Dallas PD cleaning house, officers grumbling

Nine officers have been fired so far and more terminations are expected this week as part of Dallas Police Chief David Kunkle's spring cleaning efforts aimed at improving the department's image. (Dallasblog and CrimProf blog have details. Here is the Dallas News coverage.) Unfair Park says the rank and file are grumbling, quoting a website called UndergroundCop.com where Dallas cops allegedly badmouthed another officer who was a target of misconduct in anonymous postings.

Look for this episode to turn nasty quickly when the police association responds, I suspect, in a very public donnybrook. Chiefs and Sheriffs rarely risk the wrath of their officers' unions by engaging in serial terminations like this, no matter how justified. Anytime a department fires an officer, much less several of them, it risks substantial political backlash. In El Paso, for example, the sheriff deputies' association right now is running attack ads on the radio criticizing the local sheriff for firing two officers, South Texas Chisme reports.

Such bullying media tactics, discouragingly, work more often than you'd expect - it'll be interesting to see how the Dallas Police Officers Association responds, and how well Chief Kunkle sticks to his guns.

Counties explore solutions for mentally ill in Texas jails

Everywhere in Texas county jails find themselves awash with mentally ill offenders. Jailers aren't social workers. Their facilities aren't equipped to handle the mentally ill and their guards aren't properly trained. Inmates who've had psychotic breaks might improve after being given their medication, but can't stay on the treatments without help once they're out in the free world again. Nobody seems to have a great answer, but between them Texas counties are testing quite a few different solutions. Several recent news item bear that out:

KHOU in Houston this week looked at the story of troubled suburban teen and wonders whether the mentally ill should be jailed or hospitalized?

In Dallas they're taking baby steps toward a third option - community based care. Parkland Hospital, Dallas' public hospital, will soon begin providing medication to jail inmates for several days after they leave the county's custody to give them a chance to see a doctor and maintain continuity taking their meds. (MH advocates say they should be give seven days worth of meds, which seems eminently reasonable compared to the costs of incarcerating them again after a breakdown.)

Retiring medical director of the Bexar County Jail, Dr. John Spark, lamented to the San Antonio Express News the one plan to address the problem he could never figure out how to implement - a special, statewide facility for mentally ill county jail inmates from all over Texas to resolve the space shortage at state mental hospitals (I've written about that ongoing crisis here, here, here, and here; legislative leaders recently ponied up a little money aimed at relieving the crisis, but not nearly enough.)

Meanwhile, as I'd written last week, Austin is creating a new public defender office for the mentally ill, while San Antonio has created a crisis care center where officers can take non-violent offenders who need medication and treatment more than jail.

Finding ways to handle these folks as patients instead of prisoners, preferably outside the jail, is a hot topic everywhere in the state. A lot of different solutions are being tried piecemeal, but in the big picture locals everywhere are struggling with dilemmas caused by statewide defunding of the mental health system. This problem requires a fundamental change in approach by local offiicials toward criminalizing mental illness. Slowly, of necessity, some counties do appear to be re-thinking the right approach. That's a start, but at the end of the day it will also require a legislative appropriation with a lot of zeroes behind it.

Texas Jail Inmate Locators Online

Publishing criminal records online isn't just for drunks or sex offenders anymore. In some places, now everybody who's arrested for anything gets in on the fun.

Websurfing this morning I came across this page on ancestorhunt.com, a genealogy site, listing county jail inmate locators on the web for all 50 states. (This is just for county jails; the Texas prison inmate locator, BTW, is permanently linked in Grits' sidebar.) Here are the ones they listed for Texas:

Texas County Jail Inmates and Arrest Logs

Arlington, TX Jail Inmate List

Baytown Crime Reports ; Who is in the Baytown Jail?

Bell County Jail Active Inmates List

Bexar County Jail Activity Report

Brazoria County Jail Records Search

Denton County, Texas Jail Records Search

Grayson County Jail Records Search

Gregg County Jail Records Search

Hardin County Jail Current Inmate Listing

Harris County Jail Inmate Search

Lamar County Jail Records Search

Lubbock County Online Jail Rosters

Montgomery County Jail Inmates Search

Parker County Jail Records Search

Smith County Jail Records Search

Texas Criminal History Database

Tom Green County Jail Records Search

Wise County Jail Inmates

Texas Arrest Warrants

Austin, TX Arrest Warrant Search Engine

Baytown Active Arrest Warrants List

Plano Outstanding Misdemeanor Warrants

Waco Arrest Warrants

Wise County Arrest Warrants Search

I can see arguments both ways for whether or not to put this information online. It's all public record, lots of different people have uses for the information, and newspapers report that stuff all the time. On the other hand, putting names of people online whose cases haven't been adjudicated seems potentially problematic. At the end of the day, though, if public records aren't available online it only leaves open the door for private businesses to provide that service for a fee - why make the public pay to access data they already paid to generate?

Just to try out the databases (and to check on the relatives), I ran the name Henson through several of them. It turns out I haven't been arrested, at least lately. But in Harris County two of the four names that came up in the inmate locator had no charges listed and had been shifted to the "inactive file." I'm not sure I see a reason for keeping their names in a public, online database.

UPDATE: See also Travis County's Jail Inmate Locator, Dallas' Current Inmate Listing, and the El Paso Sheriff's Inmate Log Search. Leave links to others in the comments if you know of them.

Lawmakers want to revive TX Criminal Justice Policy Council

Lawmakers want to reinstate the Texas Criminal Justice Policy Council, an agency line-item vetoed in 2003 by Governor Perry that generated statistical analysis available nowhere else on Texas' criminal justice system.

I hope he lets them; it should never have been abolished. Quotes from the Governor's office in the newspaper seemed awfully noncommittal. ("Plan to revive Criminal Justice Policy Council," Austin Statesman, June 7)

Led by the estimable Dr. Tony Fabelo, the 24 staff people at CJPC always knew much more than prison operators at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice about who was in Texas prisons, how they got there, why they left, what were the trends, etc.. (See this Texas Observer interview with Fabelo, and this recent item he wrote for the Texas Prosecutor.) The CJPC's decades of collective experience was replaced by four people at the Legislative Budget Board, an agency which for decades has told the Texas Legislature it could incarcerate as many people as it wanted and it would never affect the budget.

I'm sure they couldn't get Fabelo back - once burned twice shy. He's parlayed his experience working for the state into a healthy consulting business. But somebody needs to be playing that role. Texas' byzantine criminal justice system supervises one in twenty adults statewide and is too complex to operate without solid data. Lawmakers right now are basically flying blind.

National report on safety and abuse in prisons

A national report on prison conditions has been published focusing on four problem areas: "dangerous conditions of confinement — violence, poor health care, and inappropriate segregation — that can also endanger corrections officers and the public; the challenges facing labor and management; weak oversight of correctional facilities; and serious flaws in the available data about violence and abuse." See the website devoted to the report by the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America's Prisons.

