This morning, the LA Times has introduced some impressive gee-whiz gadgetry with its new Charles Samuel Arrests and Incarceration Timeline flash thingy. (I can’t explain the contraption. You’ll have to look for yourself. It’s quite cool, actually.)
Moving back to a more traditional delivery system (you know, prose), the Times has a news story in this morning’s paper that is both intriguing and troubling.
In it, reporters Richard Winton and Jack Leonard, have dug up information that sugguests that Charlie Samuel, the alleged killer of Lily Burk, could have gotten 25 to life, had a series of legal and clerical decisions played out differently.
If you will remember, Samuel’s one violent or serious felony occurred in 1987. It consisted of a home invasion burglary of a man’s home, a trailer, while he was in it, and robbery of the man himself. Samuel and another man (also involved in the crime) evidently jacked the man’s car too. The details of the crimes, based on the existing paperwork (which the Times has posted in PDF form) remain a bit fuzzy.
In any case, the crime was a serious matter that had violent overtones. And more importantly for discussion purposes these days, it was a crime that could have been charged as two strikes under today’s law. Instead, in that all three counts were part of a single crime, it was counted as one strike.
Under California’s 1994 three-strikes law, prosecutors are allowed to charge any felony — however minor — as a third strike if a defendant has previously been convicted of two crimes considered violent or serious.
Court records reviewed by The Times show that Samuel pleaded guilty to robbery and residential burglary in 1987 in connection with a home-invasion robbery in San Bernardino.
Residential burglary and robbery qualify as violent or serious strikes under the law.
A law enforcement source who spoke on condition of anonymity said Samuel’s rap sheet lists his robbery conviction but does not describe his burglary conviction as a residential burglary. Under the three-strikes law, non-residential burglaries do not count as strikes.
It is unclear who was responsible for the error.
Alright that was 1987. So fast forward ten years to 1997, when Samuel’s next felony arrest occurred. Although the conviction was for 2nd Degree Burglary, what Samuel actually did, the Times reports, was to attempt to “steal a bottle of alcohol from a Food 4 Less store in Barstow.”
For his unsuccessful 1997 booze snatch, Samuel received a sentence of 2 years and 8 months in prison. Leonard and Winton report that, had prosecutors seen the 1987 combo residential burglary and robbery as two strikes, they could have struck Samuel out.
Or maybe they could have.
As it was still not legal to count two parts of a single crime event as two strikes (that would become part of an amended three strikes law a year later, in 1998, based on a California Supreme Court ruling), so it is unclear whether prosecutors could or would have tried to strike Samuel out had they been aware of the specifics of his earlier convictions.
Plus, even when three strikes was fully up and running, not every prosecutor or judge went after the mandatory 25-to-life for a third strike such as attempting to steal a single bottle of alcohol.
Samuel’s only other crime of note occurred nine years later, in July of 2006, when he committed petty theft. It was a misdemeanor charge, but because of the previous failed liquor bottle theft conviction, it was bumped up to a felony. Samuel got another two years, eight months.
Scattered through those twenty-two years, and earlier, there were many little crimes like driving with an expired license, feeding a slug into a parking meter, public drunkenness, being “under the influence of a controlled substance,” and many unspecified parole violations, most, one suspects, having to do with drugs.
And then on July of 2009, Charles Samuel was on a day pass from his court-mandated rehab program, but AWOLed from his “escort”—and allegedly encountered Lily Burk, allegedly kidnapped her, allegedly traipsed her around from ready teller to ready teller trying to get money, and when that didn’t work, allegedly bashed her head and slit her throat.
There are several ways to parse out the meaning of the facts that I have just laid out for you here, courtesy of the good reporting by Jack Leonard and Richard Winton.
And there are assuredly facts still to come.
******************************************************************************************************************
PS: I just listened to Monday’s To the Point, with Warren Olney, which is an excellent show—really, really good—about how the new budgetary necessities could affect prison and parole reform, a topic that is front and center in the upcoming legislative discussion about the proposed cuts in our California corrections system, and interwoven in our examination of the death of Lily Burk. If you have 25 minutes, listen to the podcast. It is very much worth your time.
The three strikes laws are obviously a failure, and yet California does little to repeal them.
Three strikes? Sounds like a push by the CCPOA (Prison Guards Union)and the prison industry lobbyist’s with their lock em all up and keep em there philosophy (job security baby!).
Yes this tragic story, of Lily Burk and Charles Samuel, who’s lives through fate came together one hot afternoon in LA with horrible consequences, might not have occurred if the Big Bitch Law aka Three Strikes = Life, had been used on Samuel’s.
But, take another look at his record and life and tell me that this pathetic individual, with the pathetic rap sheet of petty thefts, parking meter rip offs, stealing a short dog of Tokyo from the Circle K, and then a home invasion robbery ,oh yeah, probably jacking up some tweeker for his stash and Okie Flu (bad back) medicine, in a single wide out in some San Berdoo trailer park jungle.
Sure if all these “Felonies” had been run concurrent we could have stuck Samuel’s with the Big Bitch and maybe Lily Burk would be alive today, maybe.
My Uncle who has been an LA County Probation Officer for many years told me something yesterday that most of us with any street sense and experience with urban America already know and understand, even though very few want to mention it.
Charlie Samuel’s is just one of many thousands of these miserable creatures we see every day in all cities of the USA. And innocent Lily Burk is just a more high profile (for obvious reasons), victim of timing and circumstance and tragedy.
Any Cop will tell you that tragedies like Lily Burks happen every day in LA but they usually happen to Black or Latina or Poor White women. This doesn’t lessen or minimize the murder of young Lily Burk but it’s just that most murders of poor people in LA aren’t even worth much of a mention in the LA Times or by writers like Winton and Leonard. Those kind of stories don’t sell newspapers and they don’t qualify for Pulitzer Prizes.
Guys like Charlie Samuel’s and the thousands of other miserable, pathetic, individuals you see on the street everyday were doomed from the get go. Probably born to some poor ass Black cotton chopper teenage girl with nothing going on but the rent, he no doubt grew up in some ghetto somewhere, no education, probably illiterate, a petty thief and drug addict from a very young age, chickenshit petty criminal record from birth, no skills, no chance, probably bi polar or totally nuts with an IQ of maybe 80,and by the time he was 20 or so he was totally fucked up and probably should have been in Patton State Hospital instead of Chino Prison.
This doomed person almost undoubtedly only wanted to get over for a few bucks off of young Lily Burk, but something happened, only Samuel’s knows now, and he panicked and got scared, and being a stupid crackhead who is nuts and unable to think rationally ended up killing the innocent young Lily Burk for nothing but pocket change for a rock and a beer.
It’s and old story that plays out almost every day in places like LA. Three Strikes = Life ? Maybe, it might have prevented this tragedy involving pitiful, miserable, Charlie Samuel’s and the young, pretty, smart, involved, Lily Burk, and who had everything to live for as opposed to Samuel’s who probably has been wishing to die most of his horrendous life.
So whats the solution? More draconian and punitive laws that lock up more of the poor ass black and Latino and white underclass?
Could it be that a system based on money, privilege, and color, and that denies any responsibility for it’s citizens who fall short, except punitive and penal solutions is doomed to experience more horrible Lily Burk tragedy’s?
Yes, the solution IS more draconian and punitive laws.
You want to raise my taxes to lock up all the worthless pukes for life? I got no problem with that.where do I sign up and Who do I send the check to?
Heck. You could even raise them more if you raise the stakes to TWO strikes and promise to exterminate upon conviction.
Yes. The solution IS to Lock-up career criminals for Life. If you did this, you would clear-out the underclass in a generation.
The stats say otherwise, 3 Strikes obviously works but why let the truth get in the way of your insanity.
Bob, Jonathan Swift had a modest proposal you might want to consider to “clear-out the underclass in a generation.”
Sure Fire has decided that he knows the truth, that three strikes works, and that anyone who disagrees with him is “insane.” The Legislative Analyst’s Office, which I think most grown-ups would agree is not insane, says the following:
In addition, violent crime rates declined by about the same amount in the counties that were less likely to send strikers to prison as the comparison counties. The violent crime rate in those counties least likely to send strikers to prison declined by an average of 45 percent, while the violent crime rate in the counties most likely to send strikers to prison declined by an average of 44 percent. Figure 11 shows the downward change in violent crime rates in these eight large counties.
Unfortunately, there remains no clear consensus about the public safety impact of the Three Strikes measure. In particular, data limitations (such as the number of offenders eligible for prosecution under Three Strikes) and the inherent difficulty of estimating the number of crimes prevented make it difficult to conclusively evaluate the law’s impact on crime and safety. For now it remains an open question as to how much safer California’s citizens are as a result of Three Strikes.
Bob, why stop there? We could just kill people who look at you funny.
Mavis, your #7 has cheered me up immensely.
The only open ended question about how effective 3 Strikes has been is in the close mind of people who coddle criminals, have loved ones locked up or are lawyers and far left politicians, along with other loons.
I could fill these pages to show how and why it’s been a Godsend but it’s not my blog Mavis. I could post the individual suspect backgrounds of several currently incarcerated thugs who would be walking the streets now if not for 3 Strikes, and they are all very sick puppies. They of course would be back inside quick enough but at what cost and to who? Soft on crime people care nothing about the victims, they never have it’s all a smoke screen of pretense, but I’m glad you cheered up Celeste.
Maybe Mavis and Celeste are gamblers that like the thought of criminals given chance after chance, most people I know don’t think that way, common sense dictates their thoughts on issues, not emotions. They understand people who have a second and third strike deserve to be long ways away from average worker bees. I don’t understand why some people can’t grasp that simple concept.
When you look at the list of things this guy did, it’s clear society should have been protected from him a long time ago – not just for his violent tendencies, but for his lifelong habit of preying on people. This guy is pretty obviously a career criminal, probably a sociopath, and certainly incurable. That someone with his record was on the street is outrageous.
Obama and Holden seem to think we need to have a conversation about race. That we are a bit cowardly about that. They could start by talking to the parents of this girl and Eve Carson. Then they could peruse the DOJ statistics on crime in order to familiarize themselves with the grossly disproportionate black criminality that Americans see with their own eyes every day — e.g. black males are less than 10% of the population but commit over 50% of all murders. After that we can begin the dialogue.
Celeste, glad to have helped.
Surefire, you said people who doubt that 3 strikes has worked wonderfully are insane. I replied with the words of the non-partisan legislative analyst who said that it’s actually very difficult to say whether or not three strikes has achieved it’s main goals. You respond saying you’re wrong and I have some anecdotes that prove it but I’m not going to tell you about them. And just for fun you offer that people who disagree with you don’t care about the victims of crime.
You’ve totally dodged the argument, posted a totally nasty and baseless insult, and shown yourself a prisoner to your own biases. Unless you can actually summon some data (and no, an anecdote is not data) that says otherwise, I think we’re done here.
Mavis Beacon finally spits out what I think a lot of commentor’s and readers are thinking, that the old reactionary prison guard “Sure Fire” should quit just babbling about how we should read the statistics backing up one of his demented opinions and actually produce the statistic. He sounds like the schoolyard kid who tells all the other kids some cockamamie bullshit is the truth because his father with the fifth grade education told him it was.
Thanks Mavis.
And speaking of statistics†eh†mentions (but does not provide) some incomplete and misleading stats, no doubt meant to scare the be Jesus out of the white folks. But if looked at carefully and considered they do tell a story.
1. Bureau of Justice Statistics Homicide trends in the U.S.: Trends …
Jul 11, 2007 … Charts and tables about homicide trends by race in the United States.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm –
The story they tell IMO, is that even though blacks are represented disproportionately as homicide offenders they are also represented disproportionately as homicide victims.
The circumstances of the homicides are also interesting, a disproportionate number related to drugs and gang violence. Hmmm, could it be that blacks kill other black people more often because of the environment (the ghetto), that they exist in and that drugs and gangs and violence are more likely to occur in this atmosphere?
So back to the old cause and effect and poverty breeds’ violence and why do these violent poverty stricken areas exist in a country as wealthy as ours?
Could it possibly be due to the effects of hundreds of years of racism?
“You’ve totally dodged the argument, posted a totally nasty and baseless insult, and shown yourself a prisoner to your own biases. Unless you can actually summon some data (and no, an anecdote is not data) that says otherwise, I think we’re done here.”
