Texas Youth Commission debacle mushrooming

More news from all over on the Texas Youth Commission debacle:

• Texas Youth Commission board to resign, but is it too little too late?
  

• Jessica Farrar: Lege helped cause TYC troubles

• Bad apple guard migrated from TDCJ to TYC
  

• UTMB officials testify about TYC medical care

• Feds find 'alarming,' 'chaotic,' violence at TYC unit

• Are abuses really the exception?

• Did Al Gonzales and Johnny Sutton blow the TYC case?
  

• Harris County has its own youth lockup problems, state report finds

• Watchdog to monitor TYC in Harris County

• TYC odds and ends from Capitol Annex
  

As for me, I'm still waiting to see who in the MSM will cover this story first - it's been almost a week since it was broken on this blog. After a few more behind-the-scenes email exchanges this week, I get the sense more than ever that the story has legs.

Big Sentencing Day in House Criminal Jurisprudence Tuesday, Part One

There are several excellent bills on the agenda for the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee on Tuesday, and I wanted to run through some of the highlights. Indeed, there are so many to talk about, though, I think I'll do it in two parts.

Morsels for the sentencing palate
First up on the agenda is an enhancement bill from Calendars Chair Beverly Woolley upping the penalty for cruelty to animals to a state jail felony on the third offense (I wonder if someone will quote Ghandi?).

Though to my taste that's starting on a sour note, animal lover though I am, things improve quickly when the committee will hear what I'm pretty sure is a modest but good bill (perhaps Jamie Spencer or PovertyLawyer1 can correct me if I'm misreading it) by Rep. Burt Solomons that sets notification rules for no-shows on Class C misdemeanor traffic tickets. Huh ... I had no idea Solomons cared about such things.

The Purpose of Sentencing
Anyway, after that come several good bills that collectively make this the most promising Criminal Jurisprudence Committee agenda so far this session:

The real fun starts with Rep. Sylvester Turner's HB 1075 which would create a new section of the Code of Criminal Jurisprudence on the "Purpose of Sentencing." I think that's great - right now it too often seems like the "purpose" is to maximize the judge and prosecutor's chances for re-election. Here's the key language in the bill:

(a) The purpose of a sentence is to:

(1) provide punishment that is likely to reduce the chance that the defendant will recidivate;
(2) rehabilitate the defendant, while recognizing that different rehabilitation strategies are appropriate for different defendants; and
(3) impose penalties on the defendant that are proportionate to the seriousness of the offense for which the defendant is sentenced.

(b) A sentence should be appropriate for the offense committed and the defendant being sentenced.

That's not only an excellent statement of the goals of criminal sentencing, it also makes for a nice intro into some of the other critical bills coming up that follow it. It will be instructive to hear testimony on this item - what is the purpose of sentencing? Vengeance, for example, isn't on the list, but a lot of people think that's the main purpose for punishment.

Tell me what you think: What's the purpose of criminal sentencing? Besides the philosophical question posed by the bill, I'm also curious as to what some of you legal eagles out there think this legislation would mean for defendants in practice?

More goodies from the Speaker Pro Temp
The next bill up, HB 1476, empowers judges and juries to ignore "enhancements," or pile-on penalties, as our friend 800 Lbs Gorilla calls them, "on a unanimous determination by the jury or a written determination by the judge that the enhanced punishment would result in disproportionate or unfair punishment." That leaves enhanced penalties available when they're necessary to fulfill the purposes of sentencing (see HB 1075), but gives judges and juries options to impose lesser sentences when appropriate.

Another good bill from the Speaker Pro Temp, HB 337, would require a judge to find that technical probation violations are "wilful and intentional" in order to revoke or lengthen community supervision as punishment, and requires that punishments be proportional to the violation committed. If someone can't keep up with their fees because they have no money, for example, it's not "wilful and intentional" that they didn't pay up. This is a small but significant bill that would help folks on the margins who want to meet their supervision obligations but for whatever reason, through no fault of their own, cannot.

Reducing Low-level Drug Penalties: A Real Legislative Solution for Prison and Jail Overcrowding
Next up on the docket are two bills I would expect to draw a lot of interest: HB 759 and HB 758 by Dutton, which would reduce penalties for low-level drug posession for powder and marijuana, respectively. No other two piece of legislation filed this session would do as much to reduce the overcrowding problems faced at every level of government statewide.

It speaks well of the Chair that Rep. Peña gave them a hearing. If his committee is going to continue to pass penalty enhancements, at some point they're going to have to make room for those offenders, and these bills are the best methods proposed in 2007.

While Rep. Harold Dutton has proposed them as separate bills, really these two pieces of legislation should be seen as a package. While HB 758 could stand alone, by itself HB 759 would cause serious logistical problems for counties. Taken together, though, they amount to an excellent, well-thought out alternative to current drug sentencing practices in Texas.

Let's start with HB 759 - while some think of reducing drug sentences as a liberal suggestion, actually the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation has been the most prominent recent proponent of the idea, along with Judge Michael McSpadden, a lock-em-up Republican district judge from Houston.

There is no fiscal note posted for the bill yet, but it would save Texas a lot of money. In 2003 then Chairman Ray Allen, a Grand Prairie Republican, proposed the same idea in HB 2668 (the bill was later amended to grant probation instead of incarceration on the first offense, but to keep the state jail felony). According to the fiscal note for the filed version, which included the same penalty reduction as HB 759, the state would save a quarter billion (with a "B") dollars in the first five years, and $72 million per year thereafter. It would achieve this by shifting those prisoners to the county level where they would serve shorter sentences or be placed on community supervision.

But as regular Grits readers know, county jails are basically full right now. That's why HB 759 doesn't work unless they also pass HB 758, or else some other bill that relieves local jail overcrowding. According to LBB's old fiscal note, in 2002 9,130 people entered Texas prison for state jail felony drug offenses, with 22% of them having additional felony charges that would justify state incarceration. That means 78% of them, or roughly 7,122 new people, would be affected by this change and would be incarcerated or supervised by the county.

HB 758 would resolve that problem and then some by clearing low-level pot offenders from the county jail - issuing people caught with less than an ounce of marijuna Class C misdemeanor tickets instead arresting them for a Class B misdemeanor. The difference: With a B misdemeanor officers usually arrest, so they must take time to haul them to jail. If they're indigent the county must pay for their lawyer, and the system wastes time housing somebody who nobody really thinks a serious threat. In 2002, more than 50,000 such offenders were arrested and taken to local jails. Honestly, doesn't law enforcement have bigger fish to fry?