The Austin Statesman and Doc Berman have details

Half of undocumented immigrants didn't enter illegally

Triple-layer fencing, web cams, national guard troops at the border - the list of draconian anti-immigrant proposals expands seemingly daily. But those plans ignore how undocumented immigrants really get here. Half of immigrants illegally residing in this country never swam the river, braved the desert or otherwise entered the country illegally - they came in as tourists and simply overstayed their visas. So how will fences, web cams and soldiers patroling out in the boondocks help that? Reported AP ("Millions of visa overstays overlooked," June 5):

Millions of illegal immigrants in the United States never jumped the U.S.-Mexico border where Congress wants to erect impenetrable walls and President Bush is sending National Guard troops to patrol. They never sneaked in at all.

The little-acknowledged reality is that nearly half the estimated 12 million undocumented foreigners in the United States entered on bona fide U.S. visas - and simply never left. Authorities call them "overstays" who have been largely overlooked in the vitriolic debate on immigration.

"The southwestern border gets all the attention, but it's staggering the number of people who come and overstay their visa," said Dean Boyd, a spokesman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Washington. "It's a very large-scale problem."

A study by the Washington-based Pew Hispanic Center last month indicated that 45 percent of the undocumented migrants in the United States overstayed legal visas.

Honestly, I'd have thought it'd be more. Certainly an additional, large percentage came through checkpoints without documentation - less than one half of one percent of truck traffic is searched crossing the border, so it'd be naive to think none of the other 99.5% are working with coyotes to smuggle immigrants. All the focus on militarizing border spaces between the checkpoints ignores how the majority of illegal immigrants enter the country, but that's where the money is going. In the context, don't look for new anti-immigrant programs to make a serious dent in illegal immigration - for the most part they only target the high-profile symbols, not the substance.

Grits' prediction: the need to approve legitimate personal and commercial travel will forever trump desires to keep out immigrants who want to come here. If walls and soldiers make it more difficult to trek through the desert, immigrants will still come legally and overstay their visas, or else arrive packed like sardines in the massive line of vehicles crossing the border every day. You can't shut that down without shutting down important parts of the economy - like the food supply.

IMO, trying to stop immigration flows is a fool's errand, anyway - more foolish, still, is trying to stop just half of it.

Texas homeland security chief hyping phony border threats

I've written before how politicians and law enforcement officials have been hyping unsubstantiated claims of terrorist-related border crossings along the Rio Grande, but never provide any proof. Well, somebody else has noticed the discrepancy. Reports Mariano Castillo in the San Antonio Express-News' "Beyond the Border" blog:

Last Friday, Texas Director of Homeland Security Steve McCraw told GOP convention delegates in San Antonio about an undocumented immigrant who was picked up in Texas with "links to a terrorist organization." No newspaper or other media had reported such an arrest of such significance.

One of our Austin reporters pressed McCraw on his comment, but he declined to elaborate, but noted that "links" could mean two or three degrees removed from a direct tie to a terrorist organization.

I asked W. Ralph Basham, who was sworn in as CBP commissioner on Monday, if he had knowledge of McCraw's remarks.

"I have not been briefed on this particular issue you bring up," Basham said.

To his knowledge, no terrorists have been captured along the southern border, Basham said.

"I am not aware of a direct nexus to terrorists or terrorist organizations," he said, adding, "If they have, I have not been briefed on it."

This is not the first time that local or state officials have touted the capture of terrorists who crossed illegally from Mexico, but to date they have all been debunked or unconfirmed by the FBI.

Zilch. Zero. Nada. Nothing. No documentation at all confirms hyped claims that Al Quaeda or other terrorist organizations are crossing the Mexican border. Why would they? The 9/11 hijackers all entered the country through airports. Like half of all illegal immigrants - they can just come here legally and overstay their visa - it's absurd to think an Al Quaeda operative would ever need to swim the river.

So when you hear Texas' homeland security director, Governor Perry and others mentioning terrorism and the Mexican border in the same breath, remember that such claims "have all been debunked or unconfirmed by the FBI." Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but the border security mavens seem to think they're entitled to their own facts.

Ex-Prosecutor: 'Probation is the only safety valve keeping the criminal justice system afloat'

In the ongoing comments to this Grits post on why defendants would choose jailtime over probation, an ex-prosecutor, Shannon E., suggests that focusing on individual cases risks missing the "forest" for the "trees." In the big picture, he said:

the reality is that probation is the only safety valve keeping the criminal justice system afloat, since there aren't enough courts, judges, or lawyers to try everything. And if all those cases were tried, defendants would likely get stiffer sentences than they can get through plea bargaining -- that's why it's called a "bargain"!

But I'm interested to hear solutions here -- so feel free to share any you might have.

That's a fascinating statement to me for a couple of reasons. For starters, it's kind of cute, I think, to fantasize about what would happen "if all those cases were tried." Our friend just admitted, after all, and it's quite true, that "there aren't enough courts, judges or lawyers to try everything." So that's the Big Bluff: If defendants actually all excercised their constitutional right to trial, the system would probably collapse in a month or so.

So why don't they? People facing criminal charges suffer from what's basically an economic dilemma - a "free rider" problem of massive proportions. It's in the interest of all defendants for all defendants to take their cases to trial. But in a situation where only a handful of cases see a jury and most defendants plea bargain, the risk to an individual defendant for a much higher sentence is significant. The decision to go to trial often appears too costly for any individual defendant, but it would benefit all defendants significantly if that's what happened. (It's the same reason no individual consumer would ever build a power plant, but electric utilities can afford to provide power for everyone because of economies of scale - the cost is less spread out over many people.)

In reality, with prisons and jails completely full, it's simply an empty threat to say that EVERY defendant would receive a worse sentence if they all went to trial. Texas has about 151,000 prison beds, which are already full, and more than 450,000 active probationers. Could they really ALL have received prison without a plea? I don't think so.

Back to the original question of defendants choosing jail over probation, since solutions were requested, I'd be remiss not to offer some. I responded thusly in the comments:

Here's a few solutions for you, Shannon, maybe you've heard some of them (or rather, opposed some of them) before? ;-) Shorten probation lengths (at 10 years our are highest in the country). Aggressively use early release provisions to give probationers ways to earn their way off probation through good behavior. Disallow probation revocations for at least the first 2-3 dirty UAs - provide treatment and lesser sanctions for such people. Disallow revocations for other technical violations and instead install a system of intermediate sanctions.

In short, treat probationers like humans who can be rehabilitated instead of bank accounts from which probation departments can squeeze money for a decade, and make POs SUPERVISE them instead of just shuffling paper and looking for excuses to revoke them. By reducing the total number on probation (through shortening lengths and use of early release), POs would actually have more time to do that supervision. Plus, if the system were designed to functionally supervise folks in the community, more people would have a reasonable expectation they could complete probation and fewer would choose jail

Or would that make too much sense?

