A Matter of Opinion
This afternoon, leaving the office, I ended up striking up a conversation with a probation officer on the way out. Naturally, the recent election came up. Let's just say we had very different takes on what the election meant.
First off, this P.O. is a cop. He's go the short hair, the little mustache, the talk, all of it. I get the impression that he's the kind of guy that would actually jump in when shit gets crazy. I don't know if he was ever actually employed as a cop. He's old enough to have had a full career and then retired and started a second career. But he's cop through and through.
He seems to think that the election turned out as it did because the current prosecutor got voted out of office because she tried to control too many things and "didn't prosecute." Those are his words, not mine. He was lamenting the fact that she was offering diversion in so many cases. He pointed out that there is a loss of revenue because people don't actually pay probation when the case is diverted, because they aren't on probation. So, apparently, she was a softy that was going to bankrupt the county. ... Or something.
The common wisdom in our office is that the prosecutor alienated a fairly large proportion of the electorate by locking people up over minor stuff. Of course, we're just P.D.'s.
But what really struck me was that the criticism that she didn't prosecute cases. Last I knew, the duty of a prosecutor is too seek justice. Not necessarily long terms of incarceration in every case, or hefty fines, but punishment which fit the offense and the offender.
Did I mention that these are just misdemeanors?? Most of my clients wouldn't have any interaction with the criminal justice system if they learned to deal with their anger better, used better judgment, or fell in love with people that dealt with their anger better. The solution to these problems is simple, I think: education and a sense of empowerment or ownership over their own lives. Effectuating change on a cultural level, though, is beyond the scope of this entry, anyway.
So, as far as I'm concerned, doing justice in these misdemeanor cases mostly means making some sort of positive intervention. Maybe sending a guy to an anger management course, or making a kid going to a prison and talking to the inmates there. Somehow, trying to give the client some sort of perspective on their own actions and how they impact others. It seems to me that the social costs of locking someone up on a misdemeanor for retributive purposes onlyh exacts a social cost that is to high. Children lose contact with their parents, and incarceration becomes normalized for them. The client comes out of incarceration having lost their apartment, they're behind on bills and have to find a new job. And, if they have any reflective sense whatsoever, they are altered by the fact of incarceration. Why pay all these social costs, when it's possible to intervene and make a change for the better? What the hell ever happened to rehabilitation?
But maybe I'm just bleeding heart liberal.
First off, this P.O. is a cop. He's go the short hair, the little mustache, the talk, all of it. I get the impression that he's the kind of guy that would actually jump in when shit gets crazy. I don't know if he was ever actually employed as a cop. He's old enough to have had a full career and then retired and started a second career. But he's cop through and through.
He seems to think that the election turned out as it did because the current prosecutor got voted out of office because she tried to control too many things and "didn't prosecute." Those are his words, not mine. He was lamenting the fact that she was offering diversion in so many cases. He pointed out that there is a loss of revenue because people don't actually pay probation when the case is diverted, because they aren't on probation. So, apparently, she was a softy that was going to bankrupt the county. ... Or something.
The common wisdom in our office is that the prosecutor alienated a fairly large proportion of the electorate by locking people up over minor stuff. Of course, we're just P.D.'s.
But what really struck me was that the criticism that she didn't prosecute cases. Last I knew, the duty of a prosecutor is too seek justice. Not necessarily long terms of incarceration in every case, or hefty fines, but punishment which fit the offense and the offender.
Did I mention that these are just misdemeanors?? Most of my clients wouldn't have any interaction with the criminal justice system if they learned to deal with their anger better, used better judgment, or fell in love with people that dealt with their anger better. The solution to these problems is simple, I think: education and a sense of empowerment or ownership over their own lives. Effectuating change on a cultural level, though, is beyond the scope of this entry, anyway.
So, as far as I'm concerned, doing justice in these misdemeanor cases mostly means making some sort of positive intervention. Maybe sending a guy to an anger management course, or making a kid going to a prison and talking to the inmates there. Somehow, trying to give the client some sort of perspective on their own actions and how they impact others. It seems to me that the social costs of locking someone up on a misdemeanor for retributive purposes onlyh exacts a social cost that is to high. Children lose contact with their parents, and incarceration becomes normalized for them. The client comes out of incarceration having lost their apartment, they're behind on bills and have to find a new job. And, if they have any reflective sense whatsoever, they are altered by the fact of incarceration. Why pay all these social costs, when it's possible to intervene and make a change for the better? What the hell ever happened to rehabilitation?
But maybe I'm just bleeding heart liberal.
posted by swd at 10:31 PM
1 Comments:
It's possible you are a "bleeding heart liberal," you are a public defender, after all. But I do know many people (some prosecutors, even) who share your views on what a prosecutor's job is.
Post a Comment
<< Home