#Criminal Justice System

[isaacsapphire]

Yeah, the lack of vest for Luigi stands out there. People who have been accused of more heinous crimes than cleanly killing 1 adult man are moved around by the criminal justice system with at least some consideration of protecting the accused from vigilante violence.

However, please don’t see this as “the police” because some beat cops didn’t come up with this. It’s from a lot higher up than that, and the DA’s office clearly thinks it can get away spectacles to attack the presumption of innocence.

it's extremely critical that you see the photo of the perp walk for luigi mangione as being propaganda. i've seen so many people wave it off and instead fawn over his looks. and trust me, i know it ended up being kind of pathetic and weird - but please don't brush it off as a "modelling opportunity" for him. it's a fucking terrifying message the police are sending.

i want to make a few comparisons here, in case you're not from the US or familiar with why the perp walk thing is something to pay attention to. just to set the groundwork for why this is a purposeful, unusual, and cruel act by the nyc police - for why this is not a common occurrence and for why that matters.

the prosecution alleges the show of force is due to the charge of "terrorism." for comparison, in june 2015, tsarnaev was found guilty for the boston marathon bombing, which killed 3 people and injured hundreds. his actions are considered to be an act of domestic terrorism. i have spent the last hour looking through google for pictures of similar to mangione's perp walk - and so far, i have found zero. i also just do not personally remember a moment like that, despite living in boston at the time.

they allege that luigi is a stone-cold killer who carried out a longterm plan, making him particularly dangerous. again for comparison: in nyc, recently cory martin was found guilty of the killing of brandy odom. the murder was planned and premeditated to steal insurance money. and yet no staged perp walk. why didn't her life matter enough for a "show of force"?

but mangione gets paraded by a veritable army of police officers as if he is a rabid animal. for a single citizen who allegedly killed one other single citizen, the "largest perp walk ever" occurs.

so what is the "strong message" that the mayor and the police were trying to send here? the mayor speaks as if mangione is already convicted of terrorism. there is a very thin number of people who feel threatened by the CEO's death. none of us felt like mangione needs to be under massive armed guard.

the message is that you shouldn't resist. they are trying to "make an example" of him - that if you behave badly and kill a single rich person, you'll be treated as if you killed hundreds of people. you will be treated worse than a man who was found guilty of terrorism. you will be considered guilty without trial. the message is that the rich are a protected class, and you cannot touch them without massive punishment. they are trying to prevent a revolution by showing dominance and force against you.

the message is that the police are a puppet of the wealthy and that the law is not equally applied across class disparity. it is "some are more equal than others." it is "one life is more precious than another."

the show of force wasn't for luigi. it was for us. it was a warning. they are trying to remind us who is really in control.

[isaacsapphire]

Perp walk for Mangione was a show of force in support of the rule of law. Everyone knows murder for profit is wrong. Apparently it’s a matter of public debate whether it’s ok to murder an individual deemed symbolically responsible for a systemic problem which he did not personally cause and could not have personally solved.

Rule of law? I understand what you’re saying, but rule of law includes presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial, which both were impinged upon by that perp walk.

Luigi has plead not guilty, and for all I know all the evidence was planted and he’s just a slightly loopy guy who would fit in here and was on an American walkabout when the cops decided to frame him because they needed a perp in custody asap.

And yes, the overall public reaction to the killing has been somewhere between joy and the arguably mild approval of the “we aren’t going to try to help solve this one” from various investigative subreddits, to people arguing about the true cause of the health care crisis in the United States.

The aggression of the response to both Luigi and Boston really doesn’t feel like equality under the law, because the same offenses are treated differently when the victims are regular people.

[politijohn]

Source

Reminder that 53% of Alabama’s prison population is black people who are incarcerated at 3x the rate as white people (source).

