Welcome to the Prison Talk Online Community! Take a Minute and Sign Up Today!






Go Back   Prison Talk > U.S. REGIONAL FORUMS > NORTH CAROLINA > North Carolina General Prison Talk, News, Introductions & Chit Chat
Register Entertainment FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

North Carolina General Prison Talk, News, Introductions & Chit Chat Topics & Discussions relating to Prison & the Criminal Justice System in North Carolina that do not fit into any other North Carolina sub-forum category. Please feel free to also introduce yourself to other members in the state and talk about whatever topics come to mind that may not have anything to do with prison.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-03-2004, 07:29 PM
Brian's Mom's Avatar
Brian's Mom Brian's Mom is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 413
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 4 Posts
Default Population puts burden on prisons

From Fayettetteville Online

Published on: 2004-02-29

Population puts burden on prisons

By Amneris Solano
Staff writer

State sentencing officials predict that North Carolina's prisons will run out of space within a few years.

A segregation cell at the Scotland Correctional Institution is ready for use.
The projections are putting pressure on legislators to decide whether to build more prisons than currently planned or find alternatives that will lower the need for cells. Either way, lawmakers need to act before it is too late or the state could be forced to release inmates early as it did in the 1980s, sentencing officials say.

The N.C. Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission estimates that in three years the state will be about 1,700 beds short even though four prisons are scheduled to open by 2007. In nine years, the shortage will be worse. By 2013 there will be more than 44,000 inmates in state prisons but there will be room for only about 37,000. There are more than 34,000 inmates in state prisons.

"The commission always knew exactly how it was going to play out," said Susan Katzenelson, executive director of the sentencing commission. The growth in the state's prisons, she said, coincides with an increase in the state's population. According to the 2000 census, the state has 8 million people, a 21 percent increase from 1990.

"There are simply more people in the state of North Carolina," Katzenelson said, so the prison population will go up even if the crime rate doesn't.

The state has 76 prisons. Some lawmakers and lawmen say building more is the only safe way to accommodate the growing number of people convicted of violent crimes. The commission's latest report, released in December, projects a surge in the inmate population partly because convictions for habitual felons rose from 638 to 761 in two years.


Prisons planned

A 1,000-bed prison opened in Scotland County last year, one in Anson County opened in January and another prison is scheduled to open in Alexander County in April. Three more prisons are scheduled to open by 2007. Officials said those prisons won't solve the problem for long.

"There isn't anybody who wants to or is willing to look at the early release of violent felons," said state Rep. Rick Glazier, a Fayetteville lawyer who represents part of Cumberland County.

Since 1990, the number of people in state prisons has doubled, according to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. North Carolina is not the only state that has dealt with prison crowding. Other states, such as California and Arizona, have had to deal with similar problems by reforming drug laws to divert drug offenders from prisons.

In 1993, the General Assembly passed the Structured Sentencing Act to keep dangerous offenders in prison longer and release nonviolent criminals earlier. Under the system, minimum sentences are set for prisoners. But longer prison terms are also part of the reason for an increase in the prison population, sentencing officials said.

"That's a caustic effect which we were predicting from the beginning," Katzenelson said. Since structured sentencing went into effect, the commission has been able to provide long-range projections and for the past several years the numbers have consistently risen, the commission said.


Staff photo by Steve Aldridge
Corrections Officer Queen Humphrey talks with an inmate in the segregation unit at the Scotland Correctional Institution, which is between Wagram and Laurinburg.
"The reason the guidelines came into place," Glazier said, "is because there was no stability to the system."

Robeson County District Attorney Johnson Britt said that when the state went to structured sentencing in the 1990s it helped reduce crowding. But it has caused a stacking effect, officials said. There are fewer beds because more people are serving longer sentences.


Probation violations

Another problem has been an increase in the number of probation violators, Britt said. About one-third of the offenders who enter the state's prisons have violated their probation, he said.

"It was almost like a tidal wave coming from past cases," Britt said.

Some of the burden has been placed on county jails, Britt said. Inmates who have been convicted are waiting in jails for space to become available in the state prisons.

