December 04, 2006
State "Supervision" Fails Again - Another Dead Cop

The Seattle P-I reports on the four breaks cut by courts and the state to gang member Raymond O. Porter, 23, who Saturday murdered King County Sheriff's Deputy Steve Cox in White Center before Cox's partners killed him. It's the third cop killing recently by a state supervisee. Olympia Democrats: any interest in doing more than currently planned about prison capacity? Corrections chief Harold Clarke, meanwhile, wants even more lenience for released convicts gone wrong yet again. Don't send 'em back to jail, he says, build new "violator centers" - where they'll presumably report between recidivist sprees. Small wonder county prosecutors oppose Clarke's plan.

The P-I's Hector Castro reports that starting in 2002, Porter: 1) violated supervision after a drug conviction and received a suspended sentence; 2) pled to lesser charges after an assault rap, and got another suspended sentence and DOC supervision; 3) pled guilty to a drug violation a month later, and was sentenced to jail and supervision but walked away from a Seattle-based work release program; and 4) was sentenced for the escape in Sept. '04, then released 10 months early this August under "community supervision" by DOC.

After a driver who crashed into a car in front of a White Center house Saturday was shot and beaten by participants in a party at the house, Cox and colleagues came to investigate. During an interrogation in a bedroom, Porter shot Cox in the head, killing him. (UPDATE: Police say Porter's gun was used in another killing four hours earlier, in SeaTac).

How long before news of the next killing by a DOC supervisee? I'm betting not more than six weeks, but I hope to God I'm wrong.

Related Sound Politics posts:

"The Face Of Evil, In A Courtroom;"

"Suspect In Cop's Traffic Death Should Have Been In Jail."

UPDATE II, 12/6/06: Porter turned his own gun on himself after having shot Cox and drawing return fire from other deputies, the Seattle Times reports today.

Posted by Matt Rosenberg at December 04, 2006 08:42 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Doesn't look to me like Raymond Porter was released "early" on any of his offenses. He served 22 or 23 months on a 33 month sentence for the June 2004 escape (crime # 4, sentenced in September 2004). This is appropriate -- the law says you serve 2/3 of most sentences, provided you don't screw up while you are in jail. He wasn't released earlier than he should have been. Everyone gets a year or two of "community supervision" after they are released.

The only lenience I see in this matter may have been by King County Prosecuting Attorney Norm Maleng. Porter was charged with second degree assault -- probably with a firearm or deadly weapon -- in April 2002, and could have gotten more than three years in state prison for this. Instead, Maleng reduced the charges to "harassment" and "trespass", which resulted in a suspended sentence.

Posted by: Richard Pope on December 4, 2006 08:58 AM
2. And how did Porter get any breaks by the "courts" in this process? Every single one of Porter's four felony convictions resulted in plea bargain deals with King County Prosecuting Attorney Norm Maleng. Porter was actually charged with five felonies, but a felony drug charge filed by Maleng in October 2002 was dismissed as part of a plea bargain deal.

Porter was sentenced by judges for each of his four felonies. However, I will bet that each of his plea bargains with Maleng included a recommendation by Maleng regarding his sentencing. And I will also bet that Maleng recommended the minimum sentence in each of these cases. And I will bet that none of the judges in any of the four cases sentenced Porter to any less time that what Maleng recommended.

Posted by: Richard Pope on December 4, 2006 09:05 AM
3. In the article, Tom McBride hit the nail on the head when he said we needed more prisons. We also need to stop releasing scumbags like Porter until they have served very long sentences. Clarke and others always have some convenient excuse as to why the perp committed another crime and just don't seem to understand you cannot rehabilitate some people.

If there is a need for more mental health counseling or drug rehab programs, offer it while the offenders are locked up, not on a "come see us when you feel like it" approach. This is just another example of liberal moonbats doing everything but fixing the problem. If these clowns are really serious about reducing the recidivism rate, then it is time to impose lengthy sentences without possibility of parole. And do away with programs like DOSA.

It would also help if the MSM would insert "Repeat Offender" in the headlines anytime a tragedy of this sort occurs. It would make it a lot harder for Clarke and his cronies to convince the public that warm fuzzy drop-in centers are better than more prisons.

Posted by: Burdabee on December 4, 2006 09:10 AM
4. So the DEMOCRATS are to blame for Norm Maleng being lenient with Porter? The DEMOCRATS plea bargained down a second degree assault (over three years in prison) to mere harassment with a suspended sentence? The DEMOCRATS plea bargained away a felony drug charge to a dismissal with no conviction?

You are partially right though. The DEMOCRATS have given Norm Maleng a free ride to re-election in 2002 and 2006 by not filing anyone against him.

