Judges face East Atlanta critics
February 25, 2009 at 3:46 pm by Scott Henry in NewsLast night saw an unusual event go down in East Atlanta’s Martha Brown church when two Fulton County Superior Court judges met with neighbors concerned about crime to discuss their sentencing philosophy when it comes to serial burglars.
They've got a name for people like you. That name is called "recidivism." Repeat offender!
The meeting was called after Sylvan Hills resident Monica McAfee wrote Judge Alford Dempsey a letter asking why he’d sent chronic perp Johnny Dennard, a nine-time loser with six prior burglary convictions, to a drug treatment program instead of hard time in a state prison.
Dempsey, who was accompanied by Chief Judge Doris Down, explained that he saw McAfee’s letter and similar expressions of outrage from neighbors as an opportunity for greater understanding – what Oprah Winfrey might call a “teaching moment.”
It’s not often that judges come into the community to explain their methodology in dealing with criminals, but these are desperate times. Atlanta homeowners victimized by crime are mad as hell at what they perceive as lapses by the public systems – the cops, the prosecutors, the courts, the prisons, etc. – that are supposed to protect them from the bad guys.
Downs gave the 15 or so residents in attendance a crash-course in criminal justice, explaining that judges can lock people up all day long, but the only effective way to cut down on recidivism is to send addicts to forced treatment through Fulton’s Drug Court, an intensive two-year program that requires frequent testing.
“If I give you 10 years to serve, you’d be out like that,” said Downs, snapping her fingers. That’s because Georgia has scarcely enough inmate bed space to accommodate murders and rapists, so small-time drug dealers and non-violent offenders like Dennard are routinely released by the state parole board after serving only a small fraction of their sentences.
Dempsey explained that Dennard seemed a good candidate for the Drug Court program because, by the time of his most recent trial, he was working two jobs and had gotten involved in a church-based treatment program.
Undoubtedly, not every resident went home completely satisfied by all they’d heard, but at least they have a fuller grasp of how our tangled system works.
(Photo courtesy 20th Century Fox)
February 25th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Best. Photo. Ever.
February 26th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
I’m with Curt, laughing out loud — literally – at that photo. Thanks for coming to the meeting, Scott. I think everyone understands that treating addicts is more successful than locking them up (70% of those who graduate from drug court never get in trouble again), but were dismayed to learn that the vast majority sentenced to drug court don’t complete the program and go to jail anyway. Ah well. We’re still looking for solutions!
February 28th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
“Perceived lapses”? This guy has been “CONVICTED” six times of violating people’s homes by breaking into them. By DOJ research on recidivism (yes, Virginia, there ARE records like these), that suggests he’s committed scores more of these crimes. And, for the record, there are serious questions about his “addiction.” If Scott Henry spent five minutes actually acting like a reporter and researching Dennard, recidivism and the drug court controversy, rather than just snidely mocking community activists (’Oh, look, they sure got schooled’), then he might actually find something to report, rather than naively echoing the judges, who still have real questions to answer in this case and hundreds, if not thousands, of others.
As we tragically learned last week, repeat offenders don’t always tell the truth about the “jobs” they’re working — or the “church rehab” they’re attending — not to mention that this most recent “lapse burglary” doesn’t speak too well of said “church program” itself. I bet I can name it — and find out how much they get from the city for “rehabilitating” people like Dennard while allowing him to run loose in his old stomping grounds. But, hey, I’m not the reporter here.
As for the judges, it’s all very exciting to “snap your fingers” and point them at other agencies, but when you’re the Chief Judge, the buck stops with you. Do your job, and if things are so bad that you can’t do it, say so, often and loudly, rather than maintaining silence until you’re forced to respond then do so by recriminating the non-paid constitutients (ie., your employers) who deign to ask you questions.
Incidentally, personalities aside, the claim that drug court is the only solution for recidivism is risible. How could Judge Down say such a thing? Only a fraction of those who begin drug court finish it — so it is, by definition, a failure for the majority assigned to it, who then disappear back into Atlanta’s streets more often than not, according to some very reliable people in criminal justice who spoke out recently. The highly questionable stats that advocates for drug court use to justify their mission generally only include the tiny pool of those who “finish” the program, and researchers follow those people for only a short time — so the numbers are bunk, and I suspect the judge knows this. How, precisely, does that reduce recidivism, especially if one can’t or won’t produce numbers on those who drop out, and don’t even track the ones who complete the program for very long? Drug addiction has just become an excuse for both offenders and court officials for doing nothing about crime.
I agree that there are a small fraction of defendants who make good candidates for drug court: non-violent kids and young adults with supportive relatives who are furious with them; otherwise responsible citizens with their first DUI; people with no criminal records and long employment records who get busted once for a non-burglary-type offense. These are precisely the people judges trot out to justify the program as a whole, and these people ARE helped by drug court, but it’s become mostly a dumping ground for the courts and a big pot of money for some politically well-connected “treatment” programs, some of which aren’t even staffed by mental health professionals. Much of the “drug treatment” credential industry is a scam.
The Johnny Dennards of the world are not the type of people who belong in drug court anyway. Why isn’t he serving time, instead, on three-strikes? How long will it be before he breaks into another house and finds someone inside of it, and then we have a violent assault, or worse?
Given the horrific tragedy we witnessed in Atlanta with another oft-released and pled down offender last week, one has to wonder why these judges and this reporter continue to insist that the system regarding recidivism isn’t grotesquely broken. Is it really that difficult to acknowledge that crime victims have the right to not be victimized further?
Why is that so particularly hard to admit for hard lefties like Loafing? Why do those who advertise in the paper put up with their customers being victimized at such high rates? Why do the readers who patronize said advertisers tolerate being mocked for caring about crime?
There are real questions to be asked, and answered about the performance of the courts. Sadly, it sounds as if neither was done here. And that’s not amusing at all. It’s grotesque.
February 28th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Not enough beds?
Build more prisons.
Use the stimulus money.
Good paying construction jobs, less crime.
WIN-WIN