Oh and thanks, Shannon, for livening things up around here a bit, and to Kelly, Mike and others for worthy contributions following that post and also this followup. I'm always happy to see substantive debate in Grits' comments.

Conservative think tank gives solutions for jail overcrowding

When you focus on finding solutions instead of exacerbating your enemies' problems, often conservative answers sound a lot like liberal ones - especially where, as so often happens on criminal justice questions, impending crises require that pragmatism trump ideology. Marc Levin of the Texas Public Policy Foundation suggests three ways to relieve overincarceration pressures at the Harris County jail in the Houston Chronicle ("Reducing crowding in jail on the cheap," June 4), that will sound strikingly familiar to Grits readers:

• Divert drug offenders from county jail to treatment,
• Fewer probation revocations through use of drug courts, and
• Allow low-risk, indigent defendants to be released pre-trial on personal bond

Levin's view agrees with that of Tyler district judge Cynthia Kent and a host of other criminal justice professionals when he argues that "county jail populations must be scrutinized to determine which offenders can be diverted into less expensive and more rehabilitative settings without threatening public safety. "

Add this op-ed to Levin's recent work advocating for a shift to "restorative justice" principles, expanding drug courts, strengthening the probation system, reversing "overcriminalization," and reducing penalties for low-level drug crimes, and the Texas Public Policy Foundation is articulating a compehensive approach to resolving the overincarceration crisis in Texas criminal justice system.

Levin and TPPF have announced a luncheon and public policy primer titled "Breaking the Addiction" in Austin next week - CrimProf blog has the details. Sign up to attend if you want to learn more. A lot of folks with pre-conceptions about TPPF because of their aggressive advocacy of school vouchers or their association with GOP super-donor Dr. Jim Leininger will need to re-think their views when it comes to finding criminal justice solutions. Levin's earning a reputation for good work on this topic. I like a lot of what he has to say.

Elmo don't snitch

"You have one last chance," demanded the Count, "Are you ready to cooperate?" "Elmo says no," declared Elmo. "Two, two last chances," responded the Count.

Elmo is no snitch. Check out the story of jackbooted thugs coercing this poor muppet in "C is for Cookie," depicting a "futuristic world in which consumption of cookies is controlled by the government."

That's a familiar premise.

Via Ernie's 3-D Pancackes

Why choose jail? Part II

More on why criminal defendants might choose jail over probation from the newly resuscitated blog by a Dallas public defender, The Wretched of the Earth. I was grateful to find the comments following an earler Grits post on the subject enlivened considerably by the participation of a former prosecutor, so check those out too if you're interested. The ex-prosecutor provocatively declared "don't claim probation is too onerous for 'average people' -- if defendants were average, they wouldn't be defendants in the first place." It seems to me it takes a lot of chutzpah to say that in a state where one in twenty adults at any one time is under control of the criminal justice bureaucracy - I've seen a lot of "average" folks caught up in the system over the years.

But what do you think? Under what conditions would YOU choose jail over probation? And are criminal defendants "average people," or some other kind?

Good idea: New Austin public defender office will represent mentally ill

In November, Travis County (Austin) will open the first public defender office in the country specifically aimed at guiding people with mental health problems through the criminal justice system. The Austin Statesman's Claire Osborn reported ("New office will give free legal help to the mentally ill," May 27) that:

The county received a $500,000, four-year grant ... to establish the Mental Health Public Defender Office. The grant, which becomes available Oct. 1, came from the state Task Force on Indigent Defense, a group created by the Legislature.

The office will include a chief public defender, a staff attorney, two social workers, two case workers and two administrators. The office will handle about 10 Class A and Class B misdemeanor cases per week, or about 500 per year, said Kimberly Pierce, the manager for criminal justice planning in Travis County. Typical misdemeanor cases include drunken driving, assault and shoplifting charges, she said.

Joe Crews of Texas Appleseed, a nonprofit group that advocates for indidgent defendants' right to counsel, wrote an op-ed in the Statesman following up on the announcement, calling it "a bold and pioneering step and one that needs to be replicated across Texas, where jails house more than five times as many people with mental illness as do our psychiatric hospitals."

Well sure, because as I've written before the mental hospitals are completely full. That's part of what's happening here. Travis County hopes to use specialized public defenders to manage an unfunded mandate from the state - when the mental hospitals are full, counties have to handle indigent defendants with mental illness on their own resources and initiative. Travis County is just stepping up to the plate. They've chosen to make sure specialized attorneys advocate for the legal rights of indigent, mentally ill defendants. I think that's a smart approach, for a lot of reasons.

In addition to representing individual defendants, Crews hopes the new PD's office will become an "institutional voice for defendants with mental illness — bringing together state and local stakeholders to find and develop long-term, cost-effective, community-based options to jailing persons with mental illness." That'd be a bonus. I'd be happy if these folks just got good lawyers and access to existing mental health services.

As I've mentioned previously, in San Antonio they're trying a different approach, a drop off center where officers can take mentally ill defendants who might be causing trouble but who need medication and treatment more than jail. Reported the SA Express News ("Crisis care center aids cops, detainees," 12-9-05):

An estimated 15 percent of inmates in the Bexar County Jail have a persistent mental illness, said Sheriff Ralph Lopez.

"A jail is not a place for a person suffering from a mental health episode," he said. "This should speed up the process of getting people help and keeping them from going to jail unnecessarily."

The new center should save city and county officials money, too, Evans said. The San Antonio Police Department had been spending about $600,000 annually on overtime and additional shifts for officers forced to wait in crowded emergency rooms with people needing treatment.

I hope both these programs are implemented in ways that generate metrics for measuring success - like the number of people diverted from jail, number of criminal commitments processed or averted, etc.. My sense is both these programs will save counties a lot of money in the near term, so documenting how much would make it easier for other counties to justify following suit.

Kudos to the Travis and Bexar Commissioners Courts on these innovative approaches, and to the Task Force on Indigent Defense for financing Travis County's new innovation.

(Thanks to Tricia and the Stand Down blog for pointing out the Travis PD story.)

Good intentions lead to bad law: Residency restrictions boost number of unsupervised, homeless sex offenders

Parole offices in several Texas cities may need to invest in some in-office bunks if California's experience shows what's ahead. New local laws restricting where sex offenders can live have left some parolees literally stranded with no place to sleep, apparently, but their parole officer's cubicle.

CrimProf blog reports that some CA county officials must house registerd sex offenders in local parole offices because of so many restrictions on where they can live. Meanwhile, in Texas, municipalities are establishing similar residency restrictions, inviting the same problems facing California - too many offenders with nowhere to go. Reported the Dallas Morning News ("Critics question laws on offenders," June 2):

The stricter ordinances could cause sex offenders to go underground and avoid registering, some say, making it more difficult for cities to track the offenders.

