“How am I the bad guy in that situation?” she asked.
August 24, 2016 12:09 AM   Subscribe

 In March of 2011, 12-year-old Cristian Fernandez was taken into an interview room at a Jacksonville, Florida, police station and interrogated by Michelle Soehlig, a ponytailed female officer. Before Soehlig began questioning him, she told the child, “These are your constitutional rights,” and slid over a document listing the Miranda warnings, familiar to anyone who’s seen an episode of Law & Order.

 Angela Corey,  state attorney for Florida’s Fourth Judicial Circuit, is putting hundreds of kids in prison. Duval County, the largest in her circuit, had the highest incarceration rate in Florida in 2010.  One in four Florida death sentences comes from Duval, even though it has less than 5 percent of the state’s population.

Previously

Warning: descriptions of violence, rape, violence against children.
posted by Rufous-headed Towhee heehee (37 comments total) 24 users marked this as a favorite
 
What the fuck.
posted by Slothrup at 12:44 AM on August 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


When I asked about the number of minors she charges in adult court, Corey replied that “the juvenile system was not designed to deal with kids who commit really violent crimes, or even kids who are repeat offenders, especially of violent crimes.” She argued in favor of a “hybrid” system for young people who commit what she called “very adult crimes.”

What a nonsensical justification. It sounds like she thinks we treat children differently from adults because their crimes are just cuter - less serious, less violent, more eyeroll-inducing - rather than because, you know, their brains aren't done growing yet and they typically can't understand their own actions the way that adults can. (I'm reminded of the awful Bulger case in the UK, and reading extracts from the police interviews - if I remember rightly, one of two children in that case didn't quite seem to grasp that their victim couldn't just be brought back to life). How can a criminal prosecutor fail to understand this completely basic point?
posted by Aravis76 at 1:27 AM on August 24, 2016 [37 favorites]


No one can convince me that electing prosecutors, judges, or public defenders is a good idea. You're turning people responsible for the administration of justice into politicians, where they are all rewarded for putting as many people as possible in jail for as long as possible, which is what the bloodthirsty electorate seems to demand. In my state it's bad enough that the District Attorney is elected. The notion that county PDs or judges would be elected is monstrous.
posted by 1adam12 at 1:29 AM on August 24, 2016 [79 favorites]


I think I know how to work out a Corey position. Just imagine you're in a proto-fascist state and ask what their prosecutor would do.
posted by quarsan at 1:44 AM on August 24, 2016 [8 favorites]


No one can convince me that electing prosecutors, judges, or public defenders is a good idea.

Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. Election of these people was a hard-won right intended to combat a very different set of abuses.

Well, come to think of it, a very similar set of abuses, if you substitute the middle class for landed gentry ...

Is there a middle way?

(Note: I am not in any way endorsing any of the actions by any of the individuals mentioned in the FPP.)
posted by oheso at 4:13 AM on August 24, 2016 [3 favorites]


"...the Cruelest Prosecutor in America?"

That would really be saying something.

From the little I was able to glean from the article, it sounds less like a murder than kids fighting with no adults around. I can remember, at exactly that age, knocking another kid down, and the sound his head made when it hit the asphalt. He was ok, but I could imagine a different outcome because he really went down hard. Was it intentional? Yes. Did I want to kill him? Well, we were playing "Kill the Guy with the Ball", but no. Had it been worse, what would a prosecutor have made of it today?

When I hear about what goes on today with kids, from helicopter parenting, to "zero tolerance", to juveniles prosecuted as adults, I have yet another reason to be thankful I grew up in the sixties and seventies. It seems like a kind of madness to me.
posted by sudon't at 4:14 AM on August 24, 2016 [14 favorites]


> *How can a criminal prosecutor fail to understand this completely basic point*

"It is difficult to get a person to understand something, when their salary depends on them not understanding it."
posted by I-Write-Essays at 4:27 AM on August 24, 2016 [38 favorites]


1adam12, this is one of the features of the US legal system that, as an English lawyer, appalls me. For judges to have a financial stake in the outcome of trials clearly calls their independence and lack of bias into question, but given that elected judges are bound to be viewed by voters in terms of the outcome of cases they try, this is what will inevitably happen.

