In this post I'm going to focus on the how the justice system fails those who get DWIs financially by unintentionally draining these drunks of more money than is necessary without my clients even realizing what is happening.
I'm going to take you on a journey. Imagine you get pulled over by a cop one night and you've been drinking. Now, say this is the third time this has happened to you. The cop gives you a breathalyzer test, and you comply (most people tend to not comply because they are under the impression that if they don't test, they can't be arrested). You blow over a .08 and the officer puts you in handcuffs and transports you to the jail where somewhere there gives you the option of waiting an hour to take another breathalyzer or to take another test right there.
The administration of two separate tests happens because the test given when pulled over is not accurate enough to hold up in court, and so the reason for the second test is two-fold: The test, since given an hour later could either show that your blood alcohol level is decreasing, meaning that you haven't had a drink for a while, but it could also be increasing, meaning you probably just took a couple shots not too long ago at the bar and were becoming increasingly impaired, which is more likely to be the case in any given situation. If you refuse the second test altogether, it gives the cops enough reason to lock you up for the night.
So, let's say you still blow over a .08 on this second test (or if you blow over a .2 you're automatically held for court), you'll now be held for court the next morning.
After your trial you'll have your bail set, and this is where the failure of the justice system comes into play. If you post bail, I would come pick you up and set you up on EAM with the court covering expenses at $14 a day to be reimbursed after your trial. Now, some people seem to think this is nice because they're so sure that they're going to fight it and get the charges dropped and then they wouldn't have to pay the county back even though the county still has to pay the company I work for. I've only seen one case where the defendant's charges were dropped though.
So, you're on this monitor until your trial where you will most likely be sentenced to 30 days of house arrest or EHM. However, the catch is that your trial probably won't happen for another 30-60 days. So, if you had to be on EAM before EHM for 30 days and then have to be on EHM for 30 days you're paying $935 dollars (with a 35 dollar activation fee that we charge). So far there isn't any real discrepancy and it all seems pretty straight forward. Here are a few things to think about though: Why does the trial, which will last about 20 minutes, have to be set for 30 days into the future? How are some people getting a trial before others even though their DWIs happened after? Finally and most importantly: Why can't these people take that first 30 days of EAM and just do EHM instead in order to cut costs virtually in half?
I can't really answer the first two since I don't participate in that side of the issue, but I am involved enough to know how to answer the final question: They can, they just don't know it.
Who is to blame for their ignorance? Well, everyone and no one.
In order to get converted over to EHM from EAM before you've been sentenced, we need to see an order from the judge saying that you can do so. I'm not exactly clear on how the entire process goes, but to sum it up in the simplest of ways: You talk to your lawyer and say, "Hey, I don't want to be paying all this money for 2 months, why don't I just do EHM now instead, can you talk to the judge?"
Then the defense attorney talks to a judge, "Hey, Judge, can we get this guy converted over to EHM?"
This is then followed by an order sent to us saying that you can convert and you've just saved yourself about $300!
So, there are really 4 main characters here: The judge, the defense attorney, the client, and me. Time for the blame game.
First, let's start with the client. His or her ignorance is completely justifiable. He probably just wants to get out of jail and typically doesn't realize he's paying for the machine every day even though I tell them they are. Ultimately, the client is not to blame.
Should I be counseling these people in the ways of saving money through this process? Probably. And sometimes I do. It really depends on A) Do I feel bad for the person? and B) Is the person being nice to me? Also, all I can really do is inform them that this is an option and to talk to his or her lawyer. I'm not obligated either way, I mean, it's not like I get paid commission for the longer these people stay on.
So, that only leaves the lawyer and the judge. Both of these people have more than just this one guy who got a DWI to deal with, and the procedure is pretty standard with so many occurring with so very few variables: Either you were drunk and driving, or you weren't. So, it doesn't surprise me that they would fall into an easy pattern of just letting the whole situation run it's course. However, why can't that procedure be changed? Why haven't the judges and lawyers picked up on this or tried to change the way they handle the situation? I can't really speak for them, but I'm assuming it has to do with having more important clients and cases to deal with more immediately. I mean, if you're a lawyer, you're going to pay more attention to the client who, to be extreme, has a manslaughter charge than a petty DWI. Some lawyers in the area don't even really know that one could potentially switch to EHM from EAM (Very few people in the courts understand that there is in fact a difference). So perhaps if the lawyers were a little less ignorant, these people who are on EAM could be saving a lot of money.