Charles Stevens, population manager for the state Division of Prisons, said there were more than 1,000 inmates on the jail backlog this month. The biggest backlog has been among prisoners whose sentences are less than 10 years, Stevens said.

As new prisons open, he said, the jail backlog is reduced. But it will get worse as the inmate population grows. The state pays the counties $40 a day after the first 24 hours to house those inmates until they can be moved to a prison.

The state generally transfers inmates who have been on the waiting list longest, Stevens said. Transfers are made twice a week. Stevens said the state tries to move an even number from each county, but often the larger counties have a bigger waiting list.

Troy McDuffie, chief deputy in the Hoke County Sheriff's Office, said the county jail averages holding seven to 10 inmates a month for the state.

"What we try to do is we push pretty hard in contacting DOC to get those inmates out because we are experiencing a serious problem with overcrowding in our jail," McDuffie said.

Crowding in the Hoke County Jail has gotten so bad, officials said, that they send prisoners to other counties to ensure safety. County officials said the problem contributed to an escape at the Hoke County Jail in October. The county has conducted a study to outline plans for a new jail.

"We stay in close contact with the state," McDuffie said, "and they do what they can in working with us and getting these folks in the prison system. We know it's a serious problem and it complicates problems with your local jails."

In 2002, the commission submitted several alternatives to building prisons that it says would reduce the prison population by at least 2,000 beds in 10 years. The options include reducing prison terms for nonviolent habitual felons and lowering the penalties for statutory rape, depending on the age of the offender in relation to the victim.

Harnett County District Attorney Tom Lock said he opposes some of the alternatives, especially the one dealing with the habitual felon law.

"There are some things worth spending money on even in tough economic times, and public safety is one of them," he said.


Positive effects

Eventually the state may have to revisit its sentencing laws, Lock said, but they have been effective thus far.

"Overall, I think it is accomplishing what it is supposed to do," he said. "That's one of the reasons that violent crime has gone down over the past five or six years, because the offenders are being imprisoned for longer periods of time."

Some officials say building prisons is the more expensive answer. Department of Correction officials estimate that a 1,000-bed prison costs $80 million to build and $17 million a year to operate. The average cost of housing a prison inmate is about $20,000 a year.

Last year, the General Assembly agreed to build prisons in Bertie, Greene and Columbus counties. Those prisons, which will house about 1,000 inmates each, will take about two years to complete.

State Sen. Tony Rand of Cumberland County said legislators authorized the prisons because they realized the need. Structured sentencing works, he said, because the people who should be in prison are staying in prison.

"You just have to continue to devote additional resources to incarcerate those people who violate society's rules," Rand said.

State lawmakers did not act on the sentencing commission's recommendations two years ago, but some say they will have to find a solution soon.

"We can't build prisons fast enough to accommodate the number of people that are being incarcerated," Glazier said.

Glazier said the state must find a balance between establishing alternatives to prison and building more. Lock said more than half the people in prison have serious drug or alcohol problems. One alternative, which has been used in other states, would be to divert some drug offenders to treatment programs, Britt said.

Other alternatives, Glazier said, involve helping inmates make a smoother transition back into society by providing job training skills, opportunities for education and work-release programs. Another option, Glazier said, is to start working with children at an early age and helping them beat the odds of becoming offenders.

"Those are not touchy-feely issues," he said. "We don't save money by short shrifting money in the corrections office."

Staff writer Amneris Solano can be reached at solanoa@fayettevillenc.com or 486-3521.
__________________

"Justice is the means by which established injustices are sanctioned." - Anatole France


HE'S HOME!!!!!
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 03-03-2004, 07:33 PM
Brian's Mom's Avatar
Brian's Mom Brian's Mom is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 413
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Sorry for the typos in my added messages.... I've yet to find a way to edit posts!!
__________________

"Justice is the means by which established injustices are sanctioned." - Anatole France


HE'S HOME!!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-05-2004, 06:24 AM
Sweetness's Avatar
Sweetness Sweetness is offline
Forever loving only him
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Boone, NC
Posts: 489
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Angry Thanks for this post...

I just wanted to say thank you for this post... you know, ever since structured sentencing came along, you can now see someone who did something as small as steal a bag of chips or a beer from the grocery store get more time than someone who commits first degree murder. Now y'all tell me... what sense does that make to anyone? I understand their thinking behind passing this act... because alot of these folks do need to be incarcerated and I will not argue with that. But the rumors have been that they are beginning to take away rehabilitation programs, and even shorting inmates on food to pay for their new prisons... I thought that the whole point of prison was to REHABILITATE??? Was I wrong in thinking that? When will they ever admit that they were wrong... that giving longer and tougher sentences for some IS NOT the answer? I get so mad everytime I read something like this... because there is always talk that they will HAVE to do something soon, but yet you never read about ANYTHING saying that they are DOING something about it but spend more and more money building new prisons. Yes, my man is in prison and has been for over a year and a half now, and to be honest with y'all... he has truly served his time for his crime. I'm not just sayin that because he is my man and I want him home... I am saying it because he got 7 years for something that he shoulda only had to serve 2 for! So yes, I am boiling right about now over all of this and the stupid state of NC always thinking that they know what they are doing... LET THE GOOD GUYS GO A LITTLE EARLY is all I saying, and admit that you were wrong for a change!!!
__________________

~ The love of my life comes home to me in <script language="JavaScript" src="http://webapps.nerdsonsite.com/utility/countdown.cgi?year=2007&month=10&day=24&offset=5"> </script> days! ~
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-05-2004, 06:45 AM
Brian's Mom's Avatar
Brian's Mom Brian's Mom is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 413
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Sweetness, I agree with you 100%. When I read this article I thought, It doesn't surprise me the *&^%$@'s are running out of space! Their answer to everything is convict and incarcerate.

If they're going to release these inmates someday, they certainly do need to think about rehabilitation, else some will be back and the problem of space is not going to get better.

I'll post anything more that I hear on the subject, and if you would, please do the same!!
__________________

"Justice is the means by which established injustices are sanctioned." - Anatole France


HE'S HOME!!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-05-2004, 07:16 AM
Sweetness's Avatar
Sweetness Sweetness is offline
Forever loving only him
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Boone, NC
Posts: 489
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default Needed look at prison alternatives

Here's something that I found just now...

With the prison system at capacity, the governor's office and the Department of Corrections are taking a needed look at alternative sentencing for nonviolent offenders. Those incarcerated for bad checks or a failure to pay child support, for example, would do better making restitution or supporting their children, if acceptable alternatives to sitting in a prison cell can be made available.
Nearly 50 percent of the state's 23,500 prison inmates are guilty of nonviolent offenses, including drug use and possession. Alternative sentencing, such as electronic monitoring, could allow them to be punished outside of prison, without compromising public safety. It could be done more cheaply, defraying some of the $72 million in cuts sustained by the Department of Corrections in the last three years.

Of course, questions about the dependability of electronic monitoring that have been raised locally should be answered before its broader application is considered.

The state Legislature has taken strong measures to deal with violent offenders in recent years, primarily to ensure that they stay behind bars for most of their sentences. Protecting the state from violent offenders is properly the primary focus of the state criminal justice system and the Department of Corrections.

No questions, the state should be willing to bear the considerable expense of paying to keep violent offenders securely behind bars. But the same standard of security needn't apply to nonviolent offenders.

The Department of Corrections has undertaken cost-cutting measures aimed at streamlining its operation and in recognition of the state's dire budget problems. An acceptable way of reducing the prison population would provide for major savings, in view of the large percentage of offenders who could qualify.

Corrections Director Jon Ozmint suggested, in remarks to The Greenville News, that one option could be to give nonviolent felons "a taste of prison and then allowing them, on the back end, to have the opportunity to get out and be on electronic monitoring." He envisions alternative programs for nonviolent offenders with no history of violent offenses.

