Weapons of Mass Incarceration

Text:

Only in America do we spend $40,000 a year to incarcerate each prison inmate, and only $8,000 a year to educate each elementary school student.

While the monetary figures vary from state to state, with some states spending more per year on school children, and other states spending even more than $40,000 per year on inmate, this is an important issue that American lawmakers and the American public need to tackle.

At the Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd., several of the clients we represent are currently in custody, awaiting trial. These are clients for whom the bond - of which they must post 10% in order to walk free - is far too high, so they must remain in the custody of the Department of Corrections until trial or until their loved ones can come up with the money.

Not every family can access the tens of thousands of dollars often needed to secure a loved one's freedom (conditional on the eventual verdict in the case), which is a source of much frustration and devastation. Prison is not a nice place, and especially not in the Cook County jail system. I use prison and jail synonymously, even though there is a distinction. Jail refers to the institution in which people are held after arrest, and in anticipation of trial. Prison is the institution to which people are sent after a judge has sentenced them to a serve a certain amount of time for which they have already been convicted.

Many of the people in jail, awaiting trial, do not belong there and should not have been charged. And many people in prison should not be there for as long as they have to be. Abuse of police power and prosecutorial discretion, as well as disparity in sentencing, all contribute to the soaring numbers of people behind bars.

And the more people behind bars, the greater the financial and social cost to the country.

In the coming weeks, we at the blog for the Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd., will be publishing a series of posts looking at incarceration, sentencing, for-profit prisons, and the impact of all of these on society. These are issues we care about deeply, and which we fight against every day. We hope you'll come back soon and stay informed.

As always, if you or a loved one is the subject of a criminal investigation or is being charged, it's very likely that the main goal is to stay out of prison. That is what we at the Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd., fight for. Contact us at (708) 481 - 4800, and let us help you in your time of need. Attorneys are available 24/7, and the first consultation is always free.

Police Terrorize Child Over Allegedly Stolen $5

 

Last week, a young Hispanic man accused of stealing was handcuffed to a railing at a Bronx police department and interrogated by officers for over ten hours.

This story is not all that uncommon and based on the details above, it fails to shock and enrage. It is not unusual to hear of young men being subjected to grueling police interrogations during the course of a criminal investigation.

But here are the details that make this event truly shocking: the subject of this ten hour interrogation was a seven year old boy. He was accused of stealing $5.

Wilson Reyes’s family members were shocked to enter the Bronx precinct where he was being held and find him handcuffed to a railing. He was wrongly accused of taking $5 from another student on the playground, and was subjected to physical restraints and verbal abuse for a total of ten hours at the hands of the NYPD.

The boy’s family is filing a $250 million claim against the city and the NYPD for the brutality. The robbery charge has since been dropped, and another child confessed to stealing the $5 from the victim. While the NYPD continued to argue that the child was held for a reasonable period of time, the family lawyer, Jack Yankowitz, had this to say: “It’s unfathomable, what the police did. The whole thing sounds so stupid. They were interrogating him like he was a hardened criminal. …If you have a child, a nephew, can you even imagine this happening to them?”

This story is a difficult one to process, and one can’t help but empathize with this poor child and his family. Little Wilson Reyes – and many other children like him who have experienced this – will remember this event for the rest of his life. When he’s seventeen years old, old enough to be charged as an adult, he may see a cop harassing someone. He’ll intervene and get charged with assault on an officer and be packed off to the local Department of Corrections, and that will be that. That is the nature of the life-long ritual abuse at the hands of the justice department.

But even if nothing even close to that ever happens, consider for a moment that this happened in a country that considers spanking to be child abuse. At the very least, this child will carry these traumatic events with him for the rest of his life. He’ll suffer from anxiety issues and very likely Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as well, all at the hands of the people that ‘help solve crime.’ And that is what is criminal.

For many people, particularly minorities, instances of police misconduct and overreaction like this are a reality. There are numerous stories that make the news – and countless more that do not – of unconscionably long interrogations, food and sleep deprivation, freezing temperatures, verbal abuse, beatings, and other police misconduct.

