The Springfield News-Leader publishes the OpEd, "Death penalty: Questioning cost of punishment," by Donna Walmsley. With only a few weeks into the new legislative session, our state senators and representatives are striving hard to attain a balanced budget.One public policy...
Support for Missouri Cost Study
↧
↧
Could It Happen Today?
By Jovon Ferguson YCTeen Staff WriterThis story originally appeared in YCteen, a magazine written by New York City teens. YCteen is published by Youth Communication, a non-profit organization that helps marginalized youth develop their full potential through reading and writing. It is an excerpt from a longer article titled "The Central Park Five," which ponders the question of whether an injustice like the wrongful conviction of the Central Park Five could happen today. As an African-American teenage boy growing up in New York City, I'm not afraid of the society I'm living in, but I am conscious of the threats around me. I keep in mind the history of prejudice, racism, and injustice that America has tucked away in its pocket, and I know I have a target on my back. I know I'm not safe from being wrongly accused, because it has happened to me and others around me far too often. Every day, when you share long gazes with police as they look you up and down deciding whether to stop you or let you go on, you are reminded of their presence and reputation. You are reminded of the aggressive nature of their stop and frisks, and their tendency to grab anyone who "fits the description." That is the kind of accusation you face as a young black man. I remember one of my friends telling me about his run-in with the police. They stopped him while he was walking past the basketball courts and cuffed him to one of the poles, searching him and even slapping him as words were exchanged. He had nothing on him. My point is that injustice is ongoing, large scale or small scale. Things like this continue to occur in our society because there is little opposition. Our vision of what's right has been impaired by racism, fear, and prejudice, and if we don't side with justice, injustice will keep happening. We can't be so quick to turn off our mental light bulbs and not think for ourselves. We can't just brush off the Central Park Five, any more than we can brush off Sean Bell and Trayvon Martin and countless others-they're reflections of our society. Read the full article and watch the Youth Communication's video interview with Yusef Salaam, a member of the Central Park Five. Learn more about the Central Park Five case. Check out our youth sub-site to learn about other wrongfully convicted young people.
↧
What If A NYC Consultant Is Accused Of Inside Trading
An individual who works as a financial consultant to New York City companies may be vulnerable to charges of insider trading if he or she is not vigilant with the confidential information that becomes available to them in the course of their work. A consultant who is not an employee of a particular company and [...]
↧
Basics of a Georgia Lawsuit
View More Business Law Articles & Videos Summons and Complaint: If you have a legal issue or complaint the first [...]
↧
What Is Bribery?
One criminal charge that public officials are particularly vulnerable to is the charge of bribery. Often, such charges may arise in the context of officials who deal with private contractors. Many branches of local, city, state, and federal government either hire private contractors for government work, or are the gatekeepers to parceling out government funds [...]
↧
↧
"Medical marijuana grower gets 5 years in federal prison"
The title of this post is the headline of this article from Montana concerning a high-profile federal sentencing case (which I have not recently blogged about because I ended up, for complicated reasons, meddling in a little part of the...
↧
Under what DUI situations is the Ignition Interlock Device (IID) required in Illinois?
You are arrested for an Illinois DUI (Driving Under the Influence) You have posted bond, been released from jail and have been assigned a court date. You have in your hand a bunch of papers and are wondering, what now and what does this all mean?
You will probably receive a confusing array of uninformed advice in answer to this uncertainty. In order to understand what is going on, it is important for you to realize some fundamental things.
One critical item to keep in mind is the distinction between a driver's license suspension and a revocation. A suspension is a temporary withdrawal of your right to drive in the state of Illinois. 625 ILCS 5/1-204 When the temporary period ends, your right to drive requires nothing more than paying a fee to the Illinois Secretary of State, provided that your driving privileges are otherwise valid.
In connection with a DUI offense, one of the things that can prevent your driver's license from being otherwise valid is a driver's license revocation. 625 ILCS 5/1-176 A revocation effectively terminates your current license, rather than simply putting it on hold as does a suspension. In order to be entitled to drive again, you must have a driver's license hearing with the Illinois Secretary of State.
