[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----COLO., ARIZ., NEV., CALIF., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Aug. 7



COLORADO:

Should We Execute the Mentally Ill?

On Wednesday, the final witness in the sentencing trial of Aurora theater 
shooter James Holmes testified before the court in Centennial, Colo. Ashley 
Moser was the mother of the shooting's youngest victim, 6-year-old Veronica 
Moser-Sullivan, who was shot 4 times during the massacre.

Ashley Moser herself was also shot. She lost her unborn child and now uses a 
motorized wheelchair. She wept throughout her testimony, explaining that the 
little girl she lost in 2012 was her best friend and her life. "I don't know 
who I am anymore 'cause I was a mom when I was 18, and that's all I knew how to 
be," she told jurors.

The young mother's story was just one of the many tragedies underscored in two 
days of victim testimony leading up to Holmes's sentencing. In 48 hours, the 
jury listened to a dozen men and women tell personal stories of heartbreak 
related to the 12 people who were killed and the 70 wounded on July 20, 2012 - 
and in the next day or so, they'll decide whether Holmes lives out the rest of 
life in prison or dies by lethal injection.

But last week, the jury heard a different story. They heard James Holmes's 
story.

>From family, friends, and others who know the man behind the brutal attack in 
Aurora, Colo., the jury learned that Holmes was a child loved by his family, 
uncommonly bright. And then they listened to an account of the 27-year-old's 
slow descent into schizophrenia.

At age 12, according to a CNN report, Holmes began isolating himself from other 
boys instead of playing with friends. In high school, his cross-country running 
coach described him as otherworldly and uncomfortable with close interaction 
with his teammates. After college, he returned home, where he'd stay up all 
night and sleep all day. Colleagues at a pill factory where he worked recounted 
that he frequently stared into space on the job.

Eventually Holmes went to grad school at the University of Colorado's Anschutz 
Medical Campus in Aurora to study neuroscience, where he was suddenly failing 
instead of garnering the straight-A marks he was used to. He said he had a 
"broken brain," which the neuroscience student finally decided was unfixable.

According to the defense, Holmes had a theory.

He sent his disturbing idea of "human capital" to CU-Denver student 
psychiatrist Dr. Lynne Fenton through the mail just hours before he entered the 
theater where he opened fire on the audience. In it, he described how he might 
increase the value of his own life by taking others' lives - a nonsensical, 
obsessive notion.

There is no doubt that Holmes is mentally ill and has been for some time. Every 
doctor who has testified is in agreement. With a family history of mental 
health issues, the court-appointed forensic psychologist called him 
"genetically loaded." In jail, Holmes suffered a psychotic break. He licked the 
walls of his cell, spread feces, and did somersaults, among other bizarre 
behaviors.

In March 2012, four months prior to the shooting, Holmes admitted to Fenton 
that he was having thoughts of murder. In July 2012, he carried them out. And 
while he might be mentally ill, that doesn't mean he's not responsible for his 
actions. The jury's guilty verdict means Holmes knew right from wrong when he 
killed 12 people and injured 70.

(source: Jenna Birch, Yahoo news)






ARIZONA:

Group seeks repeal of Arizona's death penalty


A former Republican legislator and a Flagstaff doctor are launching a campaign 
to repeal the death penalty in Arizona.

The initiative would repeal sections of statute that allow individuals to be 
executed by the state. Instead, those who would otherwise be sentenced to death 
would serve out the rest of their lives behind bars.

That change, if approved by voters in 2016, also would commute the sentences of 
the 118 individuals currently on death row.

Bob Hungerford, who served in the Legislature in the 1970s, said the proposal 
is an outgrowth of efforts Death Penalty Alternatives for Arizona and its 
predecessor organizations have been working on for years. He said the move now 
is to parlay that public education effort into actually changing the law.

But it won't be easy.

"We know we have an uphill fight," said David Spence. He said there's no 
identified source of money to gather 150,642 valid signatures by next July to 
put the measure on the ballot, nor any cash set aside for an advertising 
campaign.

But Spence believes he can get public attention through a volunteer effort. And 
he said the media attention may come if the initiative can persuade the 
Republican-controlled Senate to at least consider bills that have been 
sponsored by 2 Democrats to do the same things. The bills have never even 
gotten a hearing.

