18-year-old Gary Knight of the Pasadena Denver Lanes Bloods got 17 years in the federal pen for drug dealing and carjacking, his pal Antonio White got 22 years for racketeering, in addition to the 40 years for handgun possession and 2nd-degree murder he got from the city. Sadly, neither press release tells us what their gang nicknames were.
And 10 federal years for hair-ron for Adrian Aulton. Aulton was apparently a co-conspirator of "Jr" and 'Turkey," who were implicated in the 2007 torture and murder of Sintia Mesa.
31 comments:
Don't run out of gas on Greenmount!
And the
Baltimore Messenger indicates how entry through an unlocked door just might be related to the breaking of the upstairs window to get inside in order to unlock said unlocked door.
Kinda adds a whole new meaning to the definition unlocked.
dang.
In other news, Frank Conaway wants to oversee the jury pool, crossing swords with Marcella Holland, who can't find a use for another judge, despite her overfull criminal docket.
No wonder the Circuit Court doesn't work so good.
And no wonder half of the criminal cases in Baltimore City are nol prossed.
Now that Conaway testifies how many dead people are in the jury pool, I'm starting to understand some of the verdicts.
Antonio White a/k/a Fat Tony
Gary Knight a/k/a Bloody Rush
"Bloody Rush"? What kind of snappy nickname is that supposed to be? Sounds like what happens when you take out a Tampax. No wonder it wasn't in the press release, even RJR is embarrassed for them.
Caught this act tonight at the Pratt.
Came away with some interesting information from the authors. I can't confirm or deny what they say, but these ideas are worth mentioning. I guess one would have to spend 30 clams for the books to get the foot notes.
1) The majority of African Americans locked up on nonviolent drug offenses are for simple possession of marijuana.
2) African American men spend more time and effort trying to stay in touch with their kids after they have separated from their baby momma than other races.
3) The war on drugs was not started to combat crack cocaine but was used as an effective political ploy by Ronald Reagan to separate southern whites from the democratic party and turn them into republicans. The "war on drugs" had black males as its intended target, which were the basis of fear of whites at the time.
4) When a state releases nonviolent offenders crime decreases.
Here http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/11/legal_scholar_michelle_alexander_on_the she states that 4 out of 5 drug arrests are for simple possession, a fact that I would not find abnormal at all. Furthermore, I believe that this will excite the passions of the board regulars, but through plea bargaining a lot of CDS Possession With The Intent To Distribute become mere CDS Possessions. I would not speculate that it is 4 of 5 persons who are currently incarcerated however.
Finally, I think the lack of fine lines employed in determining what constitutes possession with intent is a major problem. The other day I saw a detective testify that 12 E pills in a house was the intent to distribute. I would personally think that's just a couple of weeks of hard partying.
I may have forgotten one more point that was made. That nonviolent offenders who are incarcerated often return to the system as violent offenders. So prison becomes an incubator of violent offenders.
As California and New York release nonviolent offenders, not due to any type of logic but budget constraints, we will soon have the data to prove whether it is smart government to incarcerate everyone with a bag of pot in their pocket.
#2 is a bit odd
I wish they'd stop pretending that crime is ok as long as it's "nonviolent." When someone "nonviolently" burglarizes your home while you're at work it still sucks, and the people who do it still deserve stiff prison sentences. Not to mention the fact that democracynow is a laughably biased source.
MJB, those were words right out of Michelle Alexander's mouth. She may be right for all I know.
Michelle Alexander isn't exactly a completely honest or unbiased source either. I mean I agree with her about the "War on Drugs," but her whining about racism makes me think she's full of shit.
BTW, I don't say this often but kudos to Bill O'Reilly.
A few thoughts:
I agree with Saller; plea bargaining makes 'simple drug possesion' convictions less than indicative of the conduct of the offender. I'd be better persuaded if 4 of 5 inmates were charged ONLY with simple possession.
On #2, I'm not sure what data she's using, but I could certainly see a higher incidence of efforts at paternal rights. They are often a reaction to the babymomma's efforts to collect support payments.
It's also true that the whole babymomma thing is a bit more natural in the black community. That is, perhaps white/latino fathers who have babymommas are likely in the irresponsible fringe of the white/latino communities, and therefore don't pursue parental rights.
On #3, check your history. The Dixiecrats were Republican by the time Nixon came into office. Reagan had nothing to do with it. And yes, the principal offenders in the War on Drugs are young, black, and male. What of it? That's who they are.
Do nonviolent offenders become more criminal? Yes, if the penal is unconvincing. I'd ratchet up the discomfort.
As for crime going DOWN because a certain category of offender is released from prison.... I don't think so.
Can you tell me what that evidence was? I'll research it.
On #3, what Alexander says is not that the war on drugs was a ploy. What she observes, is that the war on drugs under Reagan was precipitated by the crack epidemic, which was threatening to the white middle class. And, yes, the offenders were largely young, black males. So, the RNC picked up votes and YBM's went to prison.
So what? Was crack illegal? Did the court find them in possesion?
Case closed.
Now, if you want to argue that ani-crack laws were biases because most crack use at the time was in the black community, well,.. that's another question.
If cattle rustling is more prevalent among (white) cowboys, does that make the law against it racist?
Galt:
Michelle Alexander specifically mentioned the the war on drugs was started by Ronald Reagan well before the crack epidemic. Crack became a factor AFTER Reagan initiated his war on drugs.
As for Paul Butler, his angle is that you should educate & rehabilitate, rather than incarcerate.
And, he encourages offenders to employ the practice of jury nullification as a means of gumming up the courts. That's his version of a sit-in.