[audhdnight]

Spanking is to parenting what prisons are to criminal justice. Allow me to elaborate:

What does spanking do? “It teaches kids to behave!” Actually, no. It teaches kids to fear their caregiver(s). But say we go with that line. How does spanking teach kids to behave? “It shows them the consequences of bad actions!” Actually, no. It shows kids that when the caregiver is displeased, the kid gets hurt. In the mind of the child, the sequence of events is not [misbehave:consequence]. It is [caregiver unhappy:pain]. And maybe you’ll say “But my kid stopped mouthing off after I started spanking them for it”. Okay, sure. Maybe they stopped responding when you argue, but only because the learned to fear what their response would bring. They’re not holding their tongue because they realized it’s disrespectful or rude or whatever else you believe it is. They’re holding their tongue because they know it won’t do any good and will only make the situation worse for them. I can guarantee they are still thinking all those rebellious naughty talk-backy thoughts. They just aren’t saying them out loud. Spanking did not teach your child to behave, it taught them to walk on eggshells.

Similarly, prisons do absolutely nothing to enforce laws. Prisons do nothing to fix the real crimes that do get committed. A shooter or rapist or embezzler being incarcerated does not bring their victim back to life, un-traumatize them, or make reparations for any damages. Additionally, it makes life a living hell for the innocent people who end up in jail (OF WHICH THERE ARE A HELL OF A LOT). And maybe you might say that the point of prison is to encourage good behavior, because no one wants to go to jail. I would ask, then, why there are so many prisons, of which so many are full or overcrowded. Clearly, the threat of incarceration is not keeping people out of jail. Additionally, much like a child who was spanked being afraid to do normal things in their own home for fear of displeasing their caregiver, regular non-criminal people are afraid of prison, even though they have done nothing wrong. They know they could be incarcerated because of falsified evidence, biased testimonies, unfair trial, or simply bigotry. Especially people of color. Even though they haven’t done anything wrong, they are scared of what could happen to them if the person in power (police) was unhappy with them.

Negative consequences unrelated to the actual incident do not discourage “bad behavior”. Just like a child who is spanked will simply learn to be sneakier, a thief who goes to jail will simply cover their tracks better next time.

Stop spanking your kids, and abolish prisons. Have a nice day.

[isaacsapphire]

It was a preppy type look, but something like that is to be expected from a competent lawyer dressing a client with a background like his; you dress your client to “play the most sympathetic/innocent-looking version of themselves” and preppy boy is a pretty obvious role for Luigi.

this is killing me

[reasonsforhope]

"The New York City Council voted to ban most uses of solitary confinement in city jails Wednesday [December 20, 2023], passing the measure with enough votes to override a veto from Mayor Eric Adams.

The measure would ban the use of solitary confinement beyond four hours and during certain emergencies. That four hour period would be for "de-escalation" in situations where a detainee has caused someone else physical harm or risks doing so. The resolution would also require the city's jails to allow every person detained to spend at least 14 hours outside of their cells each day.

The bill, which had 38 co-sponsors, was passed 39 to 7. It will now go to the mayor, who can sign the bill or veto it within 30 days. If Mayor Adams vetoes the bill, it will get sent back to the council, which can override the veto with a vote from two-thirds of the members. The 39 votes for the bill today make up 76% of the 51-member council. At a press conference ahead of the vote today [December 20, 2023], Council speaker Adrienne Adams indicated the council would seek [a veto] override if necessary.

For his part, Mayor Adams has signaled he is indeed considering vetoing the bill...

The United Nations has said solitary confinement can amount to torture, and multiple studies suggest its use can have serious consequences on a person's physical and mental health, including an increased risk of PTSD, dying by suicide, and having high blood pressure.

One 2019 study found people who had spent time in solitary confinement in prison were more likely to die in the first year after their release than people who had not spent time in solitary confinement. They were especially likely to die from suicide, homicide and opioid overdose.

Black and Hispanic men have been found to be overrepresented among those placed in solitary confinement – as have gay, lesbian and bisexual people.

The resolution in New York comes amid scrutiny over deaths in the jail complex on Rikers Island. Last month, the federal government joined efforts to wrest control of the facility from the mayor, and give it to an outside authority.

In August 2021, 25-year-old Brandon Rodriguez died while in solitary confinement at Rikers. He had been in pre-trial detention at the jail for less than a week. His mother, Tamara Carter, says his death was ruled a suicide and that he was in a mental health crisis at the time of his confinement.

"I know for Brandon, he should have been put in the infirmary. He should have been seeing a psychiatrist. He should have been being watched," she said.

She says the passage of the bill feels like a form of justice for her.