Count on prosecutors to lead the opposition.

"The ultimate crime deserves the ultimate punishment," said Attorney General 
Mark Brnovich. "Too often, we focus on the defendants and what they're going 
through and we forget about the horrible crimes these individuals committed and 
the horrible stress and tragedies that befell the victims."

Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery, who said he's met Hungerford, a 
former chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Committee, and respects him. 
But Montgomery had a slightly different take on the issue than the attorney 
general.

"If he ran an initiative that ended abortion and the death penalty, I could get 
behind that," Montgomery said. "If it is only to end death penalty, I doubt 
there will be arguments offered (by initiative backers) that objective data 
cannot rebut."

Moral arguments aside, Spence said there is data to support following the lead 
of the Nebraska Legislature which just this year voted to end capital 
punishment.

1 is cost. He said the state spends far more prosecuting and handling the 
appeals on a death penalty case - including often paying for lawyers and 
investigators for the defense - than it would if the prosecutor instead sought 
life in prison. Brnovich did not dispute that but said that argument holds no 
water for him.

"Opponents of the death penalty have been engaging in a decades-long guerrilla 
war to make the death penalty expensive and unpopular," he said. "You can't put 
a price on justice."

(source: Arizona Daily Star)






NEVADA:

Jurors Vote Death Penalty for Jeremiah Bean


Jurors have voted to give convicted killer Jeremiah Bean the death penalty. He 
was found guilty last week for murdering 5 people in Lyon County in May 2013.

Bean was found guilty on 12 counts, including 5 for 1st degree murder.

The sentence ends more than 2 years of waiting for the family members of the 
victims.

Bean murdered 5 people in May of 2013. His 1st victims were Bob and Dottie Pape 
inside their Fernley home. 3 days later he killed Eli Graham near Mustang. And 
later that day, murdered Lester Leiber and Angie Duff inside her home 2 doors 
down from where Bean was staying.

(source: KTVN news)






CALIFORNIA:

Court to review request for explanation from Stanislaus County judge


The court will review a defense attorney's request for a written explanation 
from a judge who removed himself from a death penalty case last month.

Martin Baker, one of Mark Edward Mesiti's attorneys, wants Stanislaus Superior 
Court Judge John Freeland to say why he recused himself after 6 years of 
presiding over the murder case. Mesiti is accused of killing his 14-year-old 
daughter, Alycia Mesiti, whose body was found buried in a Ceres home's 
backyard.

The case has now been assigned to Judge Dawna Reeves, who on Thursday afternoon 
explained that presiding Judge Marie Silveira will review the attorney's 
request. Silveira will return from vacation later this month and resume a 
lengthy double-homicide trial.

Reeves said once Silveira is done presiding over the double-homicide trial, she 
will make it a priority to review Baker's request and consider whether to 
respond. It's not clear why Freeland removed himself from the case.

Baker's filed formal request asks the court - specifically Freeland - to 
indicate the judge's grounds for recusal. The defense attorney also is asking 
the court when Freeland realized when he could no longer preside over the case.

A minute order filed by Freeland on July 24 indicates that state Code of Civil 
Procedure allows recusal when the judge believes there is a substantial doubt 
as to his or her capacity to be impartial, or when a person aware of the facts 
might reasonably entertain a doubt that the judge would be able to be 
impartial.

Along with the capital murder charge, Mesiti is charged with more than 40 
counts of sexually abusing his daughter, as well as sexual abuse charges 
involving 2 other girls, according to a criminal grand jury indictment. The 
defendant has pleaded not guilty to the charges and denied all special 
circumstances allegations.

Authorities on March 25, 2009, discovered the girl's body buried in the 
backyard of a Ceres home where Mesiti's family lived when the girl disappeared 
in August 2006. He had already moved to Southern California when the girl's 
remains were found.

Mesiti remains in custody awaiting trial, which has not been scheduled. The 
defendant will return to court Aug. 25, when Mesiti's attorneys have a chance 
to challenge the evidence presented to a criminal grand jury behind closed 
doors.

(source: Modesto Bee)





****************

Man accused of killing 3 relatives found fit to stand trial


A jury has decided that a man accused of killing his sister-in-law and two of 
her children at their Rancho Cordova home is fit to stand trial.