The prison population has increased by about 5 percent a year, and the Department of Corrections is having a difficult time finding beds for inmates. An acceptable method of alternative sentencing wouldn't simply turn inmates out in the street, but would punish them short of being a full-time prisoner. Alternative sentencing is worth exploring to save the state money, provide for financial restitution and make overcrowded prisons more manageable.
__________________

~ The love of my life comes home to me in <script language="JavaScript" src="http://webapps.nerdsonsite.com/utility/countdown.cgi?year=2007&month=10&day=24&offset=5"> </script> days! ~
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-05-2004, 07:20 AM
Sweetness's Avatar
Sweetness Sweetness is offline
Forever loving only him
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Boone, NC
Posts: 489
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default I posted the wrong article...lol!

N.C. prisons face overcrowding after spike in felony convictions
Associated Press
RALEIGH - An unexpected surge in felony convictions - perhaps fueled by a bad economy - has put more inmates in the state's prisons, leading to an expected overpopulation by the end of next year.

State criminal justice officials count the addition of three 1,000-bed prisons in the estimates that project that the state's 77 prisons will be over capacity by nearly 1,300 inmates.

The system will have nearly 7,700 more inmates than it can handle by 2012 if no additional prisons are built before then.

"It's a scary prospect for the future," said Susan Katzenelson, the executive director of the state Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission.

Katzenelson said she worried that the courts could force the state to begin releasing inmates before the completion of their sentences if the General Assembly doesn't act.

The increase has been driven in part by a 5 percent increase in felony convictions last year. The convictions that carry heavy penalties and put the most strain on the prison system - those for murder, robbery and drug trafficking - jumped by about 20 percent last year.

State sentencing officials said they suspect the state's rising population and poor economy play a role. In addition, the General Assembly increased penalties last year for financial identity fraud, incest and stalking.

Commissioners said they worry that if the prison system receives no relief, North Carolina could have to go the way of Kentucky, where the governor freed 567 inmates last month to help cope with a $500 million budget deficit.

"There just isn't enough money in the state budget to get us out of this crisis," said Billy Sanders, a legal specialist for North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services.

North Carolina has dealt with crowded prisons before.

The state released inmates early to relieve crowding in the 1980s.

A prison-building boom followed, but legislators also toughened sentences for serious crimes in 1993, practically eliminating early releases and helping trigger another rise in the prison population.
__________________

~ The love of my life comes home to me in <script language="JavaScript" src="http://webapps.nerdsonsite.com/utility/countdown.cgi?year=2007&month=10&day=24&offset=5"> </script> days! ~
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-05-2004, 09:16 AM
squeaky squeaky is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: north carolina,united states
Posts: 221
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

the state needs to do away with structured sentencing.not everyone classified a violent offender is a threat to society.some have been convicted because some of their evidence was not allowed to be shown during their trial.they have cut funds and rehab in prisons in order to pay for the building of new prisons in this state,they cut a few years ago and have cut out even more this year.that does include the feeding of inmates,some prisons in this state just barley feed the inmates enough food to get by on.quite a few stay hungry due to that.something really does need to be done.rehab,schooling,job training would benefit all of us.one day even in some cases the most violent offender can be released depending on their sentence,without any job training,therapy,rehab they will more then likely offend again,they are now being released at times and don't know how to fit back in society.that benefits no one.
__________________
you be the change that you wish to see in the world:
ghandi
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-05-2004, 05:55 PM
Flipper Flipper is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 193
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Another flawed trial tarnishes courts

(Wilmington Star)





Yet again a man on North Carolina's death row is found to have been denied important evidence that might have changed the outcome of his trial. That breakdown in the court system almost cost him his life.

If a judge hadn't postponed his execution for other reasons, George Franklin Page would have been put to death Friday. On Monday, the missing evidence turned up.

It was brain scans that a state psychiatrist says might have changed her testimony about the defendant's ability to control his actions. If she had seen them, she said, she would have recommended further tests.

The scans should have been included in more than 1,000 pages of medical records – a number that in itself suggests something was seriously wrong with this man. The scans weren't there.

That might have been an honest error. But it was an error that could have made the difference between life and death.