The judge is probably the person to blame the most and least. The judge has to sign something saying that the defendant should be converted to EHM, so there is the knowledge that it exists, and she could definitely share that with the defendant at the preliminary hearing the morning after the DWI occurred, however the morning after court case is not sentencing, and is there to determine how much bail should be set if the person is kept in the jail.
Ultimately, it should probably be the lawyer's job to figure this out since he or she is the one trying to get his defendant the lightest sentence possible, but most of the defense attorney's that my clients have are public defenders who aren't being paid by these clients, thus giving them less motivation to help them out the best they can, and if they don't care, they wont' act.
It really boils down to: Does anyone care what happens to this person?
If I don't care, I don't really give them the time of day to inform them of their options. If their lawyer doesn't care, he follows suit. Perhaps it is time to stop being so mechanical and to start caring about the fate of our fellow man.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Comparative Jails - Client #001
"You know, this jail just isn't as nice as some of the other jails I've been to," proclaims the first guy I ever picked up from jail and set up on EAM.
"The showers there weren't as nice as the ones in Prairie County."
Clearly, this guy, who is approximately 22, has been to jail more than a handful of times, and has taken note of the many differences amongst the multiple jails he's "visited." Being incarcerated as many times as he has, he still has clearly not learned his lesson, nor does he seem to mind the idea of being in jail, which sadly seems to be a trend in many of my clients who talk about jail as though it were an expected and inevitable part of life.
On top of being a connoisseur of jail conditions, his general attitude towards me is one of camaraderie, as though we were fighting "the man" because I was getting him out of jail. Don't laud the messenger before you realize what the message actually is. However, I don't think he truly comprehends (as many of my clients don't because the county covers pre-trial costs which must be paid by the defendant after he's sentenced) that he's paying fourteen dollars a day to not be in the jail, and I'm simply an intermediary tool transporting him from the jail to his home to set him up on a monitor.
Approximately a month passes and he starts to miss calls. I call him to see why he started to miss calls, but to no avail. His phone line has been disconnected. I sent out a notice to the courts about his violation and a warrant is released for his arrest. Once it was discovered that he was picked up by the police and back in jail, I ventured over to his place to take the machine out of his apartment. Now, he lived alone and this was the first time someone had violated since I started working and the first time I had to go all repo man on someone's ass. I don't know how actual repo men take things that don't technically belong to them without feeling extremely awkward and invasive. I mean, I was going to go grab something that belongs to the company I work for, and I still had this haunting feeling that I was going to get busted by the police for breaking and entering. And then all of those feelings went away when it was actually his neighbor who was home and was holding the machine for him. Awkward imaginary crisis avoided.
That still isn't the end of my time with this guy though. After getting picked up by the police he had a court hearing about violating his probation. When someone has a court appearance after they have violated either my boss or I might have to appear in court to testify against the defendant proving that he had violated and that he didn't miss his calls because of fault on our end. I dressed myself up that day since I might have to appear in court. This was a drastic change from my shorts and a graphic tee that I usually wear to work since I don't want to get my nice clothes reeking of cigarette smoke since most of my clients smoke and I have to go into their houses which just reeks of it. Anyway, I digress. I went to the court house, sat in the court room which was initially a divorce case or civil dispute case, I'm not exactly sure, and eventually #001 come in in handcuffs and oranges and pleads guilty rendering me unnecessary, which I was not upset about.
After that double "o" 1 was sentenced to some jail time and that has been the last that I've heard from him. And like all of my other clients, hopefully I never hear from him again.
"The showers there weren't as nice as the ones in Prairie County."
Clearly, this guy, who is approximately 22, has been to jail more than a handful of times, and has taken note of the many differences amongst the multiple jails he's "visited." Being incarcerated as many times as he has, he still has clearly not learned his lesson, nor does he seem to mind the idea of being in jail, which sadly seems to be a trend in many of my clients who talk about jail as though it were an expected and inevitable part of life.
On top of being a connoisseur of jail conditions, his general attitude towards me is one of camaraderie, as though we were fighting "the man" because I was getting him out of jail. Don't laud the messenger before you realize what the message actually is. However, I don't think he truly comprehends (as many of my clients don't because the county covers pre-trial costs which must be paid by the defendant after he's sentenced) that he's paying fourteen dollars a day to not be in the jail, and I'm simply an intermediary tool transporting him from the jail to his home to set him up on a monitor.
