Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Don't believe the hype! The Truth about Jerry's Curfew Scheme
Jerry Brown has imposed a new 10pm curfew on probationers and parolees in Oakland, to seem "tough on crime" as part of his run for Attorney General. After the backlash and outrage this curfew generated, he and his staff have been furiously backpedalling, and fighting to make sure that the curfew is seen in a positive light. But here's the truth about the curfew.
THE FACTS ABOUT JERRY BROWN’S CURFEW PLAN
Who is subject to the curfew?
The curfew can be imposed on anyone who is convicted of ANY felony committed at night. .
How many people in Oakland are under the curfew?
According to the mayor’s office, the city only began implementing the curfew a few weeks ago. Conservative estimates from government officials are that between 50 and 150 people are currently under the curfew. The Mayor’s office claims that they’re targetting only a “select group”, saying that only 50 out of a total of 9,000 Oakland parolees and probationers have so far been affected. That’s misleading – those 9,000 parolees and probationers were given their conditions of parole/probation BEFORE the curfew took effect –the curfew COULD not be applied to them. These numbers are just a start, and Brown has spoken to the Governor about adopting the curfew statewide.
Isn’t there a “nexus” requirement?
Brown says that the curfew will only apply where the offense and curfew have a nexus – the alleged offense occurred at night and outdoors. The main case profiled in the press, however, involved a man arrested inside his home after police chased a suspect into his yard and noticed a marijuana plant growing in his home. He received a 5-year probation with the curfew condition. For five years, he cannot be out after 10pm.
What about racial profiling?
Who will Oakland police stop at 10 p.m. to check whether they are on parole? What neighborhoods will see lockdown from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m.? Where will homeless parolees go at 10 p.m. to avoid a violation? The curfew is reminiscent of Black Codes and South African pass laws, which prevented people of color from moving freely in their communities.
Why is the Mayor so desperately trying to look tough-on-crime at the expense of Oakland’s most vulnerable residents?
What the Mayor is willing to do for political gain appears to have no limits. Brown is likely to run for State Attorney General in 2006 and he has told the press that the curfew may be an issue in his campaign.
Does a curfew make sense when Oakland can’t find the money to keep its schools open?
The City can’t find money to keep its schools open; the County is scrambling for money for reentry services. Does sending people to prison – at the tune of $35,000 a year per person -- for being out past 10 p.m. make sense?
Is a curfew common? Haven’t I heard that the state is trying to REDUCE the number of people sent back to prison for minor violations of parole?
The curfew is just one more way to send people to prison for violations of parole. In 2003, California sent 62,355 people to prison solely for violations of parole. They were not convicted of any new offenses. Nationally parole violations account for about 35% of people sent to prison. In contrast, in California more than 50% of prison admissions are for parole violations. California has committed itself to reducing the number of people sent back to prison on parole violations. Oakland is out of step. The League of California cities reports that they know of no other city in the state imposing an adult curfew.
Who is responsible for crime in Oakland?
Once again, Jerry Brown is scapegoating people on parole for his failure to ensure public safety for Oakland. Brown consistently claims that people on parole or probation are responsible for homicides in Oakland. However, in reality, it’s impossible to come up with reliable data about who is committing homicides in Oakland when the Oakland police have not solved over half of them for 2003. Thus, any figures as to who is to blame are incredibly misleading.
Do curfews make us safer?
Study after study concludes that curfews are ineffective for reducing crime. Moreover, parole policies that stigmatize former prisoners only compound the problems people face coming home from prison. And a curfew means that more people will be returned to prison, further destabilizing Oakland’s already-fragmented communities (See, "The Problem with Addition by Subtraction: The Prison-Crime Relationship in Low-income Communities," by Todd Clear. http://www.sentencingproject.org/pub_invisible.cfm )
How can we truly make Oakland safer?
Numerous studies show that people coming home from prison need support to reintegrate into a life outside of a cage - not harassment. People coming home from prison face entrenched discrimination in employment, welfare and food stamps, housing, and student loans. We need to end this discrimination and help those coming home meet basic needs. Oakland needs to focus on keeping people out of prison and keeping people from going to prison in the first place. Oakland needs decent schools, job training, employment opportunities, affordable housing. What is Jerry Brown doing to provide these things to Oakland? Why is he trying to return more people to prison on technical violations at a cost of $35,000 per person per year – money that could be spent on things in Oakland that make us all truly safe.