"People are going to live someplace," said Ruth Epstein, who monitors sex legislation for the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas. "If they can't live someplace legally, they'll live illegally.

"The biggest danger to our youth is that they will not be protected because the predators are around, but you can't find them," Ms. Epstein said.

State law prohibits certain sex offenders on probation or parole from living within 1,000 feet of schools and other places where children gather.

Cities are expanding that law to cover offenders who are no longer being supervised.

The broader ordinances essentially prohibit some offenders from living in about three-quarters of Carrollton and about half of Arlington.

Here's a great example of tuff-on-crime overkill leading to unintended consequences that are worse than those they're designed to prevent - these laws make it LESS likely sex offenders will abide by reporting restrictions, reducing whatever positive impact registration requirements might have. Urban residency restrictions might penalize rural communities more, said one expert, moving sex offenders to smaller communities that don't have a large enough police force to provide adequate protection. Reported the News:

About 15 states restrict where sex offenders can live, said Scott Matson, research associate for the Center for Sex Offender Management, a Maryland nonprofit group funded by the U.S. Justice Department.

Although his group doesn't take a position on the laws, Mr. Matson said some organizations have raised concerns about legislation that pushes offenders to rural parts of states, where there are smaller police forces to monitor offenders and less available treatment.

"While the overall intent is a good one, there are repercussions of doing such a thing," he said.

Ms. Epstein said that as cities pass tougher restrictions, sex offenders will be less likely to have contact with their family members and places that can help in their rehabilitation.

State Sen. Florence Shapiro said any unintended consequences should be handled by passing more laws with higher criminal penalties for failing to comply with sex offender reporting. But that's not going to work - if offenders literally have nowhere to sleep but the floor of the parole office, the law has placed them in an untenable circumstance. To punish them more because the Legislature passed a silly, unworkable law just isn't right. And it's unrealistic. The state can't enforce restrictions on sex offenders already in place, so the only offenders affected will be the ones who choose to comply, i.e., the ones who are trying to change their lives and behave, anyway. Others will simply abscond, and they're the ones officials should worry about.

These new laws virtually guarantee more offenders will quit registering so they can find a place to live. Will that make anyone safer?

Once again, this is an instance where good intentions matter less when writing laws than good design.

Understanding Prisoners

"When I was in prison," Christ asked, "did you visit me?" Central Dallas Ministries chief Larry James can answer "Yes." Read his blog post from Urban Daily titled "Understanding Prisoners," including a moving letter from an inmate describing his struggle with addiction that led to an aggravated robbery conviction. Writes James:

I'm coming to the conclusion that a significant portion of our current prison population should be cared for in much less expensive environments that offer the promise of much more positive outcomes. I have a number of reasons for saying this--the experience of a number of states who seem committed to changing the system for non-violent offenders, the amazing strength of the "prison lobby" in this country, the terrible recidivism rates for ex-incarcerated persons, and personal experience with inmates and former inmates.

Why choose jail?

Blonde Justice has an interesting post discussing why a rational criminal defendant might choose short-term incarceration in the county jail rather than a probation sentence. It made me think of the Grits commenter who, reacting to this item, cited probation officers suggesting that potential probationers routinely making such choices in Harris County contributed to jail overcrowding. I've heard similar comments before, that a large number of misdemeanants in Houston (I'm sure it's true for a certain percentage everywhere) would rather sit out their time in jail than report to a probation officer and meet various court imposed requirements.

I've never seen statistical documentation showing that such defendant decisions account for a signficant portion of Harris County jail overcrowding. But if that's true it means the probation system is broken and not fulfilling its function, that the requirements are simply too onerous for average people to complete them. Another instance of programs failing not because they're not well intended, but because they're not well designed. Via Doc Berman.

Why good governance is like good furniture design

A friend returned from New York City and recounted visiting the Guggenheim museum with its famous spriral exhibit room - he'd wanted to go to the Cooper-Hewitt National Design Museum up the street (on the eastern edge of Central Park along museum row), he declared, but didn't have time. When I'm in NYC we always flip those priorities - if one must pick between those two, I find the design museum on any given day more fun, interesting and useful. (Obviously, much depends on what's being exhibited at each.)

While undertaking some overdue spring cleaning of my home office over the long weekend, I ran across a terrific quote I'd excised from a Cooper-Hewitt exhibit of a furniture designer named Richard Tuttle, whose work was on display there when Kathy and I last visited in 2004. (That also tells you how long its been since my office was thoroughly cleaned). Tuttle boldly declared that:

"A great designer has to know everything (language, history, ethnography, anthropology, psychology, biology, anatomy, etc.), while an artist doesn't have to know anything. This polarity ... is the starting point. But ironically, to really appreciate design, it is not about knowledge, but about the experience of living with the work; you don't have to know anything, and you get its 'information' almost through osmosis. Whereas to appreciate a good artwork, you have to bring and apply absolutely everything you know. Why is that?

Why indeed? It strikes me that good governance is a lot like good furniture design - the best government is that which we comfortably live with because of its ease and utility, the government that people don't notice but rely upon. When government becomes intrusive, uncomfortable and ugly, when it causes problems instead of creates solutions, when it becomes a frequent topic of conversation for average people instead of one of the silent underpinnings of everyday life, it's more frequently because of klunky, ill-fitted design than overtly ill intent.

That's why evil can so often appear "banal" - it's frequently disguised as gracelessness.

I'm not completely sure how the quotes connect, but Tuttle's statement has always reminded me of a famed comment by the great Texas Congressman Sam Rayburn, who served as speaker of both the Texas and US House: "Any fool can tear down a house," Rayburn declared, "but it takes a carpenter to build one."

An artist doesn't have to know anything ... but a designer has to know everything.

Governor refers Linebacker civil rights complaints to US Attorney

Governor Rick Perry will forward civil rights complaints about the El Paso Sheriff unlawfully engaging in immigration enforcement to Western District US Attorney Johnny Sutton, according to a letter he sent to Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa, the president of the Texas Senate Hispanic Caucus. Hinojosa announced Perry's decision to refer the case in a press release today. (Not yet online, see these past Grits items on the topic.)

"I am concerned both by recent immigration raids conducted by Sheriff Leo Samaniego in El Paso County and by confirmed reports that the sheriff is setting up roadblocks and asking vehicle occupants for driver's licenses, car insurance information and social security cards," Senator Juan Hinojosa wrote in a letter to Perry last week. " These raids and roadblocks are questionable in legality, and may give rise to civil rights lawsuits against Texas …I am asking you to develop a policy regarding the use of funds received under your border initiative -- Operation Linebacker."

No word on whether the Governor will create such a new policy. He needs to. Sounds like he's passing the buck on the civil rights complaint.

What are you reading this summer?