The Sacramento Bee reports (http://bit.ly/1KSERyw ) the jury reached the 
verdict Wednesday at the competency hearing for 22-year-old Grigoriy 
Bukhantsov. He now faces the death penalty or life without parole if convicted 
of the October 2012 killings.

Bukhantsov was 19 when he was accused of stabbing to death his 23-year-old 
sister-in law, Alina Bukhantsov, her 3-year-old daughter and 2-year-old son. 
Her 6-month-old son had been spared.

Bukhantsov's attorneys had argued that their client had a mental illness, but 
Deputy District Attorney Donell Slivka argued that he had faked and exaggerated 
his symptoms.

(source: Associated Press)






USA:

Here's what presidential candidates' websites say about criminal justice reform


Criminal justice reform is the 1 issue that just about everyone seems to agree 
on right now. There are certainly disagreements over the details, but from the 
Koch Brothers to ThinkProgress, from Rand Paul to Bernie Sanders, from Newt 
Gingrich to Al Sharpton, from the Heritage Foundation to Black Lives Matter, 
nearly everyone agrees at least in principle that the system needs to be 
reformed.

Oddly though, criminal justice is all but absent on the websites most of the 
major contenders for the 2016 election. I just reviewed the sites for all of 
the announced candidates. (I know, I'm a glutton for punishment.) The 1st thing 
that struck me odd is just how little discussion there is of any issue on the 
candidates' sites. Everyone has a bio, links to donate, links to volunteer, and 
a schedule. Some sites list the candidate's major pieces of legislation and 
accomplishments in office, which does at least give some indication of what 
issues are important and where they stand on those issues. But there's very 
little in the way of specific policy proposals, priorities, and positions. Most 
seem to be running on their personalities.

But even within the relatively light coverage of actual issues, criminal 
justice lags far behind. Only a handful of candidates address it at all. On the 
GOP side, there's much discussion of ISIS, Iran, Israel, and of course Obama. 
Among the Democrats, there's language about getting money out of politics (good 
luck!), income inequality, and health care. But for all the talk lately of 
policing, prisons, marijuana legalization, and so on, these issues still 
haven't penetrated presidential politics. Basically there's Martin O'Malley and 
Rand Paul, and then there's everyone else.

This isn't a review of the candidates' records or a critique of their positions 
on these issues (although I'll do some of that). It's more of an evaluation of 
how (and if) they address criminal justice on their campaign sites. So here we 
go.

The Gold Stars:

By far and away, the most thorough, thoughtful, and detailed analysis of 
criminal justice issues is on the website of Martin O'Malley. "Criminal Justice 
Reform" is the 1st item listed under O'Malley's "Issues" page. On the criminal 
justice page itself, O'Malley lays out several core principles, with key 
policies he'd push for each.

Under "Build Trust in Law Enforcement," O'Malley proposes expanding and 
mandating data reporting from police agencies for "police-involved shootings, 
custodial deaths, discourtesy complaints, and use of excessive force." The site 
adds that, "This data should be centralized in a universal database and made 
publicly available, allowing communities to observe trends and develop policy 
responses when necessary."

O'Malley also proposes a national use of force standard, which he'll then try 
to require each state to adapt. He proposes using the incentive of federal 
grants to encourage a variety of programs aimed at curbing common problems in 
policing, including, "undergoing racial bias training and crisis de-escalation 
training; establishing internal accountability measures to track and review 
civilian complaints and address officer misconduct; and creating and empowering 
civilian review boards to independently monitor and audit policing cases." He 
also promises to work with law enforcement groups, civil liberties advocates, 
and technology experts to come up with national standards for the use of police 
body cameras.

Additionally, O'Malley wants to reform asset forfeiture laws to put an emphasis 
on public safety (as opposed to providing revenue for police agencies). He 
promises to encourage states to pass laws requiring independent investigations 
of police shootings, and most interestingly, he proposes to strengthen the 
Justice Department's civil rights division by reducing the standard required 
for them to investigate abuses.

O'Malley's next principle is called "Increase Fairness in Sentencing." Here, he 
proposes eliminating the crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity entirely, 
reclassifying marijuana as a Schedule II drug, eliminating mandatory minimums 
for low-level drug offenders, and giving judges and prosecutors more discretion 
on sentencing for more serious crimes. He also promises to push for abolishing 
the federal death penalty.

