California: Solitary confinement for violent criminals is “unkind” and “inhumane”

Share:

CALIFORNIA- Being an ex-con, I’m always intrigued whenever I hear about topics like prison reform and making jails and prisons more “humane”. 

So after catching wind that California is trying to significantly downsize the use of solitary confinement, I had to look into what this was specifically attempting to do.

For those completely unaware of what solitary confinement is in prison, it’s a means to satisfy mitigating risk of harm to either staff or others in the inmate population.

Typically, someone will be placed in solitary because they have shot-caller status (can authorize murders of inmates on the yard or rivals on the street), or perhaps they can’t keep their hands to themselves when interacting with staff or other inmates.

Another qualify is if they need to be shielded from the other inmates who intend to do them harm.

The list goes on and on why the type of confinement exists, but three counties in California are no longer using solitary unless someone “repeatedly” assaults staff and inmates.

Santa Clara County, Sacramento County, and Contra Costa County are all on board with being kinder to inmates who would typically find themselves in solitary for either the inmate’s own protection or for the protection of others.

You can thank Don Specter, the director of the Prison Law Office, whose firm sued seven of California’s 58 counties, alleging that conditions had grown inhumane in solitary. Of course, I have the unique experience of having spent three months in solitary myself.

It’s not supposed to be a picnic; and eliminating its proper use is downright dangerous to staff and inmates.

Santa Clara County had at one point 400 inmates in solitary confinement.

Yet, by last fall there were about 40 inmates confined to isolation cells, and that number dropped to just 26 by December. Well, you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to have guessed what happened after not employing solitary properly – staff assaults went up.

Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith admitted that she remains concerned that assaults on staff are on the rise, but still think’s what they’re doing is “working”. If staff getting assaulted more often is the plan “working”, I’d hate to see when they initiative “needs work” or “fails”.

Sergeant Todd Kendrick, president of Santa Clara County Correctional Officers Association, cited the assaults on staff increase to other less restrictive jail policies as well as the relaxing of administering solitary confinement.

He and Smith both think that if the county employs more staff then that will fix everything.

I can speak, albeit from anecdotal experience, that increased staff in a prison doesn’t deter an inmate hellbent on assaulting correctional officers, it just affords violent inmates more targets.

That’s why solitary exists, to keep those type of people confined for however long is needed.

Aside from utilizing solitary for purposes of keeping those housed there from assaulting others, there are also instances where you have reformed gang members or others needing protection from the entire inmate population.

According to Sheriff Smith, they’re actually trying to get inmates out of solitary who need to use it as a form of protective custody. The county is trying to accomplish this by getting something akin to a promissory note from other inmates that they won’t harm the jailhouse snitch, former police officer, or whoever else needs to be in protective custody.

That should work out splendidly for those who testified in court.

The lunacy that starts in California is always doomed to spread. Solitary confinement is an important instrument of the correctional system here in the United States.

Correctional facilities need to worry less about being nice to violent inmates and should focus in making safety a priority and looking at methods that prepare those housed in jails and prisons to return to society with the ability to be successful.

In the meantime, you’ve got the new San Francisco D.A. who is promising less jail time for gang members.

The guy who has never prosecuted a case in his career but was elected to be the next DA of San Francisco is already turning heads before even taking office.

In what was feared to usher in an era of pro-criminal mentality to the office, his first order of business does not bode well for Bay area law enforcement in keeping the streets safe. 

One of Chesa Boudin’s first planned policy changes when he takes over next month seeks to answer a question that has long ignited debates in the city: Should people accused of crimes face harsher punishments if their actions allegedly benefited a street gang?

San Diego violence soars as police gang unit told it's stopping too many gang members
San Diego violence soars as police gang unit told it’s stopping too many gang members
Screenshot: YouTube

 

The former public defender, who takes office Jan. 8, promises to put an end to filing what are known as gang enhancements against defendants — charges that can add years to felony sentences. Gang enhancements have drawn increased opposition in California, driven by statistics showing that they are disproportionately applied to people of color in poor neighborhoods.

Many law enforcement leaders say the charges are an important tool that allows them to hold gang members accountable for the fear they create in communities when they protect turf, intimidate witnesses, recruit new associates and commit violent crimes.

