One of the problems not mentioned is mandatory sentencing guidelines that were passed as part of a "get tough on crime" laws of the 80s and 90s in the US. These laws do a lot to reduce the discretion in sentencing available to judges. My mom, who was a judge told me a lot about this.
Say you are young and you do something very stupid. You get high and you go into a store with a friend who is also high and threatens the clerk with a knife to steal something. Maybe you don't do anything more than run away with your friend after he steals something. After you are arrested a prosecutor can probably charge you with half a dozen crimes, all associated with the event. The prosecutor is incentivized to charge you with a bunch of stuff to get you to plead guilty instead of going to trial which is very expensive.
Maybe the police picked you up and you are the wrong person. Maybe you are young and you think you shouldn't go to prison because someone you barely know did something stupid and all you did was run away when they ran away. If you ask for your day in court you are going to face all these charges and probably the prosecution will win. DAs are usually better than defense attorneys unless you can afford a very good one. So you lose.
A judge might look at your past behavior. Decide you are not a really dangerous person and think, if this person were locked up for a year or two they would learn their lesson and be productive members of society. But with many charges and mandatory sentencing, there is nothing to do but lock up the person for a really long time. So long that their productive life is ruined.
Mandatory sentencing also helps weaponize charges in the plea bargaining process because it prevents a judge from applying their judgement to make the sentence fit the crime. So take a plea bargain of a couple years for an auto theft or lose in court and face ten years or more with a bunch of other charges tacked on.
What would happen if the chief public defender of a large city declared that no public defender would accept any plea deal and that they would be taking everything to trial?
The courts would immediately be clogged and prosecutors would be forced to drop many charges because they wouldn't be able to have a trial within the mandated 70 days.
Prosecutors would be forced to choose the cases that they actually believed important as opposed to the current as-many-charges-and-cases-as-they-can.
Lawyers are required by professional ethics (and possibly by law in some places) to present plea deals to their clients. Having it be otherwise would be problematic.
Well, no, they would be forced to choose the cases where they think they have the best odds of winning. And you'd end up with Japan, where confessions are extracted out of prisoners during pretrial detention and 99.9% of those brought to trial are convicted.
That said, even this would probably be an improvement, since plea bargains are an almost uniquely American horror.
They did this in San Bernardino and Riverside counties about a decade ago when the DAs refused to bargain over drug rehab diversions for non-violent/non-dealer defendants.
Nearly member of the defense bar (led by the public defenders, but including private counsel) convinced their clients to refuse to waive the rights to a speedy trial. SB and Riverside ran out of courtrooms to hold trials in by 10a that Monday, and were forced to ask LA and OC county for help. By that Wednesday, the backlog grew so large that defendants' cases were being dropped because the constitutional deadline for bringing their case to trial had passed.
I'd be worried that prosecutors would go after cases that serve their own purpose and that those wouldn't be the cases most deserving of prosecution. For example, I would want every violent and sexual offense to be prosecuted before even a single drug case is considered. But would a prosecutor give up a a mid-level drug dealer to go after a sexual assault case or a mugging?
You can't do that. Putting this on the defender is the wrong target.
The two structural changes that I would make are:
1) Any monetary collection by the "justice system" goes to a victim or into a fund which gets redistributed to the general public at the end of the year.
No more funding things with fines (aka regressive tax on the poor). You want funding--it comes out of taxes, period. This stops a lot of the perverse incentives in the system.
Marijuana legalization is mostly held up because the fines from it fund the "justice system".
2) Prosecutors may not offer plea deals.
As we have seen time and again, this devolves into abuse of office. Prosecutors offer deals with far fewer consequences to rich, non-minority defendants.
I would actually go one further:
3) Prosecutors don't get any ability to pick the jury.
The court should be able to strike people for various bias reasons. The defense should be able to strike people with some limitations.
The prosecution should have to make the case with the jury provided by the court system and the defense. Prosecutors already have far too many advantages when conducting a trial (too many jurors are "He's in the chair--he's guilty."). If they can't make a criminal conviction with those, then they shouldn't be prosecuting it in the first place.
You should look into philidelphia’s district attorney. He led his campaign with plea reform.
Also look into private prisons and Unicor. Essentially slave labor for GSA. Truly horrible conditions. There is not one semblance of rehabilitation in the US prison system.
A more likely outcome would be a doubling or tripling down on the legal threats to the defendant. It’s not the public defender’s call to make, and prosecutors are already pretty good at scaring the shit out of the defendants.