Indeed, the risk of someone being seen to have an external interest in how a judicial role was carried out led to a reform in the way courts-martials are convened in the UK armed forces. Until about 15 years ago all 3 or 5 members of the panel were selected at random on a jury-like basis from eligible personnel (broadly, officers senior to the accused). However, the concern arose that the senior member, the President of the court-martial, might be seen as inclined to deliver a verdict that would benefit his or her career. As such, a series of Permanent President posts were created, expressly to be filled by an officer in his or her last post before mandatory retirement and so who could not be seen as deriving any career benefit. Meanwhile, a ban was introduced on even mentioning in annual reports whether an officer had served on a court-martial, again so as to avoid the implication that this might influence his or her career.

There is a famous case in English law, Dimes v Proprietors of Grand Junction Canal (1852) 3 HL Cas 759, in which the then Lord Chancellor sat on an appeal regarding the defendant company, in which he held shares. On further appeal, the House of Lords held that even though nobody had suggested actual bias he should have recused himself, and (in the words of Lord Campbell) set down a principle that applies to this day:

"No one can suppose that Lord Cottenham could be, in the remotest degree, influenced by the interest he had in this concern; but, my Lords, it is of the last importance that the maxim that no man is to be a judge in his own cause should be held sacred. And that is not to be confined to a cause in which he is a party, but applies to a cause in which he has an interest. Since I have had the honour to be Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench, we have again and again set aside proceedings in inferior tribunals because an individual, who had an interest in a cause, took a part in the decision. And it will have a most salutary influence on these tribunals when it is known that this high Court of last resort, in a case in which the Lord Chancellor of England had an interest, considered that his decree was on that account a decree not according to law, and was set aside. This will be a lesson to all inferior tribunals to take care not only that in their decrees they are not influenced by their personal interest, but to avoid the appearance of labouring under such an influence."

Or, to quote Lord Hewart in another famous case, from 1923:

"... a long line of cases shows that it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done."
posted by Major Clanger at 4:33 AM on August 24, 2016 [49 favorites]


Plaudits to Lord Campbell all 'round!
posted by oheso at 4:47 AM on August 24, 2016


oh god, Angela Corey. She is terrible on so many levels. She's awful here, she was awful when she prosecuted Zimmerman, and she'll be awful tomorrow. In many ways I think prosecutorial abuse is worse than police abuse because so much less attention is paid to it.
posted by Justinian at 4:51 AM on August 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


In many ways I think prosecutorial abuse is worse than police abuse because so much less attention is paid to it.

We don't shoot 'em dead, we just fuck up their lives forever and ever, amen.
posted by oheso at 5:11 AM on August 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


"...the Cruelest Prosecutor in America?"

Dale Cox of Caddo Parish, LA.
posted by sallybrown at 5:45 AM on August 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Dale Cox of Caddo Parish, LA.

Ugh

(In which Cox says he believes the state needs to "kill more people," and that while he doesn't believe that the death penalty has a deterrent effect, he believes it is justified as a form of societal revenge.)
posted by oheso at 6:04 AM on August 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


When the accused murders a black boy, she lets him walk, then when faced with national outrage reluctantly brings him to trial and throws the case.

When the accused fires a warning shot at her abusive husband, who admired in court he was trying to kill the accused, she stacks on all the extra charges she can (gotta discourage people from insisting on an actual trial instead of just taking the plea they're offered like good little peons), and files appeal after appeal in an effort to lock up the accused for 60+ years.

When the accused is a sexually abused 12 year old boy who beat his little brother so badly that he died, she seeks to try him as an adult and probably goes for the death penalty.

