In Cook County Jail, you can find senior citizens who’ve done two decades or more of time for a nonviolent offense, had plenty of opportunity to rethink their lives and now represent no real danger to anyone. Cannot reasonable people agree that there is a case for rethinking their initial sentence with a view to letting them out before they die in jail?
There’s ample evidence that older people commit less crime. And once a person reaches a certain point in their lives, additional years of incarceration serve no obvious purpose. On the contrary, some of these longtime inmates could be out telling their stories to young people, suggesting an alternate path. They are well positioned to do so.
That’s why we’re sympathetic to the idea of Cook County prosecutors going back to court to suggest that in certain cases, a new, more measured sentence might now be more appropriate. Perhaps a thief has come to care much less about stealing fancy cars or designer duds. Maybe someone doing time for drug possession (in some cases, a lot of time) has gotten clean in jail and no longer will touch the stuff. And drug use doesn’t just result in prosecutions for drug offenses; addiction fuels many other crimes.
The problem is that the office of Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx has done little to engender trust when it comes to keeping violent offenders off the streets. In a different context, her new initiative would have received a far more sympathetic reception across the political spectrum. But Foxx only has herself to blame for that.
The plan involves prosecutors carefully selecting inmates whose sentences (in the words of the new state law) “no longer advance the interests of justice.” They’ll then have to make their case before a judge and there will be an opportunity for victims to object to any leniency. But if the judge agrees, those sentences then can be reduced.
Some have argued that this is not the job of a prosecutor and that such a mechanism already is in place. The governor can pardon the offender. That’s true, but such pardons should be rare, and no one should be under the illusion that such decisions can be made without the influence of political campaigning and influence peddling.
Under the new state law allowing for the reconsideration of sentences, no one is suggesting a pardon: merely that as time has gone on, and the prisoner has aged, a shorter sentence might now be appropriate. There’s a certain logic to the people who sought the prosecution now looking at the offender in the context of their status in the present day. This is not the same thing as parole. But it might increase the value of the state’s attorney’s office to the entire community, and change perceptions people have of it.
We’d add that we don’t love the idea of Foxx’s office getting input from Precious Blood Ministry of Reconciliation, a Back of the Yards-based community organization, or any other outside group or even the defendants’ attorneys. If the office wants to embrace this initiative, it should do its own research. And contrary to what Foxx implied in the announcement of the plan earlier this month, these nonviolent offenders should be considered without regard to their race.
The downside, of course, is that Foxx’s office has failed to prosecute too many violent offenders who have returned to the streets, compromising public safety and not only obliterating public trust but causing rebellion among even some of the attorneys in her own office. That’s why this new scheme is hard to swallow.
If Foxx can use this initiative to fulfill her goal of more just and humane sentencing, perhaps that will help her focus on prosecuting violent criminals who don’t need to be in Chicago’s most vulnerable neighborhoods.
Here’s what she should have said when she announced this program: We’re going to do this where we believe it will be safe for everyone and fair and compassionate to the offender. And at the same time, we’re going to acknowledge that we have done a poor job of prosecuting new violent offenders and keeping our neighborhoods safe. The two are linked at the hip.
Good luck hearing anything of the sort. But looking anew at aging prisoners with long sentences is a solid, humane idea. It offers reformed inmates hope, which is something we can all use.