O'Malley then offers a number of proposals to reduce recidivism and promote 
successful reentry for former prisoners, including job training programs, and 
suggests reauthorizing and expanding the 2008 Second Chance Act, which provides 
funding for "housing and benefits, substance abuse treatment, mentoring, 
education, and job training" for recently released prisoners. He wants to 
re-fund Pell Grants for inmates (as the Obama administration recently did), 
dramatically reduce solitary confinement, and ban solitary for juveniles.

Up next, O'Malley looks at restoring the rights of former prisoners. He 
proposes a federal "fair chance" policy that would prohibit the federal 
government and its contractors from denying employment based solely on an 
applicant's prior criminal record. He suggests permanent seals or expungement 
of juvenile records, restoring voting rights to felons who have served their 
sentences, and ending the federal ban on public assistance programs for people 
with drug records. He also promises to face out private prisons at the federal 
level.

Under the heading "Reinvest to Ensure Justice," O'Malley proposes programs to 
invest in drug treatment, mental health, and provide better training for law 
enforcement to deal with people in crisis. He offers policies to address the 
school-to-prison pipeline, the shortage of public defenders, immigration 
detention centers, and reforming the troubled Custom and Border Patrol.

Lastly, O???Malley outlines what you might call a holistic approach to reform 
by including several policies that he believes will improve income inequality, 
like raising the minimum wage, strengthening the power of unions, student loan 
forgiveness, child care, and immigration reform.

Whatever you think of these policies - I agree with many; I have some problems 
with others - it's clear that O'Malley has both given a lot of thought to 
criminal justice reform and plans to make the issue a key part of his campaign. 
It almost reads like a wish list of policies reform groups have been advocating 
for years. The section on policing in particular shows that O'Malley has 
followed the national debate closely, and has a deep and nuanced understanding 
of the issues at stake.

If anything, O'Malley's policies may be a bit too ambitious. Most criminal 
justice policy is made at the state and local level. O'Malley could do a lot to 
change how federal laws are enforced, but with the states, he'll be restricted 
mostly to encouraging best practices or trying to incentivize reform by 
offering or threatening to withhold federal money. There's also the matter of 
how O'Malley would get these policies passed. If he plans to promote policies 
that would strengthen public service unions, for example, he'll also be giving 
more power to the already-powerful police unions, nearly all of which will 
almost certainly oppose nearly every policing reform on O'Malley's website. I'd 
also like to see O'Malley's position on Byrne Grants, federally-funded 
multi-jurisdictional anti-drug and anti-gang task forces (which have a long 
history of problems) and police militarization.

And finally, O'Malley took a lot of criticism earlier this year for some the 
policies he implemented as mayor of Baltimore, including a policy of mass 
arrests that critics say created a lot of the same problems O'Malley addresses 
on his campaign website. It would be helpful to include a section in which he 
explains those policies, whether or not he still thinks they were good ideas, 
if he'd encourage other mayors to adopt similar policies, and how those 
policies jibe with his larger themes of fairness, second chances, redemption, 
and the destructiveness of a criminal record.

But given just how far out in front of the other candidates O'Malley is, these 
are minor quibbles. O'Malley demonstrates an understanding and appreciation of 
these issues on a level like no other candidate save perhaps for Rand Paul. 
Agree or disagree, he has certainly opened the discussion.

Rand Paul

Paul has disappointed some of his libertarian supporters of late with a 
rightward lurch on issues from Iran to immigration to putting a high priority 
on defunding Planned Parenthood. Still, no other candidate from the two major 
parties can match his legislative record on criminal justice reform. As I've 
pointed out here before, Paul's interest in these issues seems genuine, not 
opportunistic. Yes, Paul has taken some criticism for his high-profile visits 
to black colleges, a few of which resulted in some awkward moments. But Paul 
also made the case for restoring the voting rights of nonviolent felons at an 
Iowa GOP convention. Telling a crowd of conservative, overwhelmingly white 
Republicans in the 1st caucus state that we need to restore voting rights to a 
population of disproportionately black people drug offenders who are likely to 
vote Democratic isn't political opportunism, it's leadership.