A driver's license revocation occurs after a DUI conviction. DUI is a criminal charge which requires involvement of the courts and a determination that the state has enough evidence to find you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Your right to apply for a new license is denied during the period of your revocation. That period will be one year for a first conviction, five years upon a second conviction and ten years with a third conviction. If any arrest that results in a fourth or later conviction occurs after January 1, 1999, you can never apply for a license. 625 ILCS 5/6-208
In many circumstances, even though you cannot apply for a full license, the Secretary of State is authorized to grant you a hearing to request a restricted driving permit (RDP) that allows you to drive for limited purposes (employment, medical for you or family members, support group meetings, court ordered community service, day care and school for you and family members). However, upon a second or more conviction, you must wait one year before you may apply for an RDP.
There is also a waiting period of one year if you are under 21 at the time you are arrested for a DUI for which you are later convicted. Another situation that will block you from receiving an RDP hearing is if at this is your second DUI offense in the past five years.
Your right to request an RDP will be put on hold for one year if you took a chemical test at the time of your second arrest and three years if you did not take a test. These time periods, by the way, apply even if the DUI charge is dropped, or in other words, even if you are not convicted of the DUI.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
MN Drivers Should Beware Continued Aggressive DWI Enforcement Over Super Bowl Weekend
Drivers in Minnesota eager to engage in some Super Bowl Sunday festivities need to heed warnings by cops that they intend to be out in force this weekend. Police departments across the state have said they will have extra officers out and will be operating checkpoints to try and catch drivers who’ve had a little [...]
↧
MN Drivers Should Beware Continued Aggressive DWI Enforcement Over Super Bowl Weekend
Drivers in Minnesota eager to engage in some Super Bowl Sunday festivities need to heed warnings by cops that they intend to be out in force this weekend. Police departments across the state have said they will have extra officers out and will be operating checkpoints to try and catch drivers who’ve had a little [...]
↧
↧
On 21 July 2003, the defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of sexual abuse
On 21 July 2003, the defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of sexual abuse in the second degree. The court then provided the defendant with a sentencing commitment of 10 months incarceration. Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law, sentencing was adjourned, for the purpose of a presentence report to be prepared by the Department of Probation, until 28 August 2003 when the presentence report was prepared and was made available to the defendant. However, at the request of the defendant, sentencing was again adjourned until 15 September 2003, then until 26 September 2003, again until 10 October 2003, and again until 24 October 2003. The presentence report referenced the defendant's prior conviction of a third degree sexual offense in Prince County, Maryland. It also noted that, following that conviction the defendant failed to register as a sexual offender as required, and also violated probation. On 24 October 2003, the defendant again requested that sentence be adjourned and for a hearing to determine the risk level to be assigned by the court. On 30 October 2003, sentencing as well as a hearing date was set, at which time the defendant requested yet another adjournment of sentencing and hearing until 5 November 2003.
On 3 November 2003, the Board forwarded the risk assessment instrument to the court, as requested. On 5 November 2003, the court provided a copy of the risk assessment instrument to both parties. Thereafter, it was requested by the defendant that the court abide by its 10-month commitment and sentence him, but adjourn the hearing until some time after the defendant's release. According to the defendant, Correction Law provides that determinations by the sentencing court shall be made within thirty calendar days prior to release; 20 days notice of the determination proceeding and a copy of the Board's recommendations must be provided to him; and that additional time was needed for discovery.
The court denied the defendant’s request. The SORA contemplates the Board's risk level recommendation being made to the sentencing court within 60 days prior to the defendant's release. That sentencing court is then to determine the classification within 30 days prior to discharge and provide counsel with 20 days notice of the determination proceeding.
Here, by reason of the defendant's repeated adjournments of sentencing, the court would not become the sentencing court until 5 November 2003, the day before the defendant's 10-month commitment was set to expire and the defendant would be released. Clearly, at defendant's own request, the Board and the court were unable to adhere to the time frames set forth in the Correction Law. Moreover, the court did not deem it warranted to adjourn the hearing until after the defendant's unsupervised release. The Board recommended a risk level three solely upon the presence of a prior felony conviction for a sexual offense in Maryland, a conviction specifically referenced in the presentence report. The defendant had access to the presentence report since at least 28 August 2003 or over 75 days prior to sentence, and the defendant himself requested a hearing as early as 24 October 2003 or 13 days prior to the actual sentencing and SORA hearing. Since the defendant already possessed the discovery relied upon by the Board in making its assessment, there was no legitimate need, or right, to additional discovery. Lastly, the presentence report specifically references the defendant's past failure to register as a sexual offender in connection with a prior sexual offense, as well as his violation of probation for that sex crime. Obviously, adjourning the hearing until after the defendant's unsupervised release without his registering as a sex offender would have resulted in an unwarranted risk to the public. Nonetheless, the court nevertheless granted one more adjournment, until 6 November 2003, to provide defense counsel with an opportunity to review a certified copy of the Maryland court's file concerning the defendant's prior conviction for a sexual offense.