Not so fast, Mavis. SureFire still has some major ammo left on his side of this argument. He can call you a drug addict, surmise that you’re in a geriatric’s ward and suggest…oh, I don’t know…maybe that somebody pull your feeding tube. You really underestimate the depth of his analytical and rhetorical powers in these disputes…
I’ll be happy to publish some actual cases and stats tomorrow mavis, kind of tired now and just saw your response. Don and Reg couldn’t find their asses with both hands and an ass map, never was a prison gurad that I can remmeber, maybe I remind someone that use to feed you Don.
Reg, you started with the obscene name calling in other posts, that’s a sign the battle is done and you have nothing and are nothing. Can’t handle the responses leave the kitchen.
This is where I’m getting my info on the 3 Strikes Laws and the stats I’ll be using Mavis http://www.threestrikes.org/. If you have a problem with the numbers please reference your source that will argue the accuracy of what I’m going to provide.
I’m sure many here were in favor of Prop. 66 that Thank God was defeated. Here’s just one guy that would have been out if it had passed. There are other examples on the site and you should take a look yourself.
I’ll post stats in a short time regarding crime rates.
Name: Steven “Cutthroat†Matthews
Criminal history: A member of the Aryan Brotherhood, served time for robbery and kidnapping as a juvenile in the 1960s. Arrested for murder in the late 1970s, acquitted. Two weeks later, arrested for killing a person in a bar.
Convicted of murder in 1978, along with three counts
of attempted murder. Paroled in 1986. Within days, raped his mother, forced her to perform oral sex and threatened to kill her. Convicted and sentenced to 17 years in prison, where he wrote the judge, threatening to “track him down.†Paroled again in 1996. Parole revoked 24 hours later for failing a drug test and again threatening the judge.
Arrested in 2003 for being a felon in possession of two deadly weapons — a two-foot machete and a rock hammer with “Fag Finder Reminder†etched on the head. Now serving 25 years to life.
Proposition 66 release date: Under Proposition 66, Mr. Matthews’ sentence would be reduced to a maximum of three years. Because of time served and “good time†credits, he would be eligible for release in early 2005.
Sure Fire,
I’m not sure if anyone’s still reading this thread, but I saw your comment and thought it brought up some good points. I was in favor of Prop. 66 as I think Three Strikes, as written, is too broad. But your example of this horrible Mr. Matthews was a compelling one. So I went back and reread the proposed statute, and I think you’re right. It has some holes that are problematic.
Matthews was a 3rd striker in ’86, because of the juvenile convictions—but of course there was no 3 Strikes in 1986, so he continued to walk around. And the last crime would have failed to put him away under Prop 66, according to my reading of it too.
One solution would be to have a catch all category that would cover people like him who have already committed three serious and violent crimes, that would have struck them out if we could do it retroactively. So if they commit a 4th felony, that trips the “L” lever.
Also, I note that threatening a witness would have gotten him that third strike, but threatening a judge (twice) would not have, which seems like another vexing hole in Prop 66.
Anyway,…. interesting. I still want to see Three Strikes amended, but you have pointed out that Prop 66 wasn’t quite well calibrated enough.
We are, indeed very, very glad that Mr. Matthews is doing 25 to life and not walking the streets with his “Fag Finder Reminder”—or whatever.
(This does not discount my belief in poetry, but he can write his from a safe and very restricted distance, thank you very much.)
PS: I also note that Matthews only did 8 years for murder and 3 counts of attempted murder. Amazing.
My, times have certainly changed. These days if a juvenile has the bad judgment to get in a car with someone else who is up to no good and fires a gun at a third person and misses, but a gang allegation can be proved, the non-shooter kid—even if he has no priors—can do 25 to life. In one case that I know, 35 to life.
Spare me the sob story Celeste, or are you trying to convince people that know better that gangsters who sometimes drive aren’t gangsters that are the shooters in other crimes? You’ve written on gangs and I’m sure you know better or maybe you can tell me which gang doesn’t make all it’s members “put in work” they need to that shows their loyalty to the gang and willingness to do crime?
These are constantly the types of tales that liberals point to that shows the system’s so unfair. I pulled over a gang ride after a drive by in the mid-90’s (one dead one wounded..a child) one night rolling 5 deep. The driver was the father of the shooter and he had to crawl out of the car because many years earlier he was shot and couldn’t walk any more. Great example for his kid huh? There was a plea and not sure what he got but we can all tell stories and I have plenty more that sound like this with fathers, uncles, aunts, moms and grandparents pushing this life on their kids.
