To Reduce Incarceration — Reduce Serious and Violent Crime
By Joseph P. Charney
African-Americans make up 9% of LA City’s population but constitute 36 percent of its homicide victims. This contrasts with the City’s white population, where thirty percent of the population comprises eight percent of homicide victims. In light of this disparity shouldn’t we expect our County District Attorney and other LA City and County government office holders to advocate for increased police protection of the most vulnerable communities? Shouldn’t we expect the LA District Attorney to plead gun and gang enhancements as well as priors to lengthen the sentences of those who prey upon these communities?
Instead of employing these tools, the LA District Attorney chooses not to use them to save money and argues lengthy sentences impede rehabilitation. He boasts that in the first three months of holding office, he filed five thousand fewer gun and gang enhancements than his predecessor that shorten sentences and allegedly reducing prison costs by $664 million dollars. But exactly how is this savings translating into less crime? The DA was not elected to reduce prison costs. He was elected to prosecute, convict and seek sentences that incapacitate violent and repeat offenders, deter others from committing crimes, and secure justice for victims. He claims we know how to rehabilitate career criminals. We don’t.
Attempts at relying on prison rehabilitation have failed. One Justice Department study tracked 92,100 inmates out of a total of 400,000 inmates released from state prisons across 34 states in 2012. The findings were stunning. About 6 in 10 prisoners were arrested within 3 years of their release, and 7 in 10 were arrested within 5 years. Nearly half of those released returned to prison within 5 years for a parole or probation violation or a new crime. A 2017 California Legislative Analyst Report relating to recidivism after release from California prisons reported that “Of the 36,000 inmates released in 2012‑13, 16,500 (or 46 percent) were convicted of a subsequent crime within three years of release .”
When inmates are released, they return to the communities where they resided before arrest and incarceration. In Los Angeles few if any return to Pacific Palisades, Century City and Bel Air. More likely it will be China Town, South Los Angeles, Leimart Park or Civic Center. Those who cannot afford to reside in LA’s low crime communities need the protection of our criminal justice system: the police, prosecutors, courts and prisons. African-American victims want protection against thieves, killers and rapists, no matter who the perpetrators are and what their skin color is. The most preyed upon cannot afford the Bel Air Patrol or living within gated communities. They must look to a criminal justice system that sufficiently responds to their needs and protects them. After a 53 year-old mother of six was brutally murdered in her Manchester Square apartment in South LA on July 4th, her sister complained, “too often, shootings and killings of Black and Latino people are immediately written off as being “gang” related, getting far less attention from police — and from the media — than killings of white people, or killings in rich neighborhoods.”
To the victims of inner-city crime the “mass incarceration mantra” promotes the canard that prison inmates are wrongfully incarcerated. They’re not. Most are there for repetitive serious and violent crimes. According to Police Chief Michel Moore: 30 percent of homicides and 80 percent of nonfatal shootings committed this year in Los Angeles have not been solved. That is 250 more cases to handle than in the prior year. According to the Chief, “trigger-pullers are being allowed to harm the community over and over”. Isn’t it the DA’s job to prosecute “trigger pullers” and seek lengthy incarceration to reduce “mass-victimization”? All Angelenos want less incarceration but as a result of less crime not as a result of fewer arrests, prosecutions and reduced sentences.
How do we reduce violent crime? In the short run, we incarcerate those who prey on our communities. In the long run, we must do more. As statistics show, rehabilitation efforts can rarely undo the years of failure to provide effective schooling, mentoring and counseling to at-risk youth. The data are sobering. By fourth grade, nearly 80 percent of African-American male youth fail to meet California state reading standards. Black males are twice as likely to drop out of high school than White males. The arrest rate for Black youth in Los Angeles County is over 6 times higher than that of White youth. These tragic statistics must be addressed.
We must deter future generations from crime by directing adequate amounts of resources at the most at-risk demographic, to provide mentoring, adult guidance, and extensive tutoring. Investing in the latter will eventually reduce crime and the costs relating to the criminal justice system. But we must do both. While we try to inoculate young men from pursuing violence, the LA District Attorney must pursue justice for those who have suffered from it. That’s his job.
Joseph P. Charney is a former Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney
