Resistance Behind Bars: The Struggles of Incarcerated Women

ALBANY, N.Y. — Kim Dadou spent 17 years in prison for manslaughter for shooting her boyfriend as he choked and threatened her in his car. She had called police several times before and used the gun he kept under the passenger seat to kill him.

She was sentenced to 8 1/3 to 25 years, denied parole five times and released in 2008. Now, New York advocates for women prisoners are pushing legislation to cut sentences for domestic violence victims like Dadou, who strike back at abusers or get coerced into committing other crimes.

"When you get caught up in these situations there's no one to protect you," said the 46-year-old Dadou, of Rochester. "Orders of protection are just pieces of paper."

Bill supporters argue that abuse victims pose little threat to anyone other than their abusers. They acknowledge the resentencing measures won't pass this year but say the debate should start following a study from Cornell Law School and the Correctional Association that found limited leniency now for "survivor-defendants."

"It is the beginning of the battle," said Assemblyman Jeffrion Aubry, a bill sponsor who chairs the Assembly Committee on Correction. "We think there are mitigating issues here a judge ought to be able to consider in crafting a sentence."

The bills would give judges discretion to cut a sentence for first-degree manslaughter, for example, from five to 25 years to one to five years, or to probation with alternative programs.

Prosecutors said victims already get consideration with lesser charges, like manslaughter instead of murder, and lower sentences than others convicted of serious crimes. Also, most domestic violence victims don't commit violence.

"We're trying to focus more on the front end" with efforts to jail abusers, said Franklin County District Attorney Derek Champagne, president of the state district attorneys' association. "There are times when it may not truly be self-defense."

Out of some 2,000 women in state prisons, fewer than 175 could have their sentences cut under Aubry's bill, according to the Correctional Association of New York, the study's co-author. However, more than 200 women are convicted every year for crimes directly related to their abuse and would be potentially eligible for alternate sentencing, said Tamar Kraft-Solar, director of the association's Women in Prison Project.

They canvassed 49 other states, and New York would be the first to enact such a law, Kraft-Stolar said.

Under the legislation, judges could impose alternative sentences if they find the defendant was a domestic abuse survivor, the abuse was a "significant contributing factor" in the crime and the sentence under the general statute would be "unduly harsh."

Some victims said it was not a simple matter of leaving an abuser. They said violence, threats and danger typically escalate when they threaten to leave and that children complicate any attempts to get out of the situation.

The report from Cornell's Avon Global Center for Women and Justice and the association's Women in Prison Project cited state parole statistics showing 80 percent of women sent to New York prisons for a violent felony in 2009 had no prior felony convictions. Of the 38 women convicted of murder and released between 1985 and 2003, not one returned to prison on a new crime in the next three years, the report found.

New York's 1998 sentencing reform, called "Jenna's Law," contained an exception for domestic violence victims from most tough fixed sentences for violent crimes. However, state Sentencing Commission reports a decade later noted the exception had been used only once, for a man who actually got a longer sentence that way.

The report recommended funding alternative programs to cut prison costs and reduce the impact on families, allowing those imprisoned for violent crimes to get merit time reductions and enacting legislation to permit shorter prison terms.

The report also cited a 1999 study of women in New York's Bedford Hills Correctional Facility finding 94 percent had been physically or sexually abused, and that 75 percent had experienced serious physical violence from an intimate partner as adults.

Link to the report: http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/womenandjustice/upload/From-Protection-... http://online.wsj.com/article/AP66b1beaff0c24042aeed61dfd113e00c.html

and in California...
Group seeks initiative to reform Three Strikes Law
By Tracey Kaplan
tkaplan@mercurynews.com
Posted: 06/14/2011

A coalition led by a group of Stanford University lawyers intends to put an initiative on the November 2012 ballot to reform California's Three Strikes Law, the harshest such sentencing law in the nation.

The group has secured at least one major financial backer, David W. Mills, a former investment banker and Stanford Law School professor. It also hired San Francisco political consultant Averell "Ace" Smith to lead what is expected to be a fiery campaign.

In addition, the group, including Stanford Law School's Three Strikes Project, is courting key Republicans such as Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley, at a time when fiscal conservatives have called for prison reform.

The Legislature and voters passed the Three Strikes Law in 1994 after several high-profile murders committed by ex-felons sparked public outrage, including the kidnapping and strangling of 12-year-old Polly Klaas from her home in Petaluma. Since then, the courts have sent more than 80,000 "second-strikers" and 7,500 "third-strikers" to state prison, according to the state Legislative Analyst's Office. As of late 2004, 26 percent of the prison population was serving time under the law.

A previous reform measure in 2004 failed by about 3 percentage points after a last-minute media blitz by then-Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown, then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Gov. Pete Wilson.

The language of the new initiative is still being worked out, but at the very least it would limit felonies that trigger the "third" strike to violent or serious crimes. In late 2004, about 3,500 -- or just less than half of the third-strikers in prison -- had not committed a serious or violent crime.

Under the existing law, people have received life sentences for such crimes as stealing a pair of socks, attempting to break into a soup kitchen to get something to eat and forging a check for $146 at Nordstrom.

Proponents note that the provision allowing prosecutors to charge any felony as a third strike is the harshest of some 24 similar laws in the nation, and contend it is unjust and a waste of taxpayer dollars. Supporters argue the law has reduced crime and kept the streets safer.

Backers are hopeful the measure will pass this time. One reason is the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that California must drastically reduce its prison population to relieve severe overcrowding; in a majority opinion, the court blamed a series of political decisions in the state during the past 30 years, including "the passage of harsh mandatory minimum and three-strikes laws.''

California's budget crisis also has thrown into sharp relief the need for the state to re-examine its priorities. The state currently spends 11 percent of its annual budget on prisons and 7.5 percent on higher education. Nonviolent third-strikers are expected to cost the state almost $200 million a year for the next 25 years, according to the state auditor.

The group is aggressively courting Cooley, a Republican who has long called for reforming Three Strikes, but opposed the 2004 initiative because he said it went too far. Cooley has said 25 years to life in prison is the same sentence he gives murderers, calling it "disproportionate" for relatively minor crimes.

Scaling back the law also has the support of some conservatives, including Right on Crime, a criminal justice reform movement whose signatories include Ed Meese, attorney general during the Reagan administration, and anti-tax advocate Grover Norquist.

"I don't think someone should be sent to prison for life when the third strike is relatively minor,'' said Marc Levin, one of the group's policy advisers. "It's better to have the sentence fit the crime. When you have these one-size-fits-all laws, it really inhibits you from prioritizing your prison space.''

The measure also could fare better next year than in 2004 because of the greater number of younger voters and minorities expected to turn out for President Barack Obama's re-election bid.

Proponents plan to formally kick off the campaign and submit the ballot language to the secretary of state sometime between August and early October.

The first three-strikers will be eligible for parole in March 2019.

The few dozen or so who have been released won their freedom through the cooperation of Cooley and other prosecutors, as well as Stanford law professor Mike Romano and students at the university's Three Strikes Project, a law school clinic.

LaDoris Cordell, a former Santa Clara County Superior Court judge who is now San Jose's independent police auditor, also obtained the release of the female three-striker in 2009 who wrote the bad check at Nordstrom.

To qualify for the ballot, the initiative needs 504,760 signatures. Political consultant Bill Zimmerman, who submitted a proposal to steer the campaign, estimated that organizers need about $10-15 million to win.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18273887?nclick_check=1