Archive for July, 2010
July 30, 2010
Tags: ad seg, administrative segregation, catch and release, Colorado, community protections, cost effective programs, crime rates, diversion, education, escape attempts, juvenile, juvenile crime rates, juvenile justice, juveniles tried as adults, Level 4 Security, Limon Correctional Facility, penal reform, prison, prison reform, pueblo, rehab, rehabilitation, Security, sentence reform, soft on crime, solitary confinement, tough on crime, Warden Angel Medina
StopDirectFile.org has been fairly critical of corrections practices in the past. Today, we had opportunity to test some of those criticisms through a tour of the Level 4 Limon Correctional Faciltity. Entering the Correctional Facility under a darkened sky we were not optimistic that our views would change much. We were intimidated by the imposing fences and high walls. But as we reached the other side of the yard our perceptions began to change.
We were ushered quickly up some stairs and into a meeting room where we were met by Warden Angel Medina and his team. After some brief introductions Captain Ken Sokol began his presentation on the facility’s new STAR Program. Far from intimidating, the program he presented was down right impressive. Focused entirely on cognitive behavior change, the STAR program interfaces with vocational education and distance learning programs to incentivize individual responsibility and is designed to positively influence the culture of the entire facility.
While Department of Corrections employees steadfastly clung to the necessity of abandonment practices like administrative segregation, the mission statement of the Limon facility reflected a deep dedication to both security and rehabilitation.
Limon Correctional Facility serves the Colorado Department of Corrections by providing a progressive and comprehensive risk reduction program in a Level IV correctional facility to offenders who continue to, or have demonstrated behaviors that are dangerous, disruptive and/or defiant.
We are a powerful team who work collaboratively with others to interrupt an offender’s risk and threat through proactive assessment, case management, and cognitive restructuring programs that are evidenced-based.
We believe in holding offenders accountable while supporting their change….
Many organizations tout their mission in name, but fail to keep to its letter. But at the Limon Correctional Facility, the mission is sacrosanct among employees. Stopping in the yard before moving to the “incentive pod,” Warden Medina proved this point by quizzing several new corrections officers: “How do we make decisions in our facility?” The answer was almost immediate: “According to the mission, sir.”
Even prisoners who had not yet entered the STAR program understood its value and told us that, while they doubted that STAR had any real-world application or relevance to prison life, it had the potential to hasten their release. Meeting with prisoners who were in the program, the effects were more than evident. One prisoner told our group that the most valuable element in his education was “to simply stop and think.”
StopDirectFile.org has stated several times over that we support “sentence reform that provides appropriate community protections by removing offenders from society until they are no longer a threat; provides victims with a sense of justice, not revenge; and gives offenders an opportunity for rehabilitation, not cold storage.”
While StopDirectFile.org disagrees with practices like administrative segregation and sentences that offer offenders little incentive to cooperate, we wholeheartedly support both the mission and practices demonstrated at the Limon Correctional Facility. Other facilities and the entire criminal justice system should, and can, learn from Limon’s example.
July 28, 2010
Tags: 12th Judicial District, Assistant Attorney General, Attorney General, Carol Chambers, Colorado, consecutive sentences, Dan Edwards, death penalty, District Attorney David Mahonee, Doug Wilson, gang, John Caudle, John Suthers, judge, murder, parracide, prosecuting attorney Dan McIntyre, Public Defender, Sir Mario Owens
A correction was requested by the Attorney General’s Communications Director, Mike Saccone. The correction was made at 9:45 a.m. on July 29 .
15-year-old John Caudle was arraigned today on first degree murder charges in the deaths of his mother and stepfather. Caudle, who was 14 and weighed only 97 pounds when he was arrested, has been direct filed as an adult and faces 80 years in prison. Inside the Rio Grande County courtroom, the question on many people’s lips was ‘why is Assistant Attorney General Dan Edwards prosecuting this case’?
Edwards has a background in prosecuting death penalty cases and was reportedly involved with District Attorney Carol Chambers’ prosecution of Sir Mario Owens. Owens received the death penalty for the gang-related murder of witnesses set to testify against him.
Why Edwards is involved in the Caudle case is a standing question that raises concerns for Mary Ellen Johnson, Executive Director at Pendulum Juvenile Justice. “John Caudle might have weighed 97 pounds soaking wet and is about the farthest thing imaginable from a big bad gangbanger. The state has plenty of resources to prosecute an abused kid. Why are they bringing in an Assistant Attorney General, whose expertise is in death penalty cases? Local prosecutors have all the resources they need. What’s this really about?”
Asked why he thought Edwards was involved, State Public Defender Doug Wilson said, “That’s a good question,” but was reluctant to offer further speculation.