Mr. Page is hardly a model citizen. He was convicted of shooting a police officer to death. The question is whether his sentence should be affected by his mental state.

After the U.S. Supreme Court decides whether lethal injection is constitutional for some inmates, the state courts are supposed to decide what to do about the missing medical records.

Forsyth County prosecutors are contending it's too late to consider this evidence. In other words, they don't care about the whole truth. They won a death sentence on the basis of incomplete evidence, and they want to keep it.

Surely most North Carolina prosecutors don't care more about scoring personal and political points than they do about justice. But here, as in other states, more and more cases are popping up in which prosecutors were willing to ignore or suppress facts that stood in the way of a conviction.

These shameful episodes not only raise questions about the accuracy and justice of capital convictions, but of all convictions. After all, highly publicized death-penalty cases are the ones that attract the attention of investigators, law students and reporters. If they are flawed, sometimes by what appears to be the deliberate dishonesty of prosecutors or law-enforcement officers, what does that suggest about trials involving lesser crimes?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-05-2004, 07:55 PM
Brian's Mom's Avatar
Brian's Mom Brian's Mom is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 413
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 4 Posts
Default

These are great articles, and they make the point very well. The justice system seems to be a runaway train, and no one seems willing to be the one to pull the brake.
__________________

"Justice is the means by which established injustices are sanctioned." - Anatole France


HE'S HOME!!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-06-2004, 06:37 AM
Flipper Flipper is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 193
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian's Mom
These are great articles, and they make the point very well. The justice system seems to be a runaway train, and no one seems willing to be the one to pull the brake.
Dear BriMom,

I have written some of the papers and joined NC Citizens Against the Felony Murder Rule but you are so right, the courts are out of control. Even the Parole board keeping J Allen in jail for 33 years for stealing a $170 Black and White TV has no apologies and thinks they are doing the right thing!

What a mess.

Rob
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-11-2007, 06:55 AM
sixpack6t9's Avatar
sixpack6t9 sixpack6t9 is offline
Former CCCF inmate
 

Join Date: May 2005
Location: portland or
Posts: 73
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 7 Posts
Default

I've found a direct correlation between the number of parole violators, especially those whose paroles are revoked, and the erection of new prisons.

The general jist is that more people are violated and/or revoked in the period just prior to a new prison coming online, than at any other point in time. I was looking for a reason for the stunning 60% increase in parole violation arrests in Multnomah county alone, in the last 90 days when I found this article---
New prison near Madras gets 1st group of inmates
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
RYAN KNUTSON
The Oregonian Staff

Deer Ridge Correctional Institution, Oregon's 14th prison, opened Monday about four miles east of Madras and accepted its first 35 inmates.

Parrish Van Wert, community development director for Deer Ridge, said its construction followed a pledge by former Gov. John Kitzhaber to put a prison east of the Cascades. Work began in 2005 on the 453-acre site.

"It's just a little over 11 years from the discussions on siting to inmates' arrival," Van Wert said.

The $190 million prison opened only its minimum-security section, which has 644 beds. Of those, 212 are dedicated for special treatment programs such as mental health and substance abuse.

The medium-security section, with 1,223 beds, is scheduled to open in February 2008.

It is still seeking employees for its medium-security section and eventually could employ as many as 200, he said.

Deer Ridge, led by Superintendent Sharon Blacketter, will become the third-largest prison in Oregon. It could be filled by 2013, Van Wert said.

The largest prison, Snake River Correctional Institution in Ontario, has 3,000 beds; the second largest, Oregon State Penitentiary in Salem, has 2,051, Van Wert said.

"We're at a position now where we need more beds," he said. "That's why this facility is opening."

The last previous prison to open in Oregon was Warner Creek Correctional Institution in Lakeview.

Ryan Knutson: ryanknutson@ news.oregonian.com

now I see why more technical violations result in revocations today---they need bodies to justify $190 million in tax dollars wasted, with virtually no public awareness.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-11-2007, 08:08 AM
Flipper Flipper is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 193
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Dear Sixpack,

Its shameful in Oregon,
Its shameful in North Carolina,
Its bankrupting almost every state,making their DOC's their largest employers.How twisted is that!

