Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Schwarzenegger Lies About Prop. 66 - 3 Strikes Amendment Prop.
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger lies about Proposition 66 when he says 'violent prisoners will get out of prison and roam the streets.'
"It is incredibly irresponsible for the governor to try to frighten
people over this initiative. This kind of fear-mongering from Governor
Schwarzenegger is reprehensible," said Sam Clauder, original author of
the proposition and Political Director of the Yes on 66 Committee. "We
who support Prop 66 are just as concerned about the safety of our
families as anybody. Prop. 66 is a fair and balanced reform of the most
extreme "three strikes" law in the country.
"Schwarzenegger is being disingenuous and he knows it. Just like
Gray Davis and Pete Wilson before him, Schwarzenegger is pandering to
the prison guards' union for their multi-million dollar contributions.
Some commentators have said that the prison guards' union has made
Arnold their 'girlie-man.'"
Despite the governor's opposition, a Los Angeles Times' poll
released this week shows that support is strong across the entire
political spectrum. Self-identified conservatives, moderates,
Republicans, Democrats, and independents support Prop 66 by a wide
majority. The ballot measure enjoys the support of conservatives by 2
to 1, moderates by 3 to 1, and liberals by 4 to 1.
Overall, likely voters support Proposition 66 by a surprising margin
of 62% to 21%. This overwhelming support is based on the public's
knowledge of the many miscarriages of justice from the current law, and
their understanding that Prop 66 will return the law to its original
intent - keeping violent, repeat offenders behind bars with
strike-enhanced sentences.
Prop. 66 does not erase any conviction. It does not affect the
primary sentence for any crime. Prop. 66 will only affect the sentence
enhancement of non-violent offenders -- the doubling of a second-strike
sentence, and the mandatory minimum of 25-years-to-life for a third-strike.
Prop 66 will not release anyone from prison. It does provide for a
re-sentencing hearing for non-violent offenders, but with very specific,
and carefully considered provisions. The most important condition of
re-sentencing is that each convict must waive double-jeopardy rights to
get a re-sentencing hearing. This allows any DA to completely re-open
the case and file new charges based on the facts surrounding the
original conviction.
Each striker must return to their court of origin for the
re-sentencing hearing so that the original DA and Judge, who convicted
and sentenced the convict, will adjudicate appropriate justice on a
case-by-case basis. This will also allow victims, and victims'
families, to participate in the re-sentencing process.
--
"Yes On 66" Committee, FPPC ID #1267337
Sam H. Clauder II, Political Director
12865 Main Street, #637, Garden Grove, CA 92840
8-66-4-2-VOTE-66, (951) 653-3500
YesOn66 [at] charter.net
people over this initiative. This kind of fear-mongering from Governor
Schwarzenegger is reprehensible," said Sam Clauder, original author of
the proposition and Political Director of the Yes on 66 Committee. "We
who support Prop 66 are just as concerned about the safety of our
families as anybody. Prop. 66 is a fair and balanced reform of the most
extreme "three strikes" law in the country.
"Schwarzenegger is being disingenuous and he knows it. Just like
Gray Davis and Pete Wilson before him, Schwarzenegger is pandering to
the prison guards' union for their multi-million dollar contributions.
Some commentators have said that the prison guards' union has made
Arnold their 'girlie-man.'"
Despite the governor's opposition, a Los Angeles Times' poll
released this week shows that support is strong across the entire
political spectrum. Self-identified conservatives, moderates,
Republicans, Democrats, and independents support Prop 66 by a wide
majority. The ballot measure enjoys the support of conservatives by 2
to 1, moderates by 3 to 1, and liberals by 4 to 1.
Overall, likely voters support Proposition 66 by a surprising margin
of 62% to 21%. This overwhelming support is based on the public's
knowledge of the many miscarriages of justice from the current law, and
their understanding that Prop 66 will return the law to its original
intent - keeping violent, repeat offenders behind bars with
strike-enhanced sentences.
Prop. 66 does not erase any conviction. It does not affect the
primary sentence for any crime. Prop. 66 will only affect the sentence
enhancement of non-violent offenders -- the doubling of a second-strike
sentence, and the mandatory minimum of 25-years-to-life for a third-strike.
Prop 66 will not release anyone from prison. It does provide for a
re-sentencing hearing for non-violent offenders, but with very specific,
and carefully considered provisions. The most important condition of
re-sentencing is that each convict must waive double-jeopardy rights to
get a re-sentencing hearing. This allows any DA to completely re-open
the case and file new charges based on the facts surrounding the
original conviction.
Each striker must return to their court of origin for the
re-sentencing hearing so that the original DA and Judge, who convicted
and sentenced the convict, will adjudicate appropriate justice on a
case-by-case basis. This will also allow victims, and victims'
families, to participate in the re-sentencing process.