Consequently, the Board's risk assessment instrument recommended a level three designation on the basis of a prior Maryland conviction for a third degree sexual offense.
To sum it up, before the court is a proceeding to determine the classification and level of notification, pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C, to be imposed under the SORA. The defendant was convicted of the class A misdemeanor of sexual abuse in the second degree, a violation of section 130.60 (2) of the Penal Law. Prior to the commencement of the hearing, the Board of Examiners submitted to the court a risk assessment instrument which recommended a risk level three (high), based upon the defendant's prior conviction of a felony sex abuse crime in Maryland. This written decision supplements the oral decision previously rendered wherein the court assigned a level three risk designation and designated the defendant as a sexually violent offender. The question now is whether a court may, after having repeatedly adjourned at the defendant's request a sex offender's sentencing and Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA) hearing, agree to sentence the defendant, release the defendant unsupervised, and conduct the SORA hearing at a date after the defendant's release where that defendant is a prior felony sex offender who has in the past been convicted of failure to register as a sexual offender, and violated probation, and where the defendant possessed, for a substantial time prior to the hearing, the discovery relied upon by the Board of Examiners in recommending a risk level to be assigned to the defendant.
The People submitted at the hearing a certified copy of the Maryland court's file setting forth the prior sexual offense conviction. Meanwhile, the court took notice of a copy of the Maryland statute reflecting that the prior conviction is a felony with a maximum jail sentence of 10 years.
Accordingly, the court found that the certified copy of the Maryland file concerning the defendant's prior conviction established by clear and convincing evidence the existence of the conviction; independently, the presentence report, which specifically referenced that prior conviction, was reliable hearsay for purposes of the hearing; through the Maryland conviction documents and the information contained in the presentence report, the People have satisfied their burden that the defendant is a prior felony sex offender by clear and convincing evidence; and concurred with the Board's recommendation that a level three designation was warranted. It has not been established by clear and convincing evidence that there existed a mitigating factor of any kind, or to a degree, not otherwise adequately taken into account by the guidelines which would constitute special circumstances warranting a downward departure from this risk level. In sum, the defendant was found to be a sexually violent offender, on the basis of two independent grounds, namely: that the defendant was convicted of a prior offense, the Maryland felony, for which the defendant was required to register as a sex offender; and that the defendant was convicted of an offense in another jurisdiction, the Maryland felony, which includes all the essential elements of Penal Law § 130.65. In other words, the court denied defendant's request and, after a hearing, classified the defendant a risk level three and a sexually violent offender.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
Expect Increased DUI Patrols On Super Bowl Sunday
Police departments around the country are planning to ramp up their DUI detection and suppression efforts for the big game this weekend. Cops will deploy more road patrol officers than normal, and set up numerous checkpoints around the country this coming Sunday. These patrols and checkpoints will focus on popular nightlife areas and suburban neighborhoods where millions will be hosting or attending parties. Baltimore will likely see a large police presence in the downtown area, as thousands of Ravens fans will be out watching and celebrating the hometown team. The best piece of advice for any party goer who plans on drinking is to walk, take public transportation, or cab it. But, as most Marylanders are aware the state's public transportation system and taxi cab network is hardly to most accessible, so driving is usually the only option. Get a designated driver, and try to find one that'll be able to resist the temptation to drink when the Ravens are playing well, playing poorly, or doing both from one play to the next.