On his website, Paul briefly explains why criminal justice reform has become a 
priority for him, noting the lessons he learned after trips to Ferguson, 
Detroit, Atlanta, and Chicago. He doesn't get into specific policies he'd push 
as president, but he does list the bills he has already sponsored. Those 
include: --The REDEEM Act: A law aimed at helping nonviolent offenders 
(particularly juveniles) expunge their criminal records. It includes incentives 
for states to do the same.

--Justice Safety Valve Act: A law that would give judges more discretion over 
sentencing, reducing the effect of mandatory minimums.

--Civil Rights Voting Restoration Act: Would restore federal voting rights to 
all nonviolent offenders. The bill would also withhold prison fund to states 
that don't do the same.

--RESET Act: Makes possession of small amounts of illicit drugs a misdemeanor, 
instead of a felony. It also eliminates the crack/powder cocaine disparity.

--FAIR Act: A bill to reform federal asset forfeiture. It would require that 
federal prosecutors show by "clear and convincing evidence" that the property 
was tied to a crime. It would also put forfeiture proceeds into the Treasury's 
general fund and eliminate the DOJ's asset forfeiture fund. It would eliminate 
the ability of police agencies in states that have passed forfeiture 
restrictions to get around those laws by partnering with federal law 
enforcement.

Paul hasn't just talked about reform, he has sponsored legislation that would 
actually achieve it. Though his campaign site is less thorough and 
comprehensive than O'Malley's, his record has already established his bonafides 
on these issues. It's just too bad that he's so quick to exploit a 
high-profile, admittedly awful crime to grandstand on immigration. That sort of 
demagoguing by politicians are how we got so many bad laws and harsh sentences 
in the first place.

The Also-Rans

Jim Webb

Jim Webb has been talking about criminal justice reform since his days in the 
Senate. In that he actually proposed reform legislation while he was a senator, 
Webb has also done more "walking the walk" than any candidate but Paul. So it's 
not surprising that the issue is 1 of the 5 highlighted on Webb's campaign 
site. What is surprising is that it only gets a paragraph, and that paragraph 
contains no policy proposals and no positions on reform bills now pending in 
Congress. Webb basically just makes a broad, non-specific argument that things 
are bad and need to be changed. That's unfortunate, because he has been much 
more thoughtful and interesting about these issues in the past.

It's clear that Webb gets it. But as he writes in the 1st line of his one 
paragraph, "This is not a political issue; it is a leadership issue." That's 
quite true. So lead. Tell us what needs to be changed, and how you'd change it.

Rick Perry

Perry makes no mention of criminal justice on his "Issues" page, nor does he 
discuss what he'd do as president. But he does talk about what he's done in 
this area in his "Record" section. And despite Perry's ugly grandstanding on 
the death penalty in the 2012 primaries, he does have some accomplishments to 
tout. Perry helped implement drug courts in Texas for 1st time offenders, an 
imperfect approach that is nonetheless better than incarceration. He also notes 
that the policy was about treating addiction as a disease, not as a crime - at 
least for 1st-timers. (Of course, the vast majority of people who use illicit 
drugs aren't addicted and never get that way.) Perry also boasts about closing 
prisons in Texas without opening new ones. The very fact that a GOP primary 
candidate would find this something worth bragging about is a good indication 
of how much the debate has shifted.

Hillary Clinton

Despite the splash she made in her speech on criminal justice a few months ago, 
the issue doesn't get prominent placement on her campaign site. Clinton's 
policy proposals are roughly divided into what she calls "the 4 Fights." 
Criminal justice is unintuitively lumped into the "Strengthening America's 
Families" fight, and shows up at the very bottom of that page, under the 
heading "A balanced criminal justice system." It's about 500 words long.

Clinton hits some buzzwords - Ferguson, Charleston, Baltimore, mass 
incarceration - but there are few specific proposals. It's more about vague 
generalizations. For example: "We will listen to law enforcement leaders and 
work with communities to prevent crime, rather than measuring success just by 
the number of arrests or convictions."

Clinton is the only candidate whose campaign site addresses police 
militarization, although this too is vague.

We will ensure that federal funds for state and local law enforcement are used 
to bolster best practices, rather than to buy weapons of war that have no place 
on our streets.

The story is the same in the 2 paragraphs about drug addiction.

