MIDDLESEX COUNTY PRISON COORDINATING COMMITTEE NEWSLETTER

MCPCC met on February 8, 2006 in West Newton. Present were Mary Ann Donaldson, Beverly Wilkins, Tom Crowther, Elizabeth Woodbridge, Bill Bergquist, Toby Frost, Wesley Frost and Marjorie Moerschner. We welcomed back attorney Lee Gartenburg as our guest speaker.

Lee had three things that he particularly wanted to talk about:

 

1)     The new drunk driving law which was passed recently                     (Melanie's Law)

 

2) Anti-gang violence legislation now being considered by house and senate

 

3) CORI reform.

1) Previous drunk driving legislation usually focused on increasing the penalties for DWI offenses. Melanie's Law aims at putting more restrictions on people if they refuse to take a breathalyzer test after being stopped. People have a constitutional right to refuse (self-incrimination) and this refusal cannot be brought out in trial (it would be prejudicial) but this law makes refusal a very unpleasant option.

 

Refusal to take the breathalyzer test always brought a license suspension, but suspensions are much longer now. If you are over 21 and have no prior drunk driving offense you lose your license for 6 months; with a prior offense it's 3 years; two prior offenses gets you a five year suspension; 3 or more prior offenses and you lose your license for life- all for refusing to take the test. This is an administrative penalty, not a sentence after trial.

 

This bill requires an interlock ignition device to be attached to the car of a person convicted of DWI. The driver blows into it and the car won't start if the device detects alcohol. It's a criminal offense for someone to do this for you.

 

There is also now a mandatory 1-year prison sentence for anyone who drives drunk after a license suspension. It is a criminal offense to employ anyone with a suspended license to drive for you or to allow such a person to drive your car, or to lend your car to someone whose own car has an interlock device. It is a crime to drive drunk with a child in the car- this was never spelled out before- which carries a stronger penalty than simply driving drunk. There are stronger penalties for motor vehicle homicide and a new offense called motor vehicle manslaughter has been created.

 

These new laws will increase the prison population and the age of the prison population. The average age of Billerica inmates is already going up for various reasons, including domestic violence. It's not just the young who commit these offenses.

 

Laws will help to get drunk drivers off the road, but the greatest deterrent is undoubtedly cultural, when things like peer pressure make not driving drunk a standard norm of behavior.

2)     Anti-gang legislation. Boston and to some extent most major

Massachusetts cities have several serious problems that affect the crime rate: there are a lot of guns around, there are a lot of gangs, and there is a culture of intimidation of which those "don't snitch" T-shirts are just a small example. It's hard to convict offenders if no one will testify against them. Ideally, these problems should be solved proactively rather than reactively, starting when a child is in nursery school or earlier, and ideally someone, parent or other, should know where a child is all day every day. There should be after-school programs, community centers, boys and girls clubs, to keep a child constructively busy and off the street when he is not in school or at home. A child without a nurturing family structure and spending unsupervised time on the street is drawn into a gang; it becomes his family and its values become his. The result is mini societies based on guns, violence and drugs. In Boston those boys and girls clubs and community centers are failing to do what they could and should do.

 

Senator Barrios, chairman of the public safety and homeland security committee got a grant of $11,000,000 to fund community based initiatives to cut down on gang violence.

 

In addition anti-gang bills were proposed in the House (#4615) and Senate(#2242) of which Sen. Barrios was a main proponent. Both bills have common themes and some differences. A version of these bills passed each chamber and are now in conference committee.

 

Each bill set up a board to provide a system and funds for witness protection, something Massachusetts has never had. This would include armed escort during the criminal proceedings,

relocation, etc. The witness would also have the right to seek a restraining order against a threatening or intimidating person. Previously, restraining orders were essentially confined to domestic violence situations. There are also penalties for intimidating a witness.