As defense attorneys, we at the Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd., have had many clients come in with accounts of being mistreated by police. The accounts vary, but the sense of humiliation, fear, and severe stress our clients experienced is always the same. While this law firm does not handle these civil complaints against local police departments, we use our indignation over the treatment our clients suffered to help us in our fight to defend their rights and defeat the charges made against them.

If you or a loved one is the subject of a criminal investigation or has been charged with a crime, time is of the essence. Let us at the Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd., use our 37 years of experience to help you in your time of need. Attorneys are available 24/7 and the first consultation is always free. Contact us at (708) 481 – 4800.

Raymond G. Wigell to teach at 2013 Clarence Darrow Death Penalty Defense College at DePaul University College of Law

The Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd., is pleased to announce that Raymond Wigell has accepted a faculty position at the Clarence Darrow Death Penalty Defense College, taking place June 3-7, 2013, at the DePaul University College of Law in Chicago.

The Clarence Darrow Death Penalty Defense College is a week-long intensive seminar held annually in June and led by Professor Andrea D. Lyon, Associate Dean of Clinical Programs at DePaul University and director of the Center for Justice in Capital Cases. Seasoned death penalty-qualified attorneys from all over the United States bring their current capital cases to a forum that will allow them to brainstorm procedure, strategies, and trial techniques with their colleagues that are veterans of capital punishment defense.

The Center for Justice in Capital Cases organizes and presents seminars featuring nationally recognized authorities on subjects such as trial investigation, mitigation work, jury selection and management, forensic pathology, and managing lawyer stress in the area of capital defense. Attorneys, investigators, and mitigators also gather in discipline-specific meetings. The integration of the attorneys, investigators, and mitigators in plenary sessions is critical in the preparation of a death penalty case.

The combination of the plenary and discipline-specific sessions makes the Clarence Darrow Death Penalty College an exceptional experience for its attendees.

This will be Raymond Wigell's sixth time serving as a faculty member, and he will draw on his many years of experience as a trial attorney for the Office of the Public Defender of Cook County, a private criminal defense attorney, and as Certified Lead Counsel, State of Illinois Capital Litigation Trial Bar.

Online registration is available for death penalty-qualified attorneys that wish to be Darrow College participants in 2013. If you know a capital defense attorney, mitigation specialist, or fact investigator (or a team) that would benefit from the training, please visit or share the link to the Clarence Darrow Death Penalty Defense College, where registration information is available. 

In Memoriam of Aaron Swartz; Concerns About the (In)Justice System

On January 11, 2013, Aaron Swartz committed suicide. Those outside the online activism, open access, and social media circles may not be familiar with this young man, but he is responsible for protecting many of our rights to open access and our internet privacy. At the age of fourteen, Aaron co-authored RSS, which is now vital to most aspects of content creation and content consumption online. He created Reddit, a very popular social media site (which knows its fair share of legal troubles, since some members use the forum to trade child pornography). Aaron was also the founder of DemandProgress, a site and online network of activists that became a very powerful tool in fighting COICA (Combatting Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act), the precursor to SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and PIPA (Protect IP Act), which would have severely curtailed our online freedoms and privacy if passed by Congress.

While at MIT, Swartz used his access to online academic databases to download more than 400 academic journals and make them available to the public for free. According to the government, his reason for doing this was that the research written up for these journals was publicly funded, but due to the publishing methods used, the general public had very little access to this vast body of scholarship. Membership plans were pricy, and free membership was only available to those privileged few admitted to undergraduate and graduate programs where the college or university paid for access and allowed students to use the journals.

It is entirely possible, however, that Swartz was doing what a lot of hackers do and honing his skills with new challenges – the digital, online version of climbing the mountain “because it’s there.”

JSTOR, one of the biggest online journal databases and certainly quite a litigious body, was aware of the cyber-trespass, but did not press charges. It was the United States government that pressed charges and, relying on draconian computer laws, tried the case that resulted in a sentence of thirty-five years in prison for this liberation of publicly-funded knowledge and scholarship.