Join Critical Resistance in building truly safe communities.
510.444.0484
www.criticalesistance.org
croakland@criticalresistance.org
Who is subject to the curfew?
The curfew can be imposed on anyone who is convicted of ANY felony committed at night. .
How many people in Oakland are under the curfew?
According to the mayor’s office, the city only began implementing the curfew a few weeks ago. Conservative estimates from government officials are that between 50 and 150 people are currently under the curfew. The Mayor’s office claims that they’re targetting only a “select group”, saying that only 50 out of a total of 9,000 Oakland parolees and probationers have so far been affected. That’s misleading – those 9,000 parolees and probationers were given their conditions of parole/probation BEFORE the curfew took effect –the curfew COULD not be applied to them. These numbers are just a start, and Brown has spoken to the Governor about adopting the curfew statewide.
Isn’t there a “nexus” requirement?
Brown says that the curfew will only apply where the offense and curfew have a nexus – the alleged offense occurred at night and outdoors. The main case profiled in the press, however, involved a man arrested inside his home after police chased a suspect into his yard and noticed a marijuana plant growing in his home. He received a 5-year probation with the curfew condition. For five years, he cannot be out after 10pm.
What about racial profiling?
Who will Oakland police stop at 10 p.m. to check whether they are on parole? What neighborhoods will see lockdown from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m.? Where will homeless parolees go at 10 p.m. to avoid a violation? The curfew is reminiscent of Black Codes and South African pass laws, which prevented people of color from moving freely in their communities.
Why is the Mayor so desperately trying to look tough-on-crime at the expense of Oakland’s most vulnerable residents?
What the Mayor is willing to do for political gain appears to have no limits. Brown is likely to run for State Attorney General in 2006 and he has told the press that the curfew may be an issue in his campaign.
Does a curfew make sense when Oakland can’t find the money to keep its schools open?
The City can’t find money to keep its schools open; the County is scrambling for money for reentry services. Does sending people to prison – at the tune of $35,000 a year per person -- for being out past 10 p.m. make sense?
Is a curfew common? Haven’t I heard that the state is trying to REDUCE the number of people sent back to prison for minor violations of parole?
The curfew is just one more way to send people to prison for violations of parole. In 2003, California sent 62,355 people to prison solely for violations of parole. They were not convicted of any new offenses. Nationally parole violations account for about 35% of people sent to prison. In contrast, in California more than 50% of prison admissions are for parole violations. California has committed itself to reducing the number of people sent back to prison on parole violations. Oakland is out of step. The League of California cities reports that they know of no other city in the state imposing an adult curfew.
Who is responsible for crime in Oakland?
Once again, Jerry Brown is scapegoating people on parole for his failure to ensure public safety for Oakland. Brown consistently claims that people on parole or probation are responsible for homicides in Oakland. However, in reality, it’s impossible to come up with reliable data about who is committing homicides in Oakland when the Oakland police have not solved over half of them for 2003. Thus, any figures as to who is to blame are incredibly misleading.
Do curfews make us safer?
Study after study concludes that curfews are ineffective for reducing crime. Moreover, parole policies that stigmatize former prisoners only compound the problems people face coming home from prison. And a curfew means that more people will be returned to prison, further destabilizing Oakland’s already-fragmented communities (See, "The Problem with Addition by Subtraction: The Prison-Crime Relationship in Low-income Communities," by Todd Clear. http://www.sentencingproject.org/pub_invisible.cfm )
How can we truly make Oakland safer?
Numerous studies show that people coming home from prison need support to reintegrate into a life outside of a cage - not harassment. People coming home from prison face entrenched discrimination in employment, welfare and food stamps, housing, and student loans. We need to end this discrimination and help those coming home meet basic needs. Oakland needs to focus on keeping people out of prison and keeping people from going to prison in the first place. Oakland needs decent schools, job training, employment opportunities, affordable housing. What is Jerry Brown doing to provide these things to Oakland? Why is he trying to return more people to prison on technical violations at a cost of $35,000 per person per year – money that could be spent on things in Oakland that make us all truly safe.