Well, educate & rehabilitate are resource-intensive and constitute income transfers, not public services. We cannot afford that. Further, why would I be more willing to fund the ill-behaved than the well-behaved. Nonsense.
Cham will remind me that housing prisoners is expensive. My reply: then shoot 'em.
I'd like to see some data regarding how law enforcement works with each type of race. It would be nice to see and apples apples study on the result of how individuals are treated when arrested for identical crimes. Let's say a YWM is searched and found to have a small bag of pot in his pocket in Howard County, and you compare that with a YBM is searched and found to have the same size bag of pot in Baltimore City. What is the punishment for each? How big a sample size can we get and can we draw some firm conclusions with a good, well-executed study on this? Does race, social and economic status play a mitigating factor in nonviolent drug-related offenses?
Reagan's first term began January 1981.
Crack exploded in American inner cities before 1980 because an oversupply of base in the Carribean depressed prices to unheard of levels.
She knows law, not crime.
The crack epidemic exploded in the mid to late 80s.
I think the war on drugs is actually getting a bit boring. Same shit different day. Lamont, Tavon, Travon, Davon and Tayvon are all bent over the ground unit getting their pockets searched.
I think we ought to spice it up a bit. Those same cops should go into the exurbs and start searching the medicine cabinets of SAHMs and pulling out all those illegally obtained painkillers and the "shared" Xanax that belong to Jennifer, Jessica, Ashleigh and Amber. First, of course, you would have to explain to the SAHMs that they've committed drug offense because many of them don't see it that way. ;)
Not a mitigating factor. That's normative.
The question to ask is: does race or economic status have statistically explanatory power?
Yes, but actually using federal sentencing data, we find that gender and educational status have rather higher effects on sentencing than race. That is, adjusting for the facts of the case, being male will oversentence you more than being black and being a graduate will undersentence you.
One of the biggest biases is actually that cocaine sentencing is tougher than other drugs, such as pot. There are rigid federal guidelines. So, those who use coke are in some sense 'oversentenced'.
Selling $1,000 of pot will get you very different treatment from selling $1,000 of coke. That is factual.
But also, that is the law. No one ever said all laws would be behaviorally consistent. Texting in the car is different from texting in a boat or on a bicycle.
Cham, crack was here by 1980. Quite definitely.
Oh, I know it wasn't on The Wire or maybe it was Hill Street Blues at the time. But cops were certainly in the know, even if you weren't.
As for Ashleigh and Chelsea, I'm not very threatened by their Vicodin habits. You're looking for some kind of parity here. I'm not.
I deal with heroin dealers all night long. They are a big problem. They are criminals with guns. Their gang associates rob citizens on the street and break into homes and businesses.
They must be stopped, BAMN.
I'm not too worried about Ashleigh.
I should clarify my statement:
by oversentence, I meant a higher likelihood of incarceration, not length of stay or sentence.
I'm not talking about drug dealers, I'm talking about people that are walking around with drugs in their pockets, or purses or medicine cabinets or whatever, drugs for personal use.
I really don't care about Tavon with his small bag of pot or Chelsea, but the law has to be consistent for all types of drugs, whether they come in pill form or dried leaves. You can't let one race off the hook and incarcerate another for the same offense.
Oh, and Chelsea may very well be a drug dealer. She's busy splitting her legally obtained drugs in 2 and offering half of a pill to her friend, Amber, in exchange for 4 hours of babysitting. That's dealing.
Cham:
Get back to me when suburban Xanax addicts start holding people up at gun point & burglarizing houses to feed their addiction. Until then they are NOT the equivalent of crack addicts and junkies.
Actually there is sort of a state database for sentencing. It's at the Maryland State Commision on Sentencing Policy.
But you have to understand the data.
It only compares offenses for which convictions were obtained, and explicitly excludes nol prossed charges.
The statistical problem is that if you nol pros a higher charge in exchange for a plea to a longer term on a lower charge, that sentence will be compared with the sentencing guideline on the LOWER charge, not the one dropped.
So,... it makes Baltimore City actually look deceptively tough on crime, because our criminal courts nol pros half of all cases. (And that's after eliminating most of the dubious arrests which were encouraged under O'Malley)
The Circuit Court in Baltimore City is actually more compliant with the (voluntary) guidelines than any other jurisdiction in the state. But that's only because maybe 1/2% of cases are tried before a jury, obligating the SA to give away the store in plea bargaining.
You'd think that would bias your sentencing downward, but not if it more significantly biases downward the expected value of the guideline for the charges you pled down to.
Actually there is sort of a state database for sentencing. It's at the Maryland State Commision on Sentencing Policy.
But you have to understand the data.
It only compares offenses for which convictions were obtained, and explicitly excludes nol prossed charges.
The statistical problem is that if you nol pros a higher charge in exchange for a plea to a longer term on a lower charge, that sentence will be compared with the sentencing guideline on the LOWER charge, not the one dropped.
So,... it makes Baltimore City actually look deceptively tough on crime, because our criminal courts nol pros half of all cases. (And that's after eliminating most of the dubious arrests which were encouraged under O'Malley)
The Circuit Court in Baltimore City is actually more compliant with the (voluntary) guidelines than any other jurisdiction in the state. But that's only because maybe 1/2% of cases are tried before a jury, obligating the SA to give away the store in plea bargaining.
You'd think that would bias your sentencing downward, but not if it more significantly biases downward the expected value of the guideline for the charges you pled down to.
The painkiller queens are doing all sorts of interesting stuff to fuel their addictions. I know of a few good stories.
Well, then convict them on those charges.
Post a Comment