NH- Slow Justice is no justice

6-15-2009 New Hampshire:

Justice served? Not even close.

A 43-year-old convicted rapist who served 22 years in prison for his crime is back in jail again following charges that he assaulted a woman at his Portsmouth apartment. The alleged assault took place while Charles Paul was free on bail on other charges. He was arrested on June 3.

Last week, Rockingham County Attorney Jim Reams took the unusual step of going public in questioning the judicial wisdom of the judge who ordered Paul freed on bail that included personal recognizance.

Reams is not the only one who should be raising his eyebrows over the action of Superior Court Judge Tina Nadeau. It is something to which attention should be given by the state's entire law enforcement community, judges and court administrators. It is something that should arouse the passions of people interested in justice for victims and the state's population as a whole.

While Reams stopped short of criticizing Nadeau as having made a mistake, his frustration was evident last week when said the court is failing to keep up with repeat offenders.

"It's an indication of how the whole criminal justice system is slowing down and unraveling. It shouldn't take between mid-April and July to get someone sentenced," said the veteran county attorney. Reams wanted the deferred sentence imposed immediately and Assistant County Attorney William Pate asked the judge to do so, but an audio recording of the hearing shows Nadeau wanted to wait to act on the request until July 1 at a sentencing hearing on his April 13 conviction.

The delay is inconsistent with the defendant's criminal record and the charges pending against him.

Reams' position is far more understanding of the situation and a just resolution than that of Nadeau.

"I think she thinks it makes her look in a better light ... we are baffled by it," said Reams. "We wanted him in jail as a result of (the April 13 conviction)" ... "his record is horrendous," said the Rockingham County Attorney.

Last week Judge Nadeau took the unusual step of requesting a written transcript when an assistant county attorney asked her to immediately impose a deferred sentence for Paul. The action is being seen by some people as a move by Nadeau to circle the wagons in preparation for a defense of her action in the case.

Judge Nadeau is assigned to the post of supervisory judge in the three-judge court that sits in Rockingham County.

Jim Reams speaking: Recidivism among sex offenders is high. A study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a division of the U.S. Department of Justice, released a study in 2008 which said sex offenders "were four times more likely to be arrested in for another sex crime after their release than non-sex offenders".

The study (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm#recidivism) also reported, "Of released sex offenders who allegedly committed another crime, 40 percent perpetrated the new offense within a year or less" of their release.

Oh how easy it is to misuse / misquote and/or misunderstand statistics:

Notice what Jim Reams picks to mention and what he fails to mention (quoted from his link):
-Within 3 years of release, 2.5% of released rapists were rearrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for a new homicide.

-Sex offenders were less likely than non-sex offenders to be rearrested for any offense –– 43 percent of sex offenders versus 68 percent of non-sex offenders.

-Sex offenders were about four times more likely than non-sex offenders to be arrested for another sex crime after their discharge from prison –– 5.3 percent of sex offenders versus 1.3 percent of non-sex offenders.

What Jim Reams quoted is technically correct, but what he failed to quote is the explanation of the quote. The first thing to notice is that BOTH sex offenders released and non sex offenders released, committed sex crimes after release (5.3% -v- 1.3%); that is a critically important fact. Now because I catch many folks misquoting this study, I have created a chart to graphically show what they fail to tell folks, see the following:

U.S. Dep't of Justice Recidivism Statistics: Sex offenders compared to non-sex offenders Who will commit more new sex offenses within 3-years of being paroled, sex offenders -OR- non-sex offenders? Non sex offenders commit more new sex offenses when paroled!

Recidivism Rates: All released sex offenders -vs- non-sex offendersSource: "Recidivism of Sex Offenders Released from Prison in 1994." (NCJ 198281). Released (Paroled) Offender Type Paroled ReArrested for New Sex Offense %/# of New Sex Offenses by Parolees Convicted of New Sex Offense 9,691 Sex Offenders 5.3% (517) 13% (1 every 2 days) 3.5% (339) 262,420 Non-Sex Offenders 1.3% (3,328) 87% (3 per day) .83% 2,179)** 272,111 All Offenders 1.4% (3,845) 100%   Construction of chart- DOJ Pg-24 states: Sex offenders compared to non-sex offenders: "The 15 States in this study released a total of 272,111 prisoners in 1994. The 9,691 released sex offenders made up less than 4% of that total. Of the remaining 262,420 non-sex offenders, 3,328 (1.3%) were rearrested for a new sex crime within 3 years." and "Based on official arrest records, 517 of the 9,691 released sex offenders (5.3%) were rearrested for a new sex crime within the first 3 years following their release (table 21)." and DOJ Pg-2 states: "Of the 9,691 released sex offenders, 3.5% (339 of the 9,691) were reconvicted for a sex crime within the 3-year followup period." **Calculated using same proportions between 517 and 339 for sex offenders. Voice of Reason: eAdvocate ©, Copyright 2006 - All Rights Reserved

Finally, I am not advocating for/against Charles Paul, I am merely trying to set the record straight on recidivism rates quoted from this Dep't of Justice study. Clearly Jim Reams either does not understand this study, or has not really read and analyzed it because if he did he would know, he is wrong!

eAdvocate

QUESTION: Should the community be more wary of the released sex offender, OR, the released non sex offender? You decide....

Charles Paul was released from prison in the spring of 2008.

We trust judges in our state are paying some attention to such statistics and their trends in order to keep up with what is going on in our society.

The case of Charles Paul and the way it has been handled by the court in Rockingham County is something that deserves the attention of people throughout New Hampshire — and maybe beyond.

No matter the outcome on July 1, a special panel of judges should be convened to review the way this matter was handled; not one that will build a defensive wall for colleague, but one that will examine how justice and the people of New Hampshire can be better served by their courts. ..Source.. by Foster's Daily Democrat