Prosecuting Attorney: Judge, Jury & Executioner all in one cheap suit...what a job!

Happy Easter to everyone today...and how about Phil Mickelson at the Masters? Anyway, as I promised yesterday, the 3rd cent is back with the progressive truth about issues and the reactionary, xenophobic, homophobic, racist, sexist, pro-war, anti-peace, isolationist, pro-religion in schools, anti-anything else in schools, pro-tobacco, pro-oil, good 'ol boy conservative Republican position on those issues. Enjoy!

MANDITORY MINIMUM SENTENCES

Mandatory minimums came from pandering conservative politicians who falsely frighten their constituents and then offer biased "solutions" that destroy far too many lives and fragment far too many families. These federal minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offences seriously call in to question whether America is truly the "home of the free."

What's the point of an independent judicial branch if judges have no room to make judgments? The advent of mandatory minimums, and Attorney General John Ashcroft’s recent call for federal prosecutors to push for maximum charges and sentences, are mind boggling in their insensitivity and ignorance. Justice without mercy is just cruelty. One-size fits all justice is the trademark of fascist government.

Having prosecutors hold all the power in non-violent drug offences is completely improper and unfair. What sort of society would allow a prosecutor, or a politician, to decide on charges and the mandatory punishment for that charge? Unfortunately for due process and judicial discretion, it’s the sort of society advocated by narrow-minded and discriminatory conservatives.

Currently prosecutors, not judges, have the discretion to decide whether to reduce a charge, whether to accept or deny a plea bargain, whether to reward or deny a defendant's "substantial assistance" or cooperation in the prosecution of someone else, and ultimately, to determine what the final sentence will be. Due largely to mandatory minimum laws, the criminal justice system has been distorted: the enhanced power of the prosecutor in sentencing has diminished the traditional role of the judge. The result has been even less fairness, and a huge rise in the prison population.

Mandatory minimum sentences are also inherently racist (like much of the “war on drugs”). Minimum sentences for drugs used predominantly by blacks are higher than drugs used predominantly by whites. Often, the minimum sentence for a non-violent drug possession charge is higher than the sentence for a violent crime like assault or rape. In California, if you are convicted of a felony, even if is non-violent, and you’ve been convicted of two other felonies (which may or may not be violent), you are automatically sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. How is equal protection of the laws?

Mandatory minimum sentences must be abolished, and judicial discretion must be returned to judges. Computers, politicians, prosecutors should not be determining sentences; bright, intelligent and caring judges should.

Now here’s something the conservative ideologues out there will really support: the repeal of mandatory minimums must be coupled with programs that focus on rehabilitation, treatment and support, not criminalization, of those addicted to drugs. Also, the underground economy will continue to flourish if there is no access to a decent and livable wage in our society. Therefore, we must increase access to higher wages and a strong healthcare system that includes drug rehabilitation.

You can’t solve the problem by locking people up…you solve the problem by engaging it at its source. The first step is the abolishment of all mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug related crimes. For more information on mandatory minimums, visit Families Against Mandatory Minimums.