RAPP Campaign

  • HOME
  • ABOUT
  • EVENTS
  • PRESS
  • REPORTS
  • DONATE
You are here: Home / Archives for article

June 3, 2016

Longtime Prisoner Mohaman Koti Dies at 89, 2 Months After Release

Share

June 3, 2016
Headlines, Democracy Now!

An elderly New York prisoner who won wide support for his freedom has died just two months after he was released to a nursing home in Staten Island. Mohaman Koti was 89 years old. In 1978, Mr. Koti was convicted of attempted murder after he shot a New York City police officer during a traffic stop in which he says the officer drew his gun first. The officer later recovered, and Mr. Koti was offered a plea deal of seven-and-a-half years. When he demanded a trial, he was sentenced to 25 years to life. (Watch Democracy Now! coverage.)

Mr. Koti spent the next several decades mentoring young male prisoners. A corrections officer at Sing Sing said he had never met anyone so well respected on both sides of the bars. Ten years after Mr. Koti was eligible for parole, he was profiled in a 2013 New York Times column about prisoners over the age of 60 who are denied release based on their original crime, instead of an accurate assessment of the threat they pose. It described a parole board hearing where commissioners had to repeat questions to Mr. Koti because he was hard of hearing. He suffered from several medical problems and used a wheelchair, but he was still found to be at risk of committing another crime.

Mr. Koti was ultimately granted parole in September 2014, when a judge ruled the previous denials were irrational and called for a new hearing. Then, because of a pending bank robbery charge from the time of his arrest, he was ordered to serve an additional year in prison at a federal medical center in Butner, North Carolina.

Mr. Koti was finally freed in March. His longtime lawyer and friend Susan Tipograph told Democracy Now!, “The kind of life Koti lived when he got out—confined to a nursing home because he was not able to care for himself—shows that it was ludicrous to think he would have posed a threat to society all these years.”

Share

Filed Under: article, press, slideshow Tagged With: Democracy Now, Mohaman Koti, parole, Susan Tipograph

May 24, 2016

The Prison Population We Should Talk About Releasing

Share

President Barack Obama has made reducing the prison population one of his top agenda items during his final term in office. – AP/David Goldman, JUSTICE

Given his recent granting of clemency to 58 prisoners, many of whom were serving time on federal drug offenses, the President has made it clear he doesn’t want non-violent drug offenders serving long sentences. He’s also made the case that reducing sentences for non-violent drug offenders is an important part of reform and cutting the financial cost of the U.S. criminal justice system.

But criminal justice researchers say that non-violent offenders are not the prison population we should be focusing on when it comes to long-term criminal justice reform.

“The president is significantly mistaken,” Stanford University Law Professor Robert Weisberg told ATTN:.

For successful long-term criminal justice reform, the U.S. needs to consider releasing violent offenders who are no longer dangerous, even those who have been convicted of murder, said Weisberg, who is also the co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center.

“The percentage of people who have committed non-violent drug offenses is not that many to be the solution for criminal justice reform,” said Weisberg.

Of the U.S. prison population, only 17 percent of inmates in 2010 were incarcerated for primary drug offenses, according to research by Fordham University Professor John Pfaff. He wrote in research published in 2015 that the focus should be on violent crime not primary drug offenders.

“The policy implications here are clear,” Pfaff wrote. “Reducing the admissions of drug offenders will not meaningfully reduce prison populations.”

This does not mean that addressing prison sentences for non-violent drug offenses isn’t important, but Pfaff said that those offenses should not be the only focus and they don’t make up the majority of people in prison.

People who have committed drug offenses make up more of the new admissions to prisons, but nearly half of inmates incarcerated are there for violent crimes, according to the Brookings Institute.

Basically, the research suggests that if we want to effectively reduce the 2.2 million people in the U.S. prison population, we have to consider releasing violent offenders.

But aren’t all violent offenders dangerous to the public?

Actually, there’s research that suggests a significant amount of them are not.

Weisberg said that violent offenders middle aged and older who committed a crime in their 20’s and 30’s tend to age out of their crime.

Elderly Prisoners

“The most interesting example of people who should be considered for release and unquestionably committed violent crimes, but are not dangerous anymore, are elderly people,” said Weisberg.

A 2011 report by the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, which followed 860 California murderers released since 1995, found that only five of the murderers were convicted of new felonies in the 15 years after release. None of them returned to prison for “life-term” crimes. That’s a 1 percent rate of return to prison for the murderers in this study compared to the nearly 50 percent return to California state prison for the broader prison population.

So why were these murderers so well-behaved after their release?

Age is mostly likely the reason. Not only are most violent crimes committed by people under 30, but even the criminal behavior that continues after that age declines drastically after age 40 and even more so after age 50, according to the report. The average age in the 2011 study for California inmates serving life in prison who were granted parole was 49.9 years old. This suggests that by the time these “lifers” made parole, they had “aged out” of the violent stage in their lives.