But critics say gang enhancements yield arbitrary and excessive sentences, sending black and brown people to jail and prison at higher rates than white people who commit the same crimes, like assault or robbery.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, state prison records show that of 11,484 inmates who were serving sentences with a gang enhancement as of Aug. 31, 68% were Hispanic and 24% were black. Just 3% were white.

“I want to focus on holding people accountable for what they’ve done — not who they are,” Boudin told The Chronicle. “People are seeing their families impacted by overzealous uses of these gang allegations.”

Boudin said gang enhancements are “infused with racism.” The punishments, he said, increase tensions between minority communities and law enforcement, ultimately making the city less safe.

“There are violent crimes that are going unsolved,” he said, “and we need cooperation from these communities where these crimes are being committed.”

According to government statistics, Hispanics make off 44% of gangs in the US. African Americans make up 40%. Whites comprise 14%.

Breaking that down further to the state level is difficult because there are no current figures for gang membership by demographics by state. One statistic shows 58% of gang members on the West Coast are Hispanic.

Chesa Boudin for San Francisco DA, 2019
Courtesy: YouTube Screenshot from Chesa Boudin for San Francisco DA, 2019

 

Proponents of gang enhancements, however, said the charges have been a valuable tool in protecting residents of neighborhoods plagued by organized criminals. They argue that going after gangs and the power they wield have prompted steep declines in homicides in San Francisco and around the state over the past decade.

Victims of gang crimes, proponents said, are also disproportionately people of color.

“Getting rid of the gang enhancement assumes that there’s no gang problem,” said Eric Siddall, a Los Angeles County gang prosecutor and vice president of the Association of Los Angeles Deputy District Attorneys. “The law was created for a very specific purpose with a very specific target and for very specific violence.”

To be convicted of a gang enhancement, a defendant must participate in a “criminal street gang” while knowing its members have committed “a pattern of criminal gang activity,” and while promoting or assisting in that activity. The sentencing enhancement can add two, three or four years to an underlying felony. If the felony is defined as serious or violent, the defendant can face an additional five or 10 years, respectively.

Boudin’s planned policy change is the latest flash point over whether San Francisco gang crackdowns are effective and equitable.

More than a decade ago, the city began obtaining civil court injunctions against gangs that barred alleged members from engaging in certain activities in neighborhood “safety zones,” under threat of arrest. Those named in the injunctions could not associate with each other in public, wear certain colors or seek to recruit new members, for example.

City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who filed those lawsuits, said they worked to cut crime. But opponents said the injunctions created a new set of potential crimes for a specific group of people, all of whom were African American or Latino. The city recently scaled back the program after criticism that it violated the defendants’ civil rights.

Gang member image
Gang member image, courtesy Fox News screenshot from YouTube

 

The law allowing gang enhancements came decades earlier. California’s Street Terrorism Enforcement and Prevention Act of 1988, known as the STEP Act, was designed to go after street gangs during an era of high violent crime in California.

At its zenith, California had more than 4,000 homicides in 1993. That number has steadily fallen, and just over 1,700 killings occurred last year, according to the state Department of Justice. Experts debate the reason for the drop, but many credit interventions by police and anti-violence groups in stemming retribution killings between gangs.

George Gascón, who was considered to be one of the country’s most progressive top prosecutors when he stepped down in October as San Francisco’s district attorney, charged gang enhancements. He did so, however, “only in the most serious instances,” said Max Szabo, his former spokesman.

Gascón, now running for district attorney in Los Angeles County, appears to have changed his position. At a debate Wednesday night at the California African American Museum in Los Angeles, he said he would stop charging gang enhancements and support statewide efforts to repeal the law.

But even as Gascón spoke, a gang enhancement case that his administration pursued before he left office was in trial in San Francisco Superior Court.

The murder trial opened last month, and it may not be finished when Boudin replaces interim District Attorney Suzy Loftus. Closing arguments begin Monday.

The case involves the March 2017 killing of a 44-year-old father who was celebrating his birthday with his adult son in the Mission District. Defendants Jose Mejia-Carrillo, 24, and Alexis Cruz-Zepeda, 25, are accused of being members of the 20th Street clique of the Mara Salvatrucha street gang,known as MS-13.

