Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Patricia Ireland Fired by YWCA
In an incredibly unsurprising move, the Young Women’s Christian Association in October fired Patricia Ireland as its national director. Ireland was hired by the YWCA in April 2003 after leaving the National Organization for Women.
The move was an odd fit from the beginning, given Ireland’s views and the YWCA’s mission. As YWCA National Coordinating Board chairwoman Audrey Peeples said in a press release,
We have the deepest admiration for Ms. Ireland’s dedication to women’s issues and social justice, but the YWCA has proved to be the wrong platform for her to advocate for these issues.
For her part, Ireland said she was shocked when the board first met with her in October and asked her to resign. Ireland told the Associated Press she refused to do so because she didn’t want to give the impression that she was “jumping ship.” The board then apparently decided to throw her overboard.
Source:
Feminist YWCA Director Dismissed. Associated Press, October 21, 2003.
Tags: Uncategorized
Gerald Amirault Granted Parole
A Massachusetts Parole Board voted in October to grant parole to Gerald Amirault who was at the center of the Fells Acres child care sex abuse case which marked the start of a nationwide hysteria over alleged ritual sexual abuse.
Amirault still maintains his innocence and his conviction, to put it bluntly, was a travesty. Police in the case used techniques to elicit testimony from child witnesses that would simply not be tolerated today. Police told parents to question their kids about sexual abuse and instructed not to take no for an answer, while a pediatric nurse used dolls to elicit tales of sexual abuse from the children and informed them that they were in “denial” if they said that no sex abuse had taken place.
Police maintained that the Amirault’s abused the children to produce child pornography, but never turned up a single such example of this alleged child porn.
The Amirault case was a contemporary witch hunt and it is outrageous that Gerald Amirault had to spend 17 years in jail based on such a miscarriage of justice.
Amirault is slated to be released on parole in April 2004.
Source:
Gerald Amirault gets parole after 17 years. Tom Mashberg, Boston Herald, October 24, 2003.
Tags: Uncategorized
Open Season on Children in the United States
One thing I will never understand is why killing a child so often results in so little jail time provided that the person who does the killing is the parent of the child.
Consider the case of 22-year-old Tiffany Trice and her 18-month-old daughter, Victoria Miller.
Victoria died on August 5, 2002. Trice plead guilty to reckless homicide in her death — her plea agreement stipulated that she still maintains her innocence but that concedes there is enough evidence against her to obtain a conviction.
Trice punched her daughter so hard in the stomach and chest that she bruised the little girl’s aorta, leading to her death.
Trice had been held in jail for 14 months awaiting trial. Want to guess how much additional time she’ll spend in jail? Three years? Two years? Surely at least one year.
Well, the plea agreement called for a five year sentence, but the judge in the case released Trice on probation. Provided she doesn’t violate the terms of her probation, she won’t serve a single additional day in prison.
Absolutely disgusting.
Source:
Woman pleads guilty to reckless homicide. Courier-Journal News (Louisville, Kentucky), August 30, 2003.
Local Mom Who Killed Daughter Will Go Free. The Louisville.Com Channel, 2003.
Tags: Uncategorized
British Court Rejects Women’s Appeal to Use Frozen Embryos
A judge in Great Britain ruled earlier this month that two women who wanted to use frozen embryos created with their former partners did not have a right to use the embryos.
Natalie Evans, 31, and Lorraine Hadley, 38, had created the frozen embryos for later use in in vitro fertilization. Before that happened, though, their relationship with their respective partners ended. The men wanted the embryos destroyed, whereas the women wanted to be implanted with the embryos.
Great Britain’s 1990 Human Fertilization and Embryology Act says that frozen embryos can only be used if both parties agree to said use.
A High Court Justice upheld that law saying that the Fertilization and Embryology Act “must be respected.”
In criticizing the ruling, some commentators couldn’t resist good old fashioned sexism. Writing in the London Evening Standard, for example, AC Grayling maintained that the rights of the potential father under the act should be shoved aside because “the clincher is the fact that parenthood is a more crucial matter to women” and decried the fact that requiring consent from both potential parents “places control of their [the women] prospects of motherhood into the least sympathetic hands: those of their ex-partners.”
Sources:
What they said about . . . the embryo ruling. William Cederwell, The Guardian, October 3, 2003.
IVF women lose their chance to have babies. Sarah Womack, Daily Telegraph, October 2, 2003.
Tags: Uncategorized
Susan Estrich on Accusations Against Schwarzenegger
Throughout the various Clinton sexual scandals, law professor and Democratic activist Susan Estrich argued that although Clinton’s behavior may have been distasteful, it did not meet the legal criteria for harassment or battery. When last minute allegations turned up in the Los Angeles Times against gubernatorial candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger, Estrich reached a similar conclusion in an op-ed for the Times — Schwarzenegger may have acted in a distasteful manner, but there was no evidence that he violated any sexual harassment or battery laws.
Estrich wrote,
None of the six women interviewed by The Times filed legal charges. Four of the six were quoted anonymously. Of the two who were named, one, a British television hostess, had told her story to Premiere magazine years ago, and it has been widely known and largely ignored. The other recounts an alleged incident of fondling at Gold’s Gym nearly 30 years ago.
. . .
As a professor of sex discrimination law for two decades and an expert on sexual harassment, I certainly don’t condone the unwanted touching of women that was apparently involved here. But these acts do not appear to constitute any crime, such as rape or sodomy or even assault or battery. As for civil law, sexual harassment requires more than a single case of unwelcome touching; there must be a threat or promise of sex in exchange for a job benefit or demotion, or the hostile environment must be severe and pervasive.
Of course her op-ed was greeted by Democrats in much the same vein that her defense of Clinton was greeted by Republicans at the time. When it comes to political sex scandals, the only overarching ideology is that of hypocrisy.
Source:
A deplorable October surprise. Susan Estrich, Los Angeles Times, October 3, 2003.
Tags: Uncategorized
Woman Who Watched Boyfriend Murder Baby Wants to Be Released on Appeal
Andrea Bone, 21, is asking to be released from prison while she awaits the results of an appeal of her conviction in her daughter’s death.