However living in the outside world after a prison sentence is not easy. After a recent increase in parolee releases under California Gov. Jerry Brown, and an uptick in returns to jail for some of those parolees, some wondered whether former inmates are prepared to be successful. “We’re talking about people with track records of the most serious and violent crime … and we’re saying, ‘Good luck out there, do well,'” Christine Ward, executive director of Crime Victims Action Alliance, told the Los Angeles Times.

Former inmates struggle to find jobs, have a higher likelihood of divorce, and their children have a higher rate of mental health problems and school drop out rates, according to the Obama administration.

Weisberg said the difficulty of navigating society with a criminal record could contribute to re-offenses.

“It’s plausible the longer you keep someone in prison, the longer you’re wrecking their chances for legal life on the outside,” he said.

Share

Filed Under: article, slideshow Tagged With: aging behind bars, aging in prison, aging population, aging prisoners, grandparents in prison, incarcerated elders, seniors

April 5, 2016

RAPP Mourns Abdullah Majid, elder and political prisoner, 1949-2016

Share

RAPP mourns the passing of elder Black Panther political prisoner Abdullah Majid, incarcerated in Five Points prison, New York. Majid was 67 years old and had served 34 years in prison, and his continued incarceration made no sense. He was among more than 9,500 elders behind New York prison bars, grievously injuring public health and wellness for families and communities across the state. His mentorship of younger incarcerated men is only one of the many reasons he will be deeply missed. Our condolences go out to his mother, Mrs. Rose Laborde, now 91 years old, and to his entire family and community.

The government incarcerates political leaders to silence them. Here is a biography of Abdullah Majid in his own words, written several years ago:

My name is Abdullah Majid, formerly Anthony LaBorde. I was born on June 25, 1949 in Flushing, New York. I am the father of four children, and the fourth child of five boys. My two elder brothers are deceased, as is my father. My mother lives in Jamaica, New York.

My political awareness began in earnest when I was 15 years old, around the time of the murder of El Hajj Abdul Malik Shabazz (Malcolm X). I can recall vividly in 1962–63 many of the news accounts of the struggle in Africa, particularly the Congo; the murder of Patrice Lumumba and several other patriots of the national liberation struggle in Southern Africa, and the civil rights (national liberation) struggle in amerikka by people of African descent. I realized, despite geographical differences, the stunning similarities between the oppressed as well as the oppressors both here and there.

As a result of this awareness, I began working with other brothers in Jamaica, Queens, starting with the Grass Roots Advisory Council. We attempted to get funding from the poverty programs in the community with no success. After about two years of this, we realized the limitations placed upon us struggling in this manner. By this time I became involved with the Black Panther Party and the Republic of New Africa. I found both of these organizations to be much more relevant and effective with respect to the issues affecting our people. I worked in various programs such as free breakfasts for children, free clothing, liberation schools for youth, and adult political education classes, all with positive results. The Party and the RNA were also involved in important community issues, i.e., community control of the murderous police department and community control of the schools, as well as the struggle around health care in our communities. I was also in a leadership position, which required more and more time working with new Party members. From 1968 to 1971, I was a full-time Party member.

Needless to say, I became a target of this government’s “law enforcement establishment” (COINTELPRO) for my political work, along with thousands of other activists. Recently, some of the underhanded operations to disrupt, frame, and murder many of the imprisoned freedom fighters are coming to light.

In the spring of 1981, much to my surprise, I became a primary suspect in the shooting death of one cop and the wounding of another. Being familiar with how the police react to attacks on them, I decided not to wait for them to come to me. This led to a nine-month search-and-destroy campaign by the government both nationally and internationally. While being hunted by these gestapo I attempted to maintain a normal existence with aid from family and friends.

I was finally arrested in January 1982 by the Philadelphia gestapo after a physical confrontation with them during which I sustained injuries to my head. I was transported back to New York City to stand trial with Bashir Hameed (James York), who had been apprehended in Sumpter, South Carolina, for murder and attempted murder of the same two cops.

After five years and three trials, the state was finally able to engineer a trumped up conviction with flimsy and circumstantial evidence. I was sentenced to 33 and 1/3 years-to-life total on the two counts. Some five years after the murder conviction, our case was finally heard by the appellate division, second department (N.Y.), November 19, 1991. True to form of not dealing with the law where political prisoners are concerned, the court pandered to the desires of the “law enforcement” community. The court wasted no time in dispensing “justice” by issuing what has to be the fastest decision in its history (December 19, 1991). Just one month later, the court affirmed this conviction. This was no mean feat for the court, considering the fact that it has the largest caseload of any state appellate court in the nation and is backlogged by over one calendar year with cases waiting either to be heard or for rulings on cases already heard, according to court personnel. After a motion for re-argument, the appellate court remitted the case for hearing on our Batson claim (Batson vs. Kentucky), wherein we raised the issue of racial discrimination during jury selection. After a hearing, the appellate court reinstated its original decision. Our last resort in state court was denied in June 1996 by the New York court of appeals. All appeals (state and federal) have been exhausted for Bashir and me. We are exploring the possibility of a collateral attack on the sentence.