Posted by: Richard Pope on December 4, 2006 09:16 AM
5. Excuses, excuses, Mr. Pope...

The laws are too lenient, the leeway in sentencing is too broad, the level of concern for CRIMINALS is non-existent.

People are starting to get PO'ed with the lack of protection from CRIMINALS.

Posted by: BRC on December 4, 2006 09:22 AM
6. I really don't care where the blame for this idoit gets placed. The problem is the system overall. The piece of crap had been arrested SEVENTEEN TIMES. I don't care if it was for speeding and jaywalking - it is clear that he showed a history of ignorance and blatent disregard for the law. It's time to start throwing away the key on repeat criminals such as this.

Thank god he got his justice - may he rot in hell.

Posted by: eric on December 4, 2006 09:22 AM
7. Richard@1, there is no way in the world Porter should have been released early last August, 10 months before his sentence ended, considering his previous record of commiting crimes three times while under state supervision, incuding escape from a work-release program. If even with the record he had, that 10-months-early release is either what the law exclusively mandates, or standard practice due to prevailing conditions, something is very very wrong. The larger issue is lack of prison capacity, and the resulting havoc inevitably wrought by too large a percentage of state-"supervised" releasees. I have altered the headline slightly, accordingly.

Posted by: Matt Rosenberg on December 4, 2006 09:29 AM
8. We may -- infact may already have -- reached a point where men like Cox will no longer step forward to defend us (I note that the SPD are advertising on billboards for recruits!) -- there are parts of Seattle that have become lawless (4th and Pike is one) -- and I have become increasingly alarmed at the rise of new gangs in my own (tony, upscale, urban village) neighborhood. Recently I have noticed three new gang symbols sprayed in my area: a bright green, an off-white and a very crimson red -- these represent NEW gangs moving into where I live. During the past 4 months I have had to call the police three times: once for petty property damage, once to remove a twenty-something nodding off on the lawn furniture at 2 AM, and once to remove a street bum sleeping on a neighbor's porch. I do not believe that in my 45-years living at my present location that I had called the police more than once before....
Talk among yourselves...

Posted by: Lew on December 4, 2006 09:46 AM
9. Recent explanations from SPD and King County Prosecutor’s spokespersons endeavored to educate the public as to why Kelley had not been formally charged for his July crimes which should have included attempted vehicular assault charges. One reason given was “ ‘This case involved property crimes, and it's not unusual for those to take several months to put together. When a case is rush-filed, it usually involves a homicide,’ said Dan Donohoe, spokesman for King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng's office.” SPD echoed similar explanations including “Officers usually focus on locating the most violent offenders sought on warrants first, said police spokesman Sean Whitcomb.”

The public, via the press, was told cases such as Kelley’s July crimes – property crimes - aren’t considered priorities or a “rush case” status since they don’t involve major crimes such as homicides.

Interestingly this recent article reports a property crime in Magnolia that appears to have been afforded “rush case” status. Essentially a painter spray painted rocks outside and sections of a house in Magnolia. SPD dispatched officers, crime scene investigators and photographers to the site. A criminal case was promptly filed. The painter was charged and is free on bond pending further criminal proceedings set for the near future.

Unlike how Kelley’s July crimes were handled SPD had the resources to immediately investigate the painter’s crimes and expeditiously forward their findings to Maleng’s office. Maleng’s office in turn filed the case almost immediately. The painter has been initially charged with malicious mischief. Swift justice.

A prudent person might ask “Why was the property crime committed in Magnolia by a berserk painter afforded such priority attention?” At the same time that prudent person might also ask “Was this deemed a “rush case” because it happened in King County Council Chair Larry Phillips’ and King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng’s neighborhood?” Naw, things don’t work that way in Metronatural Town – do they?


Posted by: Tyler Durden on December 4, 2006 09:55 AM
10. Editors Note: The Kelly referred to @ 9 was the driver who murdered Beth Nowak last month.

Posted by: Tyler Durden on December 4, 2006 10:02 AM
11. Yeah, I was disgusted to see Norm Maleng running unapposed. In fact, I voted for a write-in rather than vote for him...or leave it blank, so King Co. could "interpret" my vote.

This guy has 4 convictions? Dosen't 3 "strikes your out" apply? I am so tired of burocrates making it difficult to impossible for police to do their job...this is one of the results. It's my understanding this officer was just closing the purchase of a home near Enumclaw, and maybe an adoption also? Soooo sad.

Don't look for MSM to support law enforcement by labeling these people "repeat offenders", but do watch for them to rabidly cover the lawsuits when the family of this "misunderstood" scum file suit against the remaining officer.

Ugh...it's so embarrassing to live in King County.

Posted by: dl on December 4, 2006 10:32 AM
12. Richard, have you considered switching to decaf?

The Democrats hold the purse strings, and are ultimately responsible for the capacity to incarcerate for the city of Seattle and the state of Washington. It does absolutely no good for the DA to secure a lengthy conviction if the jail will be turning criminals back to the streets due to overcrowding anyway. If we only have a specific capacity, why seek longer convictions that are unenforcable?

Posted by: Michael on December 4, 2006 10:37 AM
13. Tyler - you are such a cynic!

Is there a way to bring a suit against Seattle/King County for this mis-use of taxpayers' money. Something like that. It seems to be well documented what constitutes a "rush case". Why do these two get to use the SPD for their personal use?

Posted by: Right said Fred on December 4, 2006 10:39 AM
14. More or less what it boils down to is that those who like to call themselve's "progressives" have no regard for individuals. They profess to be great lovers of humanity, and in rare cases they may in fact be, but their disregard for individual human beings knows no limit. Take for instance their campaign to change the law to lower car theft to the level of a teenage prank, God knows how many people's lives will be ruined by asininities such as this little gem. Personally I would like to see first offender car theives either pilloried for a week or chained to a whipping post and flogged prior to being sent to prison for five solid years. Theives driving stolen cars are a hazzard on the roads that was exacerbated by KC left wing activists, they kill and serriously injure an untold number of people and very negatively affect the lives of those whose vehicles they have stolen.

Posted by: JDH on December 4, 2006 11:46 AM
15. I empathize with law enforcement as we become increasingly overun by violent, organized criminals. Our only choices are to build more prisons or allow police to engage these people with the intent of eliminating them from the face of the earth. Why should law-abiding citizens be plagued by this scum? I couldn't care less about their horrible childhoods or how unfair society is. I have no sympathy for criminals, only for those who suffer as a result of contact with them.

Posted by: Saltherring on December 4, 2006 11:49 AM
16. dl-

Embarrassing? How about dangerous? No justice for crime victims; a PA who lets criminals skate on plea bargains so he can garner his "stellar" record of convictions without having to work at it; an SPD chief who doesn't give damn number one about protecting private citizens; and an increasing number of gangs coming up here because they know they can get away with murder here.

Embarrassed? Hell no. Armed.

Posted by: ERNurse on December 4, 2006 11:51 AM
17. This is all part of a systemic and fundamental philosophical failure in our society. By accepting the multiculturalism and fatalism spewed by our elite left leaning intellectuals, we've bred an unwillingness to actually challenge and confront the negative elements of our culture.

Time and time again we see violence, hedonism, etc. culturally tolerated and even glorified by our primary cultural voices in Hollywood, Academia and especially in left dominated government like we have in this state.

We should not be surprised when that leads to yet another killing. What we should do is work to reverse that trend by LOUDLY and CONSISTENTLY ridiculing the unnecessary political correctness and irrational tolerance in our society.

Bad ideas and bad people have bad consequences. Until we are willing to aggressively confront these bad ideas and bad people and immediately reject and confine them, we will see more of the same.

Posted by: Jeff B. on December 4, 2006 12:05 PM
18. More jails have never been and will never be the answer.

Less democrats have never been and will never be the answer.

The answer? A society, OF ALL PEOPLE, who value crime free environments. Until then....

Posted by: GOPlease on December 4, 2006 12:20 PM
19. Right on Jeff B. and the first thing to do is call them on their phoney balony "compassion." Never conceed that leftists are compasionate, they are demonstrably not. Instead look at the consequences of their policies and when they point to their intentions just laugh at them and say, "based upon the history of what policies such as you advocate have brought us, I don't believe that your intentions were ever, are now or are ever likely to be Truely Compassionate."

Posted by: JDH on December 4, 2006 12:24 PM
20. #18 why don't we just stand around singing KOOOM BY AHHH adn floating candles. Fat lot of good your suggestion wil do.

Posted by: JDH on December 4, 2006 12:28 PM
21. #18 why don't we just stand around singing KOOOM BY AHHH and floating candles. Fat lot of good your suggestion will do.

Posted by: JDH on December 4, 2006 12:29 PM
22. Jeff B. has it right. "Multiculturism" and "diversity" have become buzzwords for tolerating and appeasing those who do not choose to embrace the American way of life. Violence and evil have replaced hard work and socially responsible behavior for many in our cities. The media, social engineers and leftist city governments make excuses for criminals and attempt to bribe or reason with them, bringing much the same result as bribing or reasoning with Islamic terrorists.