Did you know that Law Enforcement Today has a private new home for those who support emergency responders and veterans? It’s called LET Unity, and it’s where we share the untold stories of those patriotic Americans. Every penny gets reinvested into giving these heroes a voice. Check it out today.

California: Solitary confinement for violent criminals is "unkind" and "inhumane"

 

Family members of the victim, George Martinez, watched from the courtroom gallery last month as prosecutors played video of the deadly ambush.

The district attorney’s office said the defendants accused Martinez of being a member of the Norteños, a rival gang of MS-13, before Mejia-Carrillo shot him in the back and finished him off with a point-blank shot to the head outside the Beauty Bar at 19th and Mission streets.

Prosecutors said Cruz-Zepeda distracted Martinez while Mejia-Carrillo came from behind and pulled the trigger. Mejia-Carrillo faces one count of murder, along with a gang enhancement, and a charge of being a felon in possession of a firearm.

Cruz-Zepeda was charged with a single count of participating in a gang conspiracy, a charge that refers to the gang enhancement statute’s provisions that a defendant promoted or assisted a gang.

If convicted, he faces up to 25 years to life in prison. Mejia-Carrillo faces a maximum of 25 years to life, plus 25 years for the gun charge and an additional 10 years for the gang enhancement. The defendants have pleaded not guilty.

Deputy Public Defender Steve Olmo, Mejia-Carrillo’s attorney, said authorities arrested the wrong person. The video doesn’t show the killer’s face, he said, adding that DNA from three people was found on the gun, which police found in a nearby trash can.

George Borges, the attorney for Cruz-Zepeda, said his client was simply standing on the sidewalk that night, and that Martinez asked him for a cigarette before he was shot.

Cruz-Zepeda has gotten several tattoos while in San Francisco Jail, including “MS-13” on his hand and devil horns that are associated with the gang on his biceps, prosecutors said.

“These guys are remorseless,” said Sasha Martinez, George Martinez’s ex-wife, who remained close with him. “They were planning on killing people and are earning their extra tattoos. This is what they think is OK.”

If the men are convicted, their sentencing may not happen until after Boudin takes office. Martinez’s family is worried the punishment may become more lenient.

“It’s horrible that they would take away gang enhancements,” Martinez said. “These guys are running around on the streets and they’re killing innocent people who are just trying to live normal lives.”

Boudin said he couldn’t comment on cases that are in trial. But he said MS-13 “is a real issue in the United States and California and San Francisco.” Boudin said the policy shift would not significantly affect murder prosecutions.

“In a case where there’s a homicide, those kind of cases, I’ve said I’m committed to prosecuting,” he said. “And in any homicide case, the defendant is facing life without parole.”

Joshua Mason, a frequent expert witness in Bay Area gang cases, said gang enhancements have raised the biggest questions about racial disparities in more ordinary cases.

“It’s not the insane cases that gang enhancements are applied to that are a problem, it’s the lesser ones,” Mason said. “It’s the kid who gets in a fight at a bus stop and gets labeled a gang member. For him the consequence is going to be extreme.”

The gang label is rarely applied to white defendants, said Mason, 42, who spent his 20s in state prison and was labeled a gang member after pleading guilty to an attempted murder charge. He was paroled in 2005, got involved in community outreach and enrolled at UC Berkeley.

Since then, he’s been retained as an expert witness in more than 100 cases — including at least one of Boudin’s cases at the public defender’s office.

Being a gang member “is a racially applied label,” Mason said. “There’s no consistent application of that term, except that it’s to lower-income black and brown folks. That’s about the only consistent thread.”

Siddall, the Los Angeles prosecutor, pushed back on the allegation that gang enhancements are racially unjust, saying, “It just happens to be that most gangs are Hispanic or black.” Most victims of gang crimes, he said, “are minorities from socially vulnerable communities.”

“District attorneys are charged with defending people who were vulnerable on the street and giving them justice in the courtroom,” he said. “Unilaterally doing away with the gang enhancement is not fair to those people who have to deal with gangs on a daily basis.”


Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!

Facebook Follow First

Share:
Related Posts