via alternet: justice emily jane goodman writes about the rising fees assessed to criminal justice system clients:

there are arrest fees (Texas), booking fees (Colorado) and DNA bank fees (New York). Michigan bills for the services of court-appointed lawyers, creating an incentive to waive counsel or to plead guilty at an early stage before legal costs escalate. Eighteen percent of Rhode Island inmates are in custody in connection with court-imposed financial obligations. An open court debt in Florida leads to a suspended driver’s license, which in turn can lead to loss of job or re-arrest for driving with a suspended license. Alabama judges can increase fees from $600 to $10,000. There are special fees for particular offenses such as sex crimes, abuse of children or the elderly and, especially, driving while intoxicated.

yeesh. fees are sometimes even assessed for the legal defense of indigent clients. justice goodman’s piece raises research questions that one could approach on a fine-by-fine or jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis:

1. to what (if any) extent have such fees risen in the recent past?

2. how much revenue do they generate?

3. does the revenue exceed the costs of administering and enforcing them?

4. to what extent are folks punished for failure to pay?

5. are outstanding financial obligations (ceteris paribus) negatively associated with reintegration outcomes (e.g., employment and family stability).

6. are outstanding financial obligations (ceteris paribus) positively associated with recidivism?

to offer a little context on social control at the republican national convention, the minneapolis strib published data on the number of arrests in each party’s national convention for 1996, 2000, 2004, and 2008.

i’m skeptical of the data quality here, especially with respect to reporting differences in the number of arrests attributed to the convention. if the data can be trusted, however, arrests at republican conventions have outpaced those at democratic conventions for at least the last three conventions. the strib’s randy furst and anthony lonetree offer a useful companion piece regarding changes in convention policing since the 1999 WTO protests. an excerpt:

St. Paul and Denver each received $50 million in federal funds for policing the conventions. Tony Bouza, former Minneapolis police chief, said he thinks St. Paul could have handled the security with a few hundred extra police officers. “The only reason they did it was an orgy of overtime, subsidized by the United States government under the National Security Act,” he said.

hmm. ol’ chief bouza was never one to mince words…

it was certainly troubling to see all those images of riot police and masked anarchists in my hometown of good ol’ st. paul.

knowing that i had friends and former students on both sides of the lines, i worried that the clash might explode, that blood would be shed, and that careers and lives would be disrupted if not ruined.

and, did anyone else worry — just for a moment — that such a clash might usher in a repressive “law and order” response by the two major parties? don’t tell me that senator mccain isn’t ready to capitalize on such a moment, or that joe biden hasn’t already written the speech.

for better or worse, the conventions have ended, the out-of-towners have left, and the party platforms have been ratified. if you’d like a sneak preview of the role of crime in the coming debates, crimprofs points us to a helpful national criminal justice association guide to each party’s crime platform. a few excerpts and links:

The Democratic platform, adopted during the convention in Denver last week, includes a four-paragraph section on criminal justice focusing principally on support for local law enforcement and ending violence against women. On support for law enforcement, the platform states, “We will reverse the policy of cutting resources for the brave men and women who protect our communities every day. At a time when our nation’s officers are being asked both to provide traditional law enforcement services and to help protect the homeland, taking police off of the street is neither tough nor smart; we reject this disastrous approach. We support and will restore funding to our courageous police officers and will ensure that they are equipped with the best technology, equipment and innovative strategies to prevent and fight crimes.” …

“The Republican platform, adopted last week as delegates prepared to travel to Minnesota for this week’s convention, includes an eight-part criminal justice section on the topics of ending child pornography, gangs, sentencing, reforming prisons, federal law enforcement, fighting illegal drugs and protecting the victims of crime.”

i’m most interested in voting rights claims, but there’s much more fresh data in a new bureau of justice statistics publication:

Examines civil rights claims based on race, age, sex, or national origin involving employment, welfare, housing, voting, or other civil rights discrimination issues. It covers civil rights claims litigated in federal district courts from 1990 to 2006. Information is presented on trends in types of civil rights cases filed in federal district courts, the basis of federal court jurisdiction, case processing time, disposition of civil rights cases, and the types of trials that occur in the federal courts. In addition, this report examines who wins in civil rights trials and the estimated median monetary amount awarded to litigants.