Posted by: Saltherring on December 4, 2006 12:57 PM
23. God Bless the Officer and His Family.

You get what you vote for.

Thank the King County libs.

Posted by: Jack Burton on December 4, 2006 01:07 PM
24. This was clearly a racially motivated killing.....yet the MSM has avoided the issue to an extreme. Can you imagine if the shooter were white and the cop was black?
I believe it was KIRO that went so far as to not show an actual picture of Porter on it's first several news reports and instead showed a silouette of the killer that was clearly the silouette of a WHITE MAN!

Posted by: aaargh on December 4, 2006 01:16 PM
25. steve cox went way out to help the people of white center. he was a good cop;and will be missed dearly.. i pray that the killing will stop;

Posted by: rotc909 on December 4, 2006 01:30 PM
26. steve cox went way out to help the people of white center. he was a good cop;and will be missed dearly.. i pray that the killing will stop;

Posted by: rotc909 on December 4, 2006 01:30 PM
27. Seems he had a busy night. WTF is anyone with "gang connections" doing on the streets "supervised" or not I say reestablish gang connections = a commitment to a crimnal way of life therefore you go back and serve 100% of any sentence.

http://www.nwcn.com/statenews/washington/stories/NW_120406WABgunhomicidelinkLJ.5206169d.html

Posted by: JDH on December 4, 2006 01:33 PM
28. steve cox went way out to help the people of white center. he was a good cop;and will be missed dearly.. i pray that the killing will stop; now days these gangbangers shoot first ask questions later, what happened in this case to 3strikes law.. this killer should not even have been out here.but he was;with a gun and everyone was a target............rest in peace officer cox if you can,,,,,,

Posted by: rotc909 on December 4, 2006 01:41 PM
29. Has anybody else noticed that when leberal/progressive/leftwing or whatever you want to call their schemes it is not they who suffer the consequences. Just as it is childeren who suffer as a result of the left using them as guinea pigs for their cockamamie educational "reforms" and that the perpetrators are insulated from even being criticized, it is the guys out on the street protecting our a$$es that are teh victims of these policies that put criminally dangerous people on the streets of White Ctr. Ask yourself this question: "When was the last time I heard of a law enforcment officer that was also a self described "progressive?" Been a while hasn't it, could it be because their political leanings affect them personally? I say yes, there sure as heck was not much chance that the judges who ordered Domino's into hell hole neighborhoods in Oakland taht would be delivering the pizzas there, was it?

Posted by: JDH on December 4, 2006 02:41 PM
30. Sal 22--my thoughts exactly--

lib legal progressives have simply not yet been victims--trust me--things change when it's YOUR sister or own person/property as the victim. i've been there.

if my elected officials dont listen, then I will take action in the jury box--i will nail any perp without mercy and always side with cops if any doubt.

can i do so? maybe--instructions tell you to use your life experiences. and yes--i'll pay for more prisons. and--lets help pay by eliminating useless programs like diversity and ESL and other wastes.

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on December 4, 2006 02:47 PM
31. So right you are jimmie. Check out this article by the P-I's Susan Paynter who had her car stolen during the Thanksgiving holiday http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/paynter/293932_paynt29.html

Liberals love of moral relativisim and compassion for criminals magically disappears when they become victims. Paynter ought to know, if she is given to serious reflection, that the failure of liberalism has consequences much more grave than her stolen car, as we have so sadly witnessed recently.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 4, 2006 03:50 PM
32. As much as I would like car theives punished, I have come to realize it's just not ever going to be a priority of law enforcement. But 99% of car thefts are preventable. Just spend $400 - $500 on a good car alarm with a kill switch. I was living in Tacoma when a thief tried to make off with my car right in the driveway, alarm went off and the engine cannot be started at that point without a key in the ignition. He quickly went on to another target (before I could even make it outside to see what was going on).

I will never own another car without one, regardless of how old it is. When you think about the cost and time associated with a stolen car, the money for a good alarm is well worth it.

As for Porter, this state could "get tough on crime" if it wanted to. But the political landscape here would rather spend money on frivolous trains, drunk housing and useless street cars, all in the name of a "livable city". My livable city is one where good cops are not shot, and people like Porter are not on the streets.

Posted by: Palouse on December 4, 2006 04:21 PM
33. My captain dose not answer, his lips are pale and still,
My father dose not feel my arm, he has no pulse nor will,
The ship is anchored safe and sound, its voyage closed and done,
From fearful trip the victor ship comes in with object won;
Exult O shores, and ring O bells!
But I with mournful tread,
Walk the deck my captain lies,
Fallen cold and dead.