Here's the thing we must understand for this to make sense: THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS WANT THIS.

When these threads on the absolutely horrific and inhumane nature of the US criminal "justice" system come up everyone wonders how we can fix the problem, as if it were some sort of error.

It isn't an error. This is the system working exactly as intended by the majority of voters.

Most voters **WANT** prison rape to happen.

Most voters **WANT** prosecutors to bring the hammer down on black men while being lenient on everyone else.

Most voters **WANT** prosecutors to charge black children as adults.

This isn't happening because something weird and abbarant is happening, this isn't a bug, this is the outcome of the majority of the population believing in a punitive system of criminal justice for black Americans, the majority of the population believing that black Americans, especially young black men, are vicious animals who need to be oppressed for the protection of everyone else.

This is happening not because Corey is an out of control lose canon who is abusing her position, it's happening because she is following the will o those who elected her.

And that truly makes me despair. If it were merely a bug in the system it could be corrected, fixed, but when most voters want it I don't know how to change their minds.
posted by sotonohito at 6:51 AM on August 24, 2016 [46 favorites]


Most voters **WANT** prison rape to happen.
Most voters **WANT** prosecutors to bring the hammer down on black men while being lenient on everyone else.
Most voters **WANT** prosecutors to charge black children as adults.


I understand why you'd say that, and god knows I share your frustration, but I don't believe this to be true. I don't think that most voters know how bad it is. Prosecutors campaign on their conviction rate, not on, "I sent a bunch of 12 year olds to jail, where they will likely be raped by adults." This is why we see these kind of exposes from time to time ... because in many cases, if the voters DO know what's going on, they'll be appalled.
posted by Myca at 7:53 AM on August 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


I've been in conversations with people IRL who have said that they don't approve of the government trying to stop prison rape because prisons are too soft these days so without the rape here wouldn't be any incentive to avoid going to prison.

And certainly people know prison rape is a problem and yet take no action at all to stop it. They vote for politicians who just promise to git tuff on crime.

You're right, no one campaigns on a platform of sending kids to prison where they'll be raped by adults. But that's what "git tuff" means, that's what supporting trying children as adults means. Just because they use dog whistle language rather than saying it openly doesn't mean they are unaware of what is actually happening.

I think it is almost entirely the result of racism. Prison is for minorities, everyone knows that. It's not 100% true, but true enough that most white people are content in the knowledge that they're almost certainly not going to wind up in prison.

Policing is focused almost exclusively on minorities, white people know they get away with just about everything and the cops simply don't care, and for the few things that the cops do care about white people doing, most white people are convinced that only really horrible, awful, white people do it so they're ok with those white people (not them, of course) being badly treated too.

As long as mostly it's just people of color who suffer, white America is not only ok with it, but mostly in favor of it. There's nothing white America loves more than people of color being hurt.
posted by sotonohito at 8:07 AM on August 24, 2016 [11 favorites]


I just want to go back in time and do something to help that 12 year old rape survivor trying to raise a baby on her own. I know that's not what the article is about; I just can't get it out of my mind. As long as there are so many people so vulnerable out there, the Angela Coreys of the world will never be out of a job.
posted by The Underpants Monster at 8:31 AM on August 24, 2016 [13 favorites]


If it were merely a bug in the system it could be corrected, fixed, but when most voters want it I don't know how to change their minds.

It's a bug in the system that these decisions are made by people who have to care what voters think. From outside the US system, that's what seems completely crazy - that criminal justice is so totally in the hands of politicians, all the way down.
posted by Aravis76 at 8:48 AM on August 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


angela corey is a horrible trash demon and she is one of the people who makes me hope that some sort of justice is meted out in the afterlife because i sincerely doubt she'll ever have to own up to her sins while on this earth
posted by burgerrr at 9:29 AM on August 24, 2016


You know, sotonhito, even as recently as a year back I would have pushed back against your first post in this thread. Despite all the stuff I've seen, despite all the laments I've posted every time a police officer or private citizen murders a black person and walks away with little negative consequences (and often thousands of dollars richer), I still wanted to think that the majority of people did not want those kinds of things to happen.