Bone’s lover, Sandy McLure, 27, killed 13-month-old Carla-Nicole by repeatedly swinging her by her legs and slamming her head into a wall. McClure received a life sentence for the murder.
Bone was sentenced to three years after testimony at her trial that she simply sat by on a sofa smoking a cigarette and eating while McClure brutally murdered the child.
She is appealing that sentence, however, on the grounds that she was suffering from depression at the time.
Source:
Mother guilty of failing to stop murder. Frank Urquhart , The Scotsman, September 28, 2002.
Mother of dead baby to be freed. Auslan Cramb, Daily Telegraph, September 25, 2003.
Tags: Uncategorized
Should Provocation Matter In Murder Cases?
Australia’s Victorian Law Reform Commission recently released a report analyzing various defenses against homicide and suggesting a number of alternative proposals. One of the defenses the group looked at is the provocation defense, which it criticized for being largely available only to men.
The provocation defense or something like it exists in most Western legal systems and usually acts to reduce the severity of a murder charge if the accused was presented with a situation that provoked the murder. The most common such provocation is when a man or woman kills after finding his or her partner committing an act of sexual infidelity.
So, for example, when Clara Harris was charged with killing her husband after catching him with another woman, jurors had the option to convict her of manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide. Jurors did convict her of murder, but also found that the murder was motivated by a “sudden passion” — i.e. anger at finding her husband in a hotel with another woman — and as a result she received more lenient sentence than a straight ahead murder conviction would have garnered.
The Victorian Law Reform Commission’s main complaints against such a defense is that a) women who are allegedly victims of domestic violence tend to kill their husbands in rather cold-blooded manners, such as waiting until their asleep and shooting or bludgeoning them to death and b) that the provocation defense is sometimes pushed to very bizarre lengths.
On the first point, Law Reform Commissioner Marcia Neave told The Age,
One of the problems is that provocation allows for the hot-blooded killing, whereas women who kill in response to a long period of battering find that defense hard, because they often wait until the guy is asleep.
Of course it is difficult to conceive of a situation where a man or woman sleeping by themselves can be very provocative.
On the other hand, defendants in Victoria apparently try to push the defense as far as possible. The Age reporter mentions a case where a man tried to appeal his conviction for bludgeoning and stabbing his girlfriend to death by claiming she provoked him by insulting him and other members of his families.
One of the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission is to simply eliminate the provocation defense altogether, especially since the defense was added at a time when a murder conviction could lead to the death penalty (which is no longer the case). Certainly it should not be so pliable as to let people minimize murders committed for simple insults or disagreements.
Sources:
Reform call for laws on women who kill. Ian Munro, The Age, September 22, 2003.
Defences to Homicide: Options Paper. Victorian Law Reform Commission, September 2003.
Tags: Uncategorized
Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003
–S.1435–
S.1435
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the seventh day of January, two thousand and three
An Act
<ttitle>To provide for the analysis of the incidence and effects of prison rape in Federal, State, and local institutions and to provide information, resources, recommendations, and funding to protect individuals from prison rape.</ttitle>
- Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
- (a) SHORT TITLE- This Act may be cited as the `Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003′.
- (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS- The table of contents of this Act is as follows:
- Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
- Sec. 2. Findings.
- Sec. 3. Purposes.
- Sec. 4. National prison rape statistics, data, and research.
- Sec. 5. Prison rape prevention and prosecution.
- Sec. 6. Grants to protect inmates and safeguard communities.
- Sec. 7. National Prison Rape Reduction Commission.
- Sec. 8. Adoption and effect of national standards.
- Sec. 9. Requirement that accreditation organizations adopt accreditation standards.
- Sec. 10. Definitions.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
- Congress makes the following findings:
- (1) 2,100,146 persons were incarcerated in the United States at the end of 2001: 1,324,465 in Federal and State prisons and 631,240 in county and local jails. In 1999, there were more than 10,000,000 separate admissions to and discharges from prisons and jails.
- (2) Insufficient research has been conducted and insufficient data reported on the extent of prison rape. However, experts have conservatively estimated that at least 13 percent of the inmates in the United States have been sexually assaulted in prison. Many inmates have suffered repeated assaults. Under this estimate, nearly 200,000 inmates now incarcerated have been or will be the victims of prison rape. The total number of inmates who have been sexually assaulted in the past 20 years likely exceeds 1,000,000.
- (3) Inmates with mental illness are at increased risk of sexual victimization. America’s jails and prisons house more mentally ill individuals than all of the Nation’s psychiatric hospitals combined. As many as 16 percent of inmates in State prisons and jails, and 7 percent of Federal inmates, suffer from mental illness.
- (4) Young first-time offenders are at increased risk of sexual victimization. Juveniles are 5 times more likely to be sexually assaulted in adult rather than juvenile facilities–often within the first 48 hours of incarceration.
- (5) Most prison staff are not adequately trained or prepared to prevent, report, or treat inmate sexual assaults.
- (6) Prison rape often goes unreported, and inmate victims often receive inadequate treatment for the severe physical and psychological effects of sexual assault–if they receive treatment at all.
- (7) HIV and AIDS are major public health problems within America’s correctional facilities. In 2000, 25,088 inmates in Federal and State prisons were known to be infected with HIV/AIDS. In 2000, HIV/AIDS accounted for more than 6 percent of all deaths in Federal and State prisons. Infection rates for other sexually transmitted diseases, tuberculosis, and hepatitis B and C are also far greater for prisoners than for the American population as a whole. Prison rape undermines the public health by contributing to the spread of these diseases, and often giving a potential death sentence to its victims.
- (8) Prison rape endangers the public safety by making brutalized inmates more likely to commit crimes when they are released–as 600,000 inmates are each year.
- (9) The frequently interracial character of prison sexual assaults significantly exacerbates interracial tensions, both within prison and, upon release of perpetrators and victims from prison, in the community at large.