Doc Berman notes that Memorial Day is the unofficial beginning of summer and so solicits summer reading suggestions on sentencing topics. That's a little too geeky even for me, but I thought I'd share a couple of books on my summer reading list and ask readers - both the regulars and also folks who haven't commented before - what you're reading this summer. It doesn't have to be on criminal justice topics, though that's good, too. I need some suggestions to take on vacation for several weeks to Mexico in July. For now, though, here's what's on my plate:

• Suzan-Lori Parks, Getting Mother's Body (I wrote about seeing Parks speak here and have since purchased her new novel)
• Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche, The Tibetan Yogas of Dream and Sleep

I'm already into the second book and Parks' novel looks pretty short - like it might get me to the airport in Mexico City, but little farther. If I do any criminal justice reading, it might start with this book first suggested by a Grits commenter, which has been sitting on my shelf daring me to read it now for several months:

• Elizabeth Loftus, Eyewitness Testimony

What are you reading? Or, what do you plan to read on vacation this summer?

Hearne task force featured in Court TV's upcoming 'Freedom Files'

The ACLU's litigation against a now-defunct drug task force in Hearne, Texas will be featured in a July 15 episode of Court TV's The ACLU Freedom Files. If you're on a computer with speakers, a preview is here. (Long-time readers will recall Grits at one point was quoted by the defendants, i.e., lawyers representing the drug task force in that case, in one of their briefs, but the federal judge ruled with ACLU on all those points.) The case was ultimately settled out of court.

Naturally for the necessary disclaimer, I work on drug war issues for ACLU of Texas. Mi jefe grande, Will Harrell, ACLU of Texas Executive Director, is quoted on the trailer, and I understand Graham Boyd, whose ACLU Drug Law Reform Project based in Santa Cruz, CA litigated the Hearne case, was also interviewed. I've seen Boyd speak compellingly about that case, in particular the plight of the snitch, Derrick Megress, who did bad things by falsely accusing innocent people but who Graham also really had a lot of sympathy for - Megress himself faced jail time, was mentally and educationally challenged, addicted, and really didn't have a choice or a chance. He was just another piece of meat ground up into the system. (See a 20-minute documentary webcast on the Hearne episode here.)

Watch the July 15 episode on Court TV. I'll post a reminder closer to it and a link to the webcast when it's up. Thanks to Anjuli for mentioning it.

Up to 500 still without bunks at Harris County Jail

Okay, so now maybe a few hundred inmates are sleeping on the jail floor in Houston. I guess that's better than nearly 2,000 last summer, but ...

Though Harris County Sheriff Tommy Thomas told the media the problem was resolved, Chief Deputy Mike Smith told the Texas Commission on Jail Standards at their May 4 meeting that "currently the average number of inmates without bunks is between 350 and 500 at any given time," according to the minutes (pdf) posted last week on their website.

After Deputy Smith's presentation, the Commission voted to require the Harris Jail to transfer or otherwise find alternative accomodations for 500 prisoners, but Sheriff Thomas appealed the ruling, buying himself a 90 day window. Harris county commissioners and judges will have to assist the sheriff to make any progress, probably in the face of a defiant District Attorney, so I'll bet there's a lot of behind the scenes politicking going on right now about sentencing practices and the jail, especially for low-level drug users.

The situation will be helped a little by a new 300-bed drug treatment center openting up. Presently according to the Houston Chronicle, 170 men and 38 women are waiting in the Harris County jail for treatment beds to open up. (See Dale Lezon's article: "300-bed downtown facility is expected to ease pressure on the jail, speed help to the addicted," May 28.) But judges and the county commissioners court still need to get to work to find more effective solutions. Even if they achieve short-term compliance, that in no way implies they've found a long-term fix.

RELATED: See "What they're reading at the Harris County probation department," and "Grits' best practices to reduce county jail overcrowding."

TYC, juvie justice examined by TV news

What happens to kids in Texas' juvenile justice system? Bob Robuck of Austin's Channel 8 cable news had a nice five-part primer this week introducing viewers to the basics of juvie justice in the Lone Star state, from the local juvenile detention facility all the way through the process:

• Where it all begins: Austin's Gardner-Betts facility
• Inside Southwest Key: Austin caseworker program examined
• Orientation and Evaluation: Inside the Marlin intake center
• In the System: The reality of living under TYC's care
• Changing Lives: Some kids achieve rehab goals

Texas' juvie system has gotten a lot more respect since John Hubner's book came out last year praising the TYC unit in Giddings for its rehab programs aimed at violent youth, which have become a national model. They've also had some problems. Recently, Rep. Pena reported that TYC had asked the feds to evaluate their use of force policies in light of reported abuse incidents and complaints by guards. (See Elizabeth Pierson's great reporting on the topic from the McAllen Monitor.)

As you might expect from local TV news, Robuck doesn't get that deeply into it - he's got a different audience. But for average viewers who seldom think about the topic, he provides a good, big picture analysis of where the kids go and what happens to them. The whole series is worth reading (or watching, video feeds for each story are in the links), but here's a taste from Wednesday's piece, In the System:

"They're locking them up almost two years on the average. It's costing you $56,600 per year (per child), and 55 percent of them are back within a year," Southwest Key President Juan Sanchez said.

More than 60 percent of juvenile offenders in Travis County completed Southwest Key program in 2004. Depending on the child's needs the program can cost from $11,000 to $44,000. However, 48 percent of the juveniles who completed the program were re-referred or arrested as adults.

Another TYC cost is emotional turmoil. Kids here must face possible crime within the secure environment. Gangs do form and troublemakers cool their heels in a special lock-up.

"Temptation is easy in here for doing the wrong thing, like stealing and fights. It's hard. You've got to pretty much use your self-control skills and coping skills," TYC inmate Steven Howard said.

But there are those who resist the pressure and use their time in lock-up for positive change.

KLRU documents cold war between Austin police administrators and union

Maybe I've been involved in these local feuds for too long, but I yawned my way through KLRU's Austin Now program last night documenting the cold war between police administrators and the Austin Police Association.

The issue, as it's been for my entire adult life in this town, is whether, when and how to discipline officers for excessive force and misconduct. The union says no, never discipline - officers deserve complete discretion, even or perhaps especially when someone dies. The chief says, well, maybe they should be disciplined, sometimes, when misconduct becomes public and highly politicized. The public says, "Yes, discipline them every time they engage in misconduct, even when it hasn't become public - that way we won't have to make it political in the first place. That's the whole debate, and it's nearly the same players who were making the same arguments 5-6 years ago when Austin's police oversight system was created.

Former APD offiicer Carla Nickerson (she's now on Austin's oversight board) and civil rights attorney Jim Harrington did a good job articulating criticisms of the department. But the show wasn't very solutions-oriented. Police chief Stan Knee, who just resigned to go train cops in Afghanistan, came off as a man between a rock and a hard place. Police union lobbyist Mike Sheffield stridently declared any decision was justified when made in a "split second." City Manager Toby Futrell came off as defensive and just a little whacko. (Blink, sister!) If you just can't get your fill of petty squabbling and sometimes disingenuous posturing by insiders, cops, and various city bureaucrats, here's KLRU's page on the story and if you've got high-speed access, the full video feed.