At some point in the very recent past, I've come around to your way of thinking, to understanding that people want prosecutors like Corey and McCulloch (Ferguson MO), they want fleeing unarmed black suspects shot in the back, they want Philando Castile killed, they want Diamond Reynolds questioned for hours like she's the one who did something horrific, they want black suspects to get the Freddy Gray treatment, they want mosques and Muslim communities secretly surveilled, they want Muslim kids hauled off to the office and threatened by administrators and police officers without their parents present for bringing "scary" looking electronics to school, they want women to be denied autonomy and control of their reproductive destinies, they want trans people to be treated like a class of untouchables, they want cities collecting revenue off the backs of black people, and so on and so on.

And they want Corey and McCulloch and Sheriff Joe and all the others to conduct their own internal investigations that clear all of the officers and prosecutors and everyone involved of any wrongdoing.

Don't get me wrong: I know I have many allies. Comments and MeMail from folks here on MeFi after each incident have been a great source of comfort, as have messages from non-black friends on FB. And I see massive protests that include all kinds of people in cities around the country.

But it's becoming harder to ignore the fact that, as I've often seen said here on MetaFilter, that a system does what it's designed to do, and most Americans are fine with that system as long as it doesn't harm them personally. And if they think that any change to the system will inconvenience or disadvantage them in the slightest way, they will fight that change with all their hearts. Hence the continued power of Corey, McCulloch, Cox, et al.
posted by lord_wolf at 10:38 AM on August 24, 2016 [16 favorites]


Angela Corey's main opponent is one of Cristian Fernandez's defense attorneys. Before you get excited, she also defended FSU when they were sued by the woman that Jameis Winston (allegedly) raped. But, she wasn't HIS attorney, so I guess there's that.

I could have voted for Melissa Nelson in the primary, but jackass misogynist Kenny Leigh jumped in last minute and made it a closed primary. He's openly supportive of Angela Corey and has donated to her campaign. Since there's no Dem candidate for State Attorney, whomever wins the primary will be the only name on the general ballot.

Honestly, sometimes it's super super depressing living here.
posted by hollygoheavy at 10:44 AM on August 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


Regarding whether there is a middle ground between appointed judges and elected ones, the answer is yes. In some states, judges are appointed by the governor but are then subject to a retention vote every few years. And generally, unless they really screw up, they're retained. Seems like a good compromise to me.
posted by craven_morhead at 11:01 AM on August 24, 2016


No, NOT a majority of people in Duval county want Angela Corey. She's gaming the election and it's really really frustrating for the people who have grown up, raised kids and continue to live here because this is home. People here keep fighting the corruption, but it's exhausting and very dispiriting when we read lol Florida commentary. Here's what is going on with this mess:

Judge dismisses alledging Angela Corey write in conspiracy

In 1998 there was an amendment to the state constitution that said if there was no opposing party candidate in a general election, that the primary would be an open primary. In 2000, Katharine Harris ( yes, that one) wrote an opinion that a write in candidate would count towards closing a primary.

In these shananigans, Angela Corey's campaign manager filled the paperwork for a last minute, write in candidate who openly said he supported Angela Corey and had donated to her campaign. The new write in candidate is a "men's only" family law attorney with some really disgusting advertising. Write in candidate are considered "opposition" candidates and so the primary was closed by law. Now that the primary is closed, only 320K Republicans will decide this election, and almost 450K Democrats have no vote. 96% of Black voters here are registered Democrat.

Democrats sued and the case was dismissed, but the judge even side eyed the whole thing but said according to previous rulings against Dems in a similair case in Broward county, he had to rule to keep the primary closed. Now it's on to the Florida Supreme Court, but let's not hold our breath.