--
"Yes On 66" Committee, FPPC ID #1267337
Sam H. Clauder II, Political Director
12865 Main Street, #637, Garden Grove, CA 92840
8-66-4-2-VOTE-66, (951) 653-3500
YesOn66 [at] charter.net
For more information:
http://www.amend3strikes.org/
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
If you have committed two felonies, and then you get out of prison and commit a third, I don't want you walking around free in the community. You obviously just don't get it, and you never will. If you won't play by the rules, then we will put you away where you can harm no more. If this law passes, it will potentially release thousands of repeat felons into our communities. For those of us who live in safe places, it won't affect us too much. For those of you in high crime areas, you will be shit out of luck. Think about it and then vote.
. The most important condition of
re-sentencing is that each convict must waive double-jeopardy rights to
get a re-sentencing hearing. This allows any DA to completely re-open
the case and file new charges based on the facts surrounding the
original conviction.
you have convinced me! yes on 66!
re-sentencing is that each convict must waive double-jeopardy rights to
get a re-sentencing hearing. This allows any DA to completely re-open
the case and file new charges based on the facts surrounding the
original conviction.
you have convinced me! yes on 66!
Here is the truth about Proposition 66.
If passed by the voters next Tuesday, Prop 66 will ELIMINATE from the list of qualifying “strikes” ALL of the following felonies: Burglary of your home, Killing or injuring someone while driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, Setting a forest fire, Seriously injuring someone while fleeing from the police, Threatening to kill a person being stalked, Seriously injuring an elderly or disabled person while attempting to commit rape, and Possession of an assault weapon to benefit a street gang’s illegal activity.
Because Proposition 66 redefines which crimes count as “strikes” and because it applies retroactively, it will mandate the return to court for resentencing and the likely release of over 26,000 felons now serving time for “second strike” as well as “third strike” offenses.
Further, Proposition 66 will limit the counting of felony strikes to ONE STRIKE PER PROSECUTION. This means that someone who has committed serial murders, rapes, or child molests must be prosecuted in multiple trials or all of the crimes can only count as ONE strike. This provision alone will cost taxpayers millions of dollars in new legal and law enforcement costs.
So, when the proponents say Prop 66 will save money that is now spent on locking up criminals, ask yourself – just how much is a murder, a rape, or a child molest worth? If Prop 66 passes, there will be a flood of new crimes. California is currently enjoying its lowest crime rate in over 25 years, and there is a direct link between the crime rate and the incarceration of career criminals. Prop 66 will release thousands of the most dangerous offenders. They will return to our neighborhoods to commit new crimes, and more crimes means more victims.
Please, NO MORE VICTIMS. Vote NO on Proposition 66.
If passed by the voters next Tuesday, Prop 66 will ELIMINATE from the list of qualifying “strikes” ALL of the following felonies: Burglary of your home, Killing or injuring someone while driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, Setting a forest fire, Seriously injuring someone while fleeing from the police, Threatening to kill a person being stalked, Seriously injuring an elderly or disabled person while attempting to commit rape, and Possession of an assault weapon to benefit a street gang’s illegal activity.
Because Proposition 66 redefines which crimes count as “strikes” and because it applies retroactively, it will mandate the return to court for resentencing and the likely release of over 26,000 felons now serving time for “second strike” as well as “third strike” offenses.
Further, Proposition 66 will limit the counting of felony strikes to ONE STRIKE PER PROSECUTION. This means that someone who has committed serial murders, rapes, or child molests must be prosecuted in multiple trials or all of the crimes can only count as ONE strike. This provision alone will cost taxpayers millions of dollars in new legal and law enforcement costs.
So, when the proponents say Prop 66 will save money that is now spent on locking up criminals, ask yourself – just how much is a murder, a rape, or a child molest worth? If Prop 66 passes, there will be a flood of new crimes. California is currently enjoying its lowest crime rate in over 25 years, and there is a direct link between the crime rate and the incarceration of career criminals. Prop 66 will release thousands of the most dangerous offenders. They will return to our neighborhoods to commit new crimes, and more crimes means more victims.
Please, NO MORE VICTIMS. Vote NO on Proposition 66.
"If passed by the voters next Tuesday, Prop 66 will ELIMINATE from the list of qualifying “strikes” ALL of the following felonies: Burglary of your home, Killing or injuring someone while driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, Setting a forest fire, Seriously injuring someone while fleeing from the police, Threatening to kill a person being stalked, Seriously injuring an elderly or disabled person while attempting to commit rape, and Possession of an assault weapon to benefit a street gang’s illegal activity.
Because Proposition 66 redefines which crimes count as “strikes” and because it applies retroactively, it will mandate the return to court for resentencing and the likely release of over 26,000 felons now serving time for “second strike” as well as “third strike” offenses."