I wish producers spent a little more time fact checking their interviewees' comments before airing, or gave voice to a more varied group instead of the same, tired insiders. (I thought the piece they did in 2004 was a little sharper.) Futrell in particular offered some oddly skewed statistics and comparisons to much bigger cities to make her case that Austin really didn't have a big problem. From the opening lines she framed the debate in a particularly ridiculous way. But she ignores the point: We've witnessed undeniable management failures when there HAVE been problems, plus Austin's so-called civilian oversight systems (our police monitor and review panel) are toothless, opaque, distrusted by the community, and ignored when they make recommendations.

Even when the chief finds that misconduct occurred, it's become difficult bordering on impossible to fire officers for misconduct under the current system - in the 70 or so Texas municipalities that have opted into the state civil service code, an arbitrator jointly chosen between the union and the city gets to decide, not the police chief. See a report in the Austin Statesman today on one of the most contentious, politicized arbitration hearings in recent memory - Julie Schroeder, whose termination after killing an unarmed youth named Daniel Rocha was featured in the show. The union is fighting to have her reinstated. This kind of publicity is rare - frequently arbitrators overturn the chief's decision with little fanfare. Arbitrators who want to the unions to agree to hire them again in the future don't choose to fire many officers.

Worse, the City has opted into a veil of secrecy under the state civil service code concealing records about police misconduct that are public in more than 2,000 other Texas law enforcement agencies. Not a word on that topic in the story, but it's really the key accountability reform needed - if the public can't know what's going on at APD, the department can't be held accountable.

More on Tyler's alternatives to jail overcrowding

Following up on this morning's post about Smith County's jail overcrowding crisis, I called Judge Cynthia Kent in Tyler to ask for more detail about her alternative proposal to building another jail. She graciously returned my call and forwarded a detailed press release explaining her plan to reduce jail overcrowding.

Judge Kent pointed out that with the exception of Tyler's Mayor and the police chief, the-still-evolving plan largely represents a consensus among local judges and the criminal justice community, not just her own ideas. Some supporters are skeptical, she said, but given the county's limited options are willing to try it - even the District Attorney attended a Tuesday press confernece announcing the proposals. Because of Judge Kent's widely respected 21 years on the bench, she probably enjoys the gravitas needed to endure these slings and arrows. It's good she's taking the lead.

If the proposal goes through Smith County would create some version of a drug court, she said, and Judge Kent would run it herself in the initial phases. She expects quick results. Because Smith County is spending so much on renting outside jail space, about $3 million annually, Judge Kent estimates the plan would pay for itself in 43 days. Here's the full text of the judge's detailed press release:

PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
DATE: May 23, 2006
RE: Jail Overcrowding in Smith County
CONTACT: Judge Cynthia Kent

On May 13, 2006, the voters of Smith County sent a loud and clear message that the two proposals for a new $75 million to $83 million dollar jail facility were unacceptable. This resounding defeat of the two suggested proposals placed on the ballot by a majority of the Commissioner’s Court have resulted in members of that same Court calling for a meeting to draft a new proposal to put on the November ballot for another jail facility.

The real message of the May 13th bond election is that the Smith County Commissioners must develop a Master Plan and a multi-step plan focusing on a real downtown solution. The Commissioners should not rush to put yet another multimillion dollar jail proposal on the ballot.

For the last two years, the majority of the Commissioners have looked at downtown only as an afterthought. The voters have clearly told the Commissioners that they want the jail to be located downtown. Therefore, the Commissioners should spend the time to really look at the needs of downtown. It is time to come up with an interim solution that will give the Commissioners the time needed to develop a real downtown solution.

The local judges, district attorney, defense attorneys and Mr. Joel Baker today are offering the framework of a plan to try and safely deal with the jail overcrowding with an incarceration alternative program. This interim solution will enable the Commissioners to immediately start gathering information to begin the process needed for the 2007 Smith County Commissioners’ Court to review and develop a plan to take to the voters next year. This incarceration alternative plan will enable the Commissioners to take the time to address the shortcomings of the last two jail bond proposals; that is, to look at the County’s long term needs and to develop a downtown solution that meets all of the County’s needs.

The landslide vote rejecting both of the proposals developed by the Smith County Commissioners’ Court calls for a new approach to the jail overcrowding situation, not just a rehash of the rejected proposals. Just juggling the numbers but not rethinking the approach to our facility needs is nothing but putting lipstick on a pig and will result in a new chorus of that old country western song, “What part of No do you not understand?”

The landslide vote rejecting both of the proposals developed by the Smith County Commissioners’ Court calls for a new approach to the jail overcrowding situation, not just a rehash of the rejected proposals. Just juggling the numbers but not rethinking the approach to our facility needs is nothing but putting lipstick on a pig and will result in a new chorus of that old country western song, “What part of No do you not understand?”An initial approach should include:

1. Conducting a careful dialogue with the members of the business community, public officials, courthouse and jail employees, concerned citizens in Smith County who can provide input as to the needs for a master plan for Smith County government facilities. This certainly can start with a hastily called meeting on May 31st but should definitely involve a number of working meetings over the next few months to carefully discuss and analyze the problems and all possible solutions to the facility problems of Smith County.
2. Honestly listen to the needs of the county officeholders and employees.
3. Assembling detailed information on how other counties in Texas and other states have dealt with jail overcrowding, courthouse and jail facility construction and design, and incarceration alternative programs.
4. Assembling the above- referenced information for the 2007 Commissioners’ Court to develop a cost effective master plan for court facilities and a phased- in approach to providing Smith County with the appropriate locations and designs for our governmental and criminal justice needs.
5. Developing a consensus plan.

It should be obvious that Smith County will need a temporary program to help alleviate the overcrowding crise’s in Smith County so that the new Commissioners’ Court in January 2007 can develop their plan for facilities needs, dialogue with the citizens of Smith County regarding their plan. The current Commissioners’ Court should not try to rush another bond proposal on the November ballot and saddle the newly elected commissioners’ court with another bond proposal failure. The new Commissioners’ Court should only put a new bond proposal on the ballot after a comprehensive and honest disclosure to the public about the real needs and actual costs for making Smith County a safer community.

The local judges, district attorney, and private attorneys are today proposing several ideas which could help ease the overcrowding crise’s, at least temporarily, and perhaps over a longer period of time, and still maintain the focus on public safety in the enforcement of our penal laws.

The programs include:

1. An Incarceration Alternative Program which includes a Community Supervision Day Reporting Center.

Nonviolent offenders who have committed a drug offense or property crime would be referred to the Day Reporting Center for supervision and rehabilitation services. They will report each morning at a designated time and remain until late in the afternoon or evening. They would spend their evenings at home, instead of in jail, but must be at the Day Reporting Center each day.