After the verdict, on January 11, 2013, Aaron Swartz committed suicide.

The internet mourned the loss of this young visionary and champion of net neutrality. Lawrence Lessig, an academic and political advocate that is fiercely supportive of online rights and a reform of computer laws, remembered his young friend and colleague, calling him an “incredible soul.” Ronaldo Lemos, the head of Creative Commons Brazil, shared his email exchanges with Swartz, calling him an “original thinker.” Rafael Reif, the President of MIT, issued a statement as well and announced an internal investigation at the university. The Daily Beast published a great write-up about this Free Internet activist, and ABC News reported that Swartz’s death fueled an MIT probe and sparked a White House petition to oust the prosecutor that tried and won the case.

Sadly, the story of an individual using the Internet on his computer and catching a long prison sentence is nothing new or unfamiliar at the Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd. Since he started practicing in 1975, Raymond Wigell has represented many people accused of various online crimes, and in most cases, the government proposes unreasonably long sentences that do not fit the crime.

One particularly memorable case that the Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd., handled involved two young computer hackers. These men were part of a small group of hackers that honed their skills by hacking various software programs and switching servers and bouncing IP addresses. They never sold any of the information or material they hacked; instead, they shared it among themselves and those they trusted. But they hacked one program too many, and the US government caught wind of it and pressed charges. Though this group of “techies” argued that they didn’t harm anyone because they never sold any information, the government maintained that hacking and piracy violated the rights of the owners.

The two men represented by the Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd., accepted responsibility for their wrong-doing but argued that it was without personal gain. They only hacked the programs to see if they could actually do it. . On the government’s end, however, motive doesn’t matter. People who are engaging in silly, harmless conduct online with regard to piracy and hacking are treated the same as those that have malicious intent, or those who act with financial gain as their only motive. The government, when going for prison time, consults the sentencing guidelines and often pushes for the maximum years available, which can be ten, or twenty, or even more than that.

In this case, the sentencing guidelines indicated a sentence of 10 years in prison for one of the men, and Raymond Wigell was able to argue to the judge that a term of 2 years was appropriate under all of the circumstances. For the other man, Raymond was able to argue and successfully get him sentenced to probation.

While cybercrimes are serious, and involve things like hacking, piracy, distribution of pirated materials, and even things relating to sex offender registration and the like, the problem is that often times the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. Between overzealous prosecutors, like the one in charge of the case against Aaron Swartz, and fundamental flaws in our sentencing guidelines and justice system at large, many people are being sent to prison without a compelling reason, or being held there longer than is reasonable or appropriate.

Aaron Swartz’s death is a tragedy. He was a young man with a full life ahead of him, and the potential for even more greatness. He was brilliant, innovative, original, a revolutionary thinker and a celebrated advocate of net neutrality and open access. In our digital age, we need more “hacktivists” like him (despite how online security interests try to frame the idea of hacktivism and hacktivists as something threatening and disruptive).

But in our outrage about the entirely preventable death of a brilliant young man loved throughout the Internet by the lowliest middle-schooler with a Reddit account to a leader of political and academic discourse about the Internet like Lawrence Lessig, we must not forget about the others.

The others are the countless individuals who didn’t create Reddit or co-author RSS, but who were also given unjustly long prison sentences. They are the ones who faced a cold, unfeeling justice system and lost. They are the drug offenders who get lengthy prison sentences for a relatively small amount of contraband. They are the repeat drug offenders who get years upon years tacked on to their prison term instead of treatment that could actually rehabilitate them and help them once more become productive members of society. They are the non-white members of the population that face a higher risk of arrest and lengthier incarceration simply for the color of their skin.

The justice system fails them every single day, but we don’t hear about it on the nightly news. The only people who hear about these people are their family members, their friends, and their defense attorneys. The justice system failed them just like it failed Aaron Swartz. While Aaron and Aaron alone is responsible for the choice he made, it is certainly true that the outcome of his case weighed heavily on his decision.

We mourn Aaron Swartz, and we should be mourning the other men and women like him, who weren’t prodigies and weren’t friends of Lawrence Lessig. We should use our outrage at Aaron Swartz not to kick up the dust now only to let it settle, but to use it as an impetus for a serious discussion of the way our justice system functions, and an examination of sentencing guidelines that, despite their purpose, do not always ensure that justice is served.

In mourning Aaron Swartz and the brilliant life extinguished, we should work toward changing the system that extinguishes countless brilliant, productive lives every day.

The Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell has represented many people accused of hacking, piracy, and other Internet crimes. If you or a loved one is in trouble, you have hopefully realized from this post that this is not something to brush aside. The US government takes cybercrimes very seriously, and if you or a loved one is being investigated for or charged with any Internet crimes, time is of the essence. Contact the Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd., at (708) 481 – 4800. Attorneys are available 24/7 and the first consultation is free. Let us use our 37 years of experience in criminal defense to help you in your time of need.

Illinois Outlaws Shark Fins

On January 1, 2013, a new law went into effect that affects what you may or may not see on your menu when you dine out in Chicago. Public Act 97-733 prohibits anyone in the state of Illinois from possessing, selling, trading, distributing, or trying to sell a shark fin.

This is wonderful news for animal rights’ advocates, who have long condemned the brutal practice by which shark fins are harvested. In the vast majority of cases, sharks are pulled from the ocean in nets and deposited on the floor of the fishing ships. Workers quickly, and without any kind of anesthesia, saw off several fins before grabbing the bloodied shark and tossing it back into the ocean. Without its fins, the shark cannot swim, and thus cannot hunt for food or escape its predators. It slowly starves to death, unless it is eaten alive before it has a chance to do so.

Chicago sits on Lake Michigan, which has long been one of the United States’s great trading ports. Cargo from all over the world comes to the Windy City’s docks and is unloaded on our shores - cargo that often includes shark fins. There are currently several restaurants in the city that reportedly advertise and serve shark fin soup.

But on January 1, 2013, these restaurants and others were forced to permanently take Shark Fin soup off the menu. This soup is favored in Chinese and Korean cultures and traditionally served at weddings, since it supposedly boosts virility. This year and from now on, however, lovers will have to look elsewhere for their amorous aids, because Illinois has taken a serious step in combating this violent attack on the world’s sharks.

If you or a loved one is being investigated or has been charged with possession of any contraband, including but certainly not limited to shark fins (we’re thinking marijuana, narcotics, methamphetamine, firearms, etc), then time is of the essence. Contact the Law Offices of Raymond G.Wigell, Ltd., at (708) 481 – 4800. Attorneys are available 24/7 and the first consultation is free. With our 36 years of experience, let us help you through every single stage of the criminal investigation and prosecution. 

Illinois Removes A Roadblock on the Road To Rehabilitation for Convicted Felons

Public Act 97-1113 went into effect on January 1, 2013, in the state of Illinois. It states that the time frame a convicted felon must wait after completion of his sentence before applying for a Certificate of Good Conduct or a Certificate of Relief from Disabilities has been reduced from three (3) years to two (2) years. This law also allows a person who was convicted of a felony more than twice to receive these certificates, as well as a person residing in Illinois who was convicted of a crime outside of the state of Illinois.

A convicted felon’s road to rehabilitation – in terms of adjusting to life outside of prison and resuming normal social activities including working – is quite difficult. There are many restrictions placed on felons, including who they may associate with, which items they are not permitted to possess, and much more. One of the biggest obstacles they face is finding employment. It should come as no surprise that many employers are reluctant to hire convicted felons, and so these people are often forced to seek lower-paying positions, like in fast food and other service industries, despite their education and professional training. This way, convicted felons are sentenced yet again, but this time to a life of legally sanctioned discrimination in things like housing, education, and especially employment.

This is where the Certificate of Good Standing comes in. It provides evidence that an ex-convict has been rehabilitated for purposes of employment. A convicted felon may show his prospective employer the certificate and this, in addition to various federal programs that provide incentives to employers that hire rehabilitated convicts, eases slightly the path to being gainfully employed for those who have been disenfranchised by the state in this way.