Police departments tend to send out press releases about increased DUI patrols because their publicly stated goal is to prevent drunk driving. But for the road patrol officers out on the street who aren't able to watch the game, their goal is to make arrests. Many false or illegal DUI arrests occur on holidays or during large events when cops are on high alert. You can be sure that police will be quick to arrest after a traffic stop or at a checkpoint throughout the day and night on Sunday at the first hint of alcohol. Simply having a few drinks and then driving is not illegal. For police to make and arrest, a driver must either have a blood alcohol level of at least .08 or display to the stopping officer that they are intoxicated or under the influence to the extent that their faculties are impaired. It is not illegal to smell like beer and get behind the wheel, so it is important to know your rights if you happen to be pulled over.
↧
What happens if the officer or trooper fails to send the police report to DOL?
Nothing. Your driver's license will not be suspended. If the officer or trooper gave you a Department of Licensing (DOL) Hearing Request and you mailed that Request with your $375.00 - the DOL will in turn send you a letter...
↧
Friday Night Open Thread
R.I.P. Mayor Ed Koch. Here are some reactions from prominent New Yorkers. He died on the day a new documentary about his life and three terms as Mayor opened.
President Obama has offered a...
[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
↧
PSA: Traffic Hacking
This is cool. (H/t Nathaniel Burney; buy his book.) If you are close to the car in front of you and the brake lights of that car go on, you have to hit your brakes—your default reaction has to be “brake until I understand what is going on.” If the other driver is braking for [...]
↧
Interesting defense arguments for sentencing leniency in Amish beard-cutting case
As reported in this local article, which is headlined "Sam Mullet lawyer asks for leniency in sentencing in Amish beard-cutting case," some of the first sentencing materials are being filed in an unusual and high-profile federal sentencing case here in...
↧
Property Damage Crash Westbound Interstate 84 Near Kimberly Exit
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE - generated by our News Release ListServer
DO NOT REPLY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDAHO STATE POLICE NEWS RELEASE
District 4 Patrol 218 West Yakima, Jerome, ID 83338-5904 (208) 324-6000
Fax (208) 324-7897
For Immediate Release: 02/01/2013 9:00 pm
Please direct questions to the District Office
On February 1, 2013, at approximately 5:15 pm, Idaho State Police investigated a property damage crash westbound on Interstate 84 near milepost 178, four miles west of the Kimberly exit in Jerome County.
Huey Roberts, 42, of New Orleans, LA, was driving a 2013 Freightliner semi-truck west on Interstate 84. Roberts drove off the roadway hitting rocks that punctured the fuel tank, spilling approximately one-hundred gallons of diesel fuel. Roberts was wearing his seatbelt.
-------------
↧
"When Crime Pays: Prison Can Teach Some To Be Better Criminals"
The title of this post is the headline of this notable NPR story, which reports on some interesting research that reaffirms my gut feeling that, at least for certain types of offenders, sending some people to prison may ultimately increase,...
↧
↧
Massachusetts Juveniles Don't Escape Creative Sentencing
Here’s another example of “creative sentencing,” a judicial approach to punishing criminal defendants that doesn’t rely on the “traditional” penalties of fines and incarceration. Alternative, or creative, sentencing is growing in popularity across the country, and here in Massachusetts, also.
And it isn’t limited to just adult defendants. Here in Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Appeals Court handed down a ruling this past week that many in the media have paid some interesting notice to. The case involves an 11-year-old boy, who it seems had too much time on his hands, and too little regard or respect for the property or the property rights of others. The boy, through an attorney, had admitted to intentionally vandalizing neighbors’ homes by spray painting the sides of their houses. A judge put the boy on one year’s probation and ordered him to pay restitution to the victims of approximately $1,000 as damages in that time frame. The boy never paid a cent. So, what is a concerned judge to mete out for punishment to such a kid? Dismiss the charge? Place the boy on some form of minor probation? Order him to just apologize to the victims? A wise judge doesn’t want to stain such a child’s future with a criminal conviction at this young age, but neither should a judge send a message to the juvenile defendant, and in the process to other young people, that vandalism or breaking the law is somehow “not that important.”
So, once informed of the boy’s failure to obey the order, the District Court judge in this case took a different turn: He ordered the boy to get a job to pay off the approximately $1,000 in property damage he was previously ordered to pay. His court-appointed defense attorney objected, claiming that the judge’s order that the boy get a job was somehow “contrary to juvenile law.” His attorney claimed that “The state itself limits what they [12-year-olds] can do …Where does a 12-year-old find work to pay this off? It’s not going to happen.’’ His attorney appealed the District Court sentence to the state Appeals Court, making all these arguments.
The Appeals Court consists of three judge panels, and this particular panel wasn’t buying this argument, at all. Judge William J. Meade, wrote that the boy could easily find work of the type that young children have always engaged in - “earning money [from] a paper route, mowing lawns, raking leaves, shoveling snow, baby-sitting, delivering groceries, [or other similar activities.]” The Appeals Court also noted that Massachusetts law permits children as young as 9 years old to work as a newspaper delivery boy or girl. Very centrally, Meade highlighted that the District Court judge’s sentence was not motivated by money, but rather to teach a lesson about respect for the law and for other people’s property. >“[The District Court judge] properly sought to teach the juvenile one of life’s primary lessons: He is responsible for the actions he takes,’’ Meade wrote. “Such an order not only provided an opportunity to build the juvenile’s character and integrity, but also to promote his life as a law-abiding citizen."
As a Dedham Massachusetts Property Crimes lawyer, I thoroughly agree with alternative and creative sentencing such as this. If the judge had agreed to “file” (or not prosecute) this case, or had similarly given this kid a “free pass,” that would send the wrong message to this one juvenile defendant, as well as to other youths as well as adults.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
↧
Have a Plan for Driving Sober on Superbowl Sunday
Superbowl Sunday is a great day in sports and is a time when many people get together and have a few beers and watch the game. Unfortunately, if you are headed out to celebrate at a bar or at a friend's house, you will have to be careful about how you get home. Superbowl Sunday is also a day when many people make the dangerous choice to drink and drive, and this choice could be deadly.
Our Boston drunk driving injury attorneys urge everyone to be smart on this upcoming Superbowl Sunday. While you can certainly enjoy the game with a drink or two, you should have a plan in place to make sure that you do not get hurt on your way home. ![1224537_couch_potato.jpg]()
Staying Safe and Sober on Superbowl Sunday
Having a beer (or a few) goes hand-in-hand with the Superbowl for many, and law enforcement is aware. In fact, efforts have been underway for years to try to curb the dangerous practice of drinking and driving on Superbowl Sunday.
In 2008, for example, the Governors' Highway Safety Association partnered with communities across the United States to launch a campaign called Fans Don't Let Fans Drive Drunk. The initiative came after 130 people died during Superbowl weekend in 2006 and it involved both increasing the presence of law enforcement on the roads and stepping up public education on the dangers of drunk driving on Superbowl Sunday.
Massachusetts' law enforcement continues to be aware of the risks of drunk driving on the biggest football day of the year. Their response will include efforts to curb dangerous drivers and there are will be more police on the streets and more sobriety checkpoints set up. These efforts, hopefully, will help to ensure that no one is killed or seriously injured in a drunk driving crash.
Football fans can also take the initiative to protect themselves and their friends from a drunk driving crash on Superbowl Sunday. Some of the alternatives you have to create a plan for safe driving include:Having people over to watch the game. If you invite guests over, you can drink in a safe environment in your home and you won't have to worry about driving after. Remember, though, that you are responsible for any guests that come to your home. This means if you have a party, you can't let your friends leave if they've been drinking unless they have a designated driver. Planning for a designated driver prior to the game. If you are going to go be going to a bar or to a friend's house to watch the football event, you should make sure that you have someone to drive you home. Be sure that there are plenty of non-alcoholic drinks available for the DD so that he or she has more incentive to stay sober. Taking a taxi home if you've had too much to drink. Sometimes, you may plan on just having a beer or two but things may get out of hand if your friends are drinking a lot or if your favorite team is losing. If you are going to drink anything at all, you should plan on taking a taxi if you don't have a ride since it can be very hard to tell if you've had too much once you have already started drinking. By following these tips and by making a commitment to sober driving on Superbowl Sunday, you can enjoy the same without putting yourself or others at risk of a drunk driving crash.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Staying Safe and Sober on Superbowl Sunday
Having a beer (or a few) goes hand-in-hand with the Superbowl for many, and law enforcement is aware. In fact, efforts have been underway for years to try to curb the dangerous practice of drinking and driving on Superbowl Sunday.