We must ensure that everyone understands that prescription drugs can be 
addictive and a gateway to other drugs. We must also give young people 
opportunities to pursue education, good jobs, and a future that does not need 
to be dulled or muted by the use of substances ...

So she's going to prevent young people from using drugs by giving the 
opportunities, good jobs, and a future. Well okay then. It's too bad no one 
else thought of that. This is as close as she gets to a specific policy on drug 
treatment . . .

Yet, too many people who are addicted to prescription drugs, opiates, or other 
substances have no access to effective substance abuse treatment programs. We 
must work to ensure that everyone has access to these programs.

And it isn't really all that close. How will we do that? And who is we?

The only specific policy Clinton endorses on her site are body cameras for 
police. Like O'Malley, Clinton doesn't try to explain or atone for her own 
support for disastrous criminal justice policies over the years. Instead, we 
get vague platitudes.

Still, the mere fact that she's emphasizing treatment over incarceration is, 
again, an illustration of how the debate has moved. Clinton's site doesn't 
mention sentencing, the death penalty, or a host of other issues. Yet paltry as 
it is, it's still in the top tier.

Bernie Sanders

Sanders's "Issues" page makes no mention of criminal justice at all. For the 
candidate widely described as a socialist, and who is probably well to the left 
of anyone else in the field (at least among the 2 major parties), discussion of 
criminal justice is surprisingly hard to find. I finally did a Google search 
for "incarceration" on the URL for Sanders's site and found a a blog post about 
a speech he gave in Des Moines and a video and the transcript of a speech he 
gave to the National Urban League. The latter includes some discussion of 
police militarization, racial bias, incarceration, and root causes of crime. It 
also includes some vague policy positions - support for body cameras, "moving 
away" from police militarization, opposition to private prisons, investing in 
community policing. But it's still pretty vague, and you have to go through 
some effort to find it. Sanders also tends to talk about incarceration by 
lamenting how few bankers and Wall Street traders are in prison, which is more 
about economic populism than about reforming the courts, cops, and prisons.

It all has the whiff of a candidate who was thrust into this discussion, rather 
than a candidate who took it up willingly.

Whisperers of Reform

Jeb Bush

Jeb Bush's website doesn't list criminal justice reform anywhere in its main 
sets of menus. The site doesn't have an "Issues" section at all. After some 
poking around, I did find a speech Bush recently gave to the National Urban 
League. That speech included the following paragraph in which Bush does at 
least make some mention of reform:

"We didn't lose sight of the ones who had missed their chance at a better life, 
or maybe even lost their way and landed in jail. In Florida, we didn't want to 
fill prisons with non-violent offenders. So we expanded drug courts and 
prevention programs. I took the view - as I would as president - that real 
justice in America has got to include restorative justice. I opened the 1st 
faith-based prison in the United States and signed an executive order to 
promote the hiring of ex-offenders. In this country, we shouldn't be writing 
people off, denying them a 2nd chance at a life of meaning. Many ask only for a 
chance to start again, to get back in the game and do it right - and as a 
country, we should say yes whenever we can."

That's at least something. Unfortunately, this was followed by a passage in 
which Bush boasted about increasing mandatory minimum sentences for other 
crimes. Bush then claims credit for presiding over a historic crime drop in 
Florida. But of course, this was a period over which crime was dropping all 
over the country. Bush said a few good things in his speech, but these issues 
don't appear to be priorities for him.

Lincoln Chafee

While Chafee does include "protection of personal liberties" as one of his 
campaign priorities, the only issue on which he takes a specific position is 
"the wiretapping of our phones," which he says is forbidden by the Fourth 
Amendment. (I presume he's referring to the NSA wiretapping, and not all 
wiretapping in criminal investigations.) Chafee promises that, "I will never 
allow our liberties to be diminished." I'm not sure what that means. In what 
context? He'll allow no liberties to be diminished ever? Whose definition of 
"liberties?" Chafee also says he supports the First and Eighth Amendments. 
Bold!

Chafee's site doesn't address any other criminal justice issues.

