Sunday, May 20, 2007

May 20

Two incidents or one? Either way Wednesday Last week was extra-bad at Jessup: a basketball-court shanking and a prisoner fight that injured six correctional officers.

Word: Bernard Kerik, former NYC commissioner, on the Curran Baltimore curfew proposal: "I really don't know what happened between the time that Eddie Norris was commissioner and what's happening today ... take it back to crime-fighting mechanisms and let [police] do their job."

NYker: in spite of what's on CSI, hair and fiber analysis is so inaccurate as to be worse-than-useless.

Your man Rodericks: "O'Malley's veto a big setback to drug reform"

Atlanta lawyer Manny Arora defended Ray Ray, able to communicate on athlete's level, "whatever it is."
And congrats to all the new law school grads-- now get to work!

7 comments:

burgersub said...

"What started as a story on a basketball-court shanking in Jessup turns out to be much more: a riot that injured six correctional officers."

when i read these articles, it seems these were two separate incidents on different days in different facilites.

John Galt said...

from the Kerik interview:

[Baltimore needs to] ".. apply the right staffing mechanism to get police in place to do something about" [the crime, once identified.]


Hire more cops. Someone said that once or twice, I think.

burgersub said...

no, see they didn't both happen wednesday. the stabbing was tuesday in the pre-release unit and then the riot was wednesday at the patuxent institution.

Maurice Bradbury said...

Thanks Burg. I can always trust your eagle eye!

burgersub said...

glad you appreciate it! :)

sometimes i get scared that i come off as pedantic.

John Galt said...

Dan Rodricks, please tell readers the truth:

Most Baltimore offenders are in prison on drug charges. But the highest charged offense is generally neither drug possession nor distribution. The drug-related charges are just what they pled down to.

Drug offenders in Baltimore City are not primarily really nice guys who can't catch a break. Dealing is a nasty business whose goal is to broaden the abuser population.

Those who want to get innocent and tragic addicts off the stuff cannot defend dealers, large or small. Or afro-american. That adjective really has no role in this discussion, either from the enforcement or treatment perspectives, other than to obscure the real issue.

This parole-enabling bill was designed to make it easier for hoodlums to sell addictive drugs and get away with it. It was pro-crime.

Please don't wrap it in a flag of helping the little guy. It's about little offenders. We call them that because we told them they were not allowed to engage in that enterprise. In particular, the Legislature told them so. It's called a law.

I support drug treatment for users who are psychologically ready to get off the stuff. I support fiscal support for same. But most incarcerated offenders aren't ready to get off. Having been caught, they just want to ease their burden until they can get released and re-abuse. I don't intend to assist them much in that ambition.

Thank you for exhibiting more common sense than Del. Anderson, Gov. O'Malley.

Maurice Bradbury said...

Burg, you're also welcome to go in and edit, too, if you see something really effed up.