- (10) Prison rape increases the level of homicides and other violence against inmates and staff, and the risk of insurrections and riots.
- (11) Victims of prison rape suffer severe physical and psychological effects that hinder their ability to integrate into the community and maintain stable employment upon their release from prison. They are thus more likely to become homeless and/or require government assistance.
- (12) Members of the public and government officials are largely unaware of the epidemic character of prison rape and the day-to-day horror experienced by victimized inmates.
- (13) The high incidence of sexual assault within prisons involves actual and potential violations of the United States Constitution. In Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994), the Supreme Court ruled that deliberate indifference to the substantial risk of sexual assault violates prisoners’ rights under the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause of the Eighth Amendment. The Eighth Amendment rights of State and local prisoners are protected through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pursuant to the power of Congress under Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress may take action to enforce those rights in States where officials have demonstrated such indifference. States that do not take basic steps to abate prison rape by adopting standards that do not generate significant additional expenditures demonstrate such indifference. Therefore, such States are not entitled to the same level of Federal benefits as other States.
- (14) The high incidence of prison rape undermines the effectiveness and efficiency of United States Government expenditures through grant programs such as those dealing with health care; mental health care; disease prevention; crime prevention, investigation, and prosecution; prison construction, maintenance, and operation; race relations; poverty; unemployment and homelessness. The effectiveness and efficiency of these federally funded grant programs are compromised by the failure of State officials to adopt policies and procedures that reduce the incidence of prison rape in that the high incidence of prison rape–
- (A) increases the costs incurred by Federal, State, and local jurisdictions to administer their prison systems;
- (B) increases the levels of violence, directed at inmates and at staff, within prisons;
- (C) increases health care expenditures, both inside and outside of prison systems, and reduces the effectiveness of disease prevention programs by substantially increasing the incidence and spread of HIV, AIDS, tuberculosis, hepatitis B and C, and other diseases;
- (D) increases mental health care expenditures, both inside and outside of prison systems, by substantially increasing the rate of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, suicide, and the exacerbation of existing mental illnesses among current and former inmates;
- (E) increases the risks of recidivism, civil strife, and violent crime by individuals who have been brutalized by prison rape; and
- (F) increases the level of interracial tensions and strife within prisons and, upon release of perpetrators and victims, in the community at large.
- (15) The high incidence of prison rape has a significant effect on interstate commerce because it increases substantially–
- (A) the costs incurred by Federal, State, and local jurisdictions to administer their prison systems;
- (B) the incidence and spread of HIV, AIDS, tuberculosis, hepatitis B and C, and other diseases, contributing to increased health and medical expenditures throughout the Nation;
- (C) the rate of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, suicide, and the exacerbation of existing mental illnesses among current and former inmates, contributing to increased health and medical expenditures throughout the Nation; and
- (D) the risk of recidivism, civil strife, and violent crime by individuals who have been brutalized by prison rape.
SEC. 3. PURPOSES.
- The purposes of this Act are to–
- (1) establish a zero-tolerance standard for the incidence of prison rape in prisons in the United States;
- (2) make the prevention of prison rape a top priority in each prison system;
- (3) develop and implement national standards for the detection, prevention, reduction, and punishment of prison rape;
- (4) increase the available data and information on the incidence of prison rape, consequently improving the management and administration of correctional facilities;
- (5) standardize the definitions used for collecting data on the incidence of prison rape;
- (6) increase the accountability of prison officials who fail to detect, prevent, reduce, and punish prison rape;
- (7) protect the Eighth Amendment rights of Federal, State, and local prisoners;
- (8) increase the efficiency and effectiveness of Federal expenditures through grant programs such as those dealing with health care; mental health care; disease prevention; crime prevention, investigation, and prosecution; prison construction, maintenance, and operation; race relations; poverty; unemployment; and homelessness; and
- (9) reduce the costs that prison rape imposes on interstate commerce.
SEC. 4. NATIONAL PRISON RAPE STATISTICS, DATA, AND RESEARCH.
- (a) ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE STATISTICAL REVIEW-
- (1) IN GENERAL- The Bureau of Justice Statistics of the Department of Justice (in this section referred to as the `Bureau’) shall carry out, for each calendar year, a comprehensive statistical review and analysis of the incidence and effects of prison rape. The statistical review and analysis shall include, but not be limited to the identification of the common characteristics of–
- (A) both victims and perpetrators of prison rape; and
- (B) prisons and prison systems with a high incidence of prison rape.
- (2) CONSIDERATIONS- In carrying out paragraph (1), the Bureau shall consider–
- (A) how rape should be defined for the purposes of the statistical review and analysis;
- (B) how the Bureau should collect information about staff-on-inmate sexual assault;
- (C) how the Bureau should collect information beyond inmate self-reports of prison rape;
- (D) how the Bureau should adjust the data in order to account for differences among prisons as required by subsection (c)(3);
- (E) the categorization of prisons as required by subsection (c)(4); and
- (F) whether a preliminary study of prison rape should be conducted to inform the methodology of the comprehensive statistical review.
- (3) SOLICITATION OF VIEWS- The Bureau of Justice Statistics shall solicit views from representatives of the following: State departments of correction; county and municipal jails; juvenile correctional facilities; former inmates; victim advocates; researchers; and other experts in the area of sexual assault.
- (4) SAMPLING TECHNIQUES- The review and analysis under paragraph (1) shall be based on a random sample, or other scientifically appropriate sample, of not less than 10 percent of all Federal, State, and county prisons, and a representative sample of municipal prisons. The selection shall include at least one prison from each State. The selection of facilities for sampling shall be made at the latest practicable date prior to conducting the surveys and shall not be disclosed to any facility or prison system official prior to the time period studied in the survey. Selection of a facility for sampling during any year shall not preclude its selection for sampling in any subsequent year.
- (5) SURVEYS- In carrying out the review and analysis under paragraph (1), the Bureau shall, in addition to such other methods as the Bureau considers appropriate, use surveys and other statistical studies of current and former inmates from a sample of Federal, State, county, and municipal prisons. The Bureau shall ensure the confidentiality of each survey participant.
- (6) PARTICIPATION IN SURVEY- Federal, State, or local officials or facility administrators that receive a request from the Bureau under subsection (a)(4) or (5) will be required to participate in the national survey and provide access to any inmates under their legal custody.
- (b) REVIEW PANEL ON PRISON RAPE-
- (1) ESTABLISHMENT- To assist the Bureau in carrying out the review and analysis under subsection (a), there is established, within the Department of Justice, the Review Panel on Prison Rape (in this section referred to as the `Panel’).
- (2) MEMBERSHIP-
- (A) COMPOSITION- The Panel shall be composed of 3 members, each of whom shall be appointed by the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
- (B) QUALIFICATIONS- Members of the Panel shall be selected from among individuals with knowledge or expertise in matters to be studied by the Panel.
- (3) PUBLIC HEARINGS-
- (A) IN GENERAL- The duty of the Panel shall be to carry out, for each calendar year, public hearings concerning the operation of the three prisons with the highest incidence of prison rape and the two prisons with the lowest incidence of prison rape in each category of facilities identified under subsection (c)(4). The Panel shall hold a separate hearing regarding the three Federal or State prisons with the highest incidence of prison rape. The purpose of these hearings shall be to collect evidence to aid in the identification of common characteristics of both victims and perpetrators of prison rape, and the identification of common characteristics of prisons and prison systems with a high incidence of prison rape, and the identification of common characteristics of prisons and prison systems that appear to have been successful in deterring prison rape.
- (B) TESTIMONY AT HEARINGS-
- (i) PUBLIC OFFICIALS- In carrying out the hearings required under subparagraph (A), the Panel shall request the public testimony of Federal, State, and local officials (and organizations that represent such officials), including the warden or director of each prison, who bears responsibility for the prevention, detection, and punishment of prison rape at each entity, and the head of the prison system encompassing such prison.
- (ii) VICTIMS- The Panel may request the testimony of prison rape victims, organizations representing such victims, and other appropriate individuals and organizations.
- (C) SUBPOENAS-
- (i) ISSUANCE- The Panel may issue subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of written or other matter.
- (ii) ENFORCEMENT- In the case of contumacy or refusal to obey a subpoena, the Attorney General may in a Federal court of appropriate jurisdiction obtain an appropriate order to enforce the subpoena.
- (c) REPORTS-
- (1) IN GENERAL- Not later than June 30 of each year, the Attorney General shall submit a report on the activities of the Bureau and the Review Panel, with respect to prison rape, for the preceding calendar year to–
- (A) Congress; and
- (B) the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
- (2) CONTENTS- The report required under paragraph (1) shall include–
- (A) with respect to the effects of prison rape, statistical, sociological, and psychological data;
- (B) with respect to the incidence of prison rape–
- (i) statistical data aggregated at the Federal, State, prison system, and prison levels;
- (ii) a listing of those institutions in the representative sample, separated into each category identified under subsection (c)(4) and ranked according to the incidence of prison rape in each institution; and
- (iii) an identification of those institutions in the representative sample that appear to have been successful in deterring prison rape; and
- (C) a listing of any prisons in the representative sample that did not cooperate with the survey conducted pursuant to section 4.
- (3) DATA ADJUSTMENTS- In preparing the information specified in paragraph (2), the Attorney General shall use established statistical methods to adjust the data as necessary to account for differences among institutions in the representative sample, which are not related to the detection, prevention, reduction and punishment of prison rape, or which are outside the control of the State, prison, or prison system, in order to provide an accurate comparison among prisons. Such differences may include the mission, security level, size, and jurisdiction under which the prison operates. For each such adjustment made, the Attorney General shall identify and explain such adjustment in the report.
- (4) CATEGORIZATION OF PRISONS- The report shall divide the prisons surveyed into three categories. One category shall be composed of all Federal and State prisons. The other two categories shall be defined by the Attorney General in order to compare similar institutions.
- (d) CONTRACTS AND GRANTS- In carrying out its duties under this section, the Attorney General may–
- (1) provide grants for research through the National Institute of Justice; and
- (2) contract with or provide grants to any other entity the Attorney General deems appropriate.
- (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be appropriated $15,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2010 to carry out this section.
SEC. 5. PRISON RAPE PREVENTION AND PROSECUTION.
- (a) INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE-
- (1) NATIONAL CLEARINGHOUSE- There is established within the National Institute of Corrections a national clearinghouse for the provision of information and assistance to Federal, State, and local authorities responsible for the prevention, investigation, and punishment of instances of prison rape.
- (b) REPORTS-
- (1) IN GENERAL- Not later than September 30 of each year, the National Institute of Corrections shall submit a report to Congress and the Secretary of Health and Human Services. This report shall be available to the Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics.
- (2) CONTENTS- The report required under paragraph (1) shall summarize the activities of the Department of Justice regarding prison rape abatement for the preceding calendar year.
- (c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2010 to carry out this section.
- (a) GRANTS AUTHORIZED- From amounts made available for grants under this section, the Attorney General shall make grants to States to assist those States in ensuring that budgetary circumstances (such as reduced State and local spending on prisons) do not compromise efforts to protect inmates (particularly from prison rape) and to safeguard the communities to which inmates return. The purpose of grants under this section shall be to provide funds for personnel, training, technical assistance, data collection, and equipment to prevent and prosecute prisoner rape.
- (b) USE OF GRANT AMOUNTS- Amounts received by a grantee under this section may be used by the grantee, directly or through subgrants, only for one or more of the following activities:
- (1) PROTECTING INMATES- Protecting inmates by–
- (A) undertaking efforts to more effectively prevent prison rape;
- (B) investigating incidents of prison rape; or
- (C) prosecuting incidents of prison rape.
