WHAT PRICE JUSTICE?

The horrific home invasion murders in Cheshire this summer set off shock waves of reaction in communities statewide and at the State Capitol. Questions arose about the effectiveness of the parole system, sentencing procedures, and the level of rehabilitation offered in state prisons.

There were calls for immediate changes in parole and sentencing practices. Some legislative leaders cautioned against "knee jerk reactions" while others said public safety is a top priority that demands a speedy response to perceived loopholes in the law.

In-depth reviews of sentencing and parole are being done by the Democrat-controlled legislature's Judiciary Committee and a special task force set up by Republican Gov. Jodi Rell. Debate continues on whether reforms should be considered this fall in a legislative special session or wait until a full review can be done in the 2008 regular session of the General Assembly that opens in February.

Meanwhile, public nerve endings remain raw. In Southbury, an entire neighborhood expressed its dissatisfaction with the release from prison of convicted serial rapist David Pollitt who would live with relatives in Southbury. This was not a parole decision. Pollitt completed a 24-year prison sentence for his crimes.

Gov. Rell asked Democratic Attorney General Richard Blumenthal to seek court action blocking Pollitt's release but that was rejected by a judge who said Pollitt had served his time.

Society's collective mindset on crime and punishment goes through cycles over time influenced by a variety of factors. A recessionary economy can cause a spike in crime, so can an increase in the youth population. Horrible incidents such as the Cheshire murders shape public opinion on punishment.

In recent years, the state legislature was trending away from mandatory sentences for major crimes. Lawmakers have debated the potential abolition of the death penalty in Connecticut. They've also considered easing the rules on official pardons for convicted offenders.

The Cheshire incident seems to have reversed the trend with lawmakers in both parties calling for tougher prison sentences and more intensive parole and probation procedures.

Just under the surface, past the emotional rhetoric, is a brewing debate over the cost of changing the justice system. If fewer paroles are granted, convicted offenders stay behind bars longer, aggravating the prison overcrowding problem. This could necessitate prison expansion or the building of new prisons. If tighter surveillance is ordered when parole is granted, that will likely require more staff, more electronic equipment, and more paperwork.

Advocates of justice reform already are saying if the state truly wants improvement, it must create more vocational training for prison inmates, so these individuals have job skills when they return to society. They also say offenders with drug and/or alcohol problems would best be helped by treatment programs not incarceration.

All of this costs money and plenty of it. Siting of new prisons will generate controversy in the towns targeted as possible locations. Beefing up sentences or restricting parole will touch off renewed debate over civil liberties.
Press releases and news conferences promising to protect the public may curry favor with an understandably frightened public at first, but the question remains—what price justice? Unless our elected leaders carefully review the cost of "reforms," both in financial and human terms, the public will not be served. Past history shows that criminal justice laws passed without proper funding often go unenforced.

Posted 10/15/07

Comments or questions?  Contact us at  CTReport@crnradio.com

© Connecticut Radio Network