I completed my last final exam today, but I still have one more assignment that I have to finish. It’s due before 11:59 PM tonight, which is why I’ve been procrastinating on it, but my time is ticking down and I should finish it up soon.
The assignment involves finding a news story related to some aspect of law, analyzing it, explaining how it relates to law, and giving potential solutions to resolve the issue presented by the news story. Apparently Lindsay Lohan was sentenced earlier today, so I’m probably going to write about that.
UPDATE: I finished my final assignment of the semester and I decided to throw it up here, seeing as I haven’t been putting much content up on my website lately because of final exams. I didn’t really plan this paper out so it’s a little bit unfocused, and the conclusion that it proposes isn’t well-supported, but it fulfilled all the requirements of the prompt and it was for extra credit, so I didn’t spend extra time going back to revise it.
According to an article published by CNN on the evening of May 11, 2011, a judge sentenced actress Lindsay Lohan to 120 days in jail for stealing a necklace. This misdemeanor theft conviction is a part of a string of convictions that Lohan has received since her drunken driving arrest in 2007.
A fact presented in this article that caught my attention was that although the judge sentenced Lohan to 120 days in jail, she might only end up staying in jail for two weeks or possibly not at all. According to Los Angeles County Sheriff spokesman Steve Whitmore, due to budget constraints and jail overcrowding, they are required to run sentences through mandatory early release formulas that reduce the sentence down to about 20%. In Lohanâs case, because her conviction was for a non-violent crime, she may qualify to serve her sentence in home confinement.
I personally would have no problem with the early release formulas if they were applied on a case-by-case basis after reviewing each individualâs circumstances. However, being mandated to apply a reduction formula for everybody will inevitably cause problems.
Sentences and their lengths are determined based on the severity of the crime as the society sees it. If sentences are reduced overall, the magnitude of the crime gets buffered, and crimes that should be seen as severe do not hold proper intensity. This affects the convict directly because (s)he may not perceive his/her crime as a bad action to the actual degree that (s)he should. In order to counter this, some judges may start using their discretion to the fullest extent and give harsher sentences â for example, for a crime with a range of potential punishments, judges may predispositionally lean towards the harsher side.
In Lindsay Lohanâs specific case, it appears that whatever punishment she has received and is receiving is not sufficient to rehabilitate her from her criminal mind and turn her into a more moral and ethical person. Because of the huge reductions in sentences, it may be giving Lohan the impression that she can continue doing what sheâs doing and not have to face huge consequences. In her public statement, she acts as if she is unfazed by the sentence: “I am glad to be able to put this past me and move on with my life and my career. ⦠I support the judge’s decision and hold myself accountable for being in this situation.”
According to research done on incarceration compared to other forms of punishment, incarceration has the highest rate of recidivism. According to research done on zero-tolerance policies compared to rehabilitation-centralized policies, zero-tolerance policies tend to generally only increase the amount of crime. By placing people in jail in the first place, we are increasing the chances of them committing more crimes in the future and coming back in jail. This ends up becoming counterproductive because the immediate action we are taking to reduce overcrowding will ultimately end up putting more people in jails and prisons.
I think that instead of placing convicts in jail and prison for fractions of their sentences, we should either take an all-or-nothing approach. First-time offenders and non-violent offenders should not be incarcerated at all to avoid exposing them to the jail and prison setting, and instead, their full sentence should be served via other methods. Repeat offenders should be incarcerated for their full sentence rather than having it run through a reduction formula. This will not only maintain the level of intensity of each crime and honor the judgeâs decision when a sentence is made, but it will also help control overcrowding. Instead of bringing new people into jail, those spots would be taken by people serving longer sentences.
So Far in 2011…
Number of Taco Bell tacos eaten: 24
Number of times I did my own laundry: 3