The Prison Experience
I clicked on two articles tonight that I thought go together nicely.
First,
David at
Indefensible had a great post on January 13 (sorry, the perma-link seems to be broken) referencing
a New York Times article about a Minnesota judge being sent to prison and facing some of the very inmates whose sentences he either ordered or upheld. Of course, he discovers the true nature of the prisons to which he's been sentencing people.
I also found
this article, about a questionable study on prison rape.
SAN FRANCISCO - A bitterly disputed, government-sponsored study has concluded that rape and sexual assault behind bars may be rampant in movies and books but are rare in real life.
When inmates have sex, it is usually by choice, and often engaged in as a way to win protection or privileges, said Mark Fleisher, a cultural anthropologist who specializes in prisons and crime at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland....
“To take the position that it’s not a problem and prisons are safe places is asinine,” said Reggie B. Walton, a federal judge and chairman of the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission, set up under a 2003 federal law. He said Fleisher’s conclusions are “totally inconsistent” with what he has learned during 30 years in the criminal justice system.Based on my admittedly limited experience with my incarcerated clients, I have to agree with Judge Walton, rather than Professor Fleisher.
My anecdotal evidence aside, the article outlines several details that undermine the credibility of the study. Professor Fleisher conducted no literature review, provided no explanation of his methodology, and refuses to share the data supporting the conclusions.
And, oh yeah, the study confirms his previously held belief that prison rape isn't all that common:
He said his findings were no surprise to him, though he admitted his conclusion “flies in the face of what everyone believes.”
Sure thing, Professor.
Viva la New Jersey!
Say what you want about New Jersey, but I think it's a damn good state.
I went to law school in Philadelphia, just across the river from New Jersey and I visited the Garden State many times over those three years. The boardwalk-lined beaches are beautiful. It's the home state of Frank Sinatra, Bruce Springsteen, and Bon Jovi.
And now,
they've stopped executing people.
Thanks to Karl at
Capital Defense Weekly, who was there to witness the moment personally. Check out
his post.
Native Americans in Child Protection
The
Rapid City Journal is running a two part article on the interaction between the Native American community and South Dakota's child protection system.
Part OneLaw seeks to keep children's tribal identity intact
Editor’s note: This is the first in a two-part series of stories about placement of American Indian children removed from their homes. Tomorrow: Commission prompts improvements.
By Steve Miller, Journal Staff Writer
As an American Indian boy growing up in Ainsworth, Neb., Dwayne Stenstrom knew he was different from everybody else. And not in a good way.
In 1968, when he was 8 years old, Stenstrom was taken from his mother on the Winnebago Reservation in eastern Nebraska. She had a drinking problem. He and an older brother were placed in foster homes, ending up with white foster parents in Ainsworth.Part TwoState improving compliance with Indian Child Welfare Act
By Steve Miller, Journal Staff Writer
The article focuses on the identity issues caused when a Native American child is removed from his birth parents and placed with a non-Native American family. In 1978, Congress passed a law called the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) in an attempt to combat this problem. However, critics of South Dakota's system say that state officials are not complying with ICWA. Two years ago, the state formed a commission to investigate the problem.
ICWA can give rise to some awkward moments in our courtroom. When a new case comes into our court, the State is obligated to investigate whether ICWA's requirements might apply to that case. The first time a parent appears in court, the prosecutor asks the parent a series of background questions. Name, address, date of birth, etc.
The next question often prompts some puzzled looks and funny answers if I don't have a chance to warn my client that it will be asked:
Prosecutor: Are you or any member of your family a member of any Native American tribe?
Parent: Um....Do I look Indian to you?
No. No, she doesn't. She actually looks very white/black/Asian. But if I don't warn my clients about the question ahead of time, they make a face that seems to say "Why the hell would you ask me that question?" and often say something inappropriate.
Of course, aside from the technicality that the State has to make a good faith inquiry into ICWA issues, there is also the practicality that one's heritage is not always apparent from looking at them. For every ten confused looks or sarcastic answers, we get at least one person telling us that, yes, she is 1/2 Native American.