Approximately a month passes and he starts to miss calls. I call him to see why he started to miss calls, but to no avail. His phone line has been disconnected. I sent out a notice to the courts about his violation and a warrant is released for his arrest. Once it was discovered that he was picked up by the police and back in jail, I ventured over to his place to take the machine out of his apartment. Now, he lived alone and this was the first time someone had violated since I started working and the first time I had to go all repo man on someone's ass. I don't know how actual repo men take things that don't technically belong to them without feeling extremely awkward and invasive. I mean, I was going to go grab something that belongs to the company I work for, and I still had this haunting feeling that I was going to get busted by the police for breaking and entering. And then all of those feelings went away when it was actually his neighbor who was home and was holding the machine for him. Awkward imaginary crisis avoided.
That still isn't the end of my time with this guy though. After getting picked up by the police he had a court hearing about violating his probation. When someone has a court appearance after they have violated either my boss or I might have to appear in court to testify against the defendant proving that he had violated and that he didn't miss his calls because of fault on our end. I dressed myself up that day since I might have to appear in court. This was a drastic change from my shorts and a graphic tee that I usually wear to work since I don't want to get my nice clothes reeking of cigarette smoke since most of my clients smoke and I have to go into their houses which just reeks of it. Anyway, I digress. I went to the court house, sat in the court room which was initially a divorce case or civil dispute case, I'm not exactly sure, and eventually #001 come in in handcuffs and oranges and pleads guilty rendering me unnecessary, which I was not upset about.
After that double "o" 1 was sentenced to some jail time and that has been the last that I've heard from him. And like all of my other clients, hopefully I never hear from him again.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Into the Holding Cell...
"Corrections Specialist" has a certain authoritative feel to it. I must say, I do not see myself as an authoritative figure. I'm much too nice, accommodating, and understanding to be the kind of authority I should be for this job, but one day at a time I'm slowly changing into what it takes to pull off handling people who consistently try to manipulate and trick me into believing their stories and excuses.
It isn't easy. These people aren't hardcore criminals or dangerous, or even bad people. Most of them have just made one too many mistakes causing them to serve some time under house arrest with the company for which I work. If these people were a little meaner, and rough around the edges I wouldn't have such a problem telling them "no" when they try to weasel their way into more hours away at work or for getting groceries. Unfortunately/Fortunately this isn't the case.
The age of my "clients" (I'm not sure if you can consider someone a client if they are obligated to use your services) ranges from late teens to late 60s. There are about an equal number of men and women. Most of them fall within an income range of about a thousand dollars a month. (It stands true that the wealthier you are the better lawyer you can afford to get your sentencing down to a minimum time served, if any at all.) There also isn't a disproportionate amount of any ethnicity that utilizes our services either (most people in the area would ignorantly assume otherwise).
In order to be put onto house arrest or serve jail time because of a DWI (which is what most of our clients are charged with, while there are some clients that have charges of assault, drug paraphernalia and other crimes, but mainly just DWIs since the machine we use is primarily for alcohol monitoring.) it is usually the defendant's 2nd or 3rd DWI depending on what their blood-alcohol level was at the time of arrest.
A person who was driving while intoxicated usually follows this path:
First, the person drinks too much and gets pulled over by a police officer. The driver is then asked to submit to a breath test. If the person refuses and the police officer has reason to believe the driver is intoxicated, the driver can be brought into the jail for another breathalyzer. (The reason for two different tests is two-fold. One, the test they give initially isn't exactly 100 percent accurate or reliable, so the second test at the police station is necessary for accuracy. Second, if you've been out at the bar and drinking a lot, but you jumped into your car right after taking a couple of shots, your blood-alcohol level won't be that high, but in an hour it will spike, and thus the test they give you at the jail will show if your BA levels are rising or declining.)
Second, like I just stated, the person is given the choice of taking another breathalyzer test. ALWAYS take this one. You can be charged with refusal to test which doesn't help your case at all. If you're drunk and at the jail, you might as well submit, and if you're not drunk, you might as well submit since you have nothing to hide.
Third, if found to be over the legal limit they'll be incarcerated.
Fourth, they have two set bails. The higher bail (e.g. $3000) is without conditions whereas the lower one (e.g. $300) is with conditions of being released onto an alcohol monitor, or EAM - Electronic Alcohol Monitoring, (where I finally come into the picture). Most choose the latter obviously for financial reasons, although it may not be very well explained to them that they are in fact paying for our services. When on alcohol monitoring they get two calls a day, one in the morning, and one in the evening, administering a breathalyzer test. The rest of the day they are free to do whatever they want, except drink.