At the Day Reporting Center, these offenders would participate in:

A. Drug/alcohol rehabilitation counseling through a licensed professional counselor hired by Smith County Commissioners to work full time in that Day Reporting Center.
B. Receive job training and job counseling services onsite and be assigned for job interviews.
C. Receive G.E.D. training.
D. Receive life skills training onsite.
E. Be available and participate in job pool assignments and day labor jobs.
F. Receive supervision in taking medication for mental illness under a program to be developed and manned by the Andrews Center (which will be asked to participate in a program to expedite the diagnosis and treatment of mentally ill nonviolent offenders).
G. Participate in drug and alcohol screening tests.
H. Submit to an electronic monitoring program and drug patch program while assigned to the Day Reporting Center.

Smith County officials will develop working relationships with various employers in Smith County to encourage partnering with the Day Reporting Center as a resource for temporary workers as part of their community/industry involvement to help reduce jail overcrowding and encourage rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders into our community.

This program could initially utilize space in the basement of the courthouse, in the old commissioners’ court facilities, or in vacant space in the newly remodeled Ferguson Building County Annex until the viability of the program can be evaluated for more permanent quarters. The Commissioners would have to fund the employment of additional probation officers, a secretary, a security officer, a drug counselor and other supply and equipment needs for the Day Reporting Center. Mr. Gerald Hayden is currently working with Judge Kent on proposals for the personnel and funding needs of such a program.

Targeted defendants for this program initially would include persons in custody for refusing to pay their child support, theft by check cases, credit card and debit card abuse cases, thefts, forgery cases, other nonviolent offenses, and drug cases. It is possible that 200 currently incarcerated individuals may be eligible for consideration in this type of program.

2. The local judges, district attorney, and justices of the peace will be invited to a brainstorming meeting to discuss general issues involved with setting bail and the amounts which might be considered in nonviolent offenses, particularly misdemeanors and state jail felony cases. Judge Kent has offered to host this meeting on Thursday, June 1, 2006 at noon in the 114th Judicial District Court and have lunches brought in for the meeting.

Reducing the amount of required bail, pending case disposition, could assist in maintaining a reduced jail census.

3. Develop a temporary program where a district judge and a county court at law judge will hold magistrate warnings for the misdemeanor and felony arrests the day and night before. This will help expedite setting bail, assess counsel needs, and move cases quickly toward dispositions. The District Attorney will assign one experienced prosecutor to be present at the next day dockets to help assess the case and discuss expedited case disposition with defendants or their counsel. If the defendant and prosecutor are in a position to dispose of the case, the case may be pled immediately in front of the magistrate judge who also exercises jurisdiction in that case. State jail felony cases can be pled on an information with a waiver of indictment and waiver of jury trial. Misdemeanors can be pled on an information.

This type of expedited case disposition could result in quicker referral to rehabilitation programs for nonviolent offenders and maintain a lower incarceration rate for Smith County.

4. One district judge would host a drug court concept and handle, by assignment, all misdemeanors, state jail felony, and third degree felony drug charge cases. Defendants can elect to be referred to a drug court disposition by filing a written election within ten (10) days of their arrest. Upon magistration, the day after their arrest, they will be informed of the drug court program with an opt-in form provided to the defendant. If they do not opt into the program, their case will be assigned to one of the district or county courts at law on the normal rotation basis.

Those defendants who opt into the drug court will plead guilty, receive a deferred probation sentence and be subject to the continuum of sanctions for violations and drug court conditions of probation. The judge will use creative incarceration alternative and rehabilitation programs for these defendants and personally monitor the progress of the defendant to recover and reintegration into society.

There are a few of these drug courts around the nation. Although these programs are labor intensive and have mixed success, the programs seem to depend on the intensity of the efforts made to monitor, rehabilitate and educate these defendants. The use of the Day Reporting Center may be an instrumental element of the success of this type of sentencing philosophy.

5. Develop the Day Reporting Center or community service programs to be utilized for working off fines and fees in lieu of incarceration. This would be very important for municipal court and misdemeanor cases.

While these programs would have to be subject to constant reevaluation by the district attorney, local attorneys, and the judges for effectiveness in maintaining a reduced jail population in Smith County while still having the primary focus of the criminal justice system in the protection of the public, they may help temporarily relieve the overcrowding cris’s. If the programs are successful, they may even provide long-term relief to the exploding jail and prison populations of Smith County offenders.

Even with the development of these Incarceration Alternative Programs, Smith County must develop a master plan for the courts, support offices, sheriff, probation department, and jail facilities. Judge Cynthia Kent suggest that any master facilities plan must include:

1. A downtown jail site which connects with the current jail and current courthouse facilities. This must be designed to be expandable in the future for additional bed space.
2. Develop a plan to upgrade our existing minimum security facility and possible expand this location.
3. Design a new criminal courts facility or new justice center to connect with the expanded downtown jail. This must include a design for future expansion and must integrate security measures into that facility.
4. Utilize the current Smith County Courthouse as is, with only minor security improvements, until the new court facility is funded and constructed. Develop a plan to further utilize the current Smith County Courthouse to house some courts or for expansion. Any remodeling of the Smith County Courthouse could accommodate four courtrooms and integrate appropriate security corridors into the old structure.

Any rush by the Smith County Commissioner to spend five or six million dollars on the currently planned remodeling of the Smith County Courthouse is a waste of tax payer dollars, is another poorly designed plan which does not address the real needs of the community or the courts, and does little to make our citizens safe while appearing at the Smith County Courthouse.

Instead of continuing to waste taxpayer dollars, the Smith County Commissioners should look to fund a Day Reporting Center and other Incarceration Alternative Programs and allow the 2007 Smith County Commissioners’ court to decide on what master plan should be presented to the voters for their careful and educated consideration.

Judge Kent - who was sweet as Mom's apple pie on the phone, even if a little skeptical of my reasons for calling - appears to be providing important leadership in Smith County on this topic. I was utterly charmed, and impressed by her work. The first steps she's outlined would really make a big difference if the commissioners court approves them, improving public safety while reducing the burden on taxpayers.

For more on the topic, see:

• Grits best practices to reduce jail overcrowding
• TDCJ Community Justice Assistance Division Bench Manual (pdf)
  
• Materials from Judical Advisory Council Conference in January on strengthening probation.
• Tyler newspaper coverage of Judge Kent's plan.
  

Tyler judge: End jail overcrowding with community supervision of nonviolent offenders

Among Texas jails, Tyler's (Smith County) is the most overcrowded in the state after Houston, but two weeks ago voters turned down bond proposals for two new jail facilities by margins of 63% and 86%. What happens now?