Bashir Hameed returned to Allah on August 30, 2008 at Comstock Prison as a result of medical (murder) neglect by agents of the state.

The government has been very uncooperative about turning over requested documents being sought by me under the Freedom of Information Act. During the three trials, there were deliberate acts by law enforcement agencies to hide certain evidence helpful to the defense. Attorneys are still in the process of trying to make law enforcement agencies turn over all evidence in this case. In spite of my long incarceration, prison has not broken my spirit of struggle. I have been harassed, seriously assaulted twice, denied proper medical treatment, then placed in the special housing unit (SHU) as a result of being assaulted. I have also been refused certain programs offered to the general population because of my political background, supposedly due to the “influence” I am alleged to have with other prisoners. I have been repeatedly transferred hundreds of miles around the state away from my family, friends and supporters.

However, the government has not been totally successful in its attempts to criminalize our struggle for self-determination. The masses do understand the courageous positions of those who are jailed as a result of their political acts. It will be just a matter of time before that understanding by the masses turns into action. While we have had setbacks as a result of subterfuge and subversion from both within and without, we must intensify our current efforts to mobilize the masses for survival and liberation. I believe the only real guarantee we prisoners of war and political prisoners have of staying alive and surviving these prisoner-of-war camps is by keeping our conditions and status before the public both domestically and internationally.

Insha ALLAH (ALLAH willing) we will get the relief (freedom) denied us for the last four hundred years in Babylon.

 

 

Share

Filed Under: article, slideshow Tagged With: Abdul Majid, Abdullah Majid, Black Panther Party, elder, incarcerated, political prisoner, prisoner

February 12, 2016

3 Steps To Parole Justice in New York

Share

Shock waves continue to spread from the August suicide of John MacKenzie in his 40th year behind bars and following his 10th parole denial. At the August meeting of the New York State Board of Parole, the chairperson read an angry letter blaming the Board for John’s death.

Fueled by our grief for John’s death, we must now push forward and make a change. It is time to get the Board to release our elders, our family members, the thousands of people in New York prisons who have served well beyond their minimum terms, who pose no threat to public safety, but who remain in the tombs of our state because the Board denies their parole applications every two years.

Those denials, after all, are what killed John.

  1. Urgent, Right Now: Comment on New Parole Board Regulations

Reacting to years of pressure from the public, the NYS Board of Parole has published new draft regulations to guide release decisions. The new version is designed to correct a major fault in the current regs, which ignore a 2011 law directing the Board to base decisions on risk and needs assessments—evidence-based tools that help predict a person’s future actions.

Some of the proposed changes to the regulations may provide greater protections to parole applicants. Specifically, the proposed changes require commissioners to consider risk assessment scores, as well as age (for people who were under 18 at the time of the crime and face a life sentence), with more purpose and intention than is current practice. In the same spirit, the new regulations also require that in their denials, commissioners must give “factually-individualized” reasons for their conclusions.

But the proposed regulations do not fundamentally change the structure or methods of the Parole Board. The rules are not explicit and clear in making sure that the Board assesses applicants based on their current risk, rehabilitation, and readiness for release. As such, the regulations could result in a continuation of the Board’s current practice: refusing to release people from prison even when they pose a low risk of endangering public safety and are undeniably suitable for release. THIS sample comment, which you can use in submitting your own, explains this more fully.

The Board needs to hear from us—incarcerated people, family members, community organizations and individuals who care about justice and want to see the prison population decrease.

Click here for instructions on submitting comments.
Click here for suggested points to include.
Click here to read the Parole Board’s draft regulations.

Read comments filed by:
RAPP
Center for Appellate Litigation
NYC Council Member Daniel Dromm, 25th District Queens
National Lawyers Guild New York City Chapter
Community Service Society
New York State Bar Association Committee on Civil Rights
Quinnipiac University School of Law
Christopher Seeds, Attorney at Law
Milk Not Jails
Kathy Manley, Attorney at Law
Brooklyn Defender Services
Legal Aid Society and Prisoners’ Rights Project
Correctional Association of New York
Brooke Taylor
Claude Marks/Freedom Archives
Daniel McGowan
Glenn Martin/Just Leadership USA (JLUSA)
Prince Shabazz
Michael Gauthier
Ryan Barbur
NahShon Jackson
Jeffrey Bernstein
José Garcia
John Curry
Rise & Shine Community Services, Inc.
Mark Dixon
Donnell Deberry
Roslyn Smith
George Hill
Robert Rose
Issa Kohler-Hausmann, PhD, JD; Avery Gilbert, JD; Christopher Seeds, JD
Richard Hontoria
Annette Ross
Kevin Mays
The Osborne Association/Elizabeth Gaynes
Dwight James
Adrian Lopez
Alberto Rivera
Moira Meltzer Cohen, Esq.
New York State Prisoner Justice Network
Aaron Talley
Alejo Rodriguez
Richard Robles
Nancy Jacot Bell
Prison Action Network
Elysa Vulpis-Zoccoli
April Ruiz
Aretta White
Blair Meyer
Parole Justice Committee of Capital Area Against Mass Incarceration
Brittany Blizzard
Cale Layton
Charles Bowman
Christine Lolisco
Chuck Culhane
Craig Stallone
Dawn Savarese
Connie Tusa
DeAnna Dawson
Center for Community Alternatives
CURE-NY/Deborah Bozydaj, President
Damaris Reina-Herbas
Donna M. Accettulli
Elaine Arsenault
Erobos Lamashtu
Felice Gelman
Duane Dimick
Roberto Pascal
Ben Al-Dijali
Andras Turcsan
Allen Moore
Jesse Shannon
Donovan Sampson
Errol Prince
Phillip Yates
Marvin Everett
Eddie Williams
Anthony Morgan
JoAnne Palmer
Ivy Yapelli
Joan Calcaterra
Joan Potter
Kerry Gant
Laura Rawls
Laurie Storm
James Morgan
Lisa Drapkin
Lisa Melendez
Liseli Haines
M.C. Wise
Luke Patterson
Nakayima Fennelly
Mike Cintron
Patricia Lydon
Patricia Seals
Patricia Thomas
Robin Love
Robin Schnell
Sarah Mills
Shannon Rodriguez
Shea Settimi
Sylvia Bernard
Sister Honora Kinney
Timothy Bustle
Gail Patrick
Misha Volf
Sandra Giles
Audrey Hawkins
Norm Allen
Karen Flynn
Steven Mangual
Susan Hass
Suzzette Miller
Thomas Answeeney
Rosalind Robinson
Linda King
Anne Lamb
Walter D
Jessaya Duvall
Tiffany Alexander
Sheila Bush-Robinson
Crystal Alexander
Johnny Cole
Diane Alexander
Janice Sutton
Lisa Alexander
Leida Rodriguez
Susan Putland
Mary Frances Burek and Pat Case
Lenwood Jackson
Philip Fernandez
Robert Rose III
Peter King
Luzcelenia Lamont
Lawrence Dotson
Robin Alpern
Sharyn Kerrigan
Bonnie Shoultz

Ashley Habermann
David Darshan
Pamela Darshan
Naveena Darshan
Richard Kuhn, Criminon
Diane Miller
Gladys Gonzalez
Mildred Gonzalez
Scott Paltrowitz
Lee Wengraf
James Edler
Evelyn Kennenwood
Vicki Fox
Edith Allen
Julia Long
Elizabeth Halloran
Theresa Kardos
Matthew Swagler
Jenise Britt
Lindsey Ricci
Julie Greenwood
Lauren Katzman
David McNamara
Wil Van Natta
Yusuf Ahmad
Michelle Spark
Victor Pate
Gerard Deighan
Kaylee Knowles
Valerie Linet
Leah Gitter
Rhys Mateo Klauser
Nicholas Scott
R’Keyah Klauser
Robert Klauser
Marcella Klauser
Tyrell Hodge
Donna Hodge
Monique Fernandez
Lorenzo Brooks
Bear Bonebakker
Jenny Romaine
Rima Fand
Rosy Galvan
Joanne Walsh
Lisa Ellin
Tracie Threatt
Karmen Cheng
Eugene Griffin
Robert Roth
Steve Garrett
Debbie Griffin
Eva Boodman
Mujahid Farid
Robert Watt
Emily Kaufman
Shoshana Brown
Sandra DePillo
Autumn Leo

These materials are suggestions—undoubtedly it is those most affected by parole who are the experts in its reform. However, we believe there is great power in sending a unified and consistent message. We can demand that the Parole Board create clear regulations to begin doing what Parole Boards should: release people for whom further incarceration serves no purpose—neither protecting public safety nor advancing personal growth and rehabilitation. With your help, we can work toward parole reform and help reunite people with their families and communities.

Comments can take the form of a letter, or even just a list. We encourage you to include your own personal stories of how you or your loved ones have been impacted by current parole policy, as well as criticisms of the current proposed regulations.

2: Remove Obstacle: Recalcitrant Commissioners

Improving the regulations would be an important step forward. But there is another obstacle to justice: some parole commissioners have shown themselves to be dead set against following any such changes. They deny parole release over and over, thumbing their noses at the law. There is no reason to believe that these commissioners will respect the new regulations any more than they have respected the 2011 law.

The Board’s practice will never improve with such commissioners in office. Therefore, we urge Governor Cuomo, who appoints the Board, to remove these commissioners now or refuse to reappoint them when their terms expire. Among the most recalcitrant Commissioners are G. Kevin Ludlow, Lisa Beth Elovich, Walter William Smith, and James B. Ferguson (all appointed by former Governor Pataki). Governor Cuomo, who is the ultimate authority for the Board, must tell them and all commissioners: Either follow the law or find another job.

