Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Protest Against Brown's Curfew Plans in Oakland
Audio from 1/26 demonstration at Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown's loft apartment protesting his plans to implement a curfew for all future probationers and parolees between 10pm and 6am.
Listen now:
Listen now:
Listen now:
Listen now:
Listen now:
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Q: Is this a blanket curfew for all individuals on probation?
A: No. Oakland’s curfew program was designed to target a select group of criminals with histories of drug dealing and violence during the late hours covered by the curfew. For these high-risk individuals, probation with curfew is an alternative to jail. Those who demonstrate real progress under the curfew may petition the court to have it removed.
Q: Does the curfew violate the rights of probationers?
A: No. Probationers’ defense attorneys accept the curfew as a stipulation of their release from jail. Probationers, by definition, have limited freedom until they repay their debt to society. Those who violate the curfew are jailed for a period of seven to thirty days, a time during which they may access an unprecedented array of services to help them become productive members of the community.
Q: Will the curfew make Oakland safer?
A: Yes. Violent crime in Oakland is directly correlated to armed drug dealers with criminal histories roaming the streets between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. A recent study showed that probationers and parolees constituted 60 percent of the identified homicide suspects in East Oakland. They also accounted for a large percentage of homicide victims. By keeping these select individuals off of the streets during the target hours, both the probationers and the community are safer.
Q: What about probationers who work at night or need to go to a hospital?
A: Individuals with night jobs or medical emergencies can be exempted from 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. The policy is written so broadly that it could apply to misdemeanor probationers.
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 keeps claiming that they’re targetting only a “select group of the most violent”, 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 – there is simply no way the curfew COULD be applied to them. The curfew only applies to people who are getting paroled/probation AFTER the curfew implementation took effect. According the San Francisco Chronicle, 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? Is Oakland following some “best practices” for dealing with crime? 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 told the press 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 violence or 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. We also need to work on un-entry programs – like providing all of Oakland residents what they need to survive – decent schools. Job training, Clean streets. Employment opportunities. Affordable housing. Respect. Opportunity. 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.
Who is subject to the curfew?
The curfew can be imposed on anyone who is convicted of ANY felony committed at night. The policy is written so broadly that it could apply to misdemeanor probationers.
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 keeps claiming that they’re targetting only a “select group of the most violent”, 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 – there is simply no way the curfew COULD be applied to them. The curfew only applies to people who are getting paroled/probation AFTER the curfew implementation took effect. According the San Francisco Chronicle, 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? Is Oakland following some “best practices” for dealing with crime? 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 told the press 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 violence or 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. We also need to work on un-entry programs – like providing all of Oakland residents what they need to survive – decent schools. Job training, Clean streets. Employment opportunities. Affordable housing. Respect. Opportunity. 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.
For more information:
http://www.criticalresistance.org
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$260.00 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