- (2) SAFEGUARDING COMMUNITIES- Safeguarding communities by–
- (A) making available, to officials of State and local governments who are considering reductions to prison budgets, training and technical assistance in successful methods for moderating the growth of prison populations without compromising public safety, including successful methods used by other jurisdictions;
- (B) developing and utilizing analyses of prison populations and risk assessment instruments that will improve State and local governments’ understanding of risks to the community regarding release of inmates in the prison population;
- (C) preparing maps demonstrating the concentration, on a community-by-community basis, of inmates who have been released, to facilitate the efficient and effective–
- (i) deployment of law enforcement resources (including probation and parole resources); and
- (ii) delivery of services (such as job training and substance abuse treatment) to those released inmates;
- (D) promoting collaborative efforts, among officials of State and local governments and leaders of appropriate communities, to understand and address the effects on a community of the presence of a disproportionate number of released inmates in that community; or
- (E) developing policies and programs that reduce spending on prisons by effectively reducing rates of parole and probation revocation without compromising public safety.
- (c) GRANT REQUIREMENTS-
- (1) PERIOD- A grant under this section shall be made for a period of not more than 2 years.
- (2) MAXIMUM- The amount of a grant under this section may not exceed $1,000,000.
- (3) MATCHING- The Federal share of a grant under this section may not exceed 50 percent of the total costs of the project described in the application submitted under subsection (d) for the fiscal year for which the grant was made under this section.
- (d) APPLICATIONS-
- (1) IN GENERAL- To request a grant under this section, the chief executive of a State shall submit an application to the Attorney General at such time, in such manner, and accompanied by such information as the Attorney General may require.
- (2) CONTENTS- Each application required by paragraph (1) shall–
- (A) include the certification of the chief executive that the State receiving such grant–
- (i) has adopted all national prison rape standards that, as of the date on which the application was submitted, have been promulgated under this Act; and
- (ii) will consider adopting all national prison rape standards that are promulgated under this Act after such date;
- (B) specify with particularity the preventative, prosecutorial, or administrative activities to be undertaken by the State with the amounts received under the grant; and
- (C) in the case of an application for a grant for one or more activities specified in paragraph (2) of subsection (b)–
- (i) review the extent of the budgetary circumstances affecting the State generally and describe how those circumstances relate to the State’s prisons;
- (ii) describe the rate of growth of the State’s prison population over the preceding 10 years and explain why the State may have difficulty sustaining that rate of growth; and
- (iii) explain the extent to which officials (including law enforcement officials) of State and local governments and victims of crime will be consulted regarding decisions whether, or how, to moderate the growth of the State’s prison population.
- (e) REPORTS BY GRANTEE-
- (1) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General shall require each grantee to submit, not later than 90 days after the end of the period for which the grant was made under this section, a report on the activities carried out under the grant. The report shall identify and describe those activities and shall contain an evaluation of the effect of those activities on–
- (A) the number of incidents of prison rape, and the grantee’s response to such incidents; and
- (B) the safety of the prisons, and the safety of the communities in which released inmates are present.
- (2) DISSEMINATION- The Attorney General shall ensure that each report submitted under paragraph (1) is made available under the national clearinghouse established under section 5.
- (f) STATE DEFINED- In this section, the term `State’ includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any other territory or possession of the United States.
- (g) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS-
- (1) IN GENERAL- There are authorized to be appropriated for grants under this section $40,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2010.
- (2) LIMITATION- Of amounts made available for grants under this section, not less than 50 percent shall be available only for activities specified in paragraph (1) of subsection (b).
SEC. 7. NATIONAL PRISON RAPE REDUCTION COMMISSION.
- (a) ESTABLISHMENT- There is established a commission to be known as the National Prison Rape Reduction Commission (in this section referred to as the `Commission’).
- (b) MEMBERS-
- (1) IN GENERAL- The Commission shall be composed of 9 members, of whom–
- (A) 3 shall be appointed by the President;
- (B) 2 shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, unless the Speaker is of the same party as the President, in which case 1 shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and 1 shall be appointed by the minority leader of the House of Representatives;
- (C) 1 shall be appointed by the minority leader of the House of Representatives (in addition to any appointment made under subparagraph (B));
- (D) 2 shall be appointed by the majority leader of the Senate, unless the majority leader is of the same party as the President, in which case 1 shall be appointed by the majority leader of the Senate and 1 shall be appointed by the minority leader of the Senate; and
- (E) 1 member appointed by the minority leader of the Senate (in addition to any appointment made under subparagraph (D)).
- (2) PERSONS ELIGIBLE- Each member of the Commission shall be an individual who has knowledge or expertise in matters to be studied by the Commission.
- (3) CONSULTATION REQUIRED- The President, the Speaker and minority leader of the House of Representatives, and the majority leader and minority leader of the Senate shall consult with one another prior to the appointment of the members of the Commission to achieve, to the maximum extent possible, fair and equitable representation of various points of view with respect to the matters to be studied by the Commission.
- (4) TERM- Each member shall be appointed for the life of the Commission.
- (5) TIME FOR INITIAL APPOINTMENTS- The appointment of the members shall be made not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
- (6) VACANCIES- A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled in the manner in which the original appointment was made, and shall be made not later than 60 days after the date on which the vacancy occurred.
- (c) OPERATION-
- (1) CHAIRPERSON- Not later than 15 days after appointments of all the members are made, the President shall appoint a chairperson for the Commission from among its members.
- (2) MEETINGS- The Commission shall meet at the call of the chairperson. The initial meeting of the Commission shall take place not later than 30 days after the initial appointment of the members is completed.
- (3) QUORUM- A majority of the members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum to conduct business, but the Commission may establish a lesser quorum for conducting hearings scheduled by the Commission.
- (4) RULES- The Commission may establish by majority vote any other rules for the conduct of Commission business, if such rules are not inconsistent with this Act or other applicable law.
- (d) COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF THE IMPACTS OF PRISON RAPE-
- (1) IN GENERAL- The Commission shall carry out a comprehensive legal and factual study of the penalogical, physical, mental, medical, social, and economic impacts of prison rape in the United States on–
- (A) Federal, State, and local governments; and
- (B) communities and social institutions generally, including individuals, families, and businesses within such communities and social institutions.