Tyler district judge Cynthia Kent is shopping a plan to reduce incarceration pressures by releasing non-violent offenders and supervising them through a "Day Reporting Center" ("Judge reacts to 'naysayers'," Tyler Morning Telegraph, May 26). There, offenders would "receive drug and alcohol treatment, job training and day labor jobs," without the county paying to house them. The plan would cost $350,000 in the first year, compared with $3 million annually the county currently pays to house offenders in rented jailspace.

Perhaps predictably, the local police chief and the Mayor accused her in the paper of being soft on crime, but Kent fired back with a hotly worded letter that the Telegraph put online (pdf). She called the Mayor's criticisms "very close to pandering" coming from a licensed attorney, especially since he hadn't seen the plan. "The proposal, which you object to sight unseen, is not a perfect solution," she wrote, "any more than building a jail bed for everyone who writes a hot check, fails to pay their child support, or using marijuana or a controlled substance." Judge Kent told the Tyler Telegraph:

"This is just a proposal and nothing is set in concrete at this time. If the commissioners approved this program, then it would be done on a case-by-case basis and not a blanket policy for these type of nonviolent offenders," she said.

Judge Kent said the first people to be considered for the program would be those jailed for nonpayment of child support.

"On April 17 there were 90 people in jail with their most serious offense being not paying their court-ordered child support. This plan is to reduce the jail population by 200 per day, and these people would be ideal candidates," she said.

But the judge also stated that each case would be reviewed carefully with the public's safety in mind.

She said those being approved for release would have to report daily to the Day Reporting Center and gain employment. Those needing counseling for alcohol of drug problems would get that help.

The next group she said would be considered would be those in jail for fraud, theft by check, forgery and credit card abuse, "even repeat offenders."

Swindle said he would not comment on Kent's letter, but said the business community of Tyler and Smith County has lost thousands of dollars to forgers, credit card abusers and those committing fraud and theft by check, and he did not want those people back on the street.

Judge Kent responded that Swindle's statement was "painting with a broad brush," adding that not all offenders would repeat their crimes.

Another worry for law enforcement officials and the mayor was whether the program's participants would follow the rules and report to the center faithfully.

"Are some of these people not going to show up? Well, yes, there will be some that don't show up, but I believe most will and the community will benefit from the program," Judge Kent said.

The judge said the program could save the county millions of dollars each year until the jail situation was remedied.

"This is up to the commissioners to decide and it is a different program than we've ever had in Smith County. But if people are too scared and they listen to the naysayers, then we just won't do it," she said.

Judge Kent invited the mayor and police chief to meet with her to discuss the program in detail so they could be better informed.

Even if voters had passed the jail bonds, Smith County would need a short-term solution until new facilities were built. Kent's plan would relieve the burden on taxpayers and maximize public safety by changing nonviolent offenders' behavior instead of keeping them "off the streets." That's better for offenders, crime victims, and for the taxpayers, too. Judge Kent deserves a lot of credit for focusing on solutions when her critics offer only complaints.

Officer from disbanded Troup PD gave pot from evidence to informant

The first officer has pled guilty from the Troup Police Department in East Texas that was completely disbanded for drug corruption this spring. In the process, just a little more detail has come out during the prosecution of last year's Chamber of Commerce "Officer of the Year," Mark Turner. He apparently was seizing marijuana from suspects and using it himself or even sharing it with a confidential informant instead of logging it into evidence. He was convicted of tampering, a third degree felony, and also misdemeanor marijuna delivery. He will be sentenced in July.

The police chief was arrested with Turner in March, but hasn't yet been indicted. Wanna bet prosecutors will pressure Turner to testify against the chief in exchange for favorable sentencing? That whole snitching thing works both ways. The scandal utterly closed down 5-man department. The Smith County Sheriff's Office now provides policing services for tiny Troup.

Morally acceptable compared to what?

Doc Berman and the Gallup poll bring news that more Americans find the death penalty morally acceptable than wearing fur, stem cell research or gambling - 71 percent think the death penalty is morally right.

To me, it all depends on how you ask the question. Are there people in the world who need killing? Probably. Is the state of Texas competent to decide which people those are? No friggin way! The outcomes are too disparate: If nothing else, the poor go to death row while the rich are acquitted or even bump into the judge from their case shopping at the Galleria. The state's power should be limited - I don't mean any theoretical state, I mean this state, the state of Texas. The courts in charge of our criminal justice system at the highest levels often seem governed by buffoons. Our prosecutors seek convictions, not justice.

Plenty of mistakes get made - too many to kill somebody on the government's say so.

TPPF: Reduce drug sentences, strengthen probation to avert Texas' overincarceration crisis

Many people associate the Texas Public Policy Foundation with relgious right super-donor Jim Leininger and promotion of vouchers in public schools. But their fellow on criminal justice policy, Marc Levin, just produced a new white paper (pdf) with these startling drug policy recommendations to avoid building more prisons:

• Reduce offense levels for possession of small quantities of drugs
• Empower judges to consider factors other than quantity in sentencing
• Expand drug courts and judge-ordered mandatory treatment and counseling as alternatives to incarceration
• Increase availability of residential and outpatient substance abuse treatment facilities

I'll try to adumbrate the report later in more detail, but here's a taste:

The Legislature should review and revise the state’s drug statutes so that, for possession of a small amount of drugs, the minimum sentence is low enough to provide sufficient discretion for the judge to choose an alternative to a long prison term. Some 21.7 percent of Texas prisoners, which amounts to approximately 32,550 inmates, are incarcerated for nonviolent drug offenses. Even for drug offenses where prison time may be appropriate, excessively high upper ceilings should be lowered.

He also wants more drug courts, shorter probation terms, better treatment options, and a system of progressive sanctions for probation violators to reduce revocations.

I wish I thought that was the message being delivered when Leininger's checks were handed out - I'm sure it's not. But it's amazing to me that the terms of debate among Texas conservatives have shifted to the point where the Texas Public Policy Foundation could call for long drug sentences should be reduced. Right now, possession of even the smallest quantity of powder is a felony offense in Texas - to reduce it at all would mean to reduce it to a misdemeanor. That would let those folks avoid employment, housing and other consequences of a felony record beyond incarceration that follow them around for life.

Bravo, Marc! That took courage, saying what needs to be said. Sometimes the hardest things to say are the obvious - e.g., that the emperor wears no clothes. I hope you don't catch a lot of backlash for it. If the state's leaders followed your advice, I think they'd be grateful later.

Then-House Corrections Committee Chairman Ray Allen, who recently retired, in 2003 proposed a prototype version of that idea in HB 2668, which would have reduced the lowest level drug offenses to a misdemeanor (see the introduced version). But back then the political process wouldn't allow it - the final bill kept the charge a felony but required treatment and probation instead of incarceration on the first offense. Levin's proposal expands upon Allen's original bill to include the idea of reducing drug sentences on the high end.

I always thought it was gutsy for a Republican committee chairman to propose such a thing. This took guts, too. Give it a read (pdf).