WALT WHITMAN

Posted by: Pacific Grove Phlash on December 4, 2006 04:25 PM
34. Pacific--appropriate--

we have lost our gonads. no night sticks. no police car chases. no cracked, bloodied skulls a-la SDS riots in '68 Chicago. pc everywhere. lawyers perched on every cop's shoulder, second-guessing him/her. leadership? police chief loses own gun.

we're not serious. who are we kidding? we're jerking around with the public & bowing to pc fears & defense laywers. our thin blue line is understandably frustrated, wanting to fight crime, but handcuffed themselves.

we will ONLY get change when drunk beggars are thick in Medina, drive-by's are nightly in upscale Bellevue shopping squares and the elite areas of Seattle downtown are like housing projects of the 60's---where snipers shoot at cops, firemen & anything that moves.

so--do we wait for "conditions to be ripe for change" or do we nip it in the bud?

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on December 4, 2006 06:17 PM
35. What I love is how they always get out for good behavior while they are in prison. Perhaps if they had this "good behavior" outside of prison we would not have so much crime. It is time to take a tough stance on the issue of crime. Stop all the plea bargains(or at least limit how much the sentence can be reduced)and start supporting law enforcement so that we can attract people who want to be police officers.

When it comes to gangs you can see quite a bit of this activity related to the illegal immigration problem. Just talk to any member of a PD that is on the gang activity squad and they will tell you how the rise in illegal immigration has also seen a rise in crime. Not to mention a more secure border also will limit the amount of drugs brought into this country and we all know how drugs and crime go hand in hand.

Posted by: TrueSoldier on December 4, 2006 07:06 PM
36. Our entire society, nation wide, is turning into a small french village. We so desparately want to have everyone happy about us and with us. We think if we can just keep them happy they wont bother-harm-deprive us. We even do this world wide. We ran right past "PC" doing and thinking and are now just trying to get the evil in the world to see it our way. It's time to get a flippin clue !!!
The attitude was originally sponsored by lefty but we all have bought into it, or at least left them to their own devices. Well their devices are ruining it for all of us, them as well. They can't or wont see it, so my guess is that we have to show them.
What is needed is to make illegal activity in this country, the world actually, absolutely unprofitable and horribly dangerous for those who want to participate in that activity. Make the arrogant idiots believe they will suffer miserably for their indiscretions.
Enough of the rights of those who think what is mine is theirs. Enough of the rights to cushy time in organized boys clubs. Enough of the attitude that even criminals have the rights to their TV, full body workout, unlimited internet, stylish personal clothing and hair fer crice sakes.
Go to jail, you give up you hair, your TV, wear stripes and pink underwear and all that. Joe A. has it right down there. And even his "customers" have it pretty good. The idiots should languish and suffer for those who they've made to suffer.
I've got a few other choice things which they could be offered, but I can't put 'em here.

Posted by: JT on December 4, 2006 07:51 PM
37. I knew Steve Cox and worked with him. Steve really wanted to make a difference in White Center. He arrested dozens of criminals a week. Since he grew up in the center and lived there, he knew every criminal out there. He knew when they had warrants, who their parents were, their friends, everyone. He took care of the street drunks and hung around the businesses at closing. He was a mix of a bleeding heart with an iron fist. I don't know what the answers are or who to blame in this, that all seems so trivial now, so cheap. I encourage all of you Sound Politics readers to go to White Center. Visit the memorial to Steve at his office. Watch the hundreds of people of all races and politics come and mourn him. Next week, after he's buried we'll sort out who's to blame.

Posted by: Sierradog on December 4, 2006 08:20 PM
38. The real icing on the cake here is just coming out in the news. It appears this sleaze had just committed murder, a gang style execution,I think the same day, and was stopped by the police officer for something else. Looks like the ballistics from the two shootings match. This is the guy who earned an early out for good behavior. The reason he behaved in jail is not because he had an epiphany or was miraculously changed by the experience. It's because if he didn't behave in there, he had to pay the price. Maybe the same rules should be applied on the outside, instead of plea bargaining everything down.

Posted by: katomar on December 4, 2006 08:26 PM
39. aaargh @ 24

I hate giving away my employer, but for the record, we didn't show his face at first and used a silhouette because we didn't have his mug shot. Race had nothing to do with it. Once we had his mug shot we ran it and have been running it.

Don't read more into it than what's there... most of my coworkers I've talked to about the shooting are just as incredulous as you are that this piece of trash wasn't behind bars.

Posted by: Mike H on December 4, 2006 09:15 PM
40. What on earth this has to do with multiculturism or diversity or ESL, I don't get. Next thing you know someone will blame this murder on the mythical War on Christmas. Hey, there are violent criminals around.

- We can try to deter them with the prospect of punishment, which didn't seem to work with this guy.

- We can try to identify people who are so bad that it's worth locking them up for life; we already have the 3 strikes law, and I wonder how many more people it pays to lock up.

- We can try to rehabilitate criminals and provide drug treatment and other social programs, but those cost money and aren't nearly as satisfying as revenge.

- And we can try to keep guns out of circulation -- oh, I forgot, we can't do that, because it's more important to be prepared in case a cougar or out-of-control IRS agent barges into our house in the middle of the night.

Posted by: Bruce on December 4, 2006 10:22 PM
41. It seems like SoundPolitics has gone off the deep end from far-right to so-far-right-that-it's-always-wrong. Either that or global warming has been replaced by global freezing in infernally hot places. How else can one explain why Richard Pope has been defending Democrats so often lately?

Posted by: Bruce on December 4, 2006 10:26 PM
42. Hey Bruce,

here's another concept - we can actually PUNISH offenders, like they do in other countries. Single cells, 2 meals a day, no sunlight, no courtyard, no happiness and sunshine. Make prisons hell, and you will see people work to stay out of them. Making them into dormitories with no alchohol seems to not be working.

Posted by: Aaron on December 5, 2006 08:13 AM
43. "I hate giving away my employer, but for the record, we didn't show his face at first and used a silhouette because we didn't have his mug shot. Race had nothing to do with it." You are a lying sack of crap and that is the long and short of it. And furthermore "most of my coworkers I've talked to about the shooting are just as incredulous as you are that this piece of trash wasn't behind bars." Perhaps the ones you've talked to, but I can assure you that the ones you have talked to are not a representative sample.

Posted by: JDH on December 5, 2006 08:21 AM
44. "here's another concept - we can actually PUNISH offenders, like they do in other countries. Single cells, 2 meals a day, no sunlight, no courtyard, no happiness and sunshine. Make prisons hell, and you will see people work to stay out of them. Making them into dormitories with no alchohol seems to not be working."

take a look at this link if you want to see how far we as a society have gone around the bend.

http://www.wftv.com/news/10458584/detail.html

Headline of the story is, Teen Murderer Says Jail Is Too Hard, Appeals Sentence.

Posted by: JDH on December 5, 2006 08:34 AM
45. JDH @44 - I didn't know if I should laugh or pound my head against the wall! How does anyone get the concept that prison is fun, or just an extended vacation?

He will be a much better "inspirational speaker for troubled teens" after the full term. How much inspiration can he give if he goes out to the teens and shows that you can commit murder and only get 8 months? I hope he enjoys the remaining 21 years and four months!

Posted by: Right said Fred on December 5, 2006 08:44 AM
46. Aaron, I am not a prison expert and won't debate the details of confinement; I am not defending any particular prison amenity. However, I question whether Cox's killer was rational enough to have been deterred by much. Also, my understanding is that giving prisoners some modest privileges improves their behavior SOMEWHAT (obviously not entirely) after they're released. And it is easier/safer/cheaper to run prisons if guards have the ability to give and withhold privileges. I suspect there is data on the effectiveness of these measures, but I don't have it.

Posted by: Bruce on December 5, 2006 09:05 AM
47. Bruce: If Cox's killer probably wasn't rational enough to be deterred by much, then maybe he shouldn't have been out on the streets after having been found to be in violation of parole, and free to commit two murders in the space of 24 hours, dontcha think?

Posted by: katomar on December 5, 2006 09:13 AM
48. Katomar, hindsight is 20/20; can we really afford to lock up everyone with records like his for life? Do you know what that would cost?

(I'm not sure of the answers to these questions, but I have my suspicions.)

Posted by: Bruce on December 5, 2006 09:19 AM
49. JDH, did you actually read the article you linked to? The prison system, the state, and the judge -- who comprise society -- all are doing exactly what you want. Only the convicted murderer and his mother are taking a ridiculous position, which is not terribly surprising and hardly a sign that "we as a society have gone around the bend".

Posted by: Bruce on December 5, 2006 09:21 AM
50. Bruce: We can put them back if they are in violation of parole. We can keep them in jail for as long as it takes to keep the rest of us safe. We can pay for it. I'm certainly willing. And speaking of costs, what price would you put on the two lives he took? I think that's a hell of a lot more costly than the price of keeping thugs like him in jail.