- (2) MATTERS INCLUDED- The study under paragraph (1) shall include–
- (A) a review of existing Federal, State, and local government policies and practices with respect to the prevention, detection, and punishment of prison rape;
- (B) an assessment of the relationship between prison rape and prison conditions, and of existing monitoring, regulatory, and enforcement practices that are intended to address any such relationship;
- (C) an assessment of pathological or social causes of prison rape;
- (D) an assessment of the extent to which the incidence of prison rape contributes to the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and to the transmission of HIV;
- (E) an assessment of the characteristics of inmates most likely to commit prison rape and the effectiveness of various types of treatment or programs to reduce such likelihood;
- (F) an assessment of the characteristics of inmates most likely to be victims of prison rape and the effectiveness of various types of treatment or programs to reduce such likelihood;
- (G) an assessment of the impacts of prison rape on individuals, families, social institutions and the economy generally, including an assessment of the extent to which the incidence of prison rape contributes to recidivism and to increased incidence of sexual assault;
- (H) an examination of the feasibility and cost of conducting surveillance, undercover activities, or both, to reduce the incidence of prison rape;
- (I) an assessment of the safety and security of prison facilities and the relationship of prison facility construction and design to the incidence of prison rape;
- (J) an assessment of the feasibility and cost of any particular proposals for prison reform;
- (K) an identification of the need for additional scientific and social science research on the prevalence of prison rape in Federal, State, and local prisons;
- (L) an assessment of the general relationship between prison rape and prison violence;
- (M) an assessment of the relationship between prison rape and levels of training, supervision, and discipline of prison staff; and
- (N) an assessment of existing Federal and State systems for reporting incidents of prison rape, including an assessment of whether existing systems provide an adequate assurance of confidentiality, impartiality and the absence of reprisal.
- (3) REPORT-
- (A) DISTRIBUTION- Not later than 2 years after the date of the initial meeting of the Commission, the Commission shall submit a report on the study carried out under this subsection to–
- (i) the President;
- (ii) the Congress;
- (iii) the Attorney General;
- (iv) the Secretary of Health and Human Services;
- (v) the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons;
- (vi) the chief executive of each State; and
- (vii) the head of the department of corrections of each State.
- (B) CONTENTS- The report under subparagraph (A) shall include–
- (i) the findings and conclusions of the Commission;
- (ii) recommended national standards for reducing prison rape;
- (iii) recommended protocols for preserving evidence and treating victims of prison rape; and
- (iv) a summary of the materials relied on by the Commission in the preparation of the report.
- (e) RECOMMENDATIONS-
- (1) IN GENERAL- In conjunction with the report submitted under subsection (d)(3), the Commission shall provide the Attorney General and the Secretary of Health and Human Services with recommended national standards for enhancing the detection, prevention, reduction, and punishment of prison rape.
- (2) MATTERS INCLUDED- The information provided under paragraph (1) shall include recommended national standards relating to–
- (A) the classification and assignment of prisoners, using proven standardized instruments and protocols, in a manner that limits the occurrence of prison rape;
- (B) the investigation and resolution of rape complaints by responsible prison authorities, local and State police, and Federal and State prosecution authorities;
- (C) the preservation of physical and testimonial evidence for use in an investigation of the circumstances relating to the rape;
- (D) acute-term trauma care for rape victims, including standards relating to–
- (i) the manner and extent of physical examination and treatment to be provided to any rape victim; and
- (ii) the manner and extent of any psychological examination, psychiatric care, medication, and mental health counseling to be provided to any rape victim;
- (E) referrals for long-term continuity of care for rape victims;
- (F) educational and medical testing measures for reducing the incidence of HIV transmission due to prison rape;
- (G) post-rape prophylactic medical measures for reducing the incidence of transmission of sexual diseases;
- (H) the training of correctional staff sufficient to ensure that they understand and appreciate the significance of prison rape and the necessity of its eradication;
- (I) the timely and comprehensive investigation of staff sexual misconduct involving rape or other sexual assault on inmates;
- (J) ensuring the confidentiality of prison rape complaints and protecting inmates who make complaints of prison rape;
- (K) creating a system for reporting incidents of prison rape that will ensure the confidentiality of prison rape complaints, protect inmates who make prison rape complaints from retaliation, and assure the impartial resolution of prison rape complaints;
- (L) data collection and reporting of–
- (i) prison rape;
- (ii) prison staff sexual misconduct; and
- (iii) the resolution of prison rape complaints by prison officials and Federal, State, and local investigation and prosecution authorities; and
- (M) such other matters as may reasonably be related to the detection, prevention, reduction, and punishment of prison rape.
- (3) LIMITATION- The Commission shall not propose a recommended standard that would impose substantial additional costs compared to the costs presently expended by Federal, State, and local prison authorities.
- (f) CONSULTATION WITH ACCREDITATION ORGANIZATIONS- In developing recommended national standards for enhancing the detection, prevention, reduction, and punishment of prison rape, the Commission shall consider any standards that have already been developed, or are being developed simultaneously to the deliberations of the Commission. The Commission shall consult with accreditation organizations responsible for the accreditation of Federal, State, local or private prisons, that have developed or are currently developing standards related to prison rape. The Commission will also consult with national associations representing the corrections profession that have developed or are currently developing standards related to prison rape.
- (1) IN GENERAL- The Commission shall hold public hearings. The Commission may hold such hearings, sit and act at such times and places, take such testimony, and receive such evidence as the Commission considers advisable to carry out its duties under this section.
- (2) WITNESS EXPENSES- Witnesses requested to appear before the Commission shall be paid the same fees as are paid to witnesses under section 1821 of title 28, United States Code. The per diem and mileage allowances for witnesses shall be paid from funds appropriated to the Commission.
- (h) INFORMATION FROM FEDERAL OR STATE AGENCIES- The Commission may secure directly from any Federal department or agency such information as the Commission considers necessary to carry out its duties under this section. The Commission may request the head of any State or local department or agency to furnish such information to the Commission.