  1. Join the Fight for New Laws for Parole Justice

Two bills now before the New York State Legislature—the Safe and Fair Evaluation (SAFE) Parole Act (S.1728/A.2930), and Assembly Bill A,9960—would correct basic problems with New York’s parole practices. The Assembly bill (A.9960), for example, says:

…risk and needs assessments shall comprise presumptive evidence of the inmate’s risk of re-offense. Should the board choose to override such risk and needs assessments in deciding whether or not an inmate will iive and remain at liberty without violating the law, its decision must provide a detailed, individualized and nonconclusory statement as to its reasons for departing from the risk and needs assessment findings which shall be subject to judicial review. Such override decisions shall not be based solely on information relating to the instant offense and/or the pre-sentencing report for such offense.

Join RAPP, Parole Justice New York, and many other groups (more than 100 so far) in urging your representatives to pass these laws.

(Photo on homepage by Victoria Law)

Share

Filed Under: article, slideshow Tagged With: Aging, aging behind bars, aging in prison, clemency, Comments, elder parole, John MacKenzie, New York State Parole Board, NYS Parole Board, parole, parole board, Parole Comments, Parole Justice, parole reform, Parole Regs, Parole Regulation Comments, parole regulations, Public comments

January 29, 2016

RAPP Testifies to U.N. Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent

Share

New York, NY, January 26, 2016: RAPP testified at a fact-finding session held by the United Nations Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent. Along with other human rights advocates (full list and submissions here), RAPP delivered testimony on the racism that governs many structures of civil society—including a prison system that continues to incarcerate elders, most of whom come from communities of color—in the U.S. today.

ORAL TESTIMONY BEFORE THE
U.N. WORKING GROUP OF EXPERTS ON PEOPLE OF AFRICAN DESCENT

By Mujahid Farid, Lead Organizer
Release Aging People in Prison / RAPP
January 26, 2016

MASS INCARCERATION

We present on what has been called the human rights issue of the 21st century—mass incarceration in the U.S. One driver of mass incarceration is the reliance on a system of permanent punishment, a culture of retribution and revenge rather than rehabilitation and healing. And this revengeful culture is driven by what W.E.B. DuBois called the problem of the 20th century: “the color line.” In the 21st century this color line is reflected by mass incarceration.

PUNISHMENT PARADIGM  

Over the past 40 years we have witnessed the Implementation of draconian measures supporting accelerated punishments.

  1. These draconian punishments were first tested on dissenters—the so-called “canaries in the mines”—political prisoners.
  2. When there was no widespread outcry over them, we witnessed these punitive measures being applied on a wider scale.

The punishment paradigm has taken on such profound proportions that researchers now say it has morphed into the “carceral state,” having collateral consequences on every social and political institution. RAPP calls your attention to the negative impact it has on the elderly, which illustrates how it is not motivated by a concern about crime, or a concern about public safety, but is instead directly linked to the historical oppression and control of the Black population.

IMPACT OF DRACONIAN PUNISHMENT ON ELDERLY POPULATION

  • At the current rate of growth, it is projected that by 2030 there will be more than 400,000 older people behind bars, a 4,400 percent increase from 1981 when only 8,853 of the country’s incarcerated people were elderly.
  • Here in New York over the past 13 years, the overall prison population decreased by 23%, while during the same 13-year period the population of elderly people over 50 years of age increased by 81%
  • This increase occurred in New York even though it costs 2 to 4 times more to house an elderly person in prison compared with the average cost.

In New York State and elsewhere, the ballooning population of elders in prison can be tied to the failure of systems to utilize release mechanisms such as parole, compassionate release and clemency to avoid imprisoning people beyond the point when incarceration serves any useful purpose. So we find parole-eligible people being held twenty to thirty years beyond the time when they became eligible for release.

The continued imprisonment of people who have aged out of crime and pose little public safety risk truly expresses the revenge principle. It tells us that for some people—especially people of color—growth and change do not entitle you to a second chance.

REQUEST OF COMMITTEE AND WORKING GROUP

HELP SPREAD THE WORD—TELL THE WORLD THAT MASS INCARCERATION IN THE U.S. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CRIME OR CONCERNS OF PUBLIC SAFETY!

We ask that your report specifically:

  • Advocate for the imposition of independent monitoring of parole and release hearings in the U.S. to ensure that decisions reflect recognition of the human capacity to change and rehabilitate;
  • Advocate for the transparency of all parole and release practices.

Thank you for your time.

In Washington, DC, DCRAPP participated in a Town Hall for the Working Group to hear from the Black community directly impacted by issues like gentrification, police brutality, and gender oppression.

Read about the UN Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent.
Read about the Working Group’s fact-finding tour of the US.

 

Share

Filed Under: article, slideshow Tagged With: African Descent, aging in prison, aging people, incarcerated elders, mass incarceration, permanent punishment, punishment paradigm, U.N., UN, United Nations

November 13, 2015

Solving the Crisis of Aging in Prison: A Collaborative Report

Share

2015-11-13-collab-report-748x445pxThat the population of older people behind bars is a national crisis is not news. For almost a decade, reports have shown that as overall prison population numbers increase, the number of incarcerated people over the age of 50 increases at a much greater rate. And even when overall numbers hold steady or fall, the over-50 incarcerated population continues to rise.