Changing the penalty for possessing less than an ounce of pot to a C misdemeanor would let officers spend more time on the street while jailers would have fewer petty offenders to deal with, preserving jail space for more serious violators. Plus it would GENERATE fine revenue instead of costing taxpayers for incarceration and lawyer fees every time someone is arrested. In Columbia, MO when the same change was made, police actually enforced majijuana prohibitions MORE often, because they didn't have to book offenders into the overcrowded local jail.

The House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee last session unanimously approved this bill, but it never received a hearing on the House floor. Perhaps while the committee has Rep. Woolley there for her bill, they can ask her to commit to giving these bills a floor vote as a condition of passing her enhancement!

These aren't soft on crime bills, they just make the punishment fit the crime, reduce the number of people on whom we hang the label "felon," empower judges and juries, and relieve pressure on both state prisons and county jails. That's the kind of legislation that actually improves circumstances on the ground, instead of just fiddling with symbolic gestures.

That's all I've got time for now, but there are several more bills on Tuesday's Criminal Jurisprudence schedule that merit discussion and support, and I'll get back soon with those and other highlights from next week's criminal justice committees.

Housekeeping odds and ends

A few quick housekeeping notes:

After Blogger was down yesterday for a couple of hours only for those using "old Blogger," I switched to the new now-non-beta version of the upgrade (which previously wouldn't let me switch because my archives are too large). For readers, so far, the main difference appears the be the "Labels" at the bottom of each post that collect stories in identified categories. I spent a little while this morning tagging some of the more common keywords in archived posts, though not nearly comprehensively. So some categories of things I've covered more recently, like TYC, are quite robust, while other, especially older topics I haven't filled out yet. Over time the labels should become a more useful tool as more blog posts are integrated and the categories diversify.

Traffic has been up in the last few weeks, and I appreciate everyone visiting. Sometime in the next week or so Grits will see its 400,000th visitor- I've been seeing upwards of 1,100 on weekdays recently, and as of 10:13 this morning a whopping 10% even were Texas state employees (i.e., from .state.tx.us domains). Welcome! I hope you're finding what you read here useful.

Finally, just to give regulars a heads up, for the next couple of months or so I'll be tracking four key Texas legislative committees on criminal justice topics on Grits for Breakfast: House Corrections, House Criminal Jurisprudence, House Law Enforcement, and Senate Criminal Justice. That doesn't mean I won't discuss bills outside those committees (I will), but for those four I've created separate labels and intend to preview each of their committee agendas every week before they meet, then track bills of interest they pass out.

My purpose in previewing each week's agenda is to allow folks who support or oppose the criminal justice legislation I write about to know where bills are in the process and participate before the deed is done. I think that's a more useful approach than merely waiting on newsmakers to act, then reporting on it afterward. Sometimes I may not do this much before the committee hearings - bills are only posted a few days in advance - but in most cases bills are left pending for at least a week before a vote is cast, and you still have time to contact the bill sponsor, chair or committee members as needed. As always, if you're seriously tracking bills, don't wait on me - the Texas capitol website is your friend.

I mention my short-term intention regarding committee coverage both to invite readers to weigh in on bills they read about during the process, and also to solicit bill sponsors, supporters, or opponents of bills coming up in these committees to send me information arguing for your view. As I've said before, this is a better blog when readers participate.

For those of you, like my friend who emailed this morning, who feel like you don't understand the process well enough to get involved, let me point you to this primer from the House Research Organization on how a bill becomes a law.

Thanks for reading, everybody. It's already a wild session and it hasn't even really gotten going full steam, yet.

What do Susan Criss and Richard Posner have in common?

From a story about judicial blogging this morning in the Houston Chronicle, writer Mary Flood describes what two blogging judges have in common - Galveston District Judge Susan Criss and 7th US Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner:

Criss, like Posner before her, started her adventure by filling in for another blogger. For Criss, it is was on the Austin-based Texas political blog "Grits for Breakfast." Posner said he posted on the "Lessig Blog" of a California law professor who once clerked for him.

Both judges said they simply obey the same rules they would speaking in any other forum.

"You can't just run your mouth so much that you'd be recused all over the place," Criss said.

:) Read the whole piece, which also features federal District Judge Jerry Buchmeyer's humor blog and another Texas judical blog I was unaware of before from state District Judge Gil Jones. And don't neglect to visit Judge Criss' blog, As the Island Floats. Update your blog rolls accordingly.

Legislative committee reports presaged TYC woes

Before Nate Blakeslee and the Texas Observer broke the story of unprosecuted allegations of sexual abuse at a West Texas youth prison, House Corrections Committee Chairman Jerry Madden was already demanding the agency enact significant reforms, a fact for which he deserves much credit. In an era filled with complacent lawmakers, he and his committee were taking responsibility for Texas Youth Commission's shortcomings well before the most recent revelations made the front page of the nation's newspapers.

In his interview with Capitol Annex last night, Chairman Madden referenced the House Corrections Committee's Interim Report discussion of TYC (pp. 108-131), published before the allegations at Pyote became public, so I went back and took a look.

Reviewing it again, I ran across a mention on page 109 that Madden had asked then-executive director Dwight Harris in March 2006 to solicit "technical assistance" from the Department of Justice. It'd be interesting to know what that technical assistance constisted of and what were the results, but it speaks well that Chairman Madden was on top of things enough a year ago to understand there were significant problems and seek outside help.

The Corrections Committee heard 12 hours of testimony about TYC on March 22, 2006, according to the report, much of which was from employees, some of whom had been injured by incarcerated youth and said they were not supported in their disciplinary responses by the TYC administration. (Go here for those interim committee webcasts.) The following month the committee visited the TYC facilities in Brownwood and San Saba, both of which have played prominent roles in recent TYC coverage.

One managerial concern as the Pyote story has unfolded is that all the bad publicity will affect TYC's ability to recruit and retain guards at a time when the agency needs to nearly double the number of JCOs or radically restructure itself to manage kids differently.

Today, entry level JCO positions are really crappy jobs, to be frank, especially without significant increases in staffing to make them safe and the kids more secure. Think about it: 24 GOOD kids is a lot for a teacher to handle; a 24-1 guard to TYC inmate ratio is a recipe for disaster. That's got to be the worst babysitting job on the planet, and it pretty much pays like it. Entry level JCOs make $1,816 per month, according to the interim report (see the pay scales on p. 128). Not surprisingly, given the low pay and onerous work environment, 64% of TYC terminations are for attendance, mostly for job abandonment - people just stop showing up for work and are never heard from again.