- (i) PERSONNEL MATTERS-
- (1) TRAVEL EXPENSES- The members of the Commission shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of service for the Commission.
- (2) DETAIL OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES- With the affirmative vote of 2/3 of the Commission, any Federal Government employee, with the approval of the head of the appropriate Federal agency, may be detailed to the Commission without reimbursement, and such detail shall be without interruption or loss of civil service status, benefits, or privileges.
- (3) PROCUREMENT OF TEMPORARY AND INTERMITTENT SERVICES- Upon the request of the Commission, the Attorney General shall provide reasonable and appropriate office space, supplies, and administrative assistance.
- (j) CONTRACTS FOR RESEARCH-
- (1) NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE- With a 2/3 affirmative vote, the Commission may select nongovernmental researchers and experts to assist the Commission in carrying out its duties under this Act. The National Institute of Justice shall contract with the researchers and experts selected by the Commission to provide funding in exchange for their services.
- (2) OTHER ORGANIZATIONS- Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit the ability of the Commission to enter into contracts with other entities or organizations for research necessary to carry out the duties of the Commission under this section.
- (k) SUBPOENAS-
- (1) ISSUANCE- The Commission may issue subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of written or other matter.
- (2) ENFORCEMENT- In the case of contumacy or refusal to obey a subpoena, the Attorney General may in a Federal court of appropriate jurisdiction obtain an appropriate order to enforce the subpoena.
- (3) CONFIDENTIALITY OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE- Documents provided to the Commission pursuant to a subpoena issued under this subsection shall not be released publicly without the affirmative vote of 2/3 of the Commission.
- (l) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.
- (m) TERMINATION- The Commission shall terminate on the date that is 60 days after the date on which the Commission submits the reports required by this section.
- (n) EXEMPTION- The Commission shall be exempt from the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
SEC. 8. ADOPTION AND EFFECT OF NATIONAL STANDARDS.
- (a) PUBLICATION OF PROPOSED STANDARDS-
- (1) FINAL RULE- Not later than 1 year after receiving the report specified in section 7(d)(3), the Attorney General shall publish a final rule adopting national standards for the detection, prevention, reduction, and punishment of prison rape.
- (2) INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT- The standards referred to in paragraph (1) shall be based upon the independent judgment of the Attorney General, after giving due consideration to the recommended national standards provided by the Commission under section 7(e), and being informed by such data, opinions, and proposals that the Attorney General determines to be appropriate to consider.
- (3) LIMITATION- The Attorney General shall not establish a national standard under this section that would impose substantial additional costs compared to the costs presently expended by Federal, State, and local prison authorities. The Attorney General may, however, provide a list of improvements for consideration by correctional facilities.
- (4) TRANSMISSION TO STATES- Within 90 days of publishing the final rule under paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall transmit the national standards adopted under such paragraph to the chief executive of each State, the head of the department of corrections of each State, and to the appropriate authorities in those units of local government who oversee operations in one or more prisons.
- (b) APPLICABILITY TO FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS- The national standards referred to in subsection (a) shall apply to the Federal Bureau of Prisons immediately upon adoption of the final rule under subsection (a)(4).
- (c) ELIGIBILITY FOR FEDERAL FUNDS-
- (1) COVERED PROGRAMS-
- (A) IN GENERAL- For purposes of this subsection, a grant program is covered by this subsection if, and only if–
- (i) the program is carried out by or under the authority of the Attorney General; and
- (ii) the program may provide amounts to States for prison purposes.
- (B) LIST- For each fiscal year, the Attorney General shall prepare a list identifying each program that meets the criteria of subparagraph (A) and provide that list to each State.
- (2) ADOPTION OF NATIONAL STANDARDS- For each fiscal year, any amount that a State would otherwise receive for prison purposes for that fiscal year under a grant program covered by this subsection shall be reduced by 5 percent, unless the chief executive of the State submits to the Attorney General–
- (A) a certification that the State has adopted, and is in full compliance with, the national standards described in section 8(a); or
- (B) an assurance that not less than 5 percent of such amount shall be used only for the purpose of enabling the State to adopt, and achieve full compliance with, those national standards, so as to ensure that a certification under subparagraph (A) may be submitted in future years.
- (3) REPORT ON NONCOMPLIANCE- Not later than September 30 of each year, the Attorney General shall publish a report listing each grantee that is not in compliance with the national standards adopted pursuant to section 8(a).
- (4) COOPERATION WITH SURVEY- For each fiscal year, any amount that a State receives for that fiscal year under a grant program covered by this subsection shall not be used for prison purposes (and shall be returned to the grant program if no other authorized use is available), unless the chief executive of the State submits to the Attorney General a certification that neither the State, nor any political subdivision or unit of local government within the State, is listed in a report issued by the Attorney General pursuant to section 4(c)(2)(C).
- (5) REDISTRIBUTION OF AMOUNTS- Amounts under a grant program not granted by reason of a reduction under paragraph (2), or returned by reason of the prohibition in paragraph (4), shall be granted to one or more entities not subject to such reduction or such prohibition, subject to the other laws governing that program.
- (6) IMPLEMENTATION- The Attorney General shall establish procedures to implement this subsection, including procedures for effectively applying this subsection to discretionary grant programs.
- (7) EFFECTIVE DATE-
- (A) REQUIREMENT OF ADOPTION OF STANDARDS- The first grants to which paragraph (2) applies are grants for the second fiscal year beginning after the date on which the national standards under section 8(a) are finalized.
- (B) REQUIREMENT FOR COOPERATION- The first grants to which paragraph (4) applies are grants for the fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.
- (a) ELIGIBILITY FOR FEDERAL GRANTS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an organization responsible for the accreditation of Federal, State, local, or private prisons, jails, or other penal facilities may not receive any new Federal grants during any period in which such organization fails to meet any of the requirements of subsection (b).
- (b) REQUIREMENTS- To be eligible to receive Federal grants, an accreditation organization referred to in subsection (a) must meet the following requirements:
- (1) At all times after 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the organization shall have in effect, for each facility that it is responsible for accrediting, accreditation standards for the detection, prevention, reduction, and punishment of prison rape.