The Attorney General’s Office could not offer a complete explanation for its interest in this particular case. The Attorney General’s Communications Director, Mike Saccone, explained the general purpose of the Attorney General’s Homicide Assistance Unit. When asked if a specific request was made by the District Attorney’s Office Saccone said, “I’m not familiar with the details of this particular case in terms of who requested them, but we generally only intervene in cases when we’re requested to come help.”
At time of publication, the Attorney General’s Office was looking for documentation of a request for assistance from the District Attorneys’ Office in the 12th Judicial District.
Specific information about a request for assistance was also sought from District Attorney Dan Mahonee’s Office, but could not be provided without the permission of prosecuting attorney Dan McIntyre, who is out of town until next week.
July 20, 2010
Tags: abridgement, accused, Bill Ritter, checks and balances, Colorado, Colorado Revised Statutes, consecutive sentences, Court, direct file, evidence, Governor, guilt, guilty, innocense, innocent, judge, juvenile justice, law, legal, long sentence, Mary Mullarkey, precedent, prosecutor, rights, sentence reform, separation of powers, supreme court, The Denver Post, transfer hearing
According to a recent Denver Post article, Gov. Bill Ritter is set to appoint several judges to the bench, including a vacancy created by Supreme Court Judge Mary Mullarkey’s recent decision to step down. StopDirectFile.org has to ask, “what’s the point?” What’s the point when the judges you’re appointing aren’t really allowed the full scope of decision-making power that Coloradans believe they ought to have? What’s the point when a prosecutor can make an extra-judicial decision that no judge can overturn?
The power to direct file charges against a child isn’t just procedural authority, it is judicial authority. In effect, when a prosecutor chooses to file adult charges against a child, he or she is choosing a sentencing range for that child and pronouncing their judgment on that child in open court. Legal precedent in Colorado is clear. According to Colorado Revised Statutes,”the authoritative expression of legal conclusions in declaring the sentence of the law…and the pronouncing of judgment in open court in the presence of those affected thereby, so as to bind and control persons and property” are judicial functions that “cannot be lawfully exercised, except by those entrusted therewith by the people under the constitution.” De Votie v. McGerr, 14 Colo. 577, 23 P. 980 (1890).
Most states preserve separation of powers in filing adult charges by holding what is called a ‘transfer hearing.’ During a transfer hearing, from juvenile to adult court, a prosecutor presents his or her evidence against an accused child. A defense attorney then has the opportunity to cross examine that evidence before a judge. Based on the presentation and cross examination of evidence, the judge then determines the appropriate venue for trying a child. But NOT in Colorado. In Colorado we presume a child’s guilt just enough to make sure that they face consequences as an adult. In Colorado we make sure that a prosecutor’s decision to file adult charges is not subject to judicial review. That’s wrong and Gov. Ritter’s appointments, as a result, have no real meaning.
July 16, 2010
Tags: abuse, adult charges, child, chores, Colorado, Court, death, direct file, district attorney, enforcement, height to weight ratio, John Caudle, judge, judgement, jury, juvenile justice, law, legislation, malnutrition, murder, neglect, parents, parricide, politics, prosecutors, self defense, sentence, sentence reform, starvation, suspect, welfare
I don’t know exactly how tall John Caudle is, but all anyone has to do is look at a picture to know that he wasn’t simply being sent to bed without dinner. The 15-year-old murder suspect who is on trial for defending himself against severely abusive parents only weighed 97 pounds when he was arrested. But according to prosecutors he killed his parents because he didn’t want to do his chores.
So let’s put the facts in context. A healthy weight for a 15-year-old male who is 5 foot, 1 inch tall is 123 pounds…at the low end. According to MotherJones.com, Caudle is almost 6 feet tall. At that height, Caudle should have weighed at least 147 pounds. If he were healthy, he might have weighed as much as 187 pounds. The only fact that the jury in Caudle’s trial really needs to be concerned with is that Caudle was being systematically starved.
What enrages me is that had Caudle died of malnutrition or starvation, his parents might have only gotten 16 years for child abuse resulting in death. And yet, if convicted in adult court under direct file provisions, Caudle could get as much as 80 years for defending himself.
All of this leads into a wider problem: According to ChildWelfare.gov, “Colorado [has an] estimated…50 percent to 60 percent of child deaths resulting from abuse or neglect [that] are not recorded” that way. What that means is that Colorado’s prosecutors simply aren’t enforcing child abuse laws. Maybe if Colorado’s prosecutors were less focused on convicting kids for defending themselves and more focused on tracking down and prosecuting abusive parents, we could eliminate parricide in Colorado.
I guess prosecutors would rather spend millions of taxpayer dollars to incarcerate a kid for life than actually work to protect him and end the cycle of violence. Apparently, it’s just more politically expedient to nail a kid whose friends can’t or don’t vote than it is to adhere to your own ethical standards.