According to the House Corrections Committee interim report, relying on an email account by TYC staff, at some TYC facilities annual staff turnover has been as high as 70%. The committee recommended a variety of staff retention proposals that may not be enough now that the agency has received such bad publicity.

I mention all this to make several points:

First, if you or someone you know don't mind small town living and a small-town paycheck, head to your nearest TYC facility and apply for a job. They're almost certainly hiring, and they need good people who care.

Second, TYC won't be safe for students or JCOs until staff-student ratios are cut in half, and employment is stabilized so that experienced officers are retained. That either requires a major investment in the current failed system or a complete restructuring - one that is needed, but whose outcome is uncertain. That might include disbanding TYC units modeled after (or converted from) adult prisons and moving to smaller facilities located near urban areas where the kids come from. But who knows how quickly that can happen? There are few good options here.

And finally, as we look back on the unfolding TYC scandal and reporters parse out who knew what when, who acted, and who covered up, it's worth recognizing that Chairman Jerry Madden and the House Corrections Committee a year ago saw TYC's serious managerial shortcomings, expressed concern that these failings contribute to abuse of students and lapses in JCO safety, and demanded that the agency seek outside assistance - essentially an admission that the existing administration wasn't up to the job on its own.

There may be a few gotchas left in the TYC scandals as we discover the full story over time. But it's also good to know that this committee along with Chairman John Whitmire's Senate Criminal Justice Committee, whose own interim report studied and documented skyrocketing abuse rates at TYC, had already figured out that TYC had big problems and needed significant reform. Now we'll see if these folks can use the short-term political capital created by these latest revelations to make needed improvements at TYC agencywide.

Texas criminal justice committee roundup

After previewing bills heard this week in the Texas House Criminal Jurisprudence, Corrections, and Law Enforcement Committees, I wanted to add a few quick updates from this week's committee action:

The Senate Criminal Justice Committee yesterday heard hours of testimony and approved a version of "Jessica's Law" with a promise from the author that unspecified changes would be made before it reached the Senate floor. The Stand Down blog is your go-to source. See prior Grits coverage of HB 8 ("Jessica's Law").

Vince has more from the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, which also yesterday kicked out a just-filed bill that would fire the existing Texas Youth Commission board. (You'd think these folks would see the writing on the wall, and git while the gittin' is good.) See more from AP.

Meanwhile, as predicted, the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee approved two more enhancements yesterday - HB 1887 by Truitt for burglary of a vechicle, and HB 495 by Bonnen for assault against emergency personnel. Bonnen's bill increases the penalty two steps, from a Class A misdemeanor to a 3rd degree felony, if an assault victim was an emergency services worker as defined in the bill, including police, firefighters and EMTs.

Finally, the House Corrections Committee on Monday approved a narrow but good bill, HB 47 by Hodge, that allows for in-cell education for inmates in administrative segregation (solitary confinement). And speaking of House Corrections, the inaugural program of Vince's Capitol Annex podcast last night featured an interview with Corrections Chairman Jerry Madden. The Chairman repeated predictions that under current trends, without any new enhancements, Texas will require 17,000 new prison beds by 2012. But if the Legislature fully funds a stronger probation system, he announced, the Legislative Budget Board has calculated over the same period TDCJ's prison population could actually reduce by 4-5,000.

That's quite a turnaround. I hope they achieve it. And I hope the Governor has the good sense not to veto it this time.

Texas Monthly messengers pro-needle exchange article to state senators

Sometimes, when your story won't break quite soon enough to affect current events, an editor of a monthly magazine must take matters into his own hands.

Upon hearing that the Senate Health and Human Services Committee might soon hear Sen. Bob Deuell's SB 308 allowing local governments the option to approve needle exchange programs, Texas Monthly editor Evan Smith dashed off a note alerting Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and all Texas state senators and their staff to an article in the upcoming issue of TM by Bill Martin (here's a link to a free media preview of the story) exploring why Texas is the last state not to allow syringe exchange programs to operate legally.

I heard about the note and article and asked Evan for a copy, which he graciously provided. His note read:

"Dear _____________

I'm writing because I understand the Texas Senate will take up the issue of needle-exchange programs at a committee hearing tomorrow. The April issue of TEXAS MONTHLY contains a substantial piece by writer-at-large William Martin, a senior fellow at the Baker Institute of Public Policy at Rice University, that makes the case for such programs--and laments the fact that Texas is the only state in the U.S. that does not permit this life-saving, disease-combatting practice. Although it's unusual for us to release a story not yet printed in our magazine, I thought it was important that you see this one immediately and consider it as you begin your conversation, so I've taken the liberty of sending you the attached copy.

Bully for him. Read the story for yourself to see what he sent the senators. It's a good one. Martin speaks to both Sen. Deuell, a medical doctor, and bill's sponsor from the 79th Legislature, retired Houston senator Jon Lindsay, a Republican stalwart and former Harris County Judge. Wrote Martin:

Though some were surprised that Lindsay would sponsor the bill, he called it “a no-brainer.” “I talked to doctors and medical people, people who worked at clinics,” he explained. “They convinced me that it made sense to get dirty needles off the street. It wasn’t a hard sell at all. And of course, there is the side benefit of getting users in contact with clinics and medical professionals.” As for why the bill failed in 2005, he said that too many socially conservative legislators “are afraid of their shadow. They’re afraid they’ll be branded as catering to druggies and don’t want that to be a potential campaign issue. That’s the bottom line that is causing the hang-up. A large number of them don’t understand the issue. It’s more of a knee-jerk reaction.”

Maybe this year with Dr. Deuell leading the charge the bill will have easier sledding. From his comments in this article and in committee last year, he appears to be an ardent and able advocate for syringe exchange programs:

“There is absolutely no reason to oppose a needle exchange program,” Deuell said. “The research is there. People who oppose it think it will encourage drug use. Research has shown it does not. It serves to prevent transmission of HIV and other blood-borne diseases such as hepatitis B and C, and it actually brings addicts to treatment, if they so desire.” Deuell also stressed that allowing greater access to sterile syringes “is going to cost the state less money. It costs us a fortune to treat HIV and hepatitis C. It’s breaking the budget.”

That's a strong message and Deuell is a great messenger. Perhaps that combination will ward off some of the knee jerk attacks on the bill. Even conservatives at the Lone Star Times came out in favor of the legislation, to the surprise of some. Wrote blogger David Benzion:

Our current approach stinks, and I’m urging my State Senator to do the fiscally prudent–dare I say compassionate and even Christian thing–and sign on to this measure.