Posted by: katomar on December 5, 2006 09:28 AM
51. "I hate giving away my employer, but for the record, we didn't show his face at first and used a silhouette because we didn't have his mug shot. Race had nothing to do with it. Once we had his mug shot we ran it and have been running it.
Don't read more into it than what's there.
Posted by Mike H at December 4, 2006 09:15 PM"

OK.....but why, oh why did you use the Silhouette of a "WHITE GUY"??? Anyone with a lick of common sense knew because of the location & facts reported that it was obviously a killer of color. Afraid of offending?? Why use any Silhouette at all??
Perhaps you need to have a file photo of Flavor Flav with the enormous dangly clock around his neck to use next time it happens.
Flavor Flav is kind of a white black guy...isn't he? Or Steve Martin....remember "I was born a poor black person".
It was predictable to hear the murdering loser's loser family come out and blame the police.
Bill Cosby has it nailed. I hope more intellectually honest blacks take heed of Cosby and reject the pimps of poverty...Sharpton & Jackson.

Posted by: aaargh on December 5, 2006 10:15 AM
52. aaargh, send me an email.

Posted by: Mike H on December 5, 2006 10:57 AM
53. Katomar, we can't constitutionally put someone in jail "for as long as it takes to keep the rest of us safe." We can only put someone in jail as punishment for an act they've committed. A specific threat is an act, but being a bad guy with a proclivity to violence is not.

We already have a 3 strikes law. Should we make it 2 strikes? 1 strike? Cost/benefit? Of course lives have tremendous value. But reality says the value is not infinite; it must be compared with the costs. Even if we could give a life sentence for every felony, let's say we would have to imprison 100 felons each for 30 years at $100K/felon/year (total cost $300 million) to save 1 innocent life. Would that be worth it? (If you say yes, it would also pay to rebuild just about every bridge and road in the state, and several trillion dollars of other projects.)

I have pulled those numbers out of the air; my point is merely that the numbers do matter.

Posted by: Bruce on December 5, 2006 02:18 PM
54. My question is this Bruce; How many more needless deaths do we need before we put the rights of innocent people ahead of the rights of career criminals?

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on December 5, 2006 02:34 PM
55. katomar,

Your use of the word parole is no longer acceptable in Metronatural Village. The proper terminology is now community corrections. Parole was deemed harsh and mean-spirited. Also parole was only two syllables. Words that are deemed unacceptable or obsolete are always replaced with many more words and/or syllables - it's a progressive requirement.

Posted by: Tyler Durden on December 5, 2006 02:54 PM
56. Bruce: I think you are deliberately missing the point. I commented that parole violators need to go back to jail. And if we would stop plea bargaining most of these bad guys to lesser offenses, then maybe our three strikes laws would have some teeth. No one is saying we should try to divine who "potential" bad guys are. However, once they "show" who they are, they need to go away for their full term for the crime they committed, preferrably wearing pink underwear.

Posted by: katomar on December 5, 2006 02:59 PM
57. And Bruce, you still haven't answered - just how many miles of road do you think those two lives were worth?

Posted by: katomar on December 5, 2006 03:01 PM
58. We can only put someone in jail as punishment for an act they've committed.

I would hope most serious offenders aren't simply going to jail. Jail is for incarcerations of less than a year. Prison is where serious offenders and recidivists belong.

Criminals can and should be sentenced for their criminal histories; not just an act they've committed. Guidelines require that before judges pass sentence a pre-sentencing report, which includes the convicted's criminal history, be prepared for use by the judge in rendering a decision and handing down sentence.** And just what entity has the responsibility for pre-sentencing reports? No less than those Community Corrections Officers who presently appear to be doing a questionable job at best.

Gregoire "on Monday demanded a review of each (Corrections) case, with an eye toward evaluating Washington's oversight of ex-cons." I'm not holding my breath in anticipation.

**Minor cases excepted

Posted by: Tyler Durden on December 5, 2006 03:26 PM
59. DOC Secretary Clarke will not allow those below him, especially Community Corrections Officers, to do their jobs properly. Clarke has already made it next to impossible to get any offender on state supervision arrested until after a new violent crime has occurred. Why? Because jail beds cost money, and Clarke doesn't want to pay the bill. And for the record, even if Porter had been arrested for his positive drug test 3 weeks ago, under current DOC practice (which comes down from Secretary Clarke) Porter would probably have been out anywhere from the day after his arrest to two weeks after his arrest.

As for "rehabilitation," currently only the worst of the worst are supervised by the state. The vast majority do not have any desire to become law abiding citizens no matter how much money is wasted on "re-entry" programs.