As someone who previously worked a superior court reserach attorney, advising judges on criminal law matters, the fear mongering of Mr. DA's post is unfortunate.
None of the crimes listed by Mr. DA justifes life imprisonment as a punishment, and he ignores the fact that the Penal Code already provides for lengthy jail terms for these offenses by themselves, plus additional time for any enhancements, such as use of a weapon, infliction of injury, etc. In many instances, anyone who commits these offenses faces the prospect of being sentenced to 10 to 20 years or more.
Mr. DA is ignoring a serious problem with the 3 Strikes Law. Just as the federal government has been able to compel guilty pleas in "terror" cases based upon the ability to send someone indefinitely to Guantanamo Bay as a "non-combatant", DAs can use the 3 Strikes law in its current form to coerce guilty pleas to lesser charges. It certainly makes a DAs job easier, but it doesn't necessarily lead to a just result, and people may plead guilty to crimes and enhancements that they did not commit to avoid the risk of life imprisonment.
Furthermore, the 3 Strikes Law prevents judges from sentencing criminal defendants individually based upon the facts of their particular case. Instead, except in extremely rare circumstances, a judge must sentence someone found guilty of a felony that qualifies as a third strike to life imprisonment. In other words, one size fits all. And, judges who have attempted to avoid imposing three strikes life sentences usually have their efforts overruled by the appellate court, which orders the judge to impose the life sentence.
Accordingly, the 3 Strikes Law constitutes one of the worst abridgements of the independentce of the judiciary in American history. Furthermore, juries cannot be told that a defendant qualifies as a three strikes defendant when they deliberate, and there have been numerous cases in recent years where jurors were appalled to learn that the pizza theft or garage burglar that they had found guilty now faced life in prison.
Mr. DA is concealing a dirty secret that he must know: not everyone who qualifies for 3 Strikes prosection gets charged as a 3 Strikes defendant subject to life in prison. DAs decide what charges to file against a defendant. Thus, DAs, not judges and not juries, decide, to a great extent, who goes to prison for life, and who does not. If the DA does not charge someone as a 3 Strikes defendant, there is no way that they will face life in prison, whereas if the DA does do so, there is a high probability that they will.
And, that should be very disturbing to you, especially if you are a person of color, because DAs have been known historically for disqualifying jurors of color, and disproportionately prosecuting them.
Here is what you really get with 3 Strikes:
[New report finds 3 Strikes used disproportionately on minorities
African Americans “struck out” at 13 times the rate of whites, Latino rate of incarceration 82% higher than whites
Washington, DC: New data released today by the Justice Policy Institute revealed that California’s Three Strikes law disproportionately locks up African Americans and Latinos compared to whites. According to this first-of-its-kind analysis of the racial and ethnic makeup of Three Strikes defendants, African Americans are given life sentences under Three Strikes at nearly 13 times the rate of whites and the Latinos are incarcerated under Three Strikes a staggering 82% more than whites.
According to Racial Divide: An Examination of the Impact of California’s Three Strikes Law on African Americans and Latinos, African Americans and Latinos are penalized at every stage of the criminal justice system at rates disproportionate to their share of the general population.
“Three Strikes is systematically funneling African American and Latino defendants into prison for longer and longer sentences, mostly for non-violent crimes,” said Vincent Schiraldi, executive director of Justice Policy Institute (JPI), and co-author of the report. Schiraldi added that the racial disparities for African Americans were particularly harsh by criminological standards “Rarely does one see any law imposed so disproportionately against one racial group,” he added.
The report found that African Americans constitute 6.5% of the state population, but nearly 30% of California’s prison population, and 44.7% of those sentenced to life under Three Strikes. By contrast, whites constitute 47.1% of the population, 29% of the prison population, and 25.4% of third strikers. When comparing arrest and incarceration rates between African Americans and whites, African Americans are arrested at 4.4 times the rate of whites, imprisoned at 7.5 times the rate of whites and ’struck out’ for life at nearly 13 times the rate of whites.
"We’re overcrowding prisons with generations of young men of color at $31,000 each per year, nearly two-thirds of whom are locked up for nonviolent offenses," said John W. Mack, President of the Los Angeles Urban League. "Surely it’s a better investment for society to spend that money on front end prevention and jobs rather than wasting it on the imprisonment of nonviolent offenders who have harmed no one.]
If you want Mr. DA deciding who gets charged with three strikes, and who does not, and, thus, who goes to prison for life as a result of the commission of any felony, and who does not, vote NO on 66 as he suggests. Personally, I'm going to vote YES, because I believe that it's too much power for any prosecutor to have, and the historical record is clear that they tend to use it disproportionately against people of color.
--Richard Estes
Davis, CA
Because Proposition 66 redefines which crimes count as “strikes” and because it applies retroactively, it will mandate the return to court for resentencing and the likely release of over 26,000 felons now serving time for “second strike” as well as “third strike” offenses."
As someone who previously worked a superior court reserach attorney, advising judges on criminal law matters, the fear mongering of Mr. DA's post is unfortunate.
None of the crimes listed by Mr. DA justifes life imprisonment as a punishment, and he ignores the fact that the Penal Code already provides for lengthy jail terms for these offenses by themselves, plus additional time for any enhancements, such as use of a weapon, infliction of injury, etc. In many instances, anyone who commits these offenses faces the prospect of being sentenced to 10 to 20 years or more.
Mr. DA is ignoring a serious problem with the 3 Strikes Law. Just as the federal government has been able to compel guilty pleas in "terror" cases based upon the ability to send someone indefinitely to Guantanamo Bay as a "non-combatant", DAs can use the 3 Strikes law in its current form to coerce guilty pleas to lesser charges. It certainly makes a DAs job easier, but it doesn't necessarily lead to a just result, and people may plead guilty to crimes and enhancements that they did not commit to avoid the risk of life imprisonment.
Furthermore, the 3 Strikes Law prevents judges from sentencing criminal defendants individually based upon the facts of their particular case. Instead, except in extremely rare circumstances, a judge must sentence someone found guilty of a felony that qualifies as a third strike to life imprisonment. In other words, one size fits all. And, judges who have attempted to avoid imposing three strikes life sentences usually have their efforts overruled by the appellate court, which orders the judge to impose the life sentence.
Accordingly, the 3 Strikes Law constitutes one of the worst abridgements of the independentce of the judiciary in American history. Furthermore, juries cannot be told that a defendant qualifies as a three strikes defendant when they deliberate, and there have been numerous cases in recent years where jurors were appalled to learn that the pizza theft or garage burglar that they had found guilty now faced life in prison.
Mr. DA is concealing a dirty secret that he must know: not everyone who qualifies for 3 Strikes prosection gets charged as a 3 Strikes defendant subject to life in prison. DAs decide what charges to file against a defendant. Thus, DAs, not judges and not juries, decide, to a great extent, who goes to prison for life, and who does not. If the DA does not charge someone as a 3 Strikes defendant, there is no way that they will face life in prison, whereas if the DA does do so, there is a high probability that they will.
And, that should be very disturbing to you, especially if you are a person of color, because DAs have been known historically for disqualifying jurors of color, and disproportionately prosecuting them.
Here is what you really get with 3 Strikes:
[New report finds 3 Strikes used disproportionately on minorities
African Americans “struck out” at 13 times the rate of whites, Latino rate of incarceration 82% higher than whites
Washington, DC: New data released today by the Justice Policy Institute revealed that California’s Three Strikes law disproportionately locks up African Americans and Latinos compared to whites. According to this first-of-its-kind analysis of the racial and ethnic makeup of Three Strikes defendants, African Americans are given life sentences under Three Strikes at nearly 13 times the rate of whites and the Latinos are incarcerated under Three Strikes a staggering 82% more than whites.
According to Racial Divide: An Examination of the Impact of California’s Three Strikes Law on African Americans and Latinos, African Americans and Latinos are penalized at every stage of the criminal justice system at rates disproportionate to their share of the general population.
“Three Strikes is systematically funneling African American and Latino defendants into prison for longer and longer sentences, mostly for non-violent crimes,” said Vincent Schiraldi, executive director of Justice Policy Institute (JPI), and co-author of the report. Schiraldi added that the racial disparities for African Americans were particularly harsh by criminological standards “Rarely does one see any law imposed so disproportionately against one racial group,” he added.
The report found that African Americans constitute 6.5% of the state population, but nearly 30% of California’s prison population, and 44.7% of those sentenced to life under Three Strikes. By contrast, whites constitute 47.1% of the population, 29% of the prison population, and 25.4% of third strikers. When comparing arrest and incarceration rates between African Americans and whites, African Americans are arrested at 4.4 times the rate of whites, imprisoned at 7.5 times the rate of whites and ’struck out’ for life at nearly 13 times the rate of whites.
"We’re overcrowding prisons with generations of young men of color at $31,000 each per year, nearly two-thirds of whom are locked up for nonviolent offenses," said John W. Mack, President of the Los Angeles Urban League. "Surely it’s a better investment for society to spend that money on front end prevention and jobs rather than wasting it on the imprisonment of nonviolent offenders who have harmed no one.]
If you want Mr. DA deciding who gets charged with three strikes, and who does not, and, thus, who goes to prison for life as a result of the commission of any felony, and who does not, vote NO on 66 as he suggests. Personally, I'm going to vote YES, because I believe that it's too much power for any prosecutor to have, and the historical record is clear that they tend to use it disproportionately against people of color.
--Richard Estes
Davis, CA
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$190.00 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