"Brandon wasn't nothing. He was my son. He was an uncle. A brother. A grandson. And he's very, very missed," she told NPR. "I couldn't save my son. But if I joined this fight, maybe I could save somebody else's son." ...

New York City is not the first U.S. city to limit the use of solitary confinement in its jails, though it is the largest. In 2021, voters in Pennsylvania's Allegheny County, which includes Pittsburgh, passed a measure to restrict solitary confinement except in cases of lockdowns and emergencies. The sheriff in Illinois' Cook County, which includes Chicago, has said the Cook County jail – one of the country's largest – has also stopped using solitary confinement...

Naila Awan, the interim co-director of policy at the New York Civil Liberties Union, says that New York making this change could have larger influence across the country.

"As folks look at what New York has done, other larger jails that are not quite the size of Rikers will be able to say, 'If New York City is able to do this, then we too can implement similar programs here, that it's within our capacity and capabilities," Awan says. "And to the extent that we are able to get this implemented and folks see the success, I think we could see a real shift in the way that individuals are treated behind bars.""

-via NPR, December 20, 2023

[alwaysbewoke]

[typhlonectes]

[tommyandtabitha]

"We need to stop relying on the compassion of individuals but instead build compassionate systems." —Monica Maalouf, MD

We live under deadly systems that can destroy lives with a single expense.

A hypothetical person can get hit by a reckless driver and end up dying, in jail, of an infectious respiratory disease they contracted from another inmate, or maybe just freezing to death on the streets because there isn't even a warming shelter available. Things like this happen far too frequently.

The US Supreme Court's ruling that municipalities can criminalize sleeping on public property even if there's nowhere else that's safe to sleep means that being homeless and trying to find a safe place to sleep can land you in jail. A punishment for trying to exist (to be clear, this was already happening, but it's currently deemed 'Constitutional' here).

And don't forget, it's the authorities who get to decide what a safe place to sleep is. In our town, they've decided it's the lawn behind the police department. And the cops have been known to turn on the sprinklers during the times that people are allowed to stay there. A town that said the warming shelter couldn't be opened when the temperature dipped to below freezing, because it's only insured for 90-days occupancy, and those 90 days had already been used back at the beginning of the year (plenty of time to find a solution, but they didn't bother until it was already needed and they were pressured by the public and managed to find a church that would help). A town that has decided that if you're caught being too homeless in public, you can be 'excluded' from huge chunks of town.

What happens when you have no money, there are no public restrooms, you have to be a paying customer to use any business' toilet, and you can land on the sex offender registry if you're caught peeing in public? What happens when you've just been told you'll be arrested for trespassing if they ever see you on that side of town again (because you had a cardboard sign asking for help and were sitting at the exit of a parking lot) but all your stuff is on that side of town? What happens when you're given a fine you can't pay, for the crime of existing, and are threatened with jail if you can't pay?

Many people will not rent to folk who have a police record. It's nearly impossible to get a job without a home address.

Especially when you're still recovering from getting hit by a reckless driver.

Or maybe our hypothetical person's spouse died suddenly, the home isn't paid off, and the surviving person was the stay-at-home parent, so they have no work experience for a resume, and two kids in school. What happens to them?

Or maybe it's just an autoimmune disorder and they can't afford the treatments without insurance, and their insurance is through their employer, who overworks them and won't give them accommodations they need to be able to work safely, so they work unsafely and take a decade or more off their life—but at least get medical treatment... when they can get the time off for it. Systemic problems will not be resolved without systemic change.

.

linktr.ee/TommyAndTabitha

[ex-foster]

[odinsblog]

In most communities in America, Black people and people of color are significantly underrepresented in the jury pools from which jurors are selected. The law requires that the proportion of Black people in a jury pool must match Black representation in the overall population, but courts routinely fail to enforce these requirements. Legal standards created by the courts make it difficult to prove discrimination and have led to a failure to address racially discriminatory practices.

When Black people and people of color do get called for jury service, they are still removed unfairly. There is widespread racial bias in the selection of key leadership roles such as the grand jury foreperson—who has significant power to shape the conduct and outcome of legal proceedings, at least in some jurisdictions.5 In criminal trials, prosecutors and judges often remove Black people after unfairly claiming they are unfit to serve on juries.