Highlights include the following:

* Civil rights filings doubled in U.S. district courts from 1990 (18,922 filings) to 1997 (43,278 filings) and subsequently stabilized until 2003. From 2003 through 2006, the number of civil rights cases filed in U.S. district courts declined by 20%.
* During the period from 1990 through 2006, the percentage of civil rights cases concluded by trial declined from 8% to 3%.
* From 2000 to 2006 plaintiffs won just under a third of civil rights trials on average, and the median damage awards for plaintiffs who won in civil rights trials ranged from $114,000 to $154,500.

criminologists learn the secret argot of the underworld to enhance our understanding of the people and events we study. poets learn such street jargon because its imagery is often colorfully evocative and metaphorical, yet subtle or sly enough to facilitate secret communication.

boing directs us to a fine 1736 dictionary of thieving cant at fromoldbooks.com. in contrast to compilations by criminologists such as edwin sutherland, only about half the entries i read bore directly on the practice of crime. i should caution that many of the entries are offensive — most notably to women, but also to men, preachers, lawyers, and the irish and roma people. a few of the less-offensive entries:

ADAM TILER, the Comerade of a Pick pocket, who receives stollen Goods or Money, and scours off with them, Tip the coal to Adam Tiler; i.e. give the Money, Watch, &c. to a running Companion, that the Pick Pocket may have nothing found upon him, when he is apprehended.

ARCH-ROGUE, the Dimber-Damber Uprightman or Chief of a Gang; as Arch-Dell, or Arch-Doxy signifies the same Degree in Rank among the Female Canters and Gypsies.

ARK-RUFFIANS, Rogues, who in Conjunction with Watermen, &c. rob and sometimes murder on the Water; by picking a Quarrel with the Passenger and then plundering, stripping and throwing him or her over board, &c.

To BLOT the Skrip, and jark it, i.e. to stand engaged, or be bound for any Body.
It is all BOB, i.e. All is Safe.
CACKLING-FARTS, Eggs.

COSTARD, the Head. I’ll give ye a Knock on the Costard; I’ll hit ye a Blow on the Pate.

A HIGHTE-TITY, a Romp or rude Girl.

KNAVE in Grain, one of the First Rate.

MOVEABLES, Rings, Watches, Swords, and such Toys of Value.

PUPIL Mongers, Tutors at the Universities.

SCHOOL of Venus, a Bawdy-house.

SNUDGE, one that lurks under a Bed, to watch an Opportunity to rob the House.

SUCK, Wine or strong Drink. This is rum Suck; It is excellent Tipple. We’ll go and Suck our Faces; but if they toute us, we’ll take Rattle, and brush; Let’s go to drink and be merry; but if we be smelt by the People of the House, we must scowre off. He loves to Suck his Face; He delights in Drinking.

SOUL-Driver, a Parson.

STROWLING-Morts, who, pretending to be Widows, often travel the Countries, making Laces upon Yews, Beggar’s-tape, &c. Are light-finger’d, subtle, hypocritical, cruel, and often dangerous to meet, especially when a Ruffler is with them.

SWIG-Men, carrying small Haberdashery-Wares about, pretending to sell them, to colour their Roguery. Fellows crying Old Shoes, Boots, or brooms; and thos pretending to buy Old Suits, Hats or Cloaks, are also called Swig-Men, and oftentimes, if an Opportunity offers, make all Fish that comes to Net.

THUMMIKINS, a Punishment (in Scotland) by hard squeezing or pressing of the Thumbs, to extort Confession, which stretches them prodigiously, and is very painful. In Camps, and on Board of Ships, lighted Matches are clapt between the Fingers to the same Intent.

WHIRLEGIGS, Testicles.

To YAM, to eat heartily, to stuff lustily.

ZNEES, Frost, or Frozen; Zneesy weather; Frosty Weather.

just released from the bureau of justice statistics:

Parents in Prison and Their Minor Children
Presents data from the 2004 Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities about inmates who were parents and their minor children. This report compares estimates of the number of incarcerated parents and their children under the age of 18, by gender, age, race, and Hispanic origin in state and federal prisons in 1991, 1997, 1999, 2004, and 2007. It presents the total number of children who were minors at some time during their parent’s incarceration. The report describes selected background characteristics of parents in prisons, including marital status, citizenship, education, offense type, criminal history, employment, prior experiences of homelessness, drug and alcohol involvement, mental health, and physical and sexual abuse. It provides family background of inmate parents including household makeup, public assistance received by household, drug and alcohol use, and incarceration of family members. It includes information on the children’s daily care, financial support, current caregivers, and frequency and type of contact with incarcerated parents.

  • The nation’s prisons held approximately 744,200 fathers and 65,600 mothers at midyear 2007.
  • Parents held in the nation’s prisons—52% of state inmates and 63% of federal inmates—reported having an estimated 1,706,600 minor children, accounting for 2.3% of the U.S. resident population under age 18.
  • Growth in the number of parents held in state and federal prisons was outpaced by the growth in the nation’s prison population between 1991 and midyear 2007.

mother jones offers a quick breakdown of estimated annual costs per inmate in california prisons. source data come from the bureau of justice statistics, the california department of corrections and rehabilitation, and the national association of state budget officers.

i collapsed some of the smaller categories, but a more detailed table is available online. a big chunk of the annual $49k is clearly tied up in security (mostly personnel, i’m sure, rather than hardware) and another large piece of the pie in medical and psychiatric costs. hmmm. it might be instructive to compare this annualized per person cost breakdown with that of other institutions, such as military, health care, or educational institutions.

i did an interview today with wcco’s jason derusha (at left). i like his regular good question reports, in which local experts answer everything from how do i know my bank is safe? to why does music bring us back?

our conversation about international crime rates should air at 10 tonight. i would’ve referred this one to colleagues who do more comparative research, but it can be tough to catch folks during the summer. i’m expecting some snarky comments on my jeans and cleanest-dirty-shirt wardrobe. for years, i kept an emergency blue suit in my office for just such occasions, but retired it last month in a fit of housekeeping.

a local pubcrim note from andy sagvold at the council:

Do you work with or know women with children whose father is incarcerated?

This Parenting Class is a wonderful opportunity for mothers and their children impacted by incarceration. The class is FREE! Also, structured child care, food and transportation to and from the class is provided at no charge. The purpose of the Community Parenting Class is to support the unique challenges of parenting while the father of the children and/or the mother’s significant other is incarcerated.

The next Community Parenting Class starts on August 20th (please see and distribute attached flyer)!! The Council on Crime and Justice would appreciate your help in spreading the word about these classes. Please forward this email on to others that may be interested and/or work with women who are impacted by incarceration. This Parenting Class is in its sixth series, having provided support and parenting education to over 60 mothers in our community! This series of classes will be held at the Council on Crime and Justice (822 South Third St, Mpls MN 55415) and registration can be completed by contacting Karen at (612) 353-3022.

freeman posted a new comment on an old post tonight.

I’m also a convicted felon. That conviction was over 20 years ago. I’m tired of complaining about who want hire me. I survived 15 years in prison because I refused to lay down and die. I paroled a life sentence becasue I believed in the impossible while all those around me wrote me off for dead. I am here. I am free. And I will not settle for less than all I believe…

for some reason, the lines “i am here, i am free” reminded me of an old poem.