|
|
|
Following is the contents of a fact sheet
developed by the steering committee of HJR 80
Basic Fact Sheet about Long-Term Prisoners (including lifers and C#’s) Sentencing Issues o Reduction in Sentencing § Models in other states · Which states have parole, and who is eligible and when § Reintroduction of good time and / or meritorious good time § Making the case for those who would have gotten relief if Apprendi was retroactively applied o Parole for C# Prisoners and other issues related to C# prisoners o Life Without Parole § Who has LWOP in Illinois? · Demographics · For what offenses o How many are mandatory lifers? § Double homicide statute § Death eligible § Habitual offenders § Recidivist sex offenders o How many have discretionary life sentences § Juvenile Lifers Health Care in Prison o Medical Care § Medical parole? (analysis of other states) § Increasing need for geriatric care as the prison population continues to grow and age o Mental Health Care Mental Development: are there psychological predictors that can help us determine who commits crimes and who has the potential (better or worse) for rehabilitation? Conditions in Illinois Maximum-Security Prisons o Programs for long-termers § What kinds of programs to other states have in their maximum security prisons? § What did Illinois used to have in terms of programming at maximum-security prisons? § How does programming affect recidivism? § How does programming affect prisoners’ behavior? § Does programming have an effect on correctional staff or prison safety, generally? o Transfers: Making the case that long-termers and lifers can be housed in lower-security facilities § How many long-termers have tickets for assaultive behavior? § How many long-termers have had tickets in the last 10 years of their respective sentences? § Evidence of long-termers thriving in lower-security facilities (C#’s a good example) o Honors Prison / Dorm § Example of G Dorm at Stateville § Other states that have honor dorms / prisons § Is housing the best-behaved prisoners in honor dorms a practical solution to impediments of programming (e.g., movement) § How would have having an honors dorm or prison benefit the IDOC and the safety of the people who live and work in the prisons? o Clemency: § Revamp the guidelines to make clemency a more viable option for those who deserve it; and incentive for good behavior § Apprendi retroactivity cases Tamms: special study on inmates at Tamms (Tamms’ Families Committee) Restorative Justice: Bringing victims and the offenders together Loved ones of the Incarcerated: o How does long-term imprisonment affect the families and friends of those who are incarcerated? § Larger community effects of long-term incarceration
Following are direct and exact quotes from the Illinoisprisontalk website which delineates their intent and desires for HJR 80 and reveals in general their unsympathetic attitudes about victims of crime. By the way, since these quotes are reproduced exactly from a public forum (to which the rules of copyright do not specifically apply) with credit given, the owners of the IPT website cannot demand their removal from this website, especially since they have freely quoted from this website and are always welcome to do so. "I think also that victims play too big a role in the criminal justice system. A conviction and sentencing should be based ONLY on the crime itself, not the impact on the remaining family members. There are too many variables that play into that. There are many victims who do not have family to speak out loud about the pain and suffering one feels, so that prisoner spends less time behind bars than those that have very vocal family members? What makes the murder of a lawyer (or other professional) any different than that of a homeless person? I believe the victims can have a voice in the courtroom, but only once a defendant has been convicted and sentenced, a victim impact statement should have no bearing on one's punishment, nor should it have any bearing on parole hearings as well. Oftentimes parole is denied based on the nature of the crime and/or the impact on the victim's families, when truth be told, it should be solely on the individual's ability to take responsibility for his actions and to work toward improving him/herself and only then should one be given the opportunity to prove themselves." [Scout - May 24, 2006] "Offenders must be given the opportunity to search their souls and minds and reverse their course in life. They must be given the tools to affect a change in themselves and the hope for returning to society if they are successful . The decision of parole and release must be returned to the Parole Board. This needs to be a case by case determination after an offender serves a minimum number of years. Our justice and penal systems in Illinois are in a downward spiral and HJR80 is seen by many directly affected as a last chance to change this destructive, costly and inhumane course. I don't know what direction those appointed to the HJR committee will persue. When the committee is formed I'm certain there will be much public input. I hope sensible heads will prevail and our State will consider the drastic changes that need to be made when HJR80 is studied." [Dazzler - May 24, 2006]
"The key word here is crime victim, the
families of a murdered individual, although affected by the act, are not the
victims in a crime." [Scout - May 28, 2006] "So, the victims' families don't want to have to go, periodically, before a parole board? Well good. Don't go. Stay home if the only reason you are going is because in your mind you believe a person should spend the rest of his/her life in prison, and you have no intention of finding out whether or not that person has changed and meets the state's requirements to be released. We have a parole board with members on it to whom we have intrusted the responsibility of deciding when - or if - a person has been rehabilitated and is safe to release to the public. I think it should go without saying that people who knew the victims will be opposed to his/her release. " [Jims - May 28, 2006]
"Well first of all, as I have said numerous times in
numerous posts, bringing back the parole system would look at inmates on a
case-by-case basis. There would be no guarantee that anyone would absolutely be
paroled. But it would give those inmates who have put in the effort and have
worked hard to change their lives while incarcerated another chance. That is,
after all, Constitutionally speaking, the role of Corrections though in recent
years we have allowed crime victims, or more accurately, crime victims’ family
members, to have too great an impact on sentencing and parole which has obviated
the integrity of the process. "I wouldn't work to support HJR80 if it did not include getting rid of LWOP." [Jims - June 2, 2006]
"I second that!" [Scout - June 2, 2006]
"Again, unless I'm missing something (which is entirely possible), the bill is primarily focused on the cost issues surrounding the continued incarceration of those sentenced over 30 years to LWOP. There's absolutely nothing in the bill about programs, health care, inmate classification...we are touching on all these as they are just as important...but the primary focus is returning the PRB for those with lengthy sentences. Think about it for a minute, if we don't look at bringing back the parole board, what good is any of the other issues? Programs, education, good health and mental health care, etc., will mean jack-diddly with no money on the coffers to pay for it. They'll never get out of the fiscal disaster they are in, if they don't start letting some of the long-termers out...they are added DAILY to the already bulging prison population..what then, just build more prisons? As a loved one, but most importantly as a IL taxpayer, I'm thoroughly disgusted it's gone this far." [Scout - June 3, 2006] There's
been a lot of discussion here and elsewhere about inmates families, particularly
me, whose belief is that the bill is focused on (retroactively) reducing long
term sentences and not on the other topics of discussion (programs, education,
health care)....although those are very important issues, I personally do
not see these items listed out in the bill itself. I've copied the bill below.
I'd like those that are disagreeing with my perception of the bill to shed some
light as to how they perceive the bill to include these issues.
"IPT staff has taken an official position regarding
this controversial
"One more time (this makes at least the 10th time
we’ve said this) let me reiterate that we are not advocating the wholesale
release of all prisoners. We are advocating that a revised parole system be
implemented in Illinois so that some inmates, after serving a minimum sentence
of 25 years, will have the opportunity to come before the parole board IF
they meet VERY STRINGENT GUIDELINES. Some. Not ALL. SOME INMATES.
Not even MOST. What part of that is so difficult to understand?
" [Jims - November 21, 2006]
|