So, no. More than 50% of people here want her out but we're not able to vote. This is clear voter suppression.
posted by hollygoheavy at 11:09 AM on August 24, 2016 [14 favorites]


> No one can convince me that electing prosecutors, judges, or public defenders is a good idea.

Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. Election of these people was a hard-won right intended to combat a very different set of abuses.


Can you elaborate? I grew up in a state where these positions are all appointed rather than elected, and while of course the judicial system there is not perfect either, on the whole things work pretty well, and you don't have blatant politicization of the law by judges, prosecutors, or PDs to this extent. When I first moved to a state where judges are elected, I felt fundamentally angry at being asked to use my vote to select between candidates whose credentials I am not qualified to evaluate. In the end, I voted for judges who responded to interview questions with vague statements to the effect that the law is technical and they intended to rule impartially on their best understanding of it, and against those who stated any specific prejudice on how they would rule.

In a republic, these are the kind of positions that require tremendous technical expertise that we should trust our elected officials to appoint, not vote for directly. I can see an argument for a mechanism for impeachment or veto by direct vote, but I don't want my prosecutors, judges, or public defenders to be politicians, I want them to be practitioners of the law.
posted by biogeo at 11:51 AM on August 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


> I understand why you'd say that, and god knows I share your frustration, but I don't believe this to be true. I don't think that most voters know how bad it is. Prosecutors campaign on their conviction rate, not on, "I sent a bunch of 12 year olds to jail, where they will likely be raped by adults." This is why we see these kind of exposes from time to time ... because in many cases, if the voters DO know what's going on, they'll be appalled.

Most voters really don't know how bad it is only because they willfully take the information they have heard many times, and they push it aside rather than viscerally imagining how horrible prison must be, because who wants to think about horrible things?

Then they look at that 12-year-old black boy and imagine that he's surely older, stronger, tougher, and more malevolent than the soft 12-year-olds in their own families. And every expression on that young black boy's face will justify that belief -- if he scowls to avoid crying, if he shuts down to avoid showing fear, and gods forbid he uses curse words or shows real anger. They don't want to imagine their kid in that situation, so they make it an impossible thing.

Othering people works incredibly well. Our brains can do it so easily, it's astounding.

There's this personal experience I've had that keeps reminding me of how pervasive this is: I don't have kids of my own, but I remember how I felt when I heard how Trayvon Martin was killed, how my heart hurt terribly and I immediately thought about all of the teenagers in my life. I am white, and I found that a lot of white people were truly confused when I mentioned my reaction. They just didn't understand why I was saying that a black kid was reminding me of my friends' white kids*. Uh, because they're the same age?

Watching them work through this logic in their heads is just so disheartening. Did I mean that Trayvon reminded me of a specific black teenager? No, not really, not specifically, I meant that teenagers are teenagers, they walk on the grass and eat Skittles and wear hoodies and talk on their cell phones. Heck, a lot of my friends in the suburbs live in townhouses not unlike that development in FL, of course it's terribly easy for to imagine. Ohhh, they would say after a pause, "so, you said this to Make A Political Point About Race. Well, no, not at first...but...how on earth is basic sympathy such a race-specific situation?

*This is putting aside for a moment their overarching assumption that because I am white, my close friends are by default also white, as are their kids. This is not entirely accurate.
posted by desuetude at 12:19 PM on August 24, 2016 [9 favorites]


hollygoheavy Out of that supposed majority not one single person in the Democratic Party bothered running against her?

But ok. Assume you're right.

Problem is that no one, no where, runs on criminal justice reform. It is, at absolute most, a sort of hurriedly tacked on side issue that, at best, nibbles around the edges of the problem.

When was the last time a major Democratic candidate even pointed out that thanks to a Supreme Court decision any and all statistical and scientific, evidence of discrimination is inadmissible and that, literally, the only way you can legally have racial bias considered in court is if you have a single person, on record, as explicitly stating that in that particular case, they acted as they did out of deliberate and intentional racial bias?