News media across the country have written about frail or disabled people behind bars and the difficulties they face in a system designed to punish, not support, human beings even when they are young or in the best of health. In the midst of this crisis, RAPP has consistently argued that the best solution is to release vastly larger numbers of elders, because they have been proven to pose a minimal or non-existent risk to public safety.

Now that solution has found a place front and center in a publication of articles by former correctional and parole officials, academics, policy experts and analysts, human rights attorneys, and formerly incarcerated people. The Center for Justice at Columbia University has released the important policy paper, “Aging in Prison: Reducing Elder Incarceration and Promoting Public Safety.” On November 17,  the report was highlighted by The Marshall Project’s daily news roundup, The Opening Statement, as their “Report of the Day.”

“Aging in Prison” contains essays from presentations at a symposium held in March, 2014, at Columbia’s Mailman School of Public Health. That day-long event featured speeches by Brian Fischer, New York State’s former commissioner of corrections; Edward Hammock, former chair of the New York State Parole Board; Jamie Fellner, of Human Rights Watch; and a long list of prominent advocates for a more humane and less costly system of corrections, including formerly incarcerated people (see the  report’s table of contents for the full list).

All agreed that New York, as well as other states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons, can and should release many more older incarcerated people than they currently do. High on the list of recommendations for reform suggested by speaker after speaker (and featured beginning on page XVIII of the book) are: expanding and reforming the parole process to stop using the “nature of the crime” to bar release of older people serving long sentences, and passage of the Safe and Fair Evaluations (SAFE) Parole Act (S01728/A02930), as well as expanding the use of compassionate or medical release and clemency.

“Aging in Prison” deals with subjects fundamental to the human rights disaster of mass incarceration: the reliance on revenge instead of public safety to determine whether elders should be released; the tendency of prison reformers to focus only on non-violent cases, ignoring the human rights of people convicted many years ago for violent crimes; and the need for more creative re-entry approaches to allow elders and their communities to be reunified. As a result of the symposium, more than 30 organizations and individuals formed the Aging Reentry Task Force to  design just such a program. The pilot project they created forms an appendix to the book.

risk-is-low-button-transp-bkgd-160pxThroughout, the articles depict the specific ways in which criminal justice is determined at every step by racism.

Many speakers at the symposium wore buttons created by RAPP and reflecting the theme of the day: If the risk is low, let them go. “Aging in Prison: Reducing Elder Incarceration and Promoting Public Safety” provides extensive backup for that slogan. Read the report and then sign RAPP’s petition to release aging people in prison.

 

 

 

Share

Filed Under: article, slideshow Tagged With: Brian Fischer, Center for Justice at Columbia University, Edward Hammock, Human Rights Watch, Jamie Fellner, Mailman School of Public Health, Solving the Crisis of Aging in Prison

October 8, 2015

NY Parole Board Should Release More Elders

Share
Larry White (l) with the late Eddie Ellis

Larry White (left) receiving an award from the late Eddie Ellis in 2009

The Parole Board ignores its job of evaluating a person’s readiness for release, writes Jim Murphy in the Albany Times-Union, September 1, 2015 • “Too Much Time Spent in Prison” •

The late judge and former Assemblyman Richard Bartlett, a leader in the 1970s legislation reforming parole, once observed of the state’s parole board: “It is not the function of the board to review the appropriateness of the sentence. That is for the court to decide. Their role is to determine the suitability of release based on the inmate’s behavior while imprisoned and the likelihood of their reoffending.”

Yet many parole board members ignore Judge Bartlett’s remarks. Instead, they review the sentence to see if it has been long enough. The person’s current history and risk assessment are merely noted and dismissed, as if they are unimportant and irrelevant. They assume current danger based on the past crime with no other indicators.

Take the case of Mohaman Koti, who the board determined was, “At risk to commit another crime, and … create disrespect for the law” in denying him parole in 2013. At that time, Mohaman was 85 years old, with multiple medical problems and confined to a wheelchair. Sentenced to 25 years to life in 1978, he had been in prison for 35 years and had a low risk assessment and positive record. Luckily, on a 2014 appeal, a judge ruled that the board’s basis for denying him parole was irrational and called for a new hearing. After a split decision in one hearing, he won release that September.

The board’s reluctance to release aging felons shows in the state’s own statistics. Among older A1 felons who came before the board in 2014, six of the 11 who were older than 80, and 48 of the 59 who were aged 70 to 79, were denied parole.

However, when individuals convicted of felony murder are released, the statistics underline the weakness of asserting current danger. Between 1985 and 2009, 2,130 individuals sentenced for murder were released. Just 47, or 2.2 percent, were returned with a new conviction. None of them was convicted for a new murder.