As Martin notes in TM, there is little formal opposition to this bill except legislators' own fear. Between Dr. Deuell's public championing of the idea, Texas Monthly's timely publicity, and the lack of a hard-right backlash, this bill appears to have a lot of momentum in the Senate.

One minor correction to Martin's article. He wrote that "The Health and Human Services Committee sent the bill forward with only one dissenting vote, but it never came to a vote on the Senate floor." Actually, Lindsay got the bill to the floor but could only muster 17 votes, not the 20 it needed for passage, see the Senate Journal entry for SB 127. Senators Averitt, Duncan and Eltife joined Deuell, Lindsay and Senate Democrats in 2005 to support it. Deuell improves his chances a bit with Kyle Janek's support, mentioned in the TM article, and will just need to pick up three more votes to pass the bill in the Senate.

In other words, he's within spitting distance.

I'll bet not a lot of people thought this bill had a chance of moving this session. But some really good people are working on it, and sometimes the stars are just aligned. Here's hoping that's true this session for SB 308.

Despite Texas prison overcrowding, Criminal Jurisprudence keeps hearing enhancements

Texas' full prisons result in large part from increased penalty lengths for everything from the most horrific crimes to the most mundane. This afternoon's agenda at the Texas House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee hearing shows how that happens.

While some in the Legislature recognize that it's time to shift gears away from mass incarceration, especially for low-level offenders, so far Criminal Jurisprudence isn't doing its part to reduce Texas prison and jail populations. Instead they've moved this session to boost already-stiff penalties for child molesters, approved life sentences for certain drunk driving deaths, and will likely increase penalties for burglary of a vehicle. Even if Chairmans Madden and Whitmire successfully strengthen the probation system and rein in the out of control parole board, Texas' prison population will continue to burst at the seams if the Lege keeps indulging in its biennial ritual of boosting criminal penalties.

Today the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee will hear a handful of good bills along with a number of additional penalty enhancements and nickel and dime punitive restrictions on offenders. Here are some of the good bills of interest up in the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee today:

• HB 312 by Turner: Creates an evidentiary standard (preponderance of the evidence) by which the state must prove a defendant was "able but unwilling" to pay probation fees. Currently non-payment is frequently taken as prima facie evidence of non-compliance.

• HB 403 by Hodge: Would release parolees from supervision who successfully complete parole board requirements for participation in drug and alcohol treatment programs.

• HB 800 by Dutton: Provides for expunction of records in cases resulting in deferred adjudication where a defendant successfully completes supervision requirements.

And then, the enhancements:

• HB 126 by Delisi: Adds tampering with a government record to the list of offenses that may be enhanced as part of "organized criminal activity."
  

• HB 1766 by Peña: Enhances the penalty for petty theft of copper, aluminum or bronze wiring to a state jail felony regardless of the value of the wire.

• HB 347 by Hamilton: Enhances the penalty for harboring a runaway child from a Class A misdemeanor to a state jail felony of the harborer is a registered sex offender.

• HB 1093 by Geren: Expands the area around a funeral service where "picketing" is prohibited.

These four bills all have one thing in common: The Legislative Budget Board says they won't cost the state any money. That's a politicized fiction. Of course keeping more people in prison longer costs more money - any fool can see that.

By giving these bills fiscal notes of zero, LBB would have legislators believe their punitive impulse incurs no financial costs. That's why I said in 2005 that LBB is responsible for "red ink" in Texas prison budget - they've consistently understated costs of penalty enhancements for many decades in just this way.

In particular, the bills by Peña and Hamilton expressly increase penalties from a misdemeanor to a state jail felony, shifting incarceration costs from counties to state government. But those costs aren't recognized for purposes of state budget making. I wish I knew why.

In the dumb bills with no purpose category, we find HB 1480 by Castro, which would add to the list of information sex offenders must report the URLs of websites they visit or "intend to visit" every day. I don't know about you but my web surfing habits shift over time - sometimes day to day - and I don't think gathering such data will provide useful information for law enforcement or serve any purpose than to give another opportunity for registrants to commit a "technical" violation through incorrect reporting.

Finally, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention another problematic bill the committee will hear today by Rep. Phil King: HB 628. This bill would allow the lead police investigator in criminal cases to sit at the prosecution table throughout a trial, even when they may be called as a witness. The prohibition on witnesses hearing other witnesses' testimony in the Rules of Evidence exists for good reason, and has never inhibited the prosecution of crime in this state. I see no reason to risk tainting police testimony in the manner the current Rules are designed to prevent. This falls under the category of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Those are the Criminal Jurisprudence highlights this week - see the full committee agenda here, and you can watch the hearing today at 2 p.m. or on adjournment of the full House.

Kimbrough to TYC employees: Stop talking to media

A reader who works at the Texas Youth Commission forwards this agency-wide email:

To: All TYC Employees

From: Dr. Linda Reyes, on behalf of Acting Executive Director Ed Owens

Re: News Media Contact

Date: March 9, 2007

Effective immediately, all questions and requests from the media must be forwarded to central office for a response. Special Master Jay Kimbrough has named a special spokesperson, Jim Hurley, to handle media questions regarding our agency. We appreciate his assistance with the large number of media calls coming in to the Texas Youth Commission. At this time, it is necessary that the agency have a temporary spokesperson who is close enough to the investigation to respond to media questions accurately without jeopardizing any work currently underway by law enforcement agents.

Please continue to forward media requests to Tim Savoy. He will prioritize the requests and provide them to Mr. Hurley.

"Please keep my name confidential," says my source. "I don’t think they want us talking to you……"

Indeed. I bet they don't. I hope that doesn't deter y'all from doing so. :)

Nearly 6,000 bills filed at 80th Texas Lege

When the 60th day of the Texas Legislature came and went last week (the final day for bill filing under House and Senate rules), the last bills filed were SB 1944 in the Senate and HB 3977 in the House, bringing the total number filed to 5,921. That's up 13% from the 79th session. Here's a full list of bills by topic.

For those trying to track this onslaught of legislation, btw, the capitol website is your friend, as are the House and Senate sites for committee information. Collectively they are in many ways equal or superior to services for which lobbyists pay big bucks. With just 78 days and counting, that's not much time for legislation that's going to move to move.

Let the sausage making begin.

Is the Party Already Over for TYC's Ed Owens?

"The party's over" for new Texas Youth Commission director Ed Owens, declares the facade over at the TexasJustice.Net message board, pictured above.

Damn, that was quick!

Yesterday in the Dallas Morning News, Diane Jennings wrote that Owens' appointment "was greeted warmly around the state." She quoted Democratic House Corrections Committee member Rep. Jim Dunnam declaring, "I have not heard anything other than positive about Mr. Owens."

I guess neither Dunnam nor Ms. Jennings are Grits readers, because Grits commenters and prison guard bloggers at The Back Gate immediately identified this as a problematic appointment when Governor Perry announced it.

On Saturday, Grits posted court documents online provided by TexasJustice.org alleging that Owens himself covered up sex abuse allegations among his subordinates when he was the #2 man at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The state settled a civil suit stemming from those allegations last year.

Despite the unwelcome news about Owens, however, it's too early to say whether the party is really over yet. Over at Capitol Annex, Vince is busy combing through TYC's board minutes over the last two years looking for abuse references.

I get the feeling the party's only just begun.

Related Grits coverage on TYC and the Owens family:

• Settled lawsuit alleges TYC's Ed Owens covered up sex abuse scandal at TDCJ!
• Stop the preening, folks: Everyone's culpable on TYC
• Owens: TYC is safe for kids ... WHAT?!
• TYC Scandal shows the politics of crime and punishment
• Should Rangers "take the hit" on TYC?
• Can Texas judges know kids sentenced to TYC are safe?
• The Back Gate: Ed Owens wrong leader for TYC
• New TYC chief threatens employees?
• Corrections Committee bills focus on TYC
  
• Reflections on a weird day
• Questioning Rissie Owens
• Rissie Owens still won't talk
• Following Rissie Owens
  

Podunk PDs and Toothless Watchdogs

The Chairman of the Texas House Law Enforcement Committee, Joe Driver, has two noteworthy bills up in his own committee today, one I think is quite necessary, and another that I think is a bad idea.

Stop Proliferation of Podunk PDs
To start with the one I like, HCR 96 is a resolution calling for a moratorium on the creation by the Lege of new types of hyperlocal police agencies, and a joint legislative study to create a policy on what constitutes a police force.

This is sorely needed - as the number of bush-league, penny ante police forces in Texas proliferate, the quality of both officers employed and supervision given them declines. There is only so much supervisory talent in the state, and today it is spread out over more than 2,500 separate law enforcement agencies, creating a web of confusion and logistical problems (particularly in urban areas) from differences in training, procedures, and overlapping jurisdictions.

Article 2.12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure identifies 34 different classes of individuals as police officers, compared to four in the Texas constitution - sheriffs, marshals, constables, and municipal police. Others include airport police, school district police, "municipal park and recreational patrolmen," arson investigators, insurance investigators, officers appointed by appellate courts, the Department of Health, and a variety of others.

Every session it seems like somebody wants a new police agency - a good example this year is HB 702 by Bonnen, which would allow school districts to create a "volunteer reserve police force," for which the school district board would "establish qualifications and standards for training." (If you've ever been to a school board meeting, you know how qualified those folks are to decide such things and can likely guess at the wisdom for leaving issues of "volunteer reserve" police officer qualifications to such local bodies.) Another twist on the police proliferation theme comes in HB 700 by Berman which would extend Texas peace officer authority to most federal agents, creating further confusion.

So Driver's right to want to get this situation under control. I've hoped for a moratorium on creating new, specialized "boutique" police agencies for years. It's difficult because everything goes through different committees - Bonnen's HB 702, for example, was assigned to Public Ed. Bully for the Chairman for tackling the problem. (For those with a particular interest, here's some testimony I gave on the topic a few years ago to the Senate Criminal Justice Committee.)

Don't De-Fang Lazy Watchdog
Another piece of legislation by the Chairman, though, bothers me and I hope the Law Enforcement Committee will reconsider the wisdom of moving it without significant changes. HB 488 by Driver restricts the rulemaking authority of the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education (TCLEOSE) to enforce licensing restrictions and rules in ways that seem to encourage all but the most serious, finally prosecuted police misconduct. Under the bill,

(d) The commission may revoke a license issued under this chapter to an officer elected under the Texas Constitution only if the officer is convicted of:
(1) a felony; or
(2) a criminal offense directly involving the person ’s duties as an officer.

Under current law, TCLEOSE establishes procedures for recovation of an officer's license, which is automatic right now if an officer commits a felony or official oppression. This bill would restrict TCLEOSE from suspending an officer's license for anything OTHER than the most severe misconduct that's a) discovered and punished by the department, b) reported to and pursued by the District Attorney, and c) vigorously prosecuted, usually over objections of the local police union.

That puts local political barriers between officers and de-licensing that needn't apply, completely gutting the agency's licensing authority, in many ways, though truthfully TCLEOSE already was a rather lazy watchdog.

If this bill passes, the state licensing agency for private investigators will have (much) more authority over its licensees than TCLEOSE will over police officer licenses. Though I haven't looked at the law, I'd guess the same is true for electricians!

Seriously: What good is TCLEOSE's rulemaking authority if literally the only way officers can lose their license is to be convicted of a crime? Why not then just abolish TCLEOSE, if only prosecutors will have the authority to enforce licensing rules?

We've got a significant police corruption problem in this state, particularly in South Texas but really all over. Most officers aren't corrupt, but those who are too often are tolerated. It won't help the problem to de-fang the already near-toothless state police licensing agency. As watchdogs go, the poor old hound was pretty much gumming her food already.

Five TV Shows About Crime I'm Glad Somebody Made

A lot of television shows about crime and punishment these days are pure schlock - from prosecutor glamorizing blockbusters like Law & Order to shows like Boston Legal that empathize with the defense, too many TV shows about crime and law basically rely on silly, repetitive stereotyping, recycling hackneyed plots featuring barely watchable acting by people with six-pack abs and news-anchor looks.

On the other hand, there are several TV shows running now on the topic that I wouldn't miss, and that in many instances are breaking new ground in old genres. So without further ado I thought I'd present my semi-topical list of "Five TV Shows About Crime I'm Glad Somebody Made."

The Wire:
The Best. Epic. Crime. Drama. Ever. Since the advent of television. If you haven't seen it on HBO, I'm not kidding. From the brutality and humanity on the street corners to snitching, the corrupting influence of undercover work, and the impotence of numbers-driven police tactics, this show ably demonstrates many of the most obvious shortcomings in current law enforcement approaches to drugs and violent crime. The Wire is a modern masterpiece, IMO, a Dickensian triumph, well worth the DVD purchase. Start from the beginning and watch all of it.

The Sopranos:
I could go on an on about what this show did for TV drama as a genre, but I think it has also influenced the crime debate in America. While the mafioso depicted are a dying breed (today the "mafia" speak Spanish as their first or second language instead of Italian, and are more likely to run drugs up I-35 than steal trucks off I-95), the Sopranos demonstrates to liberals that crime is brutal, self-interested, and cannot be reasoned away, while simultaneously demonstrating to conservatives that crime is a business, not a psychosis, for most who engage in it, and that there are limits to the effectiveness of law enforcement against the worst of the worst. As a bonus: the writing and acting are so good you can barely take your eyes off the show, particular in the early seasons.

Prison Break:
This one I'm mostly glad they made because I enjoy it. Much of it last season was filmed around the Dallas area, including in small towns where I've spent a little time. But on the criminal justice front it also emphasizes and popularizes a fictional innocence case - the older brother awaiting execution for capital murder - and shows prisoners as people with a range of complex motives who act in their self interest. To that extent it's unusual for network TV, though the now defunct (and much better) HBO series Oz obviously did that in a less comic-book like fashion. Some of the early plot twists involving the plans of the prison escape tattooed on the protagonist's back were ingenious. I think as long as people yearn in their soul to be free, people will love prison break movies.

Monk:
This one is Kathy's favorite. On the USA Network, Tony Shalhoub brilliantly plays Adrian Monk, a semi-retired detective in San Francisco with extreme obsessive compulsive disorder and an almost savant-like crime solving ability. Monk reminds me of a twitchy version of the old detective shows like Columbo or McMillan and Wife, a throwback to when everyone was polite and crimes were finally, predictably, yet somehow still unpredictably solved at the end of each episode, with everyone including the villain in the room. This show uses an otherwise stale, outdated detective story trope and mildly satirizes it, offering the wonderful Shalhoub a chance to indulge development of this curious character he's created.

Reno 911:
This satirical TV show from Comedy Central cracks all the jokes about cops that you really can't say when they're hovering over the driver's side window of your car in their mirrored sunglasses on the side of the road. So in that sense it's easy to understand why it's popular. Humor belittling authority figures is as natural as the sunrise, and it's a great benefit of living in a free country that such humor can be expressed on the public airwaves. Besides, if you pay attention you find that there are sources out in the real world mirroring much of the humor, or it wouldn't be so funny. I mean, who among us can't laugh at a dog bite in the crotch? ... Oh, yeah ... state Senator Jeff Wentworth.

What TV shows about crime and punishment do you watch? What should have gone on the top five list, and where did I miss the boat? Remember, I'm talking about currently running TV shows, not ones that have gone off the air. Let me know what you think.

House Corrections hears bills with more (or less) common sense

Before looking at tomorrow's bills up in the Texas House Corrections committee, I should pause to say that Chairman Jerry Madden is having a great session so far. I may not agree with him on everything (in fact, I don't), but he's taken his leadership position seriously, educated himself on corrections topics admirably since he first became chair in 2005, and has emerged as a knowledgeable leader in the House and force for change. Not only that, he's a genuinely nice guy (and I don't just say that because he's a Grits reader). At the TYC joint hearing last week, Madden was the coolest, smartest head on the dais, I thought. Of all the committee's members, he seemed to come to the meeting armed with facts and a focus on solutions instead of just emotionalism and rhetorical excess. There's still a ways to go (79 days and counting) but so far he's doing a good job as we head into the heart of Texas' legislative session over the next two months.

Anyway, back to tomorrow's Corrections meeting. There are a couple of bills up I don't like, and several good ones I hope make it through. Let's run through the highlights:

Watching dots on a screen won't make us safer
HB 430 by Madden: To start with one I don't like, this bill requires GPS monitoring for certain sex offenders, a faddish approach that IMO doesn't improve safety much. I'm tired of having to make these arguments myself, so let me quote the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, a statewide victim's rights group:

Global Position Satellite (GPS) tracking of sexual offenders may make us feel good, but will not make us safer. A careful examination of salient facts indicates that universal GPS monitoring of all registered sex offenders would be ill advised. First, most sex offenders victimize in places where we expect them to be (i.e. their own homes and the homes of people they know well.) The sad fact is, providing extra measures to keep sex offenders from restricted areas (schools, parks) does not protect the overwhelming majority of child victims of sexual abuse who are molested in their own homes or the home of the abuser. Second, GPS uses relatively new technology with known flaws and limitations. For example, like cell phones signals, GPS signals are frequently lost in forested and mountainous areas; they don't work in urban canyons, underground rail lines, buildings and sometimes even automobiles. Third, GPS is expensive ($6 to $10 per day per offender). California estimated that the net fiscal impact for GPS tracking of sex offenders in that state is likely to be "several tens of millions of dollars annually for the first few years, probably reaching at least $100 million in about ten years, and increasing significantly thereafter." Finally, GPS monitoring is not designed to be a stand-alone sex offender management tool. When used in conjunction with other management tools (e.g. specialized sex offender supervision caseloads, home contacts, employment verifications, alcohol and drug testing, treatment, case reviews, risk assessment instruments, collateral contacts, polygraph testing), GPS does hold promise. However, there is little scientific research regarding its effectiveness for management of even predatory sexual offenders. Under no circumstances should GPS of registered sex offenders be considered a ‘silver bullet.’

'Nuff said.

Common sense on HIV, part one: Test prison inmates for AIDS
HB 1276 by Davis: Here's a bill that deserves passage, this one mandating AIDS tests for all prisoners during their diagnostic process upon entry into a TDCJ facility. The Attorney General said they could - this would be the Legislature telling them they have to. This way sick people get identified and treated

Common sense on HIV, part two: Condoms in prison
HB 1068 by Coleman: Though some conservatives have made fun of it, I think this bill which would allow condom distribution and disposal in prison, is probably good public policy if done for health reasons and it's not treated as an excuse to tolerate prison rape. OTOH, there's plenty of anecdotal and some statistical evidence that TDCJ tolerates prison rape now, HIV rates in Texas prisons are high, and already cost TDCJ a whopping 40% of its entire pharmacy budget! Like many things in this world, it's a good idea that could turn sour in the implementation, but that's no reason not to try - the costs of not doing so are quite high. If you asked me, "common sense part three" would be to install tattoo parlors in prison, like they approved in Canada, but that bill didn't get filed. However, we do get an,

Ombudsman for in-prison sexual assault cases
HB 1944 by Coleman: This bill would create an ombudsman position at TDCJ whose job is to compile information and take complaints about sexual assault cases. It'd be a grim job if you weren't empowered to do anything, though. The ombudsman will "initiate and oversee" investigations, but it doesn't appear to be equipped with investigative staff. I'll be interested to hear the public debate on this one. It's a problem that needs to be fixed, but I'm not sure how this would help much, except perhaps to shed more light on the issue. I certainly know Coleman is bringing it with the best intentions, and he's a smart guy, so maybe there's some reason to the rhyme.

Paying for elderly offenders' health costs
HB 2611 by Madden: This bill would expand the range of offenders who are eligible for medical parole to include so-called 3g (or typically more violent) offenders who require full-time nursing home care, as well as sex offenders who are in a "persistent vegetative state." The key to understanding the economics of this bill is that the state pays for all of prisoners' care if they need a nursing home or other expensive end-of-life medical services, while on the outside Medicare and/or Medicaid would cover it. It's a good bill, but sex offenders are the fastest growing class of elderly offenders, and eventually Texas will need to let some of the sickest of them out, too. Letting out only sex offenders who are in a "persistent vegetative state" is hardly some elderly version of Prison Break (starring Paul Newman, perhaps?) Just good common sense. IMO, they could go farther without risking public safety.

Bohac requests dull bedtime reading
HB 1453 by Bohac would have every state rep and state senator emailed each month a list of every offender who gets off community supervision or out of prison and is released into their district. So he can do what with it, I wonder? I bet if you did an open records requests about complaints against TYC and TDCJ to Bohac's office, you'd find quite a few he'd never acted on, just as Paul Burka correctly says nearly every member gets all the time. And if they're not going to do anything with THAT information, what are legislators going to do with these reports? I don't know about you, but I don't see much good coming from this, for whatever purposes he hopes to use it.

UPDATE: Well, I guess it wasn't enuff said about HB 430. Ruth Epstein from the ACLU emailed with this:

We oppose HB 430, Monitoring of Certain High-Risk Sex Offenders,who are not under community supervision or civilly committed, after their sentences have been discharged.

1. Their risk level, number three- the highest- was known at sentencing. HB 430 would be an unwarranted addition to their punishment, a sentence after their sentence.

2. These offenders were not diagnosed with the mental or behavioral abnormality which are required for civil commitment, yet HB 430 attempts a variation of Texas-style civil commitment without its benefits and with a severe deficit.

3. Unlike civil commitment, treatment is not required.

4. The monitoring is for the sole purpose of verifying that the offender
resides where he is registered, unlike wider monitoring allowed under civil commitment.

Reliable studies have shown that residence is irrelevant to sex offenses, since a very high percentage of sex offenses occur within the family circle of relatives and friends.

There you have it - ACLU and the victim's rights folks basically on the same page. Quick, take a photo, capture the memory, it might not last long! We'll see what the committee does mañana.

Settled lawsuit alleged TYC's Ed Owens covered up sex abuse scandal at TDCJ!

So you're Texas Governor Rick Perry. The Texas Youth Commission is in the middle of a sex scandal that your advisers are telling you is only going to get worse. What do you do?

I'll tell you what Governor Perry did: He appointed a man to run the agency for whom the state last year paid to settle allegations in a civil suit that he (and others) ignored sexual harassment complaints from subordinates at his old employer, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

Holy Mother of God, who is advising the Governor on TYC?

Thanks to Terry Pelz, a former Texas prison warden who runs TexasJustice.org, for forwarding this pdf of a complaint by two women against former TDCJ gang expert Salvador "Sammy" Buentello. It's from a civil suit that was settled by TDCJ last year for an undisclosed amount (see the plea bargain from Buentello's criminal case, also from TexasJustice.org). The portion of the complaint alleging that newly appointed TYC chief Ed Owens participated in the coverup of Buentello's misconduct is on pages 4 and 5:

Defendant Owen was told specifically about the sexually harrassing and assaultive conduct of Buentello in late 1999 or early 2000 by TDCJ employee Allyson Glass. Beard told Glass that they needed help handling Buentello, and Glass told her that she had spoken to Defendant Owen, that he had known about the sexual harassment, and that he said that he could not do anything unless the victims filed complaints with EEO. ... Immediately prior to Beard giving her statement to OIG, Glass begged her not to report that she or Defendant Owen knew about the harassment, or they would lose their jobs. Defendant Owen also had knowledge of the sexual harassment and sexually hostile work environment created by Buentello, because he was put on notice of the long history of sexual harassment and retaliation by Buentello by the EEO because the multiple women filed EEO claims alleging sexual harassment and retaliation by Buentello. Defendant Owen received copies of the disposition of these cases from the EEO.

Go read the whole thing, if you've a mind to, but for Owens, husband of parole board chief Rissie Owens and the former #2 man at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, the immediate import of the Buentello case lies in whether he ignored pleas of his subordinates.

Is the Owens family holding one of Gov. Perry's family members hostage somewhere that Rissie gets to run the parole board and her husband, Ed, now gets to run TYC despite the history alleged above? Hell, Owens thinks TYC's safety problems are already fixed. At least mismanagement of Texas' criminal justice system is being kept all in the family!

I don't know if this document is a "smoking gun" against new TYC chief Ed Owens, i.e., if it's enough to get him fired so soon after he was appointed. It might be, in the current environment.

In any event it's certainly an allegation that he and others at TDCJ covered up a sex scandal - allegations that TDCJ answered with a cash payment instead of a public defense in court. We don't know from this document what Owens did in response to the complaints he received from subordinates, and it sounds from my sources like this was settled before it reached the discovery phase.

Since the case was settled, Owens will never be called to account through this legal action. But it seems like, if Governor Perry was going to order TYC to appoint someone, he'd have picked somebody about whom TDCJ hadn't just settled a lawsuit alleging he'd covered up a sex scandal!

This might turn out to be a clumsier political move than the friggin HPV vaccine. We'll see. Anyway, thanks to Mr. Pelz at TexasJustice.Org for responding to my request for more information about the case.

MORE

Sexual assault victims: GPS, residency restrictions, and 25-year minimums in Jessica's Laws won't help

I hope every Texas senator reads the position statement on the website of the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault before voting on HB 8 (aka "Jessica's Law," see prior Grits coverage linked here). TAASA comes out in opposition to three proposals commonly put forward by proponents, supposedly, as ways to PROTECT victims of sexual assault. But according to TAASA's position statement (pointed out by a helpful reader):

While Jessica’s Law varies from state to state, several core components of the law remain the same. These include:

• Twenty-five year mandatory minimum sentences for any offender that rapes a child under a certain age (typically 11-14)
• Electronically monitor sex offenders for life through Global Positioning Systems (GPS)
• Create 2,000 foot Predator Free Zones surrounding all parks and schools

Initially, these proposals may seem to carry merit, but after closer examination all three have flaws so serious that their implementation may result in communities that are less safe.

Typically anytime the Victims Rights folks and criminal justice reform advocates like ACLU both oppose an idea, it's probably a really bad one, for many different reasons, or at least it's worth a second (or third) look. That's certanly the case at this point with House Bill 8, which contains two of the three provisions TAASA identified as potentially making victims less safe.

Go read the rest. Like TAASA, I'm especially opposed to adding a 25-year minimum, especially when it's only on these "continuous abuse" cases. Now every politician in the state will go home and run campaign ads on the TV saying child molesters will get 25 years because of their vote. So the public will think that's the penalty, however the bill is actually crafted. Leaving it at a regular second or first degree felony (2-20 or 5-99) leaves the assessment of the lengthiest sentences in the hands of a judge or jury.

The GPS tracking and residency restrictions opposed by TAASA are cumbersome, stupid, and create hardships on ex-offenders that encourage recidivism instead of helping them rehabilitate and succeed, so I oppose them, too. But those are not immediately dangerous to victims the way that mandatory minimums are. There will be families who don't report Grandpa because the 25-year minimum would be a life sentence. If that happens, or rather, when it does, where will these preening legislators be then?

Updates on the criminalization of business, jail diversion for the mentally ill, police as "community caretakers," and the War on Sniffles

Several non-TYC related stories around the web deserve readers' attention, and also show, IMO, why you're not fully informed if you don't read blogs in addition to the MSM. We need both, and this afternoon that's what we've got:

• Tom Kirkendall is thinking about the criminalization of business.

• The managing editor of the Texarkana Gazette is tired of his role as a footsoldier in the War on Sniffles.

• Billy Clyde says lobbying the Texas Lege would be more fun without clients or the Internet.
  

• A Texas appellate court, says the Fourth Amendment blog, says an erratic driving motion does not justify a traffic stop based on a "community caretaking function."

• A Dallas TV station examines jail diversion programs for the mentally ill, while Jeralyn says it's time to stop putting the mentally ill in solitary confinement.

But if you really can't get enough of your TYC fix today, Kuff has more on an underpublicized story in Corsicana, and South Texas Chisme says there's plenty of blame to go around. "No need to be stingy."

Grits to Pols: Stop the preening, folks, EVERYBODY'S culpable on TYC

Here's the archived video link to yesterday's first hearing of the Joint Select Committee on Operation and Management of the Texas Youth Commission. Overall it was an instructive session, though slow at the beginning, and a bit too full of preening, heart-wrenching speeches that seemed a little inappropriate given that legislators on key committees were asleep at the switch just like the clueless TYC board.

I'm sure if everyone's districts weren't ridiculously gerrymandered the public would be more likely to issue no confidence votes against the Legislature, too!

Anyway, to skip the introductory niceties and get to the good stuff, I'd suggest starting at the 1 hour and 11 minute mark where the committee begins to question the Attorney General's representative.

As I mentioned in the comments over at BurkaBlog, I remember sitting in a Senate hearing in 2005 when then-TYC director Dwight Harris mentioned, at the end of a long meeting, that he wanted to provide information about allegations of sexual abuse in West Texas. The Houston Chronicle found the video and described the meeting thusly:

Whitmire presided over a March 15, 2005, meeting of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee at which Harris attempted to update him and other committee members about an investigation "about sexual impropriety between staff and youth" at the Pyote facility.

Whitmire dismissed the comment, saying, "You can brief us at an additional time."

I thought at the time, 'somebody oughtta file an open records request to see what that's about.' But I did not. And the Senate committee did not, nor did their staff. Nor anyone present in the quite-full room. Nor anyone listening on webcast.

For that each of us, in our own way, are culpable. I regret now not just shooting an open records request off. My only reason: I was employed at the time by ACLU of Texas to work on different issues, knew little about the juvie system, and had my hands full with other topics. I'm sure everyone in the room who heard that had their own reason for not acting.

But there was one reason nobody felt it was urgent: We were given the impression that Harris was on top of it. Even if we didn't know the details, HE knew, and it was his job to take care of it. After all, he was speaking up volitionally to inform the senate committee. That was almost two years ago!

I think legislators and the TYC board should have been more aggressive overseeing the agency, and they must be in the future, not just regarding sexual but also physical abuse, and retaliation against students and staff who file complaints. (They need to look at the same problems at TDCJ, while they're at it.) Legislators also need to be held accountable for the causal relationship between understaffing and abuse.

But they aren't culpable like TYC's Dwight Harris, Joy Anderson, or Ray Worsham, or Wade County DA Randy Reynolds. They demonstrably knew the details and apparently looked the other way. Before it's over, those folks are going to have some serious 'splaining to do.

UPDATE: Pegasus News reports that Ray Worsham was suspended this morning. "Apparently Worsham changed documents in the West Texas State School Inquiry." More on Worsham from the Dallas News. Vince analyzes TYC's board minutes for discussions of abuse.

See full Grits coverage of yesterday's hearing:

• Owens: TYC is safe for kids ... WHAT?!
• TYC Scandal shows the politics of crime and punishment
• Should Rangers "take the hit" on TYC?
• Can Texas judges know kids sentenced to TYC are safe?

Can Texas judges know kids sentenced to TYC are "safe"?

News around the state is surfacing that calls into question Texas Youth Commission interim chief Ed Owens' assertion that TYC facilities are "safe" for kids:

• The Brownwood Bulletin says law enforcement has finished another investigation of sexual abuse at a TYC facility, this time involving three young women that "happened in a small storage closet." The employee in question resigne in August 2005 but was not arrested or prosecuted.

• Two guards who were later fired for neglect were away from their posts when a boy in Corsicana was brutally beaten. Reported the Dallas News: "Records obtained by The Dallas Morning News under the Texas Public Information Act include accounts of guards striking handcuffed inmates, encouraging inmates to fight one another and standing idle while beatings occurred. In one case, a guard threatened to throw a handcuffed inmate off a roof."

• Ralph Blumenthal at the New York Times has the story of another abused youth who spent his TYC stint at the Giddings state school.

This in addition to the discovery this week of a registered sex offender working as a guard at a TYC facility in Coke County, and of course the Pyote scandal. The feds are investigating completely separate complaints at facilities in Edinburg and San Saba. By their own statistics, abuse rates at TYC units have tripled in recent years.

Rep. Harold Dutton's question yesterday to Owens was whether judges should feel confident that children sentenced to TYC are safe. How many such incidents must surface before judges must reasonably conclude they're not?