- (2) At all times after 1 year after the date of the adoption of the final rule under section 8(a)(4), the organization shall, in addition to any other such standards that it may promulgate relevant to the detection, prevention, reduction, and punishment of prison rape, adopt accreditation standards consistent with the national standards adopted pursuant to such final rule.
SEC. 10. DEFINITIONS.
- In this Act, the following definitions shall apply:
- (1) CARNAL KNOWLEDGE- The term `carnal knowledge’ means contact between the penis and the vulva or the penis and the anus, including penetration of any sort, however slight.
- (2) INMATE- The term `inmate’ means any person incarcerated or detained in any facility who is accused of, convicted of, sentenced for, or adjudicated delinquent for, violations of criminal law or the terms and conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or diversionary program.
- (3) JAIL- The term `jail’ means a confinement facility of a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency to hold–
- (A) persons pending adjudication of criminal charges; or
- (B) persons committed to confinement after adjudication of criminal charges for sentences of 1 year or less.
- (4) HIV- The term `HIV’ means the human immunodeficiency virus.
- (5) ORAL SODOMY- The term `oral sodomy’ means contact between the mouth and the penis, the mouth and the vulva, or the mouth and the anus.
- (6) POLICE LOCKUP- The term `police lockup’ means a temporary holding facility of a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency to hold–
- (A) inmates pending bail or transport to jail;
- (B) inebriates until ready for release; or
- (C) juveniles pending parental custody or shelter placement.
- (7) PRISON- The term `prison’ means any confinement facility of a Federal, State, or local government, whether administered by such government or by a private organization on behalf of such government, and includes–
- (A) any local jail or police lockup; and
- (B) any juvenile facility used for the custody or care of juvenile inmates.
- (8) PRISON RAPE- The term `prison rape’ includes the rape of an inmate in the actual or constructive control of prison officials.
- (9) RAPE- The term `rape’ means–
- (A) the carnal knowledge, oral sodomy, sexual assault with an object, or sexual fondling of a person, forcibly or against that person’s will;
- (B) the carnal knowledge, oral sodomy, sexual assault with an object, or sexual fondling of a person not forcibly or against the person’s will, where the victim is incapable of giving consent because of his or her youth or his or her temporary or permanent mental or physical incapacity; or
- (C) the carnal knowledge, oral sodomy, sexual assault with an object, or sexual fondling of a person achieved through the exploitation of the fear or threat of physical violence or bodily injury.
- (10) SEXUAL ASSAULT WITH AN OBJECT- The term `sexual assault with an object’ means the use of any hand, finger, object, or other instrument to penetrate, however slightly, the genital or anal opening of the body of another person.
- (11) SEXUAL FONDLING- The term `sexual fondling’ means the touching of the private body parts of another person (including the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks) for the purpose of sexual gratification.
- (12) EXCLUSIONS- The terms and conditions described in paragraphs (9) and (10) shall not apply to–
- (A) custodial or medical personnel gathering physical evidence, or engaged in other legitimate medical treatment, in the course of investigating prison rape;
- (B) the use of a health care provider’s hands or fingers or the use of medical devices in the course of appropriate medical treatment unrelated to prison rape; or
- (C) the use of a health care provider’s hands or fingers and the use of instruments to perform body cavity searches in order to maintain security and safety within the prison or detention facility, provided that the search is conducted in a manner consistent with constitutional requirements.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.
Tags: Uncategorized
Even Convicted Murderers Can Win Custody Cases If They’re Women
It’s hard to imagine a judge granting joint custody to a man serving a prison term for murdering his wife, but a Texas judge recently approvd a custody arrangement that grants convicted husband killer Clara Harris custody of her twin sons.
Harris is serving a 20 year sentence in the murder of her husband, David Harris. Clara ran over her husband with her Mercedes Benz outside a hotel after finding him their with a woman he was having an affair with.
As Glenn Sacks noted, this sort of absurd decision simply highlights how stacked family courts are in favor of mothers over fathers. As Sacks writes,
While both the judge and the attorney appointed by the court to represent Harris’ two sons saw value in preserving the bond between the children and a mohter who is a convicted murderer, many courts are unable to see the value of the bonds between children and decent, law-abiding fathers.
. . .
While in the Harris case a mother was able to win joint custody from a prison cell, decent fathers who have never had any brush with the law beyond a traffic ticket often cannot. Studies show that in contested cases mothers are granted sole custody over fathers by a margin of eight to one. . . .
. . .
The “woman good/man bad” mentality of our family courts often hurts children by blindly favoring mtohers and placing barriers between fathers and the children who love them. The Harris ruling — where even a mother who is a convicted murderer is still not seen as being an unfit parent — demonstrates just how deep-seated and destructive this mentality is.
That a convicted murder can be granted joint custody of her children is downright bizarre.
Source:
Convicted murderess can get custody but decent fathers can’t. Glenn Sacks, GlennSacks.Com, September 30, 2003.
Clara Harris to share in twin son’s custody. Kristan Thorne, News-24 (Houston, Texas), September 16, 2003.
Custody decided for Clara Harris’ children. Click2Houston.Com, September 15, 2003.
Tags: Uncategorized
Man Recovers Child Support in Ohio Case
The Zanesville Times Recorder reported recently that an Ohio man forced to pay child support for more than 20 years for a child that was not his will receive all of the child support back from the state.
Jonathan Sims married in 1982, and shortly thereafter his wife gave birth to a child. By 1984, however, the couple were divorced and Sims submitted blood tests to a variety of agencies and his attorney that proved he was not the biological father of the child.
Due to an error, however, by the time paperwork was filed with the state to dispute paternity, Ohio and already toughened its child support laws and forced him to pay child support even though he was not actually the parent of the child.
The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services will end up reimbursing Sims for $10,144.44.
Source:
Man receives child support payback after 20-plus years. Brian Gadd, Zanesville Times (Ohio), September 7, 2003.
Tags: Uncategorized