Indeterminate and determinate individuals view public safety differently

“At San Quentin I had a hard time to convince friends that my sentence was cut to one year. The atmosphere there surprised me. There was none of that smoldering hatred of officers; no hopeless, despairing prisoners; no opium and no scheming to get it in. Everybody was looking forward to parole. There was no brutal punishment. A man’s credits were safe. All those changes worked for the best. Prisoners had a chance to shorten their time by good conduct, and their conduct was good,” Jack Black wrote in “You Can’t Win” back in 1926.

The above was written by a California prisoner 99 years ago. Of the 452 diverse books I have read during my 28-plus years of  incarceration, “You Can’t Win” is number 339. It stands out because the author lays out the straight-forward road to freedom and public safety after living much of his life as a criminal.

The words “public safety” are often spoken or written together as if they were a proper noun — a particular person, place, or thing worthy of upper case letters. In California, when these words are applied to crime, punishment, and rehabilitation, their part of speech functions more as a transitive verb — one that requires a direct object to complete its meaning. The prisoner is on the receiving end of that verb, and the results are harsh.

Stick with me, this is not a grammar lesson. This is an examination of the reality of an unbalanced legal system that metes out punishment diametrically opposed to the results it says it wants to achieve. It is a system comprised of a hierarchy of prisoners: Those serving determinate sentences at the top and beneath them, the ones serving indeterminate sentences. The latter group is held to the highly subjective standard of Public Safety to receive a grant of parole. All other prisoners need only to have a pulse in order to parole.

I repeat: Lifers, as a subset of prisoners in California — roughly 33% of the population — are the only group held to the standard of rehabilitation, to achieve Public Safety. Most laymen do not understand this distinction, and any public official who would make a counter argument either does not understand sentencing laws and prison regulations, or they are intentionally misleading the public.

By the way, I’ve chosen to upper-case Lifers with a proper noun designation, because they are the reputed “objects” required by the transitive verb, Public Safety, to rehabilitate themselves. Is it any wonder why the recidivism rate is so low for Lifers who are released on parole in California?  The Board of Parole Hearings—and in some cases up to the governor’s office—requires that Lifers have viable parole plans. 

By way of contrast, consider the young person with no criminal record, at the dawn of his burgeoning criminal career. If he decides to commit a brazen solo smash-and-grab theft, he knows, or should know, imprisonment is a likelihood. When caught and prosecuted, what would this defendant possibly face? 

To start, keeping Public Safety in mind, there is the charge of burglary because of his intent to break the law after entering the building. If workers witnessed the crime, they may have experienced fear, duress, and threat of danger. Because of those elements of the crime, more than likely this “simple theft” will be elevated to a robbery. If, say, a hammer was used to break a jewelry case, a vandalism charge and weapon enhancement may raise the stakes in the charging documents.

If found guilty, off to prison he goes, with time off for “good conduct.” Absent aggravating factors or some esoteric statute in the state’s Penal Code, the lawbreaker may not face a life sentence because the Legislature eliminated life sentences for many crimes in 1977 when it passed Senate Bill 42.

In prison, nothing is expected of an inmate who has a set release date. Sure, there are rules and regulations, but it does not matter if he has a release date. Programs, in many instances are optional, something he may complete voluntarily. Because this malefactor does not have a life sentence, he will not face a parole board. Caught with drugs, a cellphone, or other contraband: “So what?” he says. “Write me up. I don’t give f–k. I still gotta release date.” This is true, even if he forfeits all of his time off for “good conduct” credit.  

How does the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation promote Public Safety without accountability and responsibility for the roughly 67% of prisoners who have parole dates? This is a quandary for the California Model. And it continues to vex Lifers and correctional officers. I’ve talked to more than a few of the prison staff, and many have said, “This ain’t Norway.” I hear all of you who have spoken to me. It stinks for all of us. But if the “R” (rehabilitation) is dropped, time rolls back to the old CDC model, and then we’re back to “No_way.”

Presently, there are two approaches to Public Safety. It should be obvious which is defective and which efficient. Consider this quote from prison author Jack Henry Abbott, “In The Belly Of The Beast”:

“The model we emulate is a fanatically defiant and alienated individual who cannot imagine what forgiveness is, or mercy or tolerance, because he has no experience of such values. His emotions do not know what such values are, but he imagines them as so many ‘weaknesses’ precisely because the unprincipled offender appears to escape punishment through such ‘weaknesses’ on the part of society.” 

So, to make a case for Public Safety, I will state plainly why Lifers have a recidivism rate close to zero.

For a Lifer to parole, there is only that one way. Simply having a pulse will not do. Ask any parole board commissioner. Lifers must undergo a psychological evaluation; understand the underlying causative factors of their life crime; understand their primary, secondary, and tertiary victims; prepare victim impact statements; write letters of apology; have a relapse prevention plan, housing, a job, letters of support; complete positive programs; and stay disciplinary free. Then they must cogently articulate their insight on such matters to the parole board. Object and verb are on equal footing with Lifer and action. Public Safety!