Already many crimes go unpunished, you’re proposing that nearly all “petty” crimes be consequence-free just think for a second how much worse Seattle or SF would get if the police arrested even fewer criminals and even fewer ppl would prosecuted for theft and home invasions?
What you’re suggesting is a total breakdown in societal norms bec you see a problem and don’t understand the root cause so you just want to treat one symptom. Why not take some time to understand the root cause instead, and come up with a solution that doesn’t have immediately worse outcomes for literally all of the rest of society.
One issue is all the leverage prosecutors have. Things like charges that are deliberately inflated, or 3rd strike rules, defendants already on probation for something else, etc. Many defendants have to take a plea deal because the prosecution has lots of leverage.
Also, if somehow the courts managed to take all these cases to trial, for every trial that the public defender lost, she could appeal that they did not receive adequate representation. I don't think she would win those appeals, just because the courts act with spite to anyone who rocks the boat, but it would be correct; there is no way that any public defender could handle that many cases going to trial. They already aren't allotted enough time just to plea bargain.
The courts are actually pretty capable of rubber-stamping guilty verdicts very quickly. They can also scale up and hire more assistant prosecutors etc.
And American citizens have the privilege of paying for this barbarism to the tune of ~$40,000/yr.
It is a criminal waste of taxpayer capital, and it is a criminal waste of human life.
A complete fucking for everyone involved, other than the people at the capital getting kick-backs from industries profiting off of the prison industrial complex, and the owners of the prisons themselves.
The current prison systems in the US (and the UK to a lesser extent) are insane and counterproductive. It’s hard to imagine how someone would make it through a sentence in one of these places without becoming a hardened criminal, a drug addict, or both.
Our prisons are factories which churn out career criminals. It has to be stopped. Countless lives are being lost to, or permanently ruined by, ex-prisoners who might otherwise have been rehabilitated into a more normal life, after serving their time.
Prison should not be fun. Perhaps it shouldn’t even be comfortable. But we can’t go on with prisons like they are now.
While I do agree that the system has many opportunities for improvement, the idea that the vast majority of the people “in the system” can be rehabilitated is comical. Most people that can be rehabilitated have their run in with the law and straighten their act out. You don’t end up with a mile long rap sheet and on parole if you are amenable to rehabilitation. Let alone prison. You just don’t. If you actually knew a parole officer and heard what they had to deal with on a day to day basis, for very little money, you would become a “tough on crime” person. The bigger question is why do we have a culture and society where so many turn to a literal “life of crime”. Why do people begin stealing, doing drugs, and committing violence to begin with. A lot of it begins at home, but nobody wants to talk about that.
While I was in federal prison (during COVID-19) at another area of the prison inmates were allowed out of their cells for 30 minutes every 3 days and they had to choose between: (a) take a shower (b) make a phone call or (c) speak to staff or file some kind of paperwork. Note that they are essentially required to pick (a) since other inmates have to live within 4 feet of them and if they "willingly" choose to not shower they will be seen as disrespecting others.
This was because of COVID-19 causing a "lockdown" but I was told that this situation wasn't new and that over the last few years that area of the prison was locked down about 30% of the time.
It's also worth mentioning that the area of the prison was a holding area mostly for minimum security inmates - eg. inmates that have non-violent records with some other qualifications.
Shot Caller starring Nikolaj Coster-Waldau should be mandatory in US high school civics courses.
Well to do family man enters the California penal system for a DUI, is systemically raped, assaulted, and has his family's life threatened on the outside. In order to survive he is forced to join a white supremacist gang and participate in criminal activities that evolve into a life long sentence. This is "justice" apparently.
From the Wikipedia entry of this movie, it sounds like he killed someone while driving drunk. Hard to call that a "DUI."
> One night he drives his wife and friends home after dinner and causes a collision which kills one of his friends. Advised to take a plea deal due to him being under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident, Jacob is sentenced to 16 months at the California Institution for Men in Chino.
Felon (2008) is a decent drama movie that follows an interesting story as well. It's worth mentioning that the vast majority of people locked up aren't there for DUI, rape, murder, theft, etc. They are there because some plant is illegal.
If this was all "working" I don't think I would be as upset. If the streets were clear of drug addicts and addiction rate was low, then it would all be "worth" the cost were paying both in dollars and cost of violating others rights. But, it doesn't work.
Is this actually reality in the US though? Pretty much everyone I’ve known who went to jail said you could just keep to yourself and you’d be fine. Most people in jail aren’t hardened criminals.