Lyndsey Graham

According to his campaign site, Graham's core principles are "Securing Our 
Nation," "Securing Our Future," and ???Securing Our Values." I don't see 
criminal justice issues discussed on any of those pages. Searches of the site 
do turn up a couple of articles, however. In this editorial from the Des Moines 
Register, Graham criticizes mandatory minimum sentences, and says both prison 
reform and sentencing reform are an "absolute necessity," adding, "We have too 
many people in jail, and there are other ways to deal with these crimes rather 
than just filling up the jails."

Wait and See

John Kasich

At the moment, there is no "Issues" page, but the "Meet John" section includes 
a line about how Kasich has "transformed how Ohio approaches police-community 
relations." A search of the site for "prison" turns up a George Will column 
about how Kasich eschews mandatory minimums and has embraced re-entry programs 
to prepare inmates for life on the outside. Kasich has implemented some 
interesting reforms in Ohio. He only announced a few weeks ago, so perhaps 
he'll add more to his site in the coming weeks.

Carly Fiorina

Fiorina's site has no "Issues" page only loose collections of statements and 
articles under the headings "News" and "Blog." Searches for prison, jail, 
incarceration, and police turned up nothing. However, Fiorina has made some 
comments about decriminalizing drug addiction, and about the need to reduce 
mass incarceration, and about holding abusive police officers accountable. So 
the dearth of criminal justice on her website may be more due to the site's 
poor design and overall lack of content than a reflection of Fiorina's 
priorities.

Bobby Jindal

When I checked it, Jindal's campaign homepage redirected me to a donation page 
. . . and it then stayed there. There was no way out. I did a few searches on 
the URL, however, and found several articles that are in theory posted 
somewhere on the site. The problem is that when you click on them, they bring 
up a 404 error. At least as of this writing, the only thing you can do on 
Jindal's page is give him money.

On the plus side, one of the headlines suggests a story in which Jindal touts a 
program that "gives prisoners a chance." But there are also articles in which 
Jindal boasts of signing bills to lengthen sentences for drug crimes. (Jindal 
did sign a bill that lengthens heroin sentences, but he also signed another 
that softens Louisiana's harsh marijuana laws.) Another headline suggests he 
approved new sentences for crimes related to child pornography. Before we can 
learn much more, we may have to wait until Jindal gets enough donations to fund 
a working website.

Reform? What Reform?

Marco Rubio

Rubio's "Issues" pages includes sections on Life, Cuba, Israel, ISIS, marriage, 
veterans, the Internet, and 2 sections on Iran, but nothing on criminal 
justice. A Google search for "incarceration" on his site turned up nothing. A 
search for "prisons" turned up speeches about Iran, ISIS, and a condemnation of 
Obama for releasing unconvicted prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

Ted Cruz

The closest Ted Cruz's site gets to anything resembling criminal justice are 
passages in which he boasts about being part of a court case that preserved the 
phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, suing to preserve the Texas Ten 
Commandments Monument, his participation in several Second Amendment lawsuits, 
his support for Houston pastors whose sermons had been subpoenaed by the city, 
and his defense of conservative groups that were allegedly targeted by the IRS. 
A search for "incarceration" on his site turned up little. A search on "prison" 
turned up a press statement condemning the deal with Iran and a National Review 
Online opinion piece listing "extended constitutional protections to prisoners 
of war on foreign soil" as an example of "judicial tyranny."

Scott Walker

Walker's site doesn't have an "Issues" or "Record" or "Priorities" page. It's 
mostly just short newsy clips about praise for Scott Walker. A search for 
"prison" brings up only this statement on Americans being held in Iran. A 
search for "incarceration" turned up nothing. Neither did searches for 
militarization, police, and jails. Given Walker's record on these issues, 
perhaps that's for the best.

Ben Carson

Topics on Carson's "Issues" page include "Keep Faith in Our Society," "Russia 
and Lessons Learned," "Stand by Israel, Our Bulwark Middle East Ally," and 
"Protecting Innocent Life." The only topic remotely related to criminal justice 
is called, "Keep Gitmo Open." Searches on jail, incarceration, and prison turn 
up nothing.

Chris Christie

There's no mention of criminal justice on Christie's "Issues" page. Odd for a 
candidate whose most newsworthy campaign bite of late was his promise to 
basically invade the state of Colorado to stop people from smoking pot. 
Site-specific searches of various criminal justice-related terms also turn up 
nothing. The only reference to these issues at all appears to be a photo of a 
police officer attending a Christie event at the the top of the page called, 
"Taking on the Tough Issues."

