A few days after my last blog posting about the 3000 inmates being given early release, I got an email saying TDOC said the news reports were wrong. As usual, we are not getting the truth. We also haven't seen a new report with clarifications on how many inmates are being given early release, or what type crimes these inmates are guilty of. Some say they think it's a good idea to release "non violent drug users." I say, we don't have people in prison who only have a charge that is equal to non-violent drug use, it is more likely that they were drug dealers, who didn't happen to have an associated charge that was violent in nature. Here's some even more disturbing data from TDOC: (click to see the report - release trends....)
As was seen in the 2001 report, recidivism rates vary dramatically by type of release.
♦ Felons released to parole:
♦ 23% 1-year failure rate: of 2,962 releases in 2002, 686 returned within one year;
♦ 41% 2-year failure rate: of 3,193 releases in 2001, 1,314 returned within two years;
♦ 50% 3-year failure rate: of 3,998 releases in 2000, 1,984 returned within three years.
♦ Felons released to probation:
♦ 30% 1-year failure rate: of 5,607 releases in 2002, 1,674 returned within one year;
♦ 44% 2-year failure rate: of 5,228 releases in 2001, 2,289 returned within two years;
♦ 49% 3-year failure rate: of 5,436 releases in 2000, 2,684 returned within three years.
♦ Felons released to expiration of sentence:
♦ 8% 1-year failure rate: of 4,408 releases in 2002, 336 returned within one year;
♦ 18% 2-year failure rate: of 4,025 releases in 2001, 722 returned within two years;
♦ 24% 3-year failure rate: of 3,981 releases in 2000, 966 returned within three years.
If you have data that says you are twice as likely to recommit crimes if you are given probation or parole, than if you serve your full sentence, why would the state give anyone probation or parole? The data says you can predict a failure rate of 50%, within the first three years of being released, if the prisoner doesn't serve out the full term of their sentence, but only 25% if the prisoner is incarcerated for the full term of the sentence.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting, but of course the answer is that Tennessee's legislators got too busy spending money on things besides law enforcement and corrections, which should come before everything, yes, including health care for the poor (Medicaid/Tenncare)and "education" (government's free or highly subsidized baby-sitting [K-12] and status-seeking [college] services.
I desperately need to contact you about a crime committed in 1994.I will keep checking back.
Post a Comment