To put a face on some of these individuals:

  • Larry White [in photo, with the late Eddie Ellis] was released in 2011 after serving 32 years and being denied four times. At 80, he remains a passionate advocate for criminal justice reform and is working with the American Friends Service Committee.
  • Mujahid Farid was released in 2011 after serving 33 years on a 15-to-life sentence. He was denied parole 10 times. Currently he is the chief organizer for Releasing Aging People in Prison.
  • Diana Ortiz was released in 2006 after serving 22 1/2 years on a 17-to-life sentence and being denied parole three times. She is now associate director of Exodus Transitional Services, an organization helping those returning from prison to live productive lives.
  • Shuaib Raheem, released in 2011 after serving 25 years on a 25-to-life sentence and being denied five times, is a career coach in the fatherhood initiative at the Osborne Association.

Why were these people released after being denied multiple times before? Were there new factors that made them eligible that had not been there before? Were their releases based on a change in their risk assessment of danger to the community? No. The simple answer is, there were different board members hearing their case.

The Parole Board is supposed to operate as a quasi -judicial body evaluating a person’s readiness for release with the tools appropriate for the task. But in its current form, it’s a lottery system, in which inmates who have done their time and pose no danger to the community have to rely on the luck of the draw.

Jim Murphy of Schenectady is a longtime advocate on criminal justice issues and parole reform.

Share

Filed Under: article, slideshow, Uncategorized

September 29, 2015

Gov. Cuomo: Get It Together & Do the Right Thing

Share

Saturday night, September 26, 2015 was not the first time Release Aging People in Prison/RAPP – along with about 100 or so other New Yorkers committed to ending mass incarceration and prison injustice – held up lighted candles outside Governor Cuomo’s home in Mt. Kisco. “Candles for Clemency” started last year, when we first stood outside the governor’s home, urging him to grow a heart and a spine and begin taking steps to reduce New York’s huge prison population.

The target issue of the Candles for Clemency vigils has been the governor’s executive power to release people from prison when other channels are not available. RAPP has been crucial to expanding these efforts, because we emphasize that, beyond clemency, the governor could also instruct his parole commissioners to release applicants when they clearly pose no danger to public safety.

CandlesPhoto-by-Al

Last year, Governor Cuomo did not appear at or respond to Candles for Clemency. This year the governor sent his counsel, Alphonso David, to address the crowd. And on the governor’s behalf, David insulted us all. He threw the burden for the governor’s lack of compassion (zero commutations in his five years in office) back on incarcerated people and their families. The obstacle, David said, has been the lack of “viable candidates” for commutation, a dearth of robust applications submitted to the governor. Individual candle-holders began to challenge David’s statements, calling them fabrications. After all, many people at the vigil had friends or family members who have in fact submitted files and papers requesting commutation—and who have waited in vain for a response.

But we don’t need to cite those files to expose the fabrications mouthed by David for his boss. All we need to do is look at the records of parole board releases—and denials.

There are more than 9,500 elders (people 50 and older) in the prisons of New York, and 2/3 of them have parole-eligible sentences. Put those numbers together with the regulations governing parole—the use of evidence-based methods for determining whether a person of, say, 62 years of age poses any risk of committing a crime of the nature he or she may have committed many decades earlier—plus the statistics showing that older people who have served long sentences pose the very lowest risk of recidivism, and you get a recipe for simultaneously promoting public safety and human rights. Yet Governor Cuomo and his administrators continue to deny some 75% of parole applicants over and over. That is a main reason why the population of people aged 50 and older in New York State prisons has risen by 81% since about 2000.

With a series of quick strokes of his pen (to sign clemency petitions) or just one phone call (instructing his parole board to do the right thing), the governor could put New York in the lead in ending the internationally embarrassing racist policies and practices that have filled prisons with people of color, damaging their families and destabilizing their communities. He could take the courageous—but totally sensible—step of releasing many elders, instead of turning prisons into nursing facilities. He could immediately save the millions of dollars being wasted on security and incarceration and funnel those funds into community health and welfare.

In other words, Governor Cuomo could be a leader. But first he desperately needs some heart. Instead of asking the community to nominate individual cases for clemency consideration, he, like the lion from the Wizard of Oz, should have asked us to help him find some courage. When he does that, we will know he truly cares about communities and justice.

Follow RAPP on Twitter @RAPPCampaign

 

Share

Filed Under: article, slideshow, Uncategorized Tagged With: Alphonso David, Andrew Cuomo, Candles for Clemency, clemency, elders, Governor Cuomo, Mt. Kisco, parole, RAPP, Release Aging People in Prison

June 30, 2015

NYC Community Boards Join Effort to Release Elders

Share

RAPP organizer Mr. Al Tony Simon urges Queens Community Board 12 to support releasing elders from the NYS prison system (shown with CB 12 Chairwoman Adrienne Adams). Tess McRae, Editor of Southeast Queens Press (queenspress.com), wrote the story and took the photos:

RAPP Aims To Get The Elderly Out Of Prison

notebk

RAPP advocate Tony Simon addresses Community Board 12. Photo by Tess McRae

BY TESS McRAE

When a serious crime is committed and a young individual is sent to prison for decades, it’s hard to imagine them as a senior citizen living behind bars. But more often than not, men and women over the age of 50 sit and eventually die in prison, even if they haven’t posed a threat to society for years.