Even if people of color successfully navigate all of these barriers to jury service, they can be excluded by lawyers who have the right to use “peremptory strikes” to remove otherwise qualified jurors for virtually any reason—or no reason at all.

Courts allowed prosecutors to use peremptory strikes to prevent Black people from serving on juries throughout most of the 20th century. In a landmark case in 1986, the Supreme Court finally changed the legal requirements for proving a peremptory strike is racially biased.6 But the Court’s decision in Batson v. Kentucky did not eliminate racial discrimination.

Representative juries selected without racial bias or discrimination are essential in our democracy. They are especially important because Black people are underrepresented in prosecutors’ offices and in the judiciary. More than 40% of Americans are people of color, but 95% of elected prosecutors are white. Similar disparities exist within the judiciary.

(continue reading)

[bitchesgetriches]

Sup bitches! I’m in love with a very sweet, smart, hardworking man - who also finished a 20-year prison sentence three years ago. He has a great, well-paying job in a small business, his credit is blossoming, and he is beloved my all; by all accounts a success story. But of course, there are barriers, namely finding a place to rent. I have no such barriers, but I know most places do background checks on all potential occupants. What are our options?

Legal discrimination against ex-convicts is one of the blackest stains on our country. You and your partner have our sympathy and support! He has done his time and by rights should be entitled to the full privileges of any other citizen. And yet.

Remember that we are NOT legal professionals, and so we can't offer legal advice. What I CAN tell you is that if you are the only person on the lease, you will be the only one subject to a background check. Additionally, if you submit his criminal record up-front, in a personal letter to a private landlord (rather than a giant rental corporation), they're more likely to be reasonable about your case.

For more practical advice and to understand your partner's rights, risks, and options as an ex-convict, we recommend reading "The New Jim Crow." It talks about the racial component of the criminal justice system, but the discriminatory aspects of post-prison life are broadly applicable.

The New Jim Crow, by Michelle Alexander: A Bitchtastic Book Review

If this helped you out, join our Patreon!

[isaacsapphire]

Saw a post about the sex offender list that kept repeating, "police love to get minorities for X crime" and I realized, both people who supposedly oppose the system and the system itself very intentionally frame police and police discretion as a more powerful and unilateral part of the system that it actually is, while ignoring or obscuring the rest of the system.

The DA's office decides what cases to drop and what to move forward with, and what punishments to request. The judges decide to throw out cases or let them continue, and then use judicial discretion in handing down sentences. And so on, I am not a legal expert yet, but there's a whole chain of people more powerful than some beat cop who chose to pursue or drop cases.

This all seems very convenient for the DA, as nobody is rioting to abolish or defund their office.

[politijohn]

Source

[audhdnight]

So I was having a discussion about abortion rights and mentioned that making them illegal will not stop abortions from happening, and the person I was talking to sort of scoffed and said “Right so why have laws at all? Murder still happens. And I could apply that to your gun control laws too”

I need yall to understand that the point of laws is not and has never been to stop something from happening. The point of laws is to make those actions legally punishable.

Murder isn’t illegal because the law stops murder, murder is illegal so that if you beat someone to death in anger there are consequences.

I don’t want gun control laws because I think they will automatically make all wrongful deaths by firearms end forever. I want gun control laws so that it’s harder to get away with slaughtering people. So that guns are harder to access for those people who would misuse them.

Republicans know this. That’s the entire reason they want abortion to be illegal: so you can go to jail if you get one. Their aim is not and has never been to “protect life”. It has always been to control women and queer people. This isn’t about saving babies, it’s about making the exercising of bodily autonomy punishable by law.

[remembertheplunge]

“There is no poetry or thusness in the approach of win at any cost. Our job is not to win—-our job is to tap societal throb pulse and twine the art to the undulation.” 2/10/1993

Note: 12/21/2024

This quote, from the above journal entry, is referring to the way a fellow criminal defense attorney approached his work in a ruthless, no holds barred manner in which everyone else in the circle is an enemy. I see the criminal justice system as a circle in which all play a roll in achieving a fair resolution.

The balance of the had written entry were transcribed and posted separately in the 12/22/24 blog scheduled for tomorrow.