Question Time with Shane 

Shane - After being denied psychiatric medication by ValueOptions, Shane turned to illegal drugs financed by burglaries. For stealing a few hundred dollars worth of goods, he was sentenced by Judge Ron Reinstein to 11 years. Shane is the author of the blog Persevering Prison Pages.

Chris H wrote:

Can I start a possibly controversial post?

Does anyone else agree that there should be different rules for different crimes?

Paedophiles, for example. I don't think that any punishment currently administered can make up for the crime these people commit, yet many cases in the UK get sickeningly short sentences and even then get the opportunity to apply for parole even sooner.

I know none of this applies to Shane - and I'm not implying anything like that at all - but I think that your average, law abiding citizen puts that kind of logic to all prisoner victories.

I agree that 11 and a bit years for stealing is ridiculous. People SERIOUSLY get less for child abuse/assault etc.. But do you not think that certain crimes deserve a lot harsher sentences than they currently receive, more so maybe than more lenient sentences for less serious crimes?

Shane replied:

I completely agree that there should be different rules for different crimes. A sex offender, for example, should not be getting less prison time than someone caught smoking pot. Of course society should be protected from all predators, whether sex offenders, murderers or burglars. But it seems punishment is the goal and not true public safety. Otherwise, we’d still have parole boards, instead of a mandatory early release date at 85%.

Instead of a board determining whether offenders have behaved, changed their ways and aren’t a threat if released early, Arizona simply makes offenders do 85% of their prison sentence and releases them.

In court, judges are bound by sentencing charts, and hand out prison and probation based on the class of felony, prior convictions, and other criteria. A judge doesn’t have much leeway.

Example: A man molests an 8 year old. The chart says he gets anywhere between 3 years probation and 6 years prison. I burglarise an apartment, but because I have one prior conviction the chart says I get between 8 to 16 years in prison. The child molester gets the middle sentence of 3 years and I get the middle, which is 11¼ years.

Judges should be able to hand down more severe or less severe sentences based on the circumstances of the crimes and other factors, and not be bound to ridiculous sentencing charts. It’s not the crime itself that should only be considered, but all the circumstances too.

Also, Shaun Attwood is right, all of those corporations and organizations that profit from prisoners and their families should have zero influence on sentencing laws.

Thanks for the question Chris H!

L&R

Shane

Here’s a link to Shane’s prison blog: http://shannoninprison.blogspot.com/

Our friends inside appreciate your comments and questions. To post a comment if you do not have a Google/Blogger account, just select anonymous for your identity.

Shaun P. Attwood