In 2008, for example, the Governors' Highway Safety Association partnered with communities across the United States to launch a campaign called Fans Don't Let Fans Drive Drunk. The initiative came after 130 people died during Superbowl weekend in 2006 and it involved both increasing the presence of law enforcement on the roads and stepping up public education on the dangers of drunk driving on Superbowl Sunday.
Massachusetts' law enforcement continues to be aware of the risks of drunk driving on the biggest football day of the year. Their response will include efforts to curb dangerous drivers and there are will be more police on the streets and more sobriety checkpoints set up. These efforts, hopefully, will help to ensure that no one is killed or seriously injured in a drunk driving crash.
Football fans can also take the initiative to protect themselves and their friends from a drunk driving crash on Superbowl Sunday. Some of the alternatives you have to create a plan for safe driving include:Having people over to watch the game. If you invite guests over, you can drink in a safe environment in your home and you won't have to worry about driving after. Remember, though, that you are responsible for any guests that come to your home. This means if you have a party, you can't let your friends leave if they've been drinking unless they have a designated driver. Planning for a designated driver prior to the game. If you are going to go be going to a bar or to a friend's house to watch the football event, you should make sure that you have someone to drive you home. Be sure that there are plenty of non-alcoholic drinks available for the DD so that he or she has more incentive to stay sober. Taking a taxi home if you've had too much to drink. Sometimes, you may plan on just having a beer or two but things may get out of hand if your friends are drinking a lot or if your favorite team is losing. If you are going to drink anything at all, you should plan on taking a taxi if you don't have a ride since it can be very hard to tell if you've had too much once you have already started drinking. By following these tips and by making a commitment to sober driving on Superbowl Sunday, you can enjoy the same without putting yourself or others at risk of a drunk driving crash.
↧
When Crime Pays: Prison Can Teach Some To Be Better Criminals
Original ArticlePrison, for the majority, is not a deterrant, it's just a money making business!02/01/2013By SHANKAR VEDANTAM
In popular lore — movies, books and blogs — criminals who go to prison don't come out reformed. They come out worse.
Scientists who have attempted to empirically analyze this theory have reached mixed conclusions, with analyses suggesting that activities like drug addiction or gangs are what determines whether the correctional system actually gets criminals to correct their ways.
What else could be at work?Listen:
Donald T. Hutcherson II, a sociology professor at Ohio University in Lancaster, recently decided to tackle the question by mining the vast data in the U.S. government's National Longitudinal Survey of Youth.
The survey conducts incredibly detailed and confidential interviews, and then repeats those interviews with the same people year after year — often going to extraordinary lengths to track down those who may have moved overseas or ended up in prison.
Included in the survey are questions about how much money individuals make legally and illegally. Because the survey also ascertains whether people have spent time in prison, Hutcherson pored through data from tens of thousands of queries to a large number of young people to establish whether illegal earnings went up or down after individuals served time.
If prison reformed criminals, illegal earnings once people were released ought to have gone down. But if prison was a "finishing school" for criminals, illegal earnings after serving time should have increased.
"Spending time in prison leads to increased criminal earnings," Hutcherson says. "On average, a person can make roughly $11,000 more [illegally] from spending time in prison versus a person who does not spend time in prison."
As to the process by which this happens, he says, "You come in [to prison]. You're 16, 17, 18 years old. You're looking around and you're thinking, 'Listen, I can learn from these seasoned veterans.' And that's exactly what you do. ... Basically, you are spending a lot of time around other criminals, seasoned veterans who know the lay of the land, and they can teach you the mechanisms — ways to get away with crime."
Because the study looks at averages, it's important to note that Hutcherson isn't saying that all criminals come out of prison primed to become bigger criminals. Lots of people, obviously, come out determined to lead law-abiding lives.
Hutcherson pointed to the role of social networks in all of our lives. In the legal economy, being connected to influential people — via networking — is widely seen as a way to get ahead on the ladder.
The same phenomenon appeared to be at work in the illegal economy as well. "You would think that being punished, serving time in prison, for young people would be a deterrent," Hutcherson says. "But look at it this way. When you leave prison, who are you going to hang out with? You're not going to all of a sudden join the chess club."© 2006-2013 | Sex Offender Issues
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