Here’s some stats from just two years, first 3 Strikes year to last I had stats for, but since most of you people won’t look them up because crime stats since 3 Strikes to some of you is like Kryptonite to Superman you’ll keep putting out the nonsense you do. I doubt many will look at the site I linked you to because the truth isn’t all that pretty to those who use “stories” about people they might know or heard about to make a point. Look at the years prior to 3 Strikes until now and please, then try presenting a case that shows it isn’t working.
Three strikes stats. All the stats that show reductions and cost savings by putting the very worst behind bars for longer periods of time can be seen on the site.
1994
Ca pop 31,524,000
Pris pop 125,605
Violent crime 318.946
Prop crime 692,717
2007
Ca pop 37.713,000
Pris pop 171,444
Violent crime 191,493
Prop crime 457,885
Don Q: So whats the solution? More draconian and punitive laws that lock up more of the poor ass black and Latino and white underclass?
Only the criminal ones, and they deserve it. More posturing like Don’s does what to make the community safe? Maybe Don could figure out how many “of the poor ass black and Latino and white underclass” have been saved by putting the criminal element in their neighborhoods away for a long time.
Or doesn’t that matter to you Don?
Sure Fire,
I responded to what you posted, which I though made important points, and attempted to have a constructive conversation with you about Three Strikes, which I assumed we could do, even though we come at the issue from different directions.
My bad.
Instead of responding in kind, you fastened on to one thing I said in passing about the huge changes in sentencing policy, mostly having to do with the fact that Matthews did so little time for murder.
But you ignored the actual conversation we could have had and instead, yanked my passing point out of context, and then waved it around over your head like some sort of trophy that proves how Right—capital R—you are, and how hopelessly Naive and Wrong, (capital N, capital W) I am.
Not a game I’m terribly interested in, sorry.
Carry on.
This isn’t about being right or wrong Celeste, this is about the tactics people with your “belief system” (a term my old pal Frank Sontag would so often use in his rants) use so as to soften the blow when showed a different way to look at things. You never really addressed the “meat” of my post as far as I can see, the stats like I said scare away people who think otherwise.
Your last paragraph in your response was posted for what reason but to tell people so many are unjustly locked away for long periods of time. The Gang Terrorism Act was adopted because there was a need for it and I don’t know anyone I ever worked with that thought differently. Really Celeste what exactly are you trying to convey to people except that you’re a gang apologist when you end with this…
“My, times have certainly changed. These days if a juvenile has the bad judgment to get in a car with someone else who is up to no good and fires a gun at a third person and misses, but a gang allegation can be proved, the non-shooter kid—even if he has no priors—can do 25 to life. In one case that I know, 35 to life”.
So the shooter missed, why would that even matter, does that make it OK with you or lesser or the crime lesser in it’s severity? Did you address the points I made about the stats and does saving future crime victims, which 3 Strikes definitely has done even matter to you or people who think like you? Seems to me with your response your lamenting the fact some gangster, who happened to be behind the wheel that night, got put away because he got caught and the shooter missed his target. One less dead body in L.A. and you’re upset?
That to me is an incredibly weak response to an attempt murder by an obvious gang member who knew the risk associated with what he was doing. How many stories have to unfold where innocent bystanders are killed or gangsters kill…ooops, someone who wasn’t actually a gang member before you guys get it?
You seem to grieve people who act in a criminal manner and get long sentences because the system is a little too harsh for you, even when the stats show that treatment is saving lives. I will never understand that thinking. Be upset about the guy who got railroaded for killing his mom, not this gangster.
I always shake my head at how anyone could defend these thugs. Your response was typical for liberals, it’s all about feelings with you guys and the stats that show you’re wrong never really matter except as a passing thought.
Oh yeah, another liberal gem, when you and people like you don’t like the responses you get…people like me are playing a game.
Putting away bad guys is no game to me, never has been from day one, and neither is the lack of responsibility the left takes for doing their best to keep the streets less safe for me and mine. I take that real seriously and will fight the efforts of anyone who attempts to do it.