SUPREME COURT HEAR ARGUMENTS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT JUVENILES HAVE MIRANDA RIGHTS
Mark Walsh at Education Week has a good rundown of what went on at SCOTUS Wednesday with this case:
The U.S. Supreme Court appeared sharply split on Wednesday over a case about the police interrogation at school of a 13-year-old student suspected of committing neighborhood thefts.
More-liberal members of the court aggressively questioned the circumstances surrounding the 2005 interrogation of a boy identified as J.D.B., whose statements were used against him and who was judged delinquent in a juvenile proceeding.
“This 7th grader was marched by the school security officer” out of his classroom and into a windowless room, where he was interrogated in the presence of four adults, including a juvenile investigator and an assistant principal, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed out to North Carolina’s attorney general, who was defending the questioning, in part by suggesting that public school students were not typically free to leave classrooms. “That is not a normal part of the school day.” Ginsburg added.
The high court’s conservatives, however, appeared more sympathetic to police officers and the idea that the court’s longstanding Miranda rules offer objective guidance about when a suspect is in custody and must be given the familiar warnings about their rights.
CITY COUNCIL VOTES FOR A 3 MONTH HIRING FREEZE FOR LAPD, SAVING
Actually the Council voted for a compromise: Officers may be hired from the April academy class as long as they start on or after July 1 when a new pension structure kicks in.
The LA Times has more.
CONSERVATIVE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORMERS GO TO FLORIDA…AND ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS
Right on Crime is the conservative criminal justice reform group that is attempting to influence public policy in a saner direction, but doing so in a manner that conservatives can embrace.
They began in Texas and have, just this week, recently launched an initiative in Florida. But before they launched they surveyed conservatives in the state about their attitudes toward criminal justice.
Here’s a sampling of what they asked and the answers that came back:
Consider the following: ”Do you agree or disagree that individuals who are ’Tough on Crime’ can also support innovative cost-effective sanctions for nonviolent offenders — such as community supervision, mandatory drug testing and treatment programs — which will reduce the likelihood that an offender will commit a new crime as well as amount to significant savings for Florida taxpayers.” Nearly 85% of poll respondents agreed with that statement; nearly 50% indicated that they “strongly agreed.”
This question yielded similarly interesting results: “Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: ‘It does not matter whether a nonviolent offender is in prison for 21 or 24 or 27 months. What really matters is that the system does a better job of making sure that when an offender does get out, he is less likely to commit another crime.” Nearly 90% of respondents agreed with this statement; 64% indicated that they “strongly agreed.”
The polling results suggest that some caricatures of conservative views on criminal justice are deeply flawed. Conservatives do not think that sentencing offenders to prison time is the only way to be “tough on crime.” Nor do they believe that incrementally increasing prison sentences year after year is preferable to a policy that might do more to reduce recidivism. Conservatives, according to the poll, favor the reasonable use of prison space – generally for violent offenders – but they are also open to alternative sanctions for non-violent offenders if those alternatives are effective. Now all they need is elected officials who will be responsive to their concerns.
Soooooo, like, guys, when do you plan a similar launch in California? Seriously. Com’on down!
WESTBORO INSANE PEOPLE TO PROTEST AT ELIZABETH TAYLOR’S FUNERAL
A lot of people have the story but TMZ has the right tone.
Somehow I don’t think these creeps will matter in the least.
Elizabeth Taylor’s wild and wonderful spirit easily dwarfs their pinched little souls.
COLLATERAL DAMAGE: WHEN THE INNOCENT ARE RELEASED, WHAT’S THE EFFECT ON THOSE WHOSE FAULTY IDENTIFICATION SENT THEM TO PRISON?
Since so many of those whom the Innocence Project has managed to get released were convicted based on faulty witness testimony, this brings up an interesting question that most of us have overlooked but that Maria Glod of the Washington Post explores. Here’s a clip:
Twenty-seven years ago, the Virginia woman sat in a courtroom, swore to tell the truth and told a jury that a stranger named Thomas Haynesworth raped her.
She was so sure. The sight of him made her tremble.
She helped send him to prison.
But she was wrong.
“For so long, his face and his name were where I directed my anger,” the Henrico County woman said in a recent interview. “That’s gone now. He’s not the name. He’s not the face.
“Now when I hear his name, I feel guilt. Obsessive guilt.”
DNA evidence has proven that Haynesworth, who was an 18-year-old high school dropout when he was arrested, did not rape the woman.