Accountability plus opportunity equals justice
In 1998, two cousins from different sides of the track, one from East Baltimore and the other from West, were both charged with murder in two separate cases.
The 18-year-old from the east side intentionally hunted down a perceived enemy and shot his victim a dozen times for what was later confirmed to be a case of mistaken identity. His 19-year-old cousin was walking home from his first day at college when he was approached by a neighborhood gang leader who tried robbing the young man of his belongings. After a brief struggle, the cousin took the weapon from his would-be assailant and pulled the trigger out of fear for his life.
The first defendant took a plea deal and received a favorable sentence of 20 years behind bars with the possibility of parole, while the hard-working college kid in the second case took his chances with a jury, assuming it would prove to be an obvious case of self-defense. However, without the financial means to obtain a private attorney, his case took a turn for the worse, and he found himself strapped with a sentence of 50 years without the possibility of parole.
The 18-year-old was released on parole after 16 years behind bars despite having a horrendous institutional record for fighting, extortion and various other infractions. The 19-year-old, ineligible for parole, used his time behind bars to earn a college degree, worked daily in the prison library, mentored younger inmates, received numerous awards for his stellar and exemplary actions, and wrote numerous books.
However, despite those efforts, he won’t be eligible for mandatory release for another 10 to 15 years after already serving over half his initial 50-year sentence. Stories like this have inspired Senate Bill 123, the Second Chance Act, to come to fruition. Sen. Jill Carter and Del. Cheryl Pasteur crafted this well-intentioned and critically important legislation that will consider such cases and give those who have served a considerable amount of time behind bars the opportunity to show a judge that they deserve a second chance at life.
Despite the ill-conceived and narrowminded arguments made by those who believe that atonement and rehabilitation are inconsequential, my colleagues and I in the criminal justice system have seen firsthand how that thinking is irrefutably false. Understanding that individuals need to be held accountable for their actions, with stiff and severe consequences that fit the nature of the crime, we must recognize that these same individuals deserve an opportunity to show that they have transformed their lives and made a conscious decision to change their thinking, that they are entirely different people than when they were sentenced.
However, in that same vein, we also believe that those who egregiously, and without remorse, sexually assault an individual with a weapon using force should not be allowed to earn diminution credits based solely on a policy put forth to reduce overcrowding. These individuals have committed an act so heinous against their victims and displayed no regard for the laws of humanity that they must serve their entire sentence for the sake of public safety.
And this is why we chose to put forth the Pava Marie LaPere Act, Senate Bill 1098, seeking to eliminate the possibility of those convicted of first-degree rape from receiving such arbitrary diminution credits. These two separate yet integral policies allow the members of the Maryland General Assembly to address two glaring discrepancies within our criminal justice system. These bills help simultaneously expand discretion related to the parole commission (LaPere Act) and within the courts (Second Chance Act).
When we talk about justice as it relates to the criminal justice system, we must recognize that there are glaring differences in what justice looks like depending on race, gender or socio-economic status. This is why we have chosen to work collaboratively to address such discrepancies, ensuring that justice no longer represents “Just Us” in communities of color.
Similarly, accountability is not about simply pointing fingers at the bad actors for their actions in some misguided attempt to appear “tough on crime.” Nor does it give us the right to shirk our responsibilities as public officials elected to represent our constituents’ interests.
Reform legislation, like these two critical bills that we are supporting during this legislative session, and the community’s interests are not mutually exclusive. In fact, as prosecutors, we believe they strengthen our criminal justice system and the values we strive to uphold. It’s time we begin to hold ourselves accountable for our actions by putting forth thoughtful and responsible policies that reform the system without sacrificing public safety, thereby earning the trust of the entire community — not just of a select few.