-R
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-15-2007, 05:23 PM
sixpack6t9's Avatar
sixpack6t9 sixpack6t9 is offline
Former CCCF inmate
 

Join Date: May 2005
Location: portland or
Posts: 73
Thanks: 0
Thanked 10 Times in 7 Posts
Default Sentencing Guidelines Are A Hoax

I published the following article some time ago, in response to gubernatorial documents I found in the archives.
------------------------------------------------
The $entencing Guideline$ Hoax
It's All About The Money
By Sixpack of WABC

It was not a crime epidemic or a meth epidemic that spun the prison population out of control. It was, and continues to be corporate greed, coupled with the erosion of our constitutional rights and more aggressive law enforcement policies and tactics---in other words, it is the Sentencing Guidelines. These guidelines were sold to the public as a means to enhance prison sentences and make those enhancements uniform for each defendant. Unfortunately, that's not how it worked out for Oregon.

It has been presented to the public that the necessity to build another prison in Oregon is because of rising crime rates or various "problems" like the so-called meth epidemic. But when reading documents from Governor Neil Goldschmidt, the Department of Corrections and various other special interest groups, it is much easier to see the truth in hind-sight: The fact that prison growth is CONTROLLED, so what does that say about the prison population? It says that any growth is PLANNED.

Did the crime rate drop because of the new guidelines? No.

Are we any “safer” today, than we were before the new guidelines? Not really.

The one thing that is obvious is that the guidelines were designed to protect the Dept. of Corrections Prison Industries profit margin. The State no longer worries about an uncontrolled prison population eating away their profits---The guidelines can control that. Need another warehouse for prison workers? No problem, just “adjust” the guidelines, that’s what they’re for.

Instead of “taking a bite out of crime” the guidelines only spurred a frenzy of prison building that did nothing to make Oregonians any safer, deter crime or even assure us that criminals would stay locked up longer---what the sentencing guidelines did do, was enable the prison industrial complex to expand into Oregon’s largest and most powerful industry, second to none.

If we were lied to from the beginning, at the inception of the guidelines, how are we to believe anything else that we are told? We can believe that the guidelines were meant to be arbitrary, applied only as a safety-net for the prison profiteers. And we can believe that prison industries are flourishing while the rest of the state struggles to make ends meet, like in the education area.

I've started with the Neil Goldschmidt era, where the murder of Michael Francke was being investigated as related to corruption within the Oregon Department of Corrections, and the period when the sentencing guidelines were born. When read today, these archived documents tell the real story behind the planning and implementation of the “New Sentencing Guidelines” and how truly unfair the guidelines really are, to the citizens who thought they were safer, and the defendants who face the courts when prison beds need to be filled.

(These clips were created by using Adobe reader's "copy to clip board" function, and then pasting on this page, creating a "snapshot" of the online copy of the document).

You can browse a list of all of the documents archived in the Oregon State Library online at: <<http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/governors/goldschmidt/Goldschmidtseries.html>>

1989

I found memos between Gov. Neil Goldschmidt and Mark L. Cushing that imply that the sentencing guidelines have nothing to do with public safety, but rather with manipulating the prison population to suit the politician’s needs at the time. The sentencing guidelines are incessantly referred to in these early documents as "adjustments" when the number of people who will go to prison needs to be raised or lowered, depending on the budget, or there is a desire to build another new prison.

In one gubernatorial memo I found in the archives on the State of Oregon website, goldschmidt_016_052.pdf, dated February 6, 1989, the dialog about the "sentencing guidelines politics" is clear. Joyce Cohen made it clear that she wants to "send the guidelines back to the council to make appropriate [adjustments] immediately to bring guideline projections in sync with prison capacity". I never realized that changing the guidelines could be that easy, preventing the prison overcrowding and new prison construction that we are told is "imminent" and unavoidable, yet even the Governor avoids responsibility;

"...While we need to avoid getting tagged with ownership of this issue, I do not think we are well-served by lettng it "float" through the next month. I recommend you meet with the..."

