President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
52%↑
48%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
50%
50%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
May 09, 2007 03:19 PM UTC
23 Comments
Last night’s Frontline dealt with children in prison for life with no chance for parole. It used cases in Colorado to argue that it is unjust to sentence a child (15-17 years old) to prison for life without parole. The principle arguments seemed to be:
1. Kids don’t make adult, rational decisions, so is it just to sentence them to life without parole?
2. The felony murder rule is too harsh. The case involving a gun discharge in a botched robbery that would have carried at most a 15 year sentence was profiled as the example.
3. Kids, more often than adults, make choices in groups and end up being held criminally responsible for the actions of their peers/buddies. The Colorado Springs case involving a 15 year old was profiled as the example.
4. Kids who kill their parents can be held criminally responsible even when they are the victims of parental abuse. The Woodland Park case was profiled as an example.
5. In Colorado, the decision to prosecute kids as adults is made by the prosecutor alone, and not subject to judicial review.
Colorado (and Mitch Morrissey in particular) came across as pretty reactionary with a “get tough on crime” and these kids in prison are the worst of the worst.
It’s disappointing to see our state cast in such a light in the national media.
As a former cop, my experience from eons ago was that juvenile cases were adjudicated separately from adult cases and looked more like administrative proceedings than criminal trials. There were lots of kids who were constantly in juvenile court, but the philosophy seemed to be to search for ways to help the kid turn his/her life around — sometimes it worked, sometimes it did not, but 15 year olds didn’t go to prison for life.
Maybe that model should be revisted.
We have more people currently incarcerated than the rest of the civilized world combined. You raise great points regarding our juvenile justice system, but perhaps the model should be revisited in its entirety.
A large proportion of our prison population is in Club Fed or state counterparts for drug-related crimes. I agree with William F. Buckley on this point: We should declare the “war on drugs” to be over, and stop trying to fight it. Tax it and regulate it. Ditto, prostitution; civilization hasn’t ended in either Canberra or Copenhagen.
Our criminal justice system has become a settlement system, where prosecutors routinely overcharge in order to coerce the innocent defendant into copping a plea; as my CrimLaw prof (a public defender) used to say, “I’d plead my mother out to a misdemeanor.” And when the occasional defendant actually tries to exercise his rights under law, unethical prosecutors (essentially, most of them) make it as difficult as possible for the defense to prepare for trial, as they are judged by their stats. Prosecutors also tend to try cases in the media to the extent they can, and in America, you can only get as much justice as you can afford. So much for the vaunted promises of our Constitution.
Our justice system is completely overwhelmed. I know of one man who has spent nearly four years in prison awaiting trial on murder charges; while he may or may not be guilty, if he is innocent, his life has been effectively destroyed. Should we not focus our resources on crimes that pose a real danger to the public, like murder, rape, and criminal misconduct by public officials?
Here’s a URL for the show. It includes interviews (including one with incarceration champion Mitch Morrissey) and a state-by-state map of the number of juveniles convicted of life without parole.
http://www.pbs.org/w…
The show’s introduction focuses on Colorado:
http://www.pbs.org/w…
I found this part interesting:
“In 1992, the United States ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires that juvenile imprisonment focus on rehabilitation, but the U.S. reserved the right to sentence juveniles to life without parole in extreme cases involving the most hardened of criminals — the worst of the worst.”
In the rest of the world there are 12 cases of juveniles sentenced to life in prison; In the United States there are 2,000. And it seems a conviction for “felony murder” somehow falls under the “worst of the worst” in this state.
But this comment of yours caught my eye:
“The felony murder rule is too harsh. The case involving a gun discharge in a botched robbery that would have carried at most a 15 year sentence was profiled as the example.”
Presumably, this was no harmless “gun discharge,” right? Someone was killed by the bullet? While I agree that the felony murder rules needs to be reconsidered, I also think that the defendant’s killing someone during the robbery attempt makes the situation more serious than merely a botched robbery.
And the juvenile adjudication system still exists and is still used. But, as you said, the prosecution has great discretion in deciding whether to use that system or the adult criminal system.
Anyway, I generally agree with your observations. Thanks for reporting on this “Frontline.”