For those interested on the history of the prison industrial complex and political fundraising and how New York State Governor Mario Cuomo (Governor Andrew Cuomos dad) started it:
> I am familiar with the cynical riposte that jail isn't supposed to be fun. But we Americans can do better than that. The punishments received should be those mandated by the legal system, as properly expressed through the decisions of judges and juries. Some people might wish to argue for tougher penalties for some crimes and thus for some criminals, and that is a debate worth having. That is precisely the point: Such judgments should be made after public debate, not by gang powers within a prison.
The horror of prisons is tied just as much to the people that occupy them. If there wasn’t so much violence in prison, it would be easier to create a better living environment.
Please don't post flamebait to HN. It's great to include relevant links to other sources, but not with snarky one liners, especially when the topic is inflammatory.
As with the health care debate, the US is also an outlier when discussing prisons: "The United States has ... the highest incarceration rate in the world"[1]
Canada has less than 1/6th the US incarceration rate and Mexico just over 1/5th.
Interesting to keep this in mind while reading the rest of these comments.
The only reason American prisons are so horrific is that criminal gangs run them. There should be cameras everywhere, and every infraction should be punished. Once prisons stop being a lord of the flies horror show, restorative justice could be possible.
[+] [-] georgeecollins|5 years ago|reply
Say you are young and you do something very stupid. You get high and you go into a store with a friend who is also high and threatens the clerk with a knife to steal something. Maybe you don't do anything more than run away with your friend after he steals something. After you are arrested a prosecutor can probably charge you with half a dozen crimes, all associated with the event. The prosecutor is incentivized to charge you with a bunch of stuff to get you to plead guilty instead of going to trial which is very expensive.
Maybe the police picked you up and you are the wrong person. Maybe you are young and you think you shouldn't go to prison because someone you barely know did something stupid and all you did was run away when they ran away. If you ask for your day in court you are going to face all these charges and probably the prosecution will win. DAs are usually better than defense attorneys unless you can afford a very good one. So you lose.
A judge might look at your past behavior. Decide you are not a really dangerous person and think, if this person were locked up for a year or two they would learn their lesson and be productive members of society. But with many charges and mandatory sentencing, there is nothing to do but lock up the person for a really long time. So long that their productive life is ruined.
Mandatory sentencing also helps weaponize charges in the plea bargaining process because it prevents a judge from applying their judgement to make the sentence fit the crime. So take a plea bargain of a couple years for an auto theft or lose in court and face ten years or more with a bunch of other charges tacked on.
[+] [-] djoldman|5 years ago|reply
The courts would immediately be clogged and prosecutors would be forced to drop many charges because they wouldn't be able to have a trial within the mandated 70 days.
Prosecutors would be forced to choose the cases that they actually believed important as opposed to the current as-many-charges-and-cases-as-they-can.
[+] [-] ianferrel|5 years ago|reply
Lawyers are required by professional ethics (and possibly by law in some places) to present plea deals to their clients. Having it be otherwise would be problematic.
[+] [-] thebooktocome|5 years ago|reply
It's probably unconstitutional for them to refuse plea deals en masse if it creates a massive violation of one's right to a speedy trial.
[+] [-] Clewza313|5 years ago|reply
That said, even this would probably be an improvement, since plea bargains are an almost uniquely American horror.
[+] [-] gamblor956|5 years ago|reply
Nearly member of the defense bar (led by the public defenders, but including private counsel) convinced their clients to refuse to waive the rights to a speedy trial. SB and Riverside ran out of courtrooms to hold trials in by 10a that Monday, and were forced to ask LA and OC county for help. By that Wednesday, the backlog grew so large that defendants' cases were being dropped because the constitutional deadline for bringing their case to trial had passed.
The following week, both DAs gave in completely.
[+] [-] standardUser|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bsder|5 years ago|reply
The two structural changes that I would make are:
1) Any monetary collection by the "justice system" goes to a victim or into a fund which gets redistributed to the general public at the end of the year.
No more funding things with fines (aka regressive tax on the poor). You want funding--it comes out of taxes, period. This stops a lot of the perverse incentives in the system.
Marijuana legalization is mostly held up because the fines from it fund the "justice system".
2) Prosecutors may not offer plea deals.
As we have seen time and again, this devolves into abuse of office. Prosecutors offer deals with far fewer consequences to rich, non-minority defendants.
I would actually go one further:
3) Prosecutors don't get any ability to pick the jury.
The court should be able to strike people for various bias reasons. The defense should be able to strike people with some limitations.