 

The bills have a provision that potentially restricts the dissemination of grand jury minutes. A felony charge constitutionally requires an indictment before the case can go to

trial. A grand jury hears evidence presented by a district attorney that a crime was committed and that the person charged probably committed it. If the grand jury is satisfied by the evidence it makes a finding of probable cause and an indictment is handed down. (Misdemeanors, handled by the District Courts, do not require an indictment.) After indictment, the case will go to trial in Superior Court. The minutes of the grand jury proceedings, showing who testified and what they said, traditionally are then given to the defense attorney, who is never present during proceedings. This access to the minutes is necessary because they allow the defense attorney to get an idea of the case against his (or her) client in order to prepare a proper defense. It also allows him to challenge the finding of probable cause if the evidence presented to the grand jury does not seem to warrant such a finding. Further, witness testimony at trial can be challenged if it is inconsistent with prior statements the witness may have made, such as those to the grand jury.

 

Since the minutes identify witnesses, there is obvious opportunity for intimidation if the minutes fall into the wrong hands, so the proposed legislation has provisions to restrict dissemination of the minutes in various ways. There are penalties for illegal dissemination, a good thing. One proposal would require court approval before the minutes are given to the defense lawyer. Lee is not happy about the language of some of these proposals that may go too far in restricting access. Defense access to the minutes is essential to ensure a fair trial.

 

The proposed legislation would increase the mandatory sentence for unlicensed gun possession to 18 months. It is now 1 year. Under present laws a person in prison for a drug or firearm violation can't get into a work release or community work project program. Since work release is a very positive tool for starting people on a better path, Lee would rather see this restriction removed in the proposed legislation than to see an increase in the mandatory sentence for unlicensed gun possession.

Lee has some concerns about the anti-gang legislation that he has expressed to Sen. Barios, but he feels it has merit if it doesn't go to extremes. The bill is necessary, but it's reactive.

Prevention is proactive and the best solution. Very early intervention, mandatory after-school programs, improved parenting skills are all necessary and all would help.

The Dept. of Revenue, which handles child support, is going to offer parenting classes at Billerica. Framingham already has parenting classes.

3)     CORI reform.

 

CORI (Criminal Offender Record Information) involves two issues, the criminal record information itself, and the right to disseminate it. The Criminal History Systems Board keeps information about all court appearances, even if the charge was dismissed, and about the disposition of each case. It disseminates this information widely to government agencies like the Dept of Revenue and Housing Boards, and to victims and witnesses- but for $25., anyone can get this information on any individual.

 

One result is that people with CORIS don't get/hired, which is not the way to give them a new start in life. There is now a movement to find a rational way to restrict access to this information.

 

There are several problems to be considered: what information should be kept; who gets access; how to restrict access; how to make the information accurate. It is extremely difficult to correct misinformation. There are several ways that someone else's bad record can end up under your name. Some states require fingerprint verification before information is entered under a person's name. Massachusetts does not require this. Verification should be part of reform legislation.

 

There are many proposals for reform. Tony Winsor of MA Law Reform, who has studied this problem for a long time, has one. So far, though the need is recognized and is of concern, not much has happened.

In Massachusetts, records can be sealed after 10 years for a misdemeanor, 15 for a felony, assuming the person has not had any involvement with the criminal justice system during that time.

Applications for information would then come back marked "information sealed" and in this case a person applying for a job would have the right to say "no convictions." Records cannot be expunged.

 

Lee is currently Chairman of the Criminal Justice Section of the MA Bar Assn., and the Criminal Justice Section has set up a subcommittee to consider CORI. The subcommittee has decided that the formulation of a set of principles would be an orderly way to start dealing with this very complex and disturbing issue, and it is working on that now.

 

Lee is still involved with the Russian-American Rule of Law Consortium that has tried to foster the concepts of jury trials and fair trials within the Russian judicial system. Though he is rather pessimistic right now about conditions in Russia, he still hopes that those principles have taken hold.

 

Lee then gave a wonderful tribute to Beverly, our retiring coordinator. He mentioned her ability to reach out to people in many different ways, her commitment to trying to make the world a better place, and the energy and passion she brings to everything she does. We thank Lee for coming to talk to us. It is always a highlight of our year!

 

NEXT MEETING:  MARCH 8, 2006 AT & 7 PM

SECOND CHURCH IN NEWTON     60 HIGHLAND STREET, WEST NEWTON