the shooting were associated with the Regulators, a deputy clique operating out of the Century station. The suit blamed former Sheriff Lee Baca and former Undersheriff Paul Tanaka for giving tacit support to such cliques. Tanaka is a candidate for sheriff in the November election.

Paez is no longer with the department. In April, he and another deputy, Julio Martinez, were charged with conspiracy and perjury for allegedly planting guns at a medical marijuana dispensary to justify an arrest. Those charges are still pending. Paez and Martinez were both terminated in February 2013.

Ellis contends the two cases add up to a pattern of false reports and planted evidence. In the shooting case, the lawsuit alleged that Cabrales was standing inside the gate of his home, near the Jordan Downs housing project, when he saw four deputies harassing his uncle.

Paez, one of the deputies, began talking to Cabrales and tried to enter his property. Cabrales objected that the deputies did not have a warrant, at which point Paez answered in “foul, offensive and intimidating language,” saying that he did not need a warrant. Paez forcibly entered the gate, and Cabrales turned and ran. Paez then opened fire, according to the suit. Ellis said Cabrales was hit twice in the size and four times in the back.

Read on.


IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: GAY MARRIAGE ARRIVES IN INDIANA AND UTAH

On Wednesday, just a day short of the anniversary of the Defense of Marriage Act’s abolishment, federal courts struck down gay marriage bans in both Indiana and Utah. The states have joined the list of (now) 21 states that boast marriage equality. (Congratulations, Utahans and Hoosiers!)

Reuters has more on the decisions.

Posted in ACLU, LGBT, Police, War on Drugs, Zero Tolerance and School Discipline | 20 Comments »

« Previous Entries