The prosecution should have to make the case with the jury provided by the court system and the defense. Prosecutors already have far too many advantages when conducting a trial (too many jurors are "He's in the chair--he's guilty."). If they can't make a criminal conviction with those, then they shouldn't be prosecuting it in the first place.
[+] [-] dkdk8283|5 years ago|reply
Also look into private prisons and Unicor. Essentially slave labor for GSA. Truly horrible conditions. There is not one semblance of rehabilitation in the US prison system.
[+] [-] falcolas|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vxNsr|5 years ago|reply
What you’re suggesting is a total breakdown in societal norms bec you see a problem and don’t understand the root cause so you just want to treat one symptom. Why not take some time to understand the root cause instead, and come up with a solution that doesn’t have immediately worse outcomes for literally all of the rest of society.
[+] [-] tyingq|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MattGaiser|5 years ago|reply
As then the prosecution has no reason to grant any leniency, so whichever clients they tried would receive far longer sentences.
Sacrificing some clients to get others off does not seem permissible.
I believe they are also required to present the deal to their clients.
[+] [-] ErikVandeWater|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ur-whale|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] koolba|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ddtaylor|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zachrose|5 years ago|reply
Because it exposes their individual clients to greater risk?
[+] [-] honkycat|5 years ago|reply
It is a criminal waste of taxpayer capital, and it is a criminal waste of human life.
A complete fucking for everyone involved, other than the people at the capital getting kick-backs from industries profiting off of the prison industrial complex, and the owners of the prisons themselves.
[+] [-] jpxw|5 years ago|reply
Our prisons are factories which churn out career criminals. It has to be stopped. Countless lives are being lost to, or permanently ruined by, ex-prisoners who might otherwise have been rehabilitated into a more normal life, after serving their time.
Prison should not be fun. Perhaps it shouldn’t even be comfortable. But we can’t go on with prisons like they are now.
[+] [-] dan-robertson|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mberning|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thewarrior|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PurpleFoxy|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ddtaylor|5 years ago|reply
This was because of COVID-19 causing a "lockdown" but I was told that this situation wasn't new and that over the last few years that area of the prison was locked down about 30% of the time.
It's also worth mentioning that the area of the prison was a holding area mostly for minimum security inmates - eg. inmates that have non-violent records with some other qualifications.
[+] [-] tmpz22|5 years ago|reply
Well to do family man enters the California penal system for a DUI, is systemically raped, assaulted, and has his family's life threatened on the outside. In order to survive he is forced to join a white supremacist gang and participate in criminal activities that evolve into a life long sentence. This is "justice" apparently.
[+] [-] ceejayoz|5 years ago|reply
There are better resources for learning about the American prison system, just like you probably shouldn't learn about MI6 from James Bond.
[+] [-] joegahona|5 years ago|reply
> One night he drives his wife and friends home after dinner and causes a collision which kills one of his friends. Advised to take a plea deal due to him being under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident, Jacob is sentenced to 16 months at the California Institution for Men in Chino.
[+] [-] ddtaylor|5 years ago|reply
If this was all "working" I don't think I would be as upset. If the streets were clear of drug addicts and addiction rate was low, then it would all be "worth" the cost were paying both in dollars and cost of violating others rights. But, it doesn't work.
[+] [-] wayoutthere|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] giantg2|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] refurb|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Balgair|5 years ago|reply
https://www.bop.gov/jobs/volunteer.jsp
Volunteering can take many forms including:
-Vocational training
-Alcoholics Anonymous
-Narcotics Anonymous
-Tutoring
-Leisure-time activities
-Spiritual counseling
-Religious services
-Marriage and family issues
-Preparing/participating in mock job fairs
Additionally, you can donate to help those in prison. Book donations are especially popular and appreciated:
https://prisonbookprogram.org/donate-books/
Please, contact your local prison to find out more and what they specifically are interested in.
https://www.usa.gov/prisons
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] 1cvmask|5 years ago|reply
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1998/12/the-pri...
[+] [-] twiddling|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] auslegung|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TeeMassive|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vxNsr|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] internetslave|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ggm|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Koshkin|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dang|5 years ago|reply
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
[+] [-] Ensorceled|5 years ago|reply
Canada has less than 1/6th the US incarceration rate and Mexico just over 1/5th.
Interesting to keep this in mind while reading the rest of these comments.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_United_States_in...
[+] [-] modularform123|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] williesleg|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] mentatz|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] k33n|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]