At the June Community Board 12 meeting, representatives from the Release Aging People in Prison Campaign called on members to support their goal in changing the parole system to “resolve the crisis of aging behind bars.”

“I just served 30 years, I came into the prison system in 1981 and was released in 2013, but I made a transition while in prison,” Tony Simon, a former inmate and RAPP advocate, said. “So many young people make mistakes in life, end up with long-term bids and change as they age. They become positive assets to society through making amends and redeeming themselves.”

RAPP was established in 2013 by Mujahid Farid, who was incarcerated for 33 years after being denied parole nine times.

“Many of these human beings have transformed their lives and developed skills and abilities they lacked before incarceration.” Farid writes. “They could be released from prison with no threat to public safety. Yet many are denied release, often for political reasons, and needlessly remain imprisoned into old age. These elders could return to their communities if current mechanisms such as parole and compassionate release were correctly utilized.

According to Simon, elders pose the lowest threat when released from prison. Individuals ages 65 and older have a one percent chance of returning to a life of crime. Meanwhile, younger parolees have a 40 percent chance of recommitting a crime.

RAPP states that it costs the state more to keep senior citizens in prison. The group reports an annual cost of $120,000 to $240,000 per inmate each year. The expenses include daily needs and medical expenses. In 2013, 213 elders died in prison, but only eight were let out on compassionate release.

“What is going on here seems like genocide in its own right,” Simon said.

Community District 12 is among the top 12 districts where former inmates are being released in. It is because of this, RAPP asked the board to support their activism and help them petition the state in creating more transparent parole procedures and increasing access to compassionate release.

“We seek fair and objective hearings for everyone who comes before the Parole Board,” the RAPP website reads. “We will not try to expand release opportunities for certain classes of offenses by denying opportunities for others. Instead, we insist that decisions be made on each person’s individual merits and experiences inside.”

In addition to advocating more of the aging prison population to qualify for compassionate release, RAPP is developing a pilot program to work with seniors in their reentry and reintegration into society.

Reach Editor Tess McRae at (718) 357-7400 ext. 123, tmcrae@queenspress.com or follow her on Twitter @tess_mcrae.

– See more at: http://queenspress.com/rapp-aims-to-get-the-elderly-out-of-prison/#sthash.hXKAIaPS.dpuf

 

Share

Filed Under: article, slideshow Tagged With: aging behind bars, Al Tony Simon, Community Board 12, Queens, RAPP Campaign, Southeast Queens Press, Tess McRae

May 5, 2015

Mass Hype, Not Mass Clemency

Share

Read the fine print: Not one person will be released from prison — or even have their criminal record expunged — under Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s plan to grant “mass clemency on a level rarely seen.”

What we actually have is mass hype on a level rarely seen.

Those eligible are not prisoners. The few that meet a long list of conditions — including approval by local prosecutors and unnamed state officials — may be offered a nonbinding revocable conditional piece of paper that says a potential employer may, if they wish, hire the applicant despite his or her criminal history — which the applicant is still required to disclose.

Applicants would have been convicted of a low-level nonviolent crime when they were 16 or 17 years old, have had a clean record for 10 years, have not been convicted of a sex crime, are not in arrears on their taxes, have been evaluated by state officials, are adjudged productive members of their communities, are employed or seeking work or in school, and are approved by local prosecutors.

In the unlikely event that there is anyone left in the pool after all that, they would receive a conditional and revocable document that does nothing to remove their criminal record. They would still be required to check “yes” on any application that asks for criminal history.

If by any remote chance they then get a job interview anyway, they can present this piece of paper and the potential employer can do whatever they want with it.

The most enthusiastic supporter of mass incarceration could find nothing to complain about in this scheme. Cuomo gets the florid praise of the reformers, nobody gets out of jail (now or going forward) or gets any substantive relief from collateral consequences, the prosecutors are happy, the public is impressed, and mass incarceration goes on undisturbed.

New York’s criminal justice system needs real change, not window dressing.

This article, by Naomi Jaffe of Capital Area Against Mass Incarceration and Parole Justice New York, appeared in the Albany Times-Union under the headline, “Mass Clemency Plan Yet Another Injustice.” 

To fight for real change and an end to the cycle of permanent punishment, join RAPP and Parole Justice New York.

As published in The Times Union (Albany, NY, December 29, 2015)

Share

Filed Under: article, slideshow, Uncategorized Tagged With: clemency, Cuomo, incarceration, New York, pardon, parole

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Next Page »

Attend our monthly meetings!

First Weds. of each month.
6:00-8:15 pm
See our events page for location
• Pizza, soda and meeting
• For more information: nyrappcampaign123@gmail.com

See Us on Social Media

CONTACT US

RAPP, 168 Canal St., 6th Fl., NY NY 10013; 631-885-3565; nyrappcampaign123@gmail.com

Blog Posts

  • Tell Gov. Cuomo: Release Aging People in Adirondack Prison
  • Media Advisories, Press Releases, Briefings
  • End death by incarceration & advance parole justice—Join us on April 21

Copyright © 2021 by RAPP Campaign · info(AT)rappcampaign(DOT)com