Finally, after usually a month, they person on the alcohol monitor goes to their hearing, is sentenced, and generally has 30 days of home monitoring, or EHM - Electronic Home Monitoring, to do at their own expense (meaning the courts no longer cover the cost up front). When on house arrest, the client may only leave the house for work, doctor appointments, or any court mandated rehab sessions, as well as two hours a week for personal errands.
This is just a general idea of what happens. It varies from county to county and case to case with a majority of people being simply on EHM and not EAM to EHM.
Having recently graduated unemployed and with no future plans from Brown University, this job serendipitously fell into my lap. The rest of my posts will be various tales of some of the clients with hilarious stories, some disturbing ones, and discussions about how the legal system fails and screws over some people. Join me as we follow those who must traverse the path of driving while intoxicated.
It isn't easy. These people aren't hardcore criminals or dangerous, or even bad people. Most of them have just made one too many mistakes causing them to serve some time under house arrest with the company for which I work. If these people were a little meaner, and rough around the edges I wouldn't have such a problem telling them "no" when they try to weasel their way into more hours away at work or for getting groceries. Unfortunately/Fortunately this isn't the case.
The age of my "clients" (I'm not sure if you can consider someone a client if they are obligated to use your services) ranges from late teens to late 60s. There are about an equal number of men and women. Most of them fall within an income range of about a thousand dollars a month. (It stands true that the wealthier you are the better lawyer you can afford to get your sentencing down to a minimum time served, if any at all.) There also isn't a disproportionate amount of any ethnicity that utilizes our services either (most people in the area would ignorantly assume otherwise).
In order to be put onto house arrest or serve jail time because of a DWI (which is what most of our clients are charged with, while there are some clients that have charges of assault, drug paraphernalia and other crimes, but mainly just DWIs since the machine we use is primarily for alcohol monitoring.) it is usually the defendant's 2nd or 3rd DWI depending on what their blood-alcohol level was at the time of arrest.
A person who was driving while intoxicated usually follows this path:
First, the person drinks too much and gets pulled over by a police officer. The driver is then asked to submit to a breath test. If the person refuses and the police officer has reason to believe the driver is intoxicated, the driver can be brought into the jail for another breathalyzer. (The reason for two different tests is two-fold. One, the test they give initially isn't exactly 100 percent accurate or reliable, so the second test at the police station is necessary for accuracy. Second, if you've been out at the bar and drinking a lot, but you jumped into your car right after taking a couple of shots, your blood-alcohol level won't be that high, but in an hour it will spike, and thus the test they give you at the jail will show if your BA levels are rising or declining.)
Second, like I just stated, the person is given the choice of taking another breathalyzer test. ALWAYS take this one. You can be charged with refusal to test which doesn't help your case at all. If you're drunk and at the jail, you might as well submit, and if you're not drunk, you might as well submit since you have nothing to hide.
Third, if found to be over the legal limit they'll be incarcerated.
Fourth, they have two set bails. The higher bail (e.g. $3000) is without conditions whereas the lower one (e.g. $300) is with conditions of being released onto an alcohol monitor, or EAM - Electronic Alcohol Monitoring, (where I finally come into the picture). Most choose the latter obviously for financial reasons, although it may not be very well explained to them that they are in fact paying for our services. When on alcohol monitoring they get two calls a day, one in the morning, and one in the evening, administering a breathalyzer test. The rest of the day they are free to do whatever they want, except drink.
Finally, after usually a month, they person on the alcohol monitor goes to their hearing, is sentenced, and generally has 30 days of home monitoring, or EHM - Electronic Home Monitoring, to do at their own expense (meaning the courts no longer cover the cost up front). When on house arrest, the client may only leave the house for work, doctor appointments, or any court mandated rehab sessions, as well as two hours a week for personal errands.
This is just a general idea of what happens. It varies from county to county and case to case with a majority of people being simply on EHM and not EAM to EHM.
Having recently graduated unemployed and with no future plans from Brown University, this job serendipitously fell into my lap. The rest of my posts will be various tales of some of the clients with hilarious stories, some disturbing ones, and discussions about how the legal system fails and screws over some people. Join me as we follow those who must traverse the path of driving while intoxicated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)