The case described on Frontline was that the victim — age 17 — wanted to buy a handgun from one of his acquaintenances/friends. It is, of course, illegal for minors to own handguns, so the transaction contemplated by both parties was illegal.
The “robbery” was that the seller would take the money, give the victim the gun, then ask the victim if he could see the gun. Then the seller would run off with both the gun and the money. The gun discharged in the course of that transaction, so it was not a classic bad guy going into a store to rob it or somebody robbing a stranger. Like most killings, it involved friends and family.
The jury found the seller guilty of reckless manslaughter and robbery, but not of 1st degree murder. Because robbery is a felony, and the DA opted to prosecute the seller as an adult, the seller was automatically convicted of felony murder and sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole.
The victim’s parents don’t want the seller released ever. The seller’s parents agree that he should spend time in jail, but argue that life without parole for crimes that would have carred at most a 15-year sentence is unjust. There’s merit to both views.
The “get tough on crime” laws in Colorado that put kids in jail, according to Frontline, were enacted in a special session of the legislature called by then Governor Romer. So, ironically, it’s not a social injustice that liberals can blame on right-wingers.
Ya gotta love bipartisan special legislative sessions called to fix a social problem (crime, illegal immigration).
To clarify, felony murder is not an automatic conviction. The DA must actually charge the Defendant with the separate crime of felony murder (which is a form of 1st degree murder). The jury must separately find that the elements of felony murder have been proved (typically, that the defendant killed another during the course of committing a felony). So, the jury could’ve acquitted of felony murder if the jury were so inclined, I suppose. But the jury apparently decided to convict this guy of felony murder. Of course, the jury seemed to be faithfully following the jury instructions and applying the law.
The problem, as you say, is with the law and with the prosecutors who bring these charges in situations like the one you describe.
And I wholeheartedly agree with your observations.
apply to everyone but them? Why can’t they be as open as they ask government to be?
http://www.rockymoun…
I thought only Bill Ritter could credibly make THAT claim by opposing abortion while supporting funding for Planned Parenthood.
But it turns out that Rudy “I Hate Abortion” Giuliani donated $900 to Planned Parenthood in the ’90’s while Ann Romney, the charming wife of the newly-minted pro-lifer, Mitt Romney, donated the smaller sum of $150.
No word on whether McCain gave any money to P.P. Now aren’t Huckabee and Brownback looking better and better every day to the true right wingers?
Had a long history of supporting PP, as did, I think, his daddy Prescott. That is, until some of the cons found out when Poppy was trying to gain a toehold in the Houston Republican power structure. To this day, they deny their contributions, but the records are there via tax returns.
In the days before electronic documents and photo shopping, there it was, a fundraising letter with Prescott and/or his wife’s name (I forgot which of the two actually served on the fundraising committee) on the letterhead. They simply tried to deny that it existed!
His Irish-Catholic Democratic opponent kicked his ass in that U.S. Senate race in the 50’s!
no one looks good. Not on the left and not on the right. It’s a long time to the election-maybe a true American with ethics, dignity, honour, some guts, and a brain and who knows what the country needs and the people want will step forward. OK-OK, I guess I was just dreaming out loud. Sorry, I just do not see any of those qualities in any candidate out there today.
Right-wingers and their media enablers love to accuse progressives/liberals/socialists/commies of ignoring the things that Bush has “done right”.
My question to you, CoPols readers and trolls, is this:
What, if anything, has Bush done right? And by whose standards?
That last point is very important.
For example: According to most observers, the invasion and occupation of Iraq has been a disaster on steroids: for our economy, for our reputation abroad, for our military readiness, and most especially for the Iraqi people. But I suppose that if you are an employee or CEO of Halliburton – which has officially bailed out of the US and Iraq before the newly-installed Democratic Congress had the chance to level penalties against it for its illegal dealings with Iran – the invasion and occupation of Iraq has been just groovy, especially if you own Halliburton stock.
Similarly, Bush’s handling of Hurricane Katrina (both before and after the storm) has been roundly condemned by even the normally Bush-enabling GOP/Media Complex. But if you’re a Republican looking to see enough black Democratic voters leave New Orleans and environs to tip both the city and the state into the GOP column, or a real estate developer eager to sell or rent to higher-income (read: white) people, Bush’s malignant neglect is a good thing.
So let’s play the game. What things do you think that Bush has “done right” – and by whose standards?
Game On! (As Cheney so elequently told the Iraqi government today)
But Bush’s handling of the Republican majority in Congress was impressive. When you, as President, veto ONE bill in 6 years, you’ve got to have some control of Congress. Now, I dont agree with the crap Congress has passed in the last 6 years, byt the fact that Republicans passed just about anything the Prez told them to speaks volumes.
Spending Bills…well, all that “pork” is Congress’ fault…”I only signed it b/c departments need their funding,” Bush could say.
Post 9/11…hell yeah el presidente Arbusto! We’ll pass anything you want to protect the Uhmerikan people.
I could go on, but my point is simple. Very few presidents w/ the exception of FDR had control over congress like Bush before this year. Is it “right”…sure, if youre a Repub. But it’s hard to say it wasnt effective…
I;m not surprised.
Can any of you right-wing bloggers find anything remotely similar to the Clinton, or any other Democratic representative?
“At least we now know that Condi’s lack of attentiveness, incuriousness, and ineptitude at managing her job are not recent problems but rather part of her DNA. While the GOP wingnut culture has been harping for years about kickbacks and bribery with Saddam on the UN oil for food program, Condi was watching Chevron take part in similar behavior from the board of directors. And of course Cheney did business with Saddam also while at Halliburton, but wanted everyone to think he wasn’t aware of that.
Then again, the production sharing agreements in the draft Iraq Oil Law will be the end reward for all this right wing hypocritical blather. It was OK for them to do business with Saddam under the table, and now its OK for the same gang of multinational extortionists to plunder Iraq’s oil revenues from its newly “liberated” populace.”
h/t History
Saddam was funding the intifada, sending $25K to the family of every suicide bomber. Israel wanted him gone.
Chevron wanted access to the world’s second-largest deposit of cheap crude oil. Chevron wanted him gone.
The GOP wanted control of Congress, and this was an unparalleled opportunity to get it done. The GOP could have cared less about Saddam.
Saddam posed no threat to America — no more than the Sudan. He wasn’t about to give the few remaining WMD he had to al-Q, as they were the best of friends. Everything we were told was a lie, and quite obviously so. But at this point, given the astounding track record of the Bush Administration, is that really a surprise?
If you can get Bush to the Hague, I’ll pay for the plane ticket.
Mike McConnell of WLW in Cincinnati Ohio had this to say about global warming last weekend. From his Saturday show on the Premiere Radio NetworkJust now getting around to transcribing it from the podcast, starting at about 9:00 in:
“If you’re firm believer that we’re causing the globe to get warmer I’m just curious do you believe that when we launch rockets we knock the earth out of orbit? Because that’s how much impact man actually has on the planet. Launching rockets doesn’t affect the orbit; driving your car doesn’t make it warmer. I know a lot of scientists say I’m wrong on this but I’m sticking to my guns because I’m pigheaded. Why am I pigheaded? Because they’re always wrong. I can’t think of the last time they were right about anything. I don’t mean scientists as a whole but when things become warnings from the government down. And from the U. N. down. Can anyone think of the last time the U. N. was right about something?”
Yeah Mike, I can think of one time…to say the least:
http://www.cnn.com/2…
that have a pretty good record blasting rockets into space, as he mentions.
The UN also has done great work in health issues like smallpox.
Also, it’s hard to prove a negative; how many times were larger problems averted because of what the UN did?
And how many people have died because of U.N. inactivity or blunders?
Typical RW “thinking.” As I said, it’s hard to prove a negative. Then, catch your phrase, “Inactivity or blunders.” So, they are damned if they do nothing and damned if they try but blunder. If the UN farted lilac scent, you wouldn’t be happy.
Lilacs are in bloom….don’t ruin it:-)
I just took a big bag of lilac blooms to my daughter’s in Houston. A little Colorado memory for her.
Said daughter graduated from the University of Texas School of Nursing Magna Cum Laude. She started school post-divorce, got remarried, had a kid and mother to a total of four kids!
The UT Nursing School, only 34 years old, was recently ranked #5 in the country.
“My future’s so bright I gotta wear shades.”
We had a great time, even my ex was kind to me.