Donald Trump

Not surprisingly, Donald Trump's campaign site is mostly a testament to the 
prowess, success, and classiness of Donald Trump. Other than the trashing of 
immigrants, I see no discussion of any issues at all - just articles about how 
Trump is topping the polls, basking in praise from Ted Cruz, and issuing witty 
ripostes on Twitter. A search for "prison" turns up articles in which Trump 
bashes immigrants from Cuba and Mexico. A search for "incarceration" turns up 
an article in which trump bashes immigrants more generally. A search for 
"police" also turns up articles in which Trump bashes immigrants. That search 
did also turn up an interview with Anderson Cooper in which Trump criticized 
the police officer who arrested Sandra Bland. But he followed by telling 
Cooper, "I am a huge fan of the police. I think the police have to be given 
back power."

Jim Gilmore

The former Virginia governor's rudimentary campaign site has only one 
substantive page, and that outlines his economic plan. Searches on various 
criminal justice-themed terms produced no results.

George Pataki

The GOP's other throwback candidate also mostly ignores criminal justice on his 
website. That's too bad, because Pataki was in office when New York switched 
from incarcerating for low-level drug crimes to prioritizing treatment. The 
state's prison population has plunged since 1999.

Of course, Pataki spent a good deal of his political capital fighting those 
reforms, and to this day he boasts of both reinstituting the death penalty and 
abolishing parole for violent offenders. Pataki also boasts more generally of 
his "tough on crime" policies, and takes credit for the drop in violent crime 
in New York that took place in part while he was in office. It would be 
interesting to hear him explain how that drop in crime happened even as the 
state was releasing drug offenders and closing prisons. Pataki's site does link 
to an article in the Des Moines Register that touts him reaching out to 
minority voters, but the article makes no mention of criminal justice reform. 
The site also lists a Pataki appearance on MSNBC in which he chastises Rand 
Paul for the senator's opposition to renewal of the PATRIOT Act.

Rick Santorum

Santorum's priorities include "Fighting Radical Islam," "Immigration Reform," 
"Preserving Conservative Values," and the Sanctity of Life," but there's no 
mention of criminal justice reform. The only remotely related issue is his 
promise to use the DOJ's Civil Rights Division to make employers accommodate 
the religious practices of their employees. Searches for criminal justice 
themes did turn up 1 article in which Santorum lists incarceration among a 
number of things that are "limiting opportunities to rise," but it comes in an 
article about Santorum's plan to "reduce immigration by 25 %."

The Retrograde

Mike Huckabee

Given that evangelicals like Chuck Colson were beating the path to prison 
reform long before it was chic, it's a bit surprising that neither of the 2 
openly evangelical candidates seems to have much interest in these issues. But 
while Rick Santorum's site mostly ignores criminal justice, Mike Huckabee's 
site reads as if he were running in 1991.

Under his "Record as Governor" page, Huckabee writes:

Law and order has always been one of my top priorities. The 2 people in this 
country he values the most are soldiers and police officers, because they are 
the only thing standing between our freedom and total anarchy.

Huckabee then boasts of "carrying out 16 executions," which just seems kind of 
gross. He also boasts that he turned down 85 % of commutation requests. 
Huckabee here appears to be trying to compensate for 1 particularly unfortunate 
commutation in which the man whose sentence he waved went on to kill 4 police 
officers in 2009. Whether that particular granting of clemency was the right 
call at the time is open to debate, but in an era in which politicians, 
pundits, and activists from across the political spectrum are decrying the 
destructive nature of harsh sentences, boasting about his reluctance to show 
mercy is an odd thing to see from a candidate, particularly one is so open 
about his faith in a religion that purports to be about love and forgiveness. 
In any case, Huckabee's stinginess with the commutation power isn't even in the 
same league as our current president's. Obama has denied 99.7 % of commutation 
requests.

A search for "crime" on Huckabee's site turns up this article, in which he 
promises to prosecute attacks on people who oppose gay marriage as hate crimes. 
Searches for incarceration, prison, and jails produce nothing of significance.

(source: Radley Balko blogs about criminal justice, the drug war and civil 
liberties for The Washington Post)