510.444.0484
www.criticalesistance.org
croakland@criticalresistance.org
For more information:
http://www.criticalresistance.org
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Misinformation only weakens progressive political movements by illustrating the willingness of dedicated people to act decisively upon skewed information. What's even more revealing is when "leaders" demonstrate a willingness to spread false information in order to create fervor among the group. This is a dangerous tactic that only detracts from efforts to build a cohesive movement based on truth and justice.
The main weakness in Sitara's piece is the oft-repeated assertion that the curfew is a scheme to put people in prison. This is simply not true. The curfew is an alternative to incarceration. Without the curfew, these individuals would remain incarcerated. The curfew is a form of limited freedom -- something to which probationers are entitled.
I work in the Mayor's office, but I'm writing today as a progressive thinker who has spent a lot of time on Oakland's streets. A member of my family just completed a four year sentence for a drug crime (a sentence I consider excessive and unproductive) and unfortunately many people I love have also done time. I've been to San Quentin and met men there who contacted me when they returned to Oakland, and I delivered on my promise to help them readjust. They can call me anytime.
But I've also seen the devastation that criminals leave in their wake when they victimize others. Idealism is a luxury, but those of us who want to get things done must work with reality, and the reality is that some people need to be locked up. Child molesters, rapists and killers won't be neutralized by group hugs and understanding. Maybe in 2012, when the world flushes like a toilet and the lions chill with the lambs, we won't need prisons. But until utopia descends, we must act within a framework of reality. Waving signs and maligning progressive politicians for making the streets safer won't result in reform.
Murder dropped by 25 percent in Oakland last year. The approach to crime reduction may not match everyone's ideals, but I didn't see many members of the community protesting the other night. Most people in the affected communities don't want armed drug dealers roaming their streets at night.
Here are some counterpoints to Sitara's piece, which was a counterpoint to something I wrote.
1) This curfew does not apply to all probationers, nor is there a plan to institute it across the board. Critical Resistance organized their protest while under the assumption that this was a blanket curfew, but now they're backpedaling and resorting to prophecy. There simply are not enough police resources or jail space for a blanket curfew, nor would such a tactic make sense, nor would the public accept it. There is no plan to institute a "blanket" curfew in Oakland or anywhere else.
2) Critical Resistance claims that the curfew is throwing people in prison, where they will cost taxpayers $35,000 a year. In fact, curfew violators receive only "intermediate sanction," a short sentence in City Jail, as opposed to returning to County or State facilities. The curfew is keeping certain individuals out of prison and out of the cemetery by keeping them off of the streets. Project Choice, Options Recovery, Men of Valor and other positive intervention programs are all operating within the jail, providing an unparalled opportunity for these individuals to gain support, counseling, education and life skills training.
3) It is very hard for convicts to find jobs in our society, but the City of Oakland maintains a policy that embraces the hiring of felons who are turning their lives around. In fact, if you read the news today, you will see that OPD is looking for a fugitive who is a City employee. We understand that in order for people to survive and thrive, they must be able to work. If you know any felons who need work, send them our way. If we can't hire them, we'll find someone who can.
4) The guy who got the curfew because an officer noticed his pot plants while chasing someone else then busted him for possession of four guns was a convicted kidnapper. It is illegal for a felon to possess weapons, and he could have gone back to the joint for that one. Instead, he can enjoy the sunshine freely, but he has to be in by 10 p.m. I don't know about you, but I'm not going to lose any sleep because a convicted kidnapper with guns isn't roaming the streets at night while stoned.
5) Racial Profiling. Police work closely with the probation department to identify the specific individuals on curfew. OPD is dedicated to eliminating discrimination, and collects data in an effort to ascertain whether discriminatory patterns occur. OPD is currently recruiting officers. The best way to reform an institution is from within... ever tried walking a beat?
I could go on and on, but I'll stop here. If anyone would like to discuss this further, shoot me an email. We are very accessible to the community, and always on the lookout for critical input.
gil jose duran
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$230.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network