Posted by: Jen Smith on December 5, 2006 04:28 PM
60. DOC Secretary Clarke will not allow those below him, especially Community Corrections Officers, to do their jobs properly. Clarke has already made it next to impossible to get any offender on state supervision arrested until after a new violent crime has occurred. Why? Because jail beds cost money, and Clarke doesn't want to pay the bill. And for the record, even if Porter had been arrested for his positive drug test 3 weeks ago, under current DOC practice (which comes down from Secretary Clarke) Porter would probably have been out anywhere from the day after his arrest to two weeks after his arrest.

As for "rehabilitation," currently only the worst of the worst are supervised by the state. The vast majority do not have any desire to become law abiding citizens no matter how much money is wasted on "re-entry" programs.

Posted by: Jen Smith on December 5, 2006 04:28 PM
61. Bruce,
Yes I did. The left says "Free Lenord Peltier" I say "Fry Lenord Peltier." There isn't a destructive element that the left doesn't embrace and excuse, it is a pattern with the left. It makes me question their motives. It is beyond me why the left self-identifies with obvious filth, I just accept that they do.

Posted by: JDH on December 5, 2006 06:01 PM
62. JDH writes: "It is beyond me why the left self-identifies with obvious filth..."

Fair question. I am "left" but I absolutely don't identify with any criminal. I do, however, try to see all sides of an issue. The flip side of this is that it frustrates me to see intelligent people who oversimplify things by failing to see all sides.

The point here is not the perspective of the criminal, but the reasons why every jurisdiction, red and blue, practices plea bargaining and parole and provides some comforts in prison. It's not to be nice to criminals; even you can't imagine a motive for that. It's because, when done intelligently, these are rational policies for society in the real world of finite resources.

Posted by: Bruce on December 5, 2006 07:17 PM
63. I'm not buying it. I have seen too many examples of the left investing a great deal of energy to get some absolute menace to society back on the streets.

Posted by: JDH on December 5, 2006 08:37 PM
64. http://www.noparolepeltier.com/

Take a good look at the Peltier case and then do a google search and you will find a veritable "who's who" of the "mainstream left" lining up to demand clemancy, parole etc. In fact trying to find a "mainstream Democrat" politician who will come out with a public statement regarding the fact that his champions are simply in denial is not that easy. Actually it is impossible, the only Democrat politicians who have are now "marginalized" by thir own Party's faithfull. Explain that.

Posted by: JDH on December 5, 2006 08:54 PM
65. Just heard on Q13 tonight (12/5), that the DOC says it just doesn't have room to bring back every offender with a drug or alcohol problem. (not an exact quote, but close).

So what do we really get from DOC? TALK. They talk about what they are going to do, they can build violator centers, someday. Work releases (that's criminals living, coming and going, in your neighborhood) No action.

Vision statements, talk that signifies what?

3 fine officers dead. 3 supervised felons the cause. How many more?

Is it time to rid this state of sentencing laws that don't work? Is it time to give discretion back to our judges? Is it time to get back to the business of prisons, and a strong enabled parole board that will not let them out without PROOF they have changed? Is it time to get in touch with legislators about some serious change?

No more DOSA deals, designer sentences.

There is a well-funded liberal think tank pushing the empty-the-prisons agenda across this nation (vera.org). Check it out, see who is involved, see who they've recruited to pass out their message, see who's behind it all.

How many more social engineering experiments is this state and country going to tolerate regarding criminal justice? How many more police officers and innocent and law abiding people will be harmed while these experiments are run?

Is is right for our government to spend millions on social experiments that have only theoretical foundations?

Talk, promises, lip service, smoke, mirrors, spin. How many millions spent, persons harmed, and NOTHING accomplished?

Dismantle the DOC and put it back to its basic charge which is to incarcerate (remove the scum from society), change the sentencing structure, empower our judges, and bring back a strong parole board, make felons earn the right to come back to society. Otherwise they stay in and yes, we pay for more prisons.

Posted by: Gus on December 5, 2006 10:45 PM
66. Bruce: If, as you say, you are "left", then you are out of step with your base and leadership, as they think the "real world" is indeed made up of "infinite resources".

Posted by: katomar on December 5, 2006 10:53 PM
67. Gus--
Obviously we MUST increase taxes!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on December 6, 2006 06:07 AM
68. More or less what this is yet one more demonstration ofis the contempt that "progressives," "Liberals," or what ever they are calling themselves today, have for individuals. I for one don't buy their self professed compassion, I question their motives as well. All EVIDENCE of the impact on innocent people resulting from the practices that grow out of their ideology leads me to no other conclusion.

Posted by: JDH on December 6, 2006 07:21 AM
69. "$100K/felon/year"

A year of prison costs most states around 22-30K, depending on the state and facilites. NOT 100K as is previously suggested.

Posted by: boodity on December 6, 2006 04:15 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?