Should Prison Sentences Be Based On Crimes That Haven’t Been Committed Yet?

[davidpdx]

Criminal sentencing has long been based on the present crime and, sometimes, the defendant’s past criminal record. In Pennsylvania, judges could soon consider a new dimension: the future.

Pennsylvania is on the verge of becoming one of the first states in the country to base criminal sentences not only on what crimes people have been convicted of, but also on whether they are deemed likely to commit additional crimes. As early as next year, judges there could receive statistically derived tools known as risk assessments to help them decide how much prison time — if any — to assign.

Risk assessments have existed in various forms for a century, but over the past two decades, they have spread through the American justice system, driven by advances in social science. The tools try to predict recidivism — repeat offending or breaking the rules of probation or parole — using statistical probabilities based on factors such as age, employment history and prior criminal record. They are now used at some stage of the criminal justice process in nearly every state. Many court systems use the tools to guide decisions about which prisoners to release on parole, for example, and risk assessments are becoming increasingly popular as a way to help set bail for inmates awaiting trial.

But Pennsylvania is about to take a step most states have until now resisted for adult defendants: using risk assessment in sentencing itself. A state commission is putting the finishing touches on a plan that, if implemented as expected, could allow some offenders considered low risk to get shorter prison sentences than they would otherwise or avoid incarceration entirely. Those deemed high risk could spend more time behind bars.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/prison-reform-risk-assessment/

Personally I don't like this idea at all. There would clearly be racial biases in the model. While it could allow judges to sentence some to lesser sentences, I don't think that is worth the risk.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Sounds like just another way to discriminate against the poor and minorities.

Take a starving, jobless, homeless man and a guy with a good job and stable home who just ate a pricey meal and put them next to an unattended stall full of apples. Which is more likely to steal an apple to eat?

They're worried that 'reform' might take away their ability to screw over the people as much, so they're proactively finding new ways to screw them over.

[Android3.14]

2. How effed up is that?

I predict it will not stand judicial scrutiny. That a state pulled such a stunt is just another indication of how our government no longer serves the people.

[SheilaT]

3. They made a movie on that theme.

"Minority Report". 2002.

Given to what extent a lot of people cannot tell fiction from a documentary, I'd say it's about time this has been proposed.

I'm not advocating this, mind you.

[davidpdx]

5. That was my first reaction when I read the headline

In fact it was on a friend's Facebook feed and I commented "What is this a Tom Cruise movie?"

[Blue_Tires]

4. Just a 'scientific' justification to put more black folks in prison...

[gopiscrap]

6. I would say absolutely not!

[tech3149]

7. They've already been doing the same thing with regard to driving privleges

Check the Motor Vehicle Code section 1519. Any reported condition of "incompetency" reported will cause the immediate revocation of privileges. It matters not the level of risk or the the accuracy of the reported risk, or the severity of the risk.
One example is a man in Eastern PA advising his doctor that he drank six beers a day on a regular basis. His doctor was compelled by civil liability laws to report that to the DMV. that bit of information was enough to revoke his privileges.
I can entirely accept and agree with the concept of the legislation but have seen it taken to extremes that cannot be justified.
Having spent my entire working life on the road I can say from experience that many people out there deserve to have their privileges revoked for incompetency but the law as written and interpreted is enforced on "presumed risk" much more than verifiable historical acts of incompetence.
I have a personal stake in this particular issue having been on the receiving end. It's hard to defend yourself against when you can't afford to spend the $ to present an adequate defense.

[udbcrzy2]

8. Prior and Persistant Offender

I think that is what they called it when the white man who stole a car for a 2nd time recently was sentenced to 7-years. It was only 2 years ago that he stole my car and destroyed it and received a 5-year sentence. He was released on parole, he had other charges as well, like 13 separate charges for stealing (breaking into cars and stealing), felony drug charges too.

This man is very young, he is now about 22-years-old and comes from a nice home in the suburbs. He screwed me out of a car, I only had liability insurance. He took it joy-riding and wrecked it, it was a total loss, I could not even drive it home. He never paid one single dime to me for the car.

What do you do with a guy like this?

[davidpdx]

13. I had something similar, but not near as bad happen

I was rear-ended by someone who didn't have insurance and in addition was a hit-and-run. Someone was nice enough to follow the person and get the plate and then came back. The police eventually arrested him, but I didn't get any money. Thankfully I had uninsured motorist insurance, but I still had to pay $500

[awoke_in_2003]

9. Rec for exposure

I just got done reading 1984 for the 5th time since 1982. The only thing wrong with the book is Orwell's time line was off. The book gets scarier with every reading, because it keeps getting more real.

[bemildred]

10. "Thought crime" is here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime

[Hoppy]

11. The Pennsylvania commission is recommending light meters be given to sentencing judges.

The judge can hold the meter against the convicted felon's arm. If the meter moves, the sentence can be from probation or time served to a maximum of 1 year. If the meter doesn't move, or moves only a little, the sentence should be a minimum of 5 years and up.

[kcass1954]

12. How the hell else are we going to keep those privatized prisons up to quota?

This is just so wrong. People of color will continue to pay in a disproportionate way, and also poor folks in general.

[marble falls]

14. Preventive detention. Hasn't that been decared unConstitutional already.