Once an ex-felon has a job, an important hurdle has been overcome. That individual is now able to lawfully earn an income and pay for basic needs like housing and food. With gainful employment, an ex-felon no longer feels strongly compelled to return to a life of crime in order to survive, and can turn his attentions to other desires and goals toward self-improvement. When this is the case, everyone benefits.

Make no mistake: it is still very difficult for convicted felons to put their crimes behind them, turn over a new leaf, and resume leading normal lives. But Illinois lawmakers have taken a small step in making it easier for ex-convicts to gain employment by making the waiting period to receive this certificate 33% shorter.

There is still much work to be done if we intend to commit ourselves to the honorable task of helping those convicted of felonies resume their rightful place as upstanding, productive members of society, but baby steps are still important steps. Anything that extends a helping hand to convicted felons, who are quite a politically, economically, and socially vulnerable group in our country, deserves appreciation and the renewing of our commitment to rehabilitation.

If you or a loved one is currently dealing with a criminal investigation or prosecution on the misdemeanor or felony level, time is of the essence. Contact the Law Offices of Raymond G.Wigell, Ltd., at (708) 481 – 4800. Attorneys are available 24/7, and the first consultation is free. With our 36 years of experience, let us help you in your time of need.

Illinois Residents Can No Longer Make Decisions About Underage Drinking

 On January 1, 2013, Public Act 97-1049 went into effect. This law seeks to crack down on parents (or guardians, like other relatives, or baby-sitters, etc.) who permit underage drinking on property they own. Not only is it a crime to allow underage drinking at the parent or guardian’s home, but it is now also a crime to allow underage drinking on property under the parent or guardian’s control, such as a barn, cabin, boathouse, or guesthouse. Illinois legislators are seeking to reduce instances of underage drinking by making it clear that law enforcement may now more forcefully target parents and guardians with this new law. They hope that this law will serve as a deterrent and make parents even more vigilant about what their children are doing on their own property.

Underage drinking is a problem, especially when those teenagers compound that violation with something like driving a car, snowmobile, four-wheeler, or power boat, or participating in general rowdiness. The fact that underage drinking can be a very serious problem is not disputed.

However, as with most situations, there are limits. Many parents see no problem with allowing their children a sip of wine once a week with dinner. Often times, parents may see fit to allow their teenager to consume a limited amount of beer or champagne on a special occasion, such as graduating from high school, or enlisting in the armed forces. (Indeed, the argument that it is ridiculous that one can engage in armed combat for his country but still is not permitted to consume alcohol is one that is commonly made by critics of the prohibition.) Furthermore, in many cultures, serving children under 18 a small amount of significantly watered down alcohol is not at all a cause for concern.

There is no argument that parents actively allowing their children to consume large quantities of alcohol and then allowing those children to go out in public, where they cause problems for others as well as law enforcement, is irresponsible and should not be condoned.

But there is a big difference between being that irresponsible with the safety of one’s child and the safety of others, and, for example, sharing a microbrew with one’s nineteen-year-old the day he enlists for service.

The laws governing parental involvement in underage drinking do not consider such differences. Worse, they take the decision as to what is or isn’t appropriate for children out of their parents’ hands, instead enforcing a decision arrived at by a group of lawmakers in Springfield, one that ignores nuance and the right of a parent to decide what should or shouldn’t occur under his or her own roof.

Regardless of the arguments to be made against such a decision, this law is currently in effect in the state of Illinois. It is important to be aware that penalties have been increased for parents or guardians who allow underage drinking anywhere on their property, so that Illinois parents can better protect themselves from criminal investigation and prosecution.  

If you have any questions or concerns about this, or are in the midst of an investigation involving any kind of underage drinking crime or any alcohol or drug-related offense, contact the Law Offices of Raymond G.Wigell, Ltd., at (708) 481 – 4800. Attorneys are available 24/7 and the first consultation is free. With our 36 years of experience, let us help you through every stage of the criminal investigation and prosecution. 

Content written by +Law Offices of Raymond G. Wigell, Ltd.