• February 23, 2019, 09:57:26 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Welcome to ILLINOIS PRISON TALK, www.illinoisprisontalk.org - A Family Support Forum and Information Center for those interacting with the Illinois Department of Corrections. IPT members are comprised of family/friends of inmates, prison reform activists, ex-offenders, prisoner rights advocates and others interested in the well-being of Illinois prisoners. We encourage open discussion but please be tolerant of other's opinions. This website is protected by Copyright © 2006-2019. All rights reserved. There are some private forums that require registration, please register.

Author Topic: Illinois State Commission on Criminal Justice and Reform  (Read 6030 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline trauma4us

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 689
  • Karma: 16
Re: Illinois State Commission on Criminal Justice and Reform
« Reply #20 on: February 16, 2017, 06:54:18 PM »
Okay so my son is incarcerated for a Class X home invasion with injury but not great bodily harm - I wonder if he would still be eligible under this law?

Offline willied

  • Jr. member
  • **
  • Posts: 32
  • Karma: 5
Re: Illinois State Commission on Criminal Justice and Reform
« Reply #21 on: February 19, 2017, 03:04:19 PM »
The Governor’s Commission on Criminal Justice and Sentencing 
      Proposal to amend Reform #19 of the “Commission on Criminal Justice and Sentencing Reform” (CJSR) final report.
    The new last paragraph to read:
 “Beginning on the date these changes take effect, inmates will earn credit on their current sentence for programs successfully completed.  Inmates shall also be granted credit for programs completed before the date these changes take effect.”
     Gov. Rauner’s CJSR gave insight to the root causes of Illinois’ high incarceration rate and high costs. .   (Page 7. Il Background, A. The role---).  The problems began in the 1970s and was twofold.  Old line policymakers responded to the spike in crime by adapting laws that broadened the number of crimes for which offenders could be imprisoned and increased the length of sentences.  There was also the shift in penal “philosophy”.  The same politicians agreed that “nothing worked” to rehabilitate offenders.  The most effective response was to use increasing incarceration.  This trend continued with unenlightened politicians passing “Truth in Sentencing” (T-i-S) laws.
     The CJSR itself makes a strong case for extending the ability to earn sentencing credit to inmates sentenced under the “T-i-S” laws.  (pages 56-60)  They state (p.59),  “These restrictions are counterproductive.  As is true with other inmates, most of the large group of “T-i-S” inmates will be released at some future date, and society has an equally compelling interest in these inmates learning the skills and confronting the problems that contributed to their criminal behavior. The commission therefore recommends that inmates sentenced under “T-i-S” laws be eligible for prison programming and sentence credit on comparable terms as other inmates, …”.
     The commission then contradicts their thinking with regard to inmates who have already completed these programs, learned new skills, and confronted their problems.  WHY?  These inmates have taken it upon themselves to learn and understand their problems, seek thru available programs to correct their problem areas and learn new skills/job skills to prepare themselves for successful re-entry into society.  They have proven their desire to improve, all without the incentive of sentence credit.  Will inmates now take programs/classes to improve, or primarily for sentence credit?
     How can the Commission justify the position that from an arbitrary date, inmates with similar offences can earn sentence credits by taking programs/classes, while denying these same credits to inmates who have previously completed these same programs/classes?   Will IDOC allow inmates to re-enter the same programs/classes for credit?  Shouldn’t everyone have an equal opportunity to sentence credits?
     For fairness, amend Reform #19 as proposed.
Thank you     willied
William Oliver Deere