Sentencing and Supervision Process

The sentencing process is not the best in the US.  In my last blog, I actually mentioned a different, alternative way the sentencing process could be better, " It would first start with a hearing where the crime is addressed.  The victims would play a bigger role (if they so choose) during this process, just like in restorative justice.  The judge, jury (if needed), and victim would come to an agreement on a sentence.  There would also be an evaluation of the offender with a psychiatrist.  The psychiatrist would determine if the offender actually does have the capabilities of remorse or has any under lying mental illness(es)."  I go on to state that there would be three different options once a decision had been made.  

This process would keep offenders equal and give them equal opportunities to programs, therapy and education.  With the current one the US has, there is are major biased sentencing decisions especially with mandatory minimums.  These sentences target lower income communities and are racially biased.  Take crack cocaine for example, it only take about five grams to receive 5-20 years in prison.  Whereas it take about 500 grams of powder cocaine to receive the same sentence.  Crack cocaine is much cheaper to buy and produce, meaning many lower income communities use this type of drug.  There is no difference between power and crack cocaine, rather a few small ingredients, so the effects are the same.  

With sentencing like these, this increases incarceration rates and raises the cost of prisons (whether it be to build more or to house more inmates).  

Before getting a sentence the offender needs to go through court.  This is where the offender would have there bail be posted based on their crime and how much they make.  This bail allows the offender no to go to jail to wait for the court hearing.  Once at court, the offender will receive this amount of money back.  Bail is like insurance for the government to make sure the offender will attend their court hearing.  

There is help an offender can receive from bail bondsman.  This allows an outside agency to pay for your bail, but you have to pay the bondsman a certain percentage back no matter how you were sentenced (guilty or not).  These percentages can be very high ranging 10-30%.  So let's say your bail was set at $1,000 and you went to a bondsman to bail you out.  If you were found guilty, you would still owe the bondsman $100-300 and you would need to pay any fines, court fees (lawyers), community service (which takes away from you making money), or go to prison (where you will not be making any money).  Now think of it this way, about 50% of all incarcerated people make $20,000-30,000/year.  This is the poverty line.  Having to pay all of these fines and bondsmen would be devastating to their well-being.

If the offender cannot pay bail, they must go to jail to await their trial.  Jail is not nice.  data shows that inmates would rather go to prison than be in jail.  Jails have no separation, offenders are coming in right off the streets so these people could be still high of their drugs or very emotional.

  

Incarceration is where offenders are lock up away from society and then comes probation where they are released back into the community.  Probation can also be used as a sentence and the offender won't have to spend any time in prison.  Probation is much more loose in regulations than incarceration and has more freedom.  The tricky thing with probation is that time can continue to be added to your sentence.  

This can happen when you are coming into contact with the police in any form.  If the judge decides that it is a bad interaction or the cops write you up, more time is added.  If you break the probation regulations then more time can be added.  Offenders meet with probation officers to make sure they are following rules and staying out of trouble.  Probation officers can also advise/refer treatment programs and be there to support the offender. 

I do not support mandatory minimums and think probation could be better utilized.  Mandatory minimums separate socioeconomic classes.  Offenders need to be judged on their offense individually and assessed to see for the root case of crime.  After this assessment, the court can order the correct treatment/sentence for the offender.  If we use probation more rather than prison, then the cost of prisons and jails would decrease.  This would allow more funding into the probation process so there can be more one-on-one interaction with offenders and probation officers and there can be more resources to help offenders get education, rehabilitation, therapy, career building classes, and into treatment programs.