On page 6 of this set we see that "guidelines could be adopted AFTER the construction program already has been approved with the sentencing board having the authority to make [adjustments] to guidelines as needed in the interim". Can we assume that the guidelines can change anytime their need for more funding arises? No mention of "public safety" in this discussion.

Governor Neil Goldschmidt
February 12, 1989
Page 6

"(presumably in the form of you agreeing not to oppose) that guidelines could be adopted after the construction program already has been approved either the sentencing board having the authority to make adjustments to guidelines as needed in the interim. The Council would then make a report to future legislatures about the impact of guidelines on prison capacity and the need for any changes in guidelines or the need to increase prison capacity. If such a consensus among the..."

Richard Peterson, the interim Director of DOC states that the "flow of [thugs] goes naturally to the highest security facility in normal population movement".

1990

In November 1990, goldschmidt_102_009.pdf dated August 1st 1990, the focus changes to parole sanctions, sex offenders and women's issues. New calculations of "effective capacity" given the new prison construction since 1988, and will consider "any necessary [adjustments] to the guidelines to maintain prison populations within this capacity". A 600 bed women's facility is proposed in the DOC 1991-93 budget request (i.e. Coffee Creek). Not surprisingly, the new facility will also house an expanded DMV call center, (doubled, from 40 to 80 workstations). DMV pays a regular wage for each woman employed, and DOC "graciously" gives each worker $35 per month as PRAS awards. This means DOC keeps the rest, about $1,100.00 or so per month per inmate, pocketing several million dollars of inmate wages. To me it looks like one state agency feeding money to the other.

DOC starts singling women out for "supervised transitional housing". In this set of documents, women and sex offenders are repeatedly separated out for "expanded" supervision programs and more intensive supervision for women. This should ensure that the required number of parolees will make it back to prison, provided there are is a need to fill prison beds.

"Effective prison capacity" is an interesting play of words. …

"1.5 The capacity limits recommended in the Strategic Corrections Plan for Oregon's correctional facilities should be adopted by the State Sentencing Guidelines Board and the Legislature as the effective capacity of state correctional facilities. Sentences and sanctions for revocations of supervision under sentencing guidelines should conform to that capacity.

In November of 1990, the Criminal Justice Council will seek the assistance of the Department of Corrections in calculating a current "effective capacity" given the new prison construction since the 1988 Task Force Report and will consider any necessary adjustments to the guidelines to maintain prison population within this capacity.

W084/3"

In documents in goldschmidt_089_008.pdf, The guidelines themselves will become a means to assess the need for additional prison capacity, i.e. How many new warehouses can we build?

"The sentencing guidelines promulgated by the Sentencing Guidelines Board of the Oregon Criminal Justice Council are required to conform to available prison capacity. Therefore, the future Oregon prison population, if guidelines are properly designed and administered, should be the same as the future capacity of the prisons.

Initially, the guidelines will be designed to conform with the prison capacity available on September 1, 1989. If prison admissions increase without an increase in capacity, sentences may either be modified downward to accommodate the increased population or the legislature may add additional prison capacity. If capacity is added in excess of increased populations, sentences can be modified upward to adjust to the newly available capacity."

.Think of what that could mean for two different people with similar convictions--One convicted while prisons are at "capacity", and one convicted while there are plenty of open beds. "Sentences can be modified UPWARD to adjust to the newly available capacity", meaning one of those newly convicted people will get MORE TIME because there are open beds in the prison, and the other will get leniency due to the prison being full at that time.

(One of the key reasons proponents gave for the guidelines was to make sentencing even all across the board, so judges couldn't be "soft" on anyone, doling out punishments evenly)

What a crock! What a lie! Looks like only DOC can go limp, if it needs to protect profits.

This was again clearly stated in an interoffice memo to then Governor Neil Goldschmidt, dated May 18th, 1989 from Cory Streisinger Goldschmidt:goldscmidt_072_105.pdf (Confidential) RE: Jim Hill's Prison Proposal:

"First, you might well cause chaos in the sentencing guidelines negotiations. Right now, our major hope of getting agreement on the guidelines is to convince the "tough on crime" crowd that guidelines are necessary because we simply don't have an infinite amount of prison space. If you suddenly surface a brand new proposal to create more space, even several years in the future, the “Rs” may well seize on this as a basis for insisting that the guidelines be toughened up immediately. This would be disastrous for the concept of guidelines as a resource-oriented management tool, and it would commit you to additional prison space which you might later decide is unwise."

The key phrase here is “This would be disastrous for the concept of guidelines as a resource-oriented management tool". If that doesn't spell it out in plain English, I can't imagine what does. All the hype and advertisement about how crime was out of control, and the urgent need to clean up the streets for the safety of the public---and all the guidelnes were intended to do was make it easier for officials to manage prison populations! In other words, keep the prisons full to an acceptable level of slave labor, and incentives to con the citizens into going into debt for more prisons to house the slaves in.

Then in the next paragraph;

"...summer of 1990. But keep in mind that we are talking about some form of tax increase here, disguised as it may be. An inoffensive bond measure may give the public the illusion that we are building more prisons, but in the long run it would simply make our operating costs worse if no new revenue is added."

They talk about the public, their constituents, US, like we are all a bunch of ignorant fools---"disguised as it may be", and it "may give the public the illusion that they are building more prisons..."

This next clip is talking about max security, where death row inmates are also housed.

"All cells will be constructed utilizing the concept of indirect (non-contact) supervision. Direct supervision by at least two officers, backed up by control room personnel, will be utilized whenever ah inmate is out of a cell. All inmates will be in restraints when they are outside their cells in the presence of anyone else. There will be no contact amongst inmates at any time. The podular concept will be utilized with cells against the wall. The control center must be able to clearly see the front of all cells. The day room space will be utilized for indoor exercise space.

The cells will all have a solid metal door with a window and food/cuff slot for securing the inmate before he is removed from the cell. All doors will be sliding with pneumatic locking devices. Each cell will have a drain under the door. There will be an air evacuation system for cell blocks. Fire suppression/smoke & particle detection systems will be installed. All cells will be wet with outside-the-cell shut-off. This will produce staff efficiencies and simplify inmate supervision. Each cell will have a shower and toilet/sink combination with the toilet set in concrete. Cement slab bunks will be utilized with cement writing areas. High security lighting will be used in the cells with no electrical outlets other than the TV outlet. All cells will be built to current American Correction Association standards of 70 square feet.

cc: Directors Council
Wardens Council
Cory Streisinger
Mark Cushing"

And as a final note, here is what the maximum security section looks like, in the words of a prison official---interestingly, this description is also consistent with the general structure of the Multnomah County Detention Center (MCDC) in downtown Portland. The only difference is that MCDC inmates are not restrained while outside their cells and may have "walk time" with the other inmates. There are no electrical outlets at MCDC.

There are many documents in the archives that point directly to the legislative and law enforcement abuses of the public. These are just a few examples of how Oregonians were blatantly lied to in order to fulfill an agenda.

Who benefits from all of this deception? The State Government and a few vendors.

Who is on the losing end?

Why, WE ARE--- the people who actually pay our hard earned money to incarcerate ourselves!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Article: Auditors assail private prisons PattiD1157 Washington Prisons & Jail Specific Discussions 1 06-17-2005 11:06 AM
ARTICLE: No reliable data on private prison savings arriana Arizona Prison & Criminal Justice News & Events 1 03-30-2005 08:26 PM
Pending Legislation Addresses Mental Health Treatment in Prisons MsChiku Ohio Prison & Legal News, Info & Events 2 12-15-2004 09:48 PM
Loving Those State Prisons JJT Washington General Prison Talk, News, Introductions & Chit Chat 0 11-19-2004 02:25 PM
Sentencing and Prisons in Finland Flammenschwert European Prison & Criminal Justice Topics 0 07-11-2003 01:13 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:07 PM.
Copyright © 2001- 2019 Prison Talk Online
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Website Design & Custom vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media
Message Board Statistics