Baptist Ministers and Black and Latino Caucus Oppose 3-strikes
by Christine Stuart | January 15, 2008 4:51 PM
Posted to State Capitol
A group of Baptist ministers and the Black and Latino legislative caucus said Tuesday at press conference that they do not support the three strikes legislation proposed last week by Gov. M. Jodi Rell.
Rev. Boise Kimber, president of the state Baptist convention, said three strikes legislation “puts Blacks and Latinos in jeopardy” because they make up a larger portion of the prison population than whites. Kimber said his organization, which includes more than 100,000 members, wants judges to maintain discretion over sentencing. “A judge should be able to look at each inmate and give them a fair sentence,” Kimber said.
Rep. Toni Walker of New Haven said “judges are the ones who should make changes to the judicial system,” not the legislature and not the governor.
Click the play button to see some of Rev. Boise Kimber and Rep. Walker’s remarks
Senator Eric Coleman of Hartford said “we prefer judicial discretion and would like every case determination to be made on an individual basis.”
The Baptist ministers and Black and Latino legislators would like Mrs. Rell and the legislature to address the growing prison population and put their money where their mouth is when it comes to finding money for prison re-entry programs.
Rep. Walker said there are an estimated 19,700 people in prison right now, which is 300 more inmates than the state had in custody on Jan. 1. She estimated that by the end of the month it would increase by 1,000 individuals. “We have to move people out and provide them with community services,” she said.
The problem is the spending cap. Walker said if the state is serious about providing better services inside and outside the prison setting then “where are we going to get the money to do this?”
Sen. Coleman said he thinks any reforms the legislature addresses need to be directly linked to the incident in Cheshire. He said we all know the three strikes proposal would not have impacted either of the two parolees charged with the murders of a mother and her two daughters.
Last week, Mrs. Rell proposed imposing a third strike and 30 year minimum sentence on violent offenders.
Archbishop LeRoy Bailey Jr. of First Cathedral said “we as a society are not trying to keep people out of jail.” He said when inmates are released from prison they often return to a life of crime because they’re unable to get a job when they’re released to the community and end up returning to a life of crime. He said prison becomes “a way of life.” He said the state needs more programs to rehabilitate these inmates.
Bailey said an estimated 600 inmates are released into Hartford, New Haven, Bridgeport, and Waterbury every month and the state needs to give these communities money for programs to help newly released inmates.
Rep. Marie Kirkley-Bey of Hartford said when the two Cheshire parolees were released from prison they were living at a halfway house in her neighborhood. She said she saw the older one, Steven J. Hayes, walk down the street to Kent Pizza every day. “Why don’t we send them back to the communities they came from?” Kirkley-Bey said.
“If this family was Black this would not be happening,” Kirkley-Bey said.
Comments (4)
Posted by: Steve | January 15, 2008 8:28 PM
Three Strikes is not an effective means of deterring crime. It doesn't address the roots of the problem (inequality, marginalization, disempowerment) that place people in positions where crime is a viable option. A punative solution focuses on the end result (where people may want to committ crimes, but don't because they don't want to suffer the punishment) and ignore the entire development (where people learn that committing crime is alright for their needs). If we want to stop crimes then we need to address the real, underlying problems of inequality and social negligence, and propose real, community-based solutions that treat people as people and not demonized criminals who are someone inherenly evil and unsalvagable. These are the solutions that criminologists suggest, but can't make happen because they're unpopular with misinformed public opinion. And yes, three strikes, and the criminal justice system in general hugely targets and punishes black and hispanics more than anyone else. There are a bunch of reasons for this, none of which have to do with culture or any other issue that assume there is some inherent difference between people based on race and ethnicity.
Posted by: Steven G. Erickson | January 15, 2008 11:28 PM
Judges aren't elected in Connecticut, representatives and state senators are. The elected officials represent the people, they should make sure the courts, judges, police, and others being paid with tax dollars act in the best interest of the public.
Two thirds of the Judiciary Committee legislators are lawyers. That is a conflict of interest in that they rule to make other lawyers more money, to see that they are less accountable, and put a rubberstamp on anything judges want or ask for.
What is wrong is that minorities and poorer Whites are ignored until they commit big crimes with no chance of erasing their records or ever living a normal life again. If you are rich you are given a break and your record is erased in most cases.
The elite in Connecticut wants the quality of life to be low for poor and average residents, so they hopefully move out. The elite want to keep the "riffraff" out. One way is to give as many criminal records to the little people as possible.
There is separate and unequal in Connecticut, it might be the most blatantly racist unfair state in the union.
http://starkravingviking.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Sally Joughin | January 20, 2008 12:03 PM
3-strikes and other harsher penalties will no nothing to deter crime. People who commit terrible crimes either don't expect to get caught or are incapable of thinking about consequences of the their behavior. We should be putting our tax money into crime prevention, not punishments AFTER the crimes are committed, and certainly not after THREE crimes are committed. Real deterence means providing more community services, good jobs, youth activities, helping troubled youth and mentally ill individuals, providing jobs for people leaving prison, better education in poor communities, and so on. Locking more people up for longer periods is no solution for our social problems. The legislature should step back and make intelligent choices, and not take the wrong course because of one incident, no matter how tragic.
Posted by: Ted Holcomb | February 20, 2008 3:34 PM
The Three Strikes Act will be one of the most controversial issues talked about in the state legislature this year.
Each month, The Justice Journal column Versus publishes comments by readers and leaders.
As a leader, will you please take time to visit www.thejusticejournal.com, click on Versus and submit your thoughts on this month's topic: Three Strikes?
Submissions will be printed in the next issue of our newspaper. Let us know your thoughts on this topic and how stringent you think the penalty should be: life with no parole or let judges decide?
Feel free to share this information with others who might like contribute to our Versus column.
Ted Holcomb COO
The Justice Journal
203-454-5910
t.holcomb@thejusticejournal.com