Even among the Democrats, even among Democratic Party prosecutors, the system persists. No one, anywhere, is talking about the fact that trial by jury (like we see everywhere on TV) is essentially non-existent. Most people in prison never saw a jury.

97% of criminal defendants enter a plea deal.

Why?

Because prosecutors have the ability to pile on charges. What might officially be a simple fight that ended with one person injured by a gunshot turns into literally dozens of separate charges, and the judges and prosecutors tell the accused that if they insist on a jury trial they'll find them guilty of every single charge and make them serve the time sequentially.

As a result arrest means conviction for almost everyone. Even people who are perfectly innocent and simply the first person the police nab almost at random take a plea bargain because the alternative is usually life in prison. Better ten years than life, no? Even if it makes a complete mockery of the very concept of justice.

And no one, in any position of power anywhere, even talks about this.

White voters, even of the less racist and mostly vaguely good intended variety, don't demand change because they're mostly willfully ignorant about the whole mess, it doesn't impact them personally so they can maintain a willful ignorance about how horribly messed up our system of criminal justice really is.

A Democratic prosecutor replacing Corey would probably drop back to the background level of awful that doesn't stand out but still imprisons people without trials, encourages policing to focus on people of color at the exclusion of whites, and justifies any and all police misconduct.

And I don't think this is because the USA is filled with Klansmen. Even in the Republican Party where Klansmen are much more openly tolerated, I doubt the average voter cackles with glee and deliberately votes in a way to produce maximum pain for people of color (mostly younger black men).

Yet, that is the effect. That toxic combination of acceptance of the status quo, simmering background unconscious racism, and a desire for the easy false peace of no one complaining over the much harder true peace of real justice results in even the supposed good guys just perpetuating more of the same.

This is similar to the problem we have with abortion laws. There are some places that haven't gone down the rabbit hole of utter evil like Texas has, but nowhere are things getting **BETTER*. No one, even in the supposedly liberal states is calling for and enacting expanded abortion access. The best we have is maintenance of a bad status quo.

No one with power, anywhere, is actively working to improve things. No one, anywhere, is running on campaigns of improving things. Nowhere is there a large movement of white people seeking true justice.

BLM exists, and remains almost entirely the providence of black activists. The great masses of white Americans, however much they aren't Klansmen, stand at best indifferent and at worst like the people Dr. King spoke of in his Letter From a Birmingham Jail, urging restraint and saying that now is not the time.

So yes, it happens because most people want it this way. I'll append to that "or are content to let it sit, and feel no need to work for change."

Like Burke said: All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

And the "good" people of America are doing nothing.

desuetude The walls of social segregation are amazingly long lasting and durable. I'm a liberal minded white guy, the only black people I spend any time with or could legitimately count as friends are my wife and a few of her family members. Otherwise I have a few passing acquaintances at work who are black and the rest of my life is a sea of whiteness.

Part of white privilege is being able to be around other white people almost exclusively without thinking about it, without effort, and without even realizing that it's the case.
posted by sotonohito at 1:08 PM on August 24, 2016 [5 favorites]


Yet, that is the effect. That toxic combination of acceptance of the status quo, simmering background unconscious racism, and a desire for the easy false peace of no one complaining over the much harder true peace of real justice results in even the supposed good guys just perpetuating more of the same.

Hit post before I revised.

I meant to add:

And also the suppressed but undeniable awareness that white America is deliberately and intentionally looting, pillaging, destroying, and hurting people of color for the benefit of white people.

