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.

As this video clip from CNN shows, the U.S. Supreme Court is going to take a case involving the legality of charging juveniles as adults in cases where death does not occur.  This is the same court that, in 2005, ruled that teenagers are not mentally mature enough to ever deserve the death sentence.  Dare we hope, based on that previous ruling, that the highest court in the land will again decide on the side of justice and declare that children are not ever developed or mature enough to be charged as adults UNTIL THEY ARE ADULTS?  The caveat that no deaths have occurred in  the case is an obvious nod to the “tough on crime” folks, but even so, this would be a very big step in the right direction.

To those who consider it “justice” that children be locked up with adults, I would ask: how do you explain that?  How is it justice to hold someone accountable under a standard that they do not meet?  Guilt in our justice system depends a good deal on the criminality of the offenders intent, just as much as on the actual commission of the crime.  Which is why murder is a Capitol crime, whereas involuntary manslaughter is not.   Justice demands that some restitution be made for crimes, humans demand that the “guilty” suffer and perhaps die for their crimes.

It is easy to view the world in this way, just so long as it is not your child that is the one found guilty.  As long as the horrible stories we hear of abuse and violence happen in other peoples families, it is easy to play judge and jury and stick to the empty mantra “adult crime, adult time.”  However, when it is our own child, it is not so easy.  Perhaps, instead of seeing a monster, we would see an impressionable, immature, underdeveloped child that deserves a second chance.  Perhaps, rather than howling for blood, we would realize that justice involves respecting the rights of all parties, not just the victims.  It is easy to see black and white when one has no skin in the game.  Actually knowing the accused child, and knowing first hand that he or she is not a monster changes things a bit.

Teenagers lack the reasoning ability and the perspective that adults have, that adults need to fully comprehend the crimes they commit.  If the U.S. Supreme Court recognizes this fact, it will be a great victory.

Alamosa Prosecutor Dan McIntyre wants us to believe that if John Caudle killed his mother and step father it was over a dispute about chores. That would tie things up nicely.  Never mind that the child he wants to try as an adult spent 14 years enduring severe neglect and abuse.

According to a recent interview with family friend Cecile Dinsmore in The Valley Courier, Caudle’s mother Joanne Rinebarger was an abusive drug addict who “killed every bit of joy in [John's] life, and took everything that he loved away from him as punishment.”

…But never mind all that because what is really on trial in the case of the State of Colorado vs. John Caudle is really justice vs. politics; right vs. wrong. McIntyre is seeking two consecutive 40 year sentences. Unless he expects Caudle to live to be 95 in prison, that’s a slow death sentence. McIntyre needs us to believe that he’s trying a “monster” because that is the only thing that justifies the monstrous vengeance he’s seeking.

More than anything, McInTyre needs us to believe that monstrous vengeance is justified. If we don’t believe that vengeance is necessary then he can’t justify it to himself. Like most prosecutors, McIntyre knows that kids are different from adults. He knows there are numerous studies (see references) that show  kids are prone to risky, emotionally driven behavior. McIntyre knows that adolescents, while maturing, are not mature enough to make adult decisions in the heat of the moment.

Finally, McIntyre knows that using the practice of direct file to mete out cruel and unusual punishment to John Caudle is unconscionable. If John Caudle killed his mother and his step father then he ought to be incarcerated, but he shouldn’t be warehoused in cold storage for the rest of his life. As a child, Caudle deserves a chance at redemption.

Trying Caudle as an adult using direct file is wrong. McIntyre knows the difference between right and wrong; he just doesn’t care.

In the end, everything that Dan McIntyre knows makes him more of a monster than John Caudle will ever be.