Other good responses I've witnessed have been:
Prosecutor: Are you or any member of your family a member of any Native American tribe?
Parent: Yes, I'm a U.S. citizen.
Prosecutor: Are you or any member of your family a member of any Native American tribe?
Parent: What does that mean?
Prosecutor: Do you have any Native American ancestry?
Parent: Huh? What is Native American?
Prosecutor: [stammering, trying with all his might to resist the urge to put one finger behind his head and start chanting "woo-woo woo-woo"] Um, I mean, are you Indian?
Parent: Oh. No.
Everyone's a Critic
Man held for hitting urinal work A 77-year-old Frenchman has spent a night in custody in Paris after attacking a plain porcelain urinal considered to be a major artwork.
The headline for this article on BBC's home page reads:
"Urine trouble now: Man held for damaging famous sculpture."
When I first read that, I thought that he had urinated into it. Understandable mistake. Could have happened to anyone. But no. Apparently, that's what he did in 1993.
This incident might be a little harder to defend.
The Pre-school Al-Qaida Cell
My last post featured a child's quote that seemed just a bit too perfect. Here's another one, clearly the quote of the week:
“I don’t want to be on the list. I want to fly and see my grandma.”
- Four-year-old Edward Allen's reaction to being told he is on the TSA's "no-fly" list.
A dangerous combination of Bush fear-mongering and tragic lack of common sense apparently delayed a family's air travel last month.
4-year-old turns up on government ‘no-fly’ list
Confusion over boy's name trips up family’s journey home for the holidaysUpdated: 3:58 p.m. ET Jan. 5, 2006HOUSTON - Edward Allen’s reaction to being on the government’s “no-fly” list should have been the tip-off that he is no terrorist.
“I don’t want to be on the list. I want to fly and see my grandma,” the 4-year-old boy said, according to his mother.
Sijollie Allen and her son had trouble boarding planes last month because someone with the same name as Edward is on a government terrorist watch list. My favorite part of the article is when, on the return trip, the ticket agent tells them that they should be grateful that the airport people aren't bigger idiots. I'm curious as to the exact nature of the "other process" mentioned in the article.
Child Abuse Reporting in the Media
I feel like I should apologize for the lack of posting recently. Not much has been going on here since our judge is on vacation. As much as I complain about his decisions, he is a nice guy (deep down) and it is certainly more interesting to work here when he is on the bench and I can be in court. At the very least, it gives me material for my blog.
I'm always on the lookout for child abuse/neglect stories that reach the mainstream media. Two parents were arrested yesterday after they left their children home alone while they went on vacation.
Police: Calif. couple leaves kids home alone
Children's father, his wife get a dog-sitter but leave boys without care
The article is a great demonstration of the way the mainstream media usually reports child abuse and neglect. In short, I beleive that it is misleading and irresponsible.
Updated: 8:20 a.m. ET Jan. 5, 2006MANTECA, Calif. - A married couple who got a dog sitter for their puppies but left the man’s young children home alone while they vacationed in Las Vegas were arrested Wednesday, police said.Well, the fact that they got a dog sitter is hardly relevant to the neglect. The reporter is simply looking for an interesting "angle" for the story. In abuse and neglect stories, that "angle" is usually a demonization of the parents. More on this particular "angle" later.
Jacob Calero, 39, and Michelle De La Vega, 32, were taken into custody as they arrived home on a flight to Oakland. They had left town Friday to celebrate the new year, authorities said.
2006 is off to a bad start for them.
The couple apparently told 9-year-old Joshua to look after his 5-year-brother, Jason, who is autistic. The children spent one night alone before police found them.
The fact that the 5-year-old is autistic is admittedly relevant here. The fact that he has special needs makes this worse.
'These kids are helpless,' grandmother says
The grandmother, Libbey Holden, said she called police because she had suspected the couple left the children at home in San Ramon, about 35 miles east of San Francisco.
“I had big concerns,” Holden said. “These kids are helpless.”
Joshua said his father and stepmother got each other puppies for Christmas, which they brought to De La Vega’s mother to care for before leaving town.
“I thought they loved them more than us,” Joshua told The Associated Press during an interview at his maternal grandmother’s apartment. The children’s mother died in 2003.
Come on! Are you kidding me? The 9-year-old really said that? That quote is just a little too perfect.
The converse of demonizing the parents is building sympathy for the victim. First, they give you that heart-breaking line. Then, just in case you weren't feeling enough sympathy for the poor child and his autistic brother, they throw in the line about their mother being dead.
He added that he and his brother ate cereal for breakfast and cooked frozen dinners in the microwave.
See, this is why they didn't leave the puppies home alone. The puppies can not get their own cereal and frozen dinners. Not to mention that the kids are probably toilet trained and the puppies are not. I'm not trying to be funny here, I'm trying to explain the rationale behind the "interesting angle" that the reporter is using. The reporter is trying to make it sound like the parents have more concern for the puppies than they do for their children. The real reason is that the children are more capable of functioning on their own.
It's not because they love the puppies more than you, Joshua.
“I didn’t know who I could call in an emergency. Even if I called my father, he’s far away, so there wouldn’t be much he could do,”
Calero and De La Vega each were being held on suspicion of two felony counts each of child endangerment. Bail was set at $200,000.
Kids found in OK shape
Police found the children asleep in their beds Saturday night. A gas fireplace was on, but they found nothing out of the ordinary.
Here we go. Finally. Two-thirds of the way into the story, the reporter finally tells you that no harm came to the kids. I repeat, THE KIDS WERE NOT HARMED. The reason this is buried down here is because no one would read a story about unharmed kids. Again, the reporter is just trying to make the story more interesting.
“It appears that the food and the environment were set up for them to be alone,” San Ramon Police Sgt. Brian Kalinowski said.
Ok, so this shows planning and intent. But it also shows that the parents had some concern for the kids well-being.
Officers began calling Calero’s cell phone Saturday, but he didn’t call back until Tuesday. “We get the sense that they felt no urgency for them to return home,” Kalinowski said.I would love to hear that voice mail message:
"Hello, this is Officer Kalinowski of the Manteca Police Department. Would you please come home so we can arrest you for child endangerment?"
Calero and De La Vega have requested lawyers and have refused to talk to police, Kalinowski said. Felony child endangerment carries a maximum sentence of six years in prison.
Well, of course. That's what guilty people do. They hire lawyers and refuse to cooperate with the police. This is just old hat for them. Way to make the parents look like hardened criminals!
Calero is a plumber and De La Vega works in a dental office, police said.
Rule of Child Abuse Journalism #8: If you must humanize the parents, only do it a little and do it at the very end of the article.
Ok, I'm not saying that what the parents did was not wrong. Clearly, if these facts prove to be true, they have neglected, maybe even endangered, their children. However, there is also an element of irresponsibility in mainstream news reporting of child abuse and neglect.
This case is not a typical "home alone" case. The parents we defend in child protection court don't usually go on vacation and leave the kids home. They are people with debilitating drug addictions that have rendered them incapable of caring for children whether they're physically there or not.
They are poor people who have to work multiple jobs to make ends meet. These people don't have money for child care, nor do they have employers who are understanding of parents who miss shifts to care for their children. Unlike the parents in the news story, most of the parents we represent don't have a support network of family and friends to help them with child care emergencies.
That's the danger of this type of news reporting. If this is the only type of story that you show people, the public will start to think that this is the archetype of child neglect. It is not. The archetypical neglectful parent is much more complex than the caricature presented in this article. She is less financially able, less malicious, and far more sympathetic.
This type of article is the reason that people cringe when I tell them I am a public defender, then cringe even more when they find out I represent parents accused of abuse and neglect.
I'm not saying that this article is inaccurate, but it does have an agenda. It clearly places shock value and moral outrage above presenting a balanced, engaging, nuanced story. In that way, it is more like a tabloid story than a mainstream news story. The sad thing is that this type of article is typical of major newspapers, television news, and internet news sites.