I cannot help but think that for a lot of voters that awareness is a big component of the reflexive support for law'n'order. They know that they have been wronging people of color for generations and fear that if the repressive thumb of prosecution and policing were ever let up black Americans would rise up in fully justified rage and demand repayment of their stolen blood and treasure. So they vote for law'n'order to keep black people so oppressed that they will never be able to demand the return of what was stolen from them.
posted by sotonohito at 1:13 PM on August 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


No, not one Democrat on the ballot for State Attorney OR Public Defender and there haven't been for 8 years.
posted by hollygoheavy at 2:01 PM on August 24, 2016


No one with power, anywhere, is actively working to improve things. No one, anywhere, is running on campaigns of improving things. Nowhere is there a large movement of white people seeking true justice.

The fact that people honestly believe this is part of what makes it so difficult for those who are actively working to improve things to succeed in their goals. Fortunately there are enough people throughout the country using the tools of democratic change to push things forward, many of whom we saw speaking and in the audience at the DNC, that even with this kind of facile cynicism from the Left and obstructivist opposition from the Right, progress is still happening. We are all fortunate for their energy, persistence, and optimism in the face of such cynical defeat.
posted by biogeo at 2:11 PM on August 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


No one with power, anywhere, is actively working to improve things. No one, anywhere, is running on campaigns of improving things.
I'm a cynical nihilist, but this is a bridge too far. The Innocence Project, ACLU, NAACP, and dozens of other organizations fight problems with the criminal justice system every day. Journalists and documentarians help out, too. And sometimes white people in power do amazing things like restore voting rights to thousands of ex-cons despite intense opposition or impose a moratorium on the death penalty pending repeal legislation.

And the truth is that, overall, the number of incarcerated juveniles has greatly decreased since the 90's, from about 100,000 to about 70,000 today. This is because reforms have happened--in many states, juvenile incarceration has been positively linked to future unemployment and educational deficits, often leading to further criminal activity. As a result, many legislators and prosecutors have been trying to reduce incarceration and mandatory minimums in favor of probation with mental health treatment requirements, evening checkins, and family services.

I agree that there is certainly a systemic problem with our criminal justice system, from juvenile justice all the way up to military and federal courts. But I think it's hyperbolic to say that literally no one cares and that no one is trying.
posted by xyzzy at 2:44 PM on August 24, 2016 [7 favorites]


I'm no longer surprised by the depths of evil, ugliness, depravity and imbecility that so many public officials inhabit. What I am still surprised by are their always new and innovative ways of demonstrating it.
posted by turbid dahlia at 4:01 PM on August 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Innocence Project, ACLU, NAACP, and dozens of other organizations fight problems with the criminal justice system every day

I said no one with power, not no one.
posted by sotonohito at 5:33 PM on August 24, 2016


I said no one with power, not no one.
The Pew Charitable Trusts just helped Alaska reform their criminal justice system in pretty positive ways, including reforms of the parole and pretrial systems and the introduction of drug treatment and community support for inmates and parolees.
posted by xyzzy at 5:56 PM on August 24, 2016 [6 favorites]


As of today's local paper, Corey's reelection bid is in trouble. NRA is supporting her challenger.
posted by wittgenstein at 9:45 AM on August 26, 2016


The "follow the money" trail is long and sordid. How many shares of The Geo Group Inc does Angela Corey own? What about the judges on these cases where it is in the shareholders 'best interest' to incarcerate?

This boils down to the fact that incarcerations and prison population percentage have nothing whatsoever to do with guilt, innocence or justice. It has to do with the bottom line and the contract between the government entity (city, state and.or county) and the for-profit corporation that runs the prison, which may have a clause that the prison must remain xx% full to avoid penalties and fees.
posted by Monkey0nCrack at 8:44 PM on August 28, 2016 [1 favorite]


This is just to note for the historical record that Corey lost her primary election with, currently, only 26\% of the vote.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:08 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


(though of course north Florida being what it's historically been it may be she lost because she just wasn't harsh enough; I dunno)
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:38 PM on August 30, 2016


« Older 6.2 Earthquake rocks central Italy   |   Bauhaus Online Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments