Friday, April 03, 2009
INMATES HELP BUILD NEW ADDITION TO JAIL IN BERKELEY COUNTY SOUTH CAROLINA
In Inmates Help Build New Addition to Jail WCIV TV tells the story of "inmates [whose] lives [are being turned] around by building a new jail."
At first blush, the article presents uplifting news. But, closer inspection reveals that this story is less than heartwarming.
As would be expected in a workforce of non-violent county inmates, some of the workers are apparently "Deadbeat Dads" like "49-year-old Donald Clark [who has] been locked up since January for issues related to child support" and [who] is happy to be outside and get[ting] fresh air instead of sitting in there and just looking at the TV."
Mr. Clark gets fresh air, but no reduction in his sentence and no income to apply to his increasing child support obligation. The citizens of Berkeley County get a bill for guarding, housing, and feeding Mr. Clark. The Contractor gets free "voluntary labor" which results in reduced overhead and higher profits. The Berkeley County Sheriff's Office likely profits in some way off the increased jail population. However, the ex-wives, ex-girlfriends and children of Mr. Clark and the other inmates get nothing and, in the meantime, the total child support arrearage in South Carolina continues to increase algebraically. So, overall, this is not a heartwarming story. And any public policy that allows the commercial use of either slave labor or uncompensated "voluntary labor" provided by people incarcerated for not meeting their child support obligations--whichever the case may be--is both an immoral public policy and a wasteful public policy.
In Inmates Help Build New Addition to Jail WCIV TV tells the story of "inmates [whose] lives [are being turned] around by building a new jail."
At first blush, the article presents uplifting news. But, closer inspection reveals that this story is less than heartwarming.
As would be expected in a workforce of non-violent county inmates, some of the workers are apparently "Deadbeat Dads" like "49-year-old Donald Clark [who has] been locked up since January for issues related to child support" and [who] is happy to be outside and get[ting] fresh air instead of sitting in there and just looking at the TV."
Mr. Clark gets fresh air, but no reduction in his sentence and no income to apply to his increasing child support obligation. The citizens of Berkeley County get a bill for guarding, housing, and feeding Mr. Clark. The Contractor gets free "voluntary labor" which results in reduced overhead and higher profits. The Berkeley County Sheriff's Office likely profits in some way off the increased jail population. However, the ex-wives, ex-girlfriends and children of Mr. Clark and the other inmates get nothing and, in the meantime, the total child support arrearage in South Carolina continues to increase algebraically. So, overall, this is not a heartwarming story. And any public policy that allows the commercial use of either slave labor or uncompensated "voluntary labor" provided by people incarcerated for not meeting their child support obligations--whichever the case may be--is both an immoral public policy and a wasteful public policy.
Labels: Inmate Labor
Comments:
<< Home
I was in Family Court with my attorney sometime back (never go without one.) The first case was a guy led in shackles. No telling how long he had been locked up. The judge was a visiting judge. He reviewed the case and noted a question about whether or not the man's children had reached the age of 18. The clerk was supposed to get that information before the hearing. They had not so the Judge asked the guy when his kids turned 18. There were three and they had all turned 18 since around 2002. His arrearage had been ongoing and included child support he owed after the kids turned 18. After the inmates statement the judge turned to the Clerk, asked her to come back with a calculation that did not include all the additional child support, had the marshall lead the guy out of the courtroom with a statement that he would be brought back once the clerk had calculated the correct arrearage and a request to the clerk to get it done as soon as possible.
So how long has this guy been locked up? Who knows. Is he still there? could be. Does he owe all the money that he was alleged to? obviously not. But he probably makes a great day laborer so why not keep him for a little longer?
So how long has this guy been locked up? Who knows. Is he still there? could be. Does he owe all the money that he was alleged to? obviously not. But he probably makes a great day laborer so why not keep him for a little longer?
# posted by 
: 3:55 AM
: 3:55 AM
This is heartbreaking. Both for the guy and the South Carolina families who are owed $1.5 Billion in back child support.
There is no other way around it. DSS and the CSED in South Carolina are not part of the solution--they are a large part of the problem.
Anyone in South Carolina with complaints about being locked up for owing small amounts of child support or for being owed any amounts of child support should telephone Larry McKeon at 1-800-768-5858 and ask him when he is going to get this mess cleaned up. And parents who are owed money should insist that the contractors who received voluntary labor from their ex-spouses report the "gifts" on their income tax returns.
There is no other way around it. DSS and the CSED in South Carolina are not part of the solution--they are a large part of the problem.
Anyone in South Carolina with complaints about being locked up for owing small amounts of child support or for being owed any amounts of child support should telephone Larry McKeon at 1-800-768-5858 and ask him when he is going to get this mess cleaned up. And parents who are owed money should insist that the contractors who received voluntary labor from their ex-spouses report the "gifts" on their income tax returns.
Why not make the hiring a tax incentive for the contractor? Allow the contractor to pay the inmate a reasonable rate given his experience, "pay" the inmate via payments to custodial parent and kids that apply against the arrearage and give the contractor a deduction since he is trying to work within the system and put up with the nonsense of government contracting. The State could fund technical education/rehab centers from all the money they save on construction costs.
In theory, your idea is very good. In practice, the use of inmate labor has been abused. (Use the search engine on this site to "google" "inmate labor" and/or "Sheriff.") The Sheriffs who control the jails have gotten rich at the taxpayers' expense.
Remember too, only "deadbeats" who are able to pay but refuse to do so are supposed to be placed in jail and then only until they meet their obligations. This is how "Civil Contempt" works--coercion rather than punishment is the goal. If a person who lacks the means to meet his obligations is incarcerated, then the process is tainted. Moreover, society then has to absorb the costs of feeding both the incarcerated person and his family during the period of his incarceration.
People outside of the system think that only jerks and ne'er-do-wells end up in jail for Civil Contempt. As one person wrote, about Mr. Clark "so...he went to jail for not paying his child support (after how many warnings?) and now we are to let him out so he can "get a job" and still not pay his child support? Tell me that is not what this article suggests! His ex wife and children very well may not be any better off if he gets out of jail. Seems like they are the same either way. Everyone knows the rules when they choose to break them."
In reality, there is no consistent standard applied by the Trial Judges who make the decisions regarding who is wilfully disobeying an Order and who is unable to pay. In fact, we know of a case in which a man was held in Contempt and jailed after being told by his lawyer that the other side had misinterpreted the Order, he did not owe the money, and that he should not pay it. Eventually, the Trial Judge's Ruling was reversed and the "Court Fess" accessed against the man were returned. It only cost the man $10,000 to clear his name.
The system is broken and needs to be repaired.
Remember too, only "deadbeats" who are able to pay but refuse to do so are supposed to be placed in jail and then only until they meet their obligations. This is how "Civil Contempt" works--coercion rather than punishment is the goal. If a person who lacks the means to meet his obligations is incarcerated, then the process is tainted. Moreover, society then has to absorb the costs of feeding both the incarcerated person and his family during the period of his incarceration.
People outside of the system think that only jerks and ne'er-do-wells end up in jail for Civil Contempt. As one person wrote, about Mr. Clark "so...he went to jail for not paying his child support (after how many warnings?) and now we are to let him out so he can "get a job" and still not pay his child support? Tell me that is not what this article suggests! His ex wife and children very well may not be any better off if he gets out of jail. Seems like they are the same either way. Everyone knows the rules when they choose to break them."
In reality, there is no consistent standard applied by the Trial Judges who make the decisions regarding who is wilfully disobeying an Order and who is unable to pay. In fact, we know of a case in which a man was held in Contempt and jailed after being told by his lawyer that the other side had misinterpreted the Order, he did not owe the money, and that he should not pay it. Eventually, the Trial Judge's Ruling was reversed and the "Court Fess" accessed against the man were returned. It only cost the man $10,000 to clear his name.
The system is broken and needs to be repaired.
So let me get this right, this guy was found guilty of contempt even though the order was not clear and thrown in jail until he paid up.
He gets out and appeals the ruling and the Appeals court says the judge was wrong, he gets his Court fees back and the ex gets to keep the money even though he wasn't in contempt. After spending all that money and I would imagine a good bit of time he was able to get rid of his record, and this was for civil contempt.
I thought that when you paid your money you cleared the charge and everything just went away. If I got this right, the bottom line is that anyone that is jailed for civil contempt has a criminal record and they can't get rid of it even though they have done what they are supposed to do.
That sounds a lot more like you would punish a criminal instead of some one involved in a civil law suit.
How the heck can anybody, once they have a criminal record, ever expect to get a decent job again? I guess Martha Stewart did it.
But every job application I have ever filled out asks you that and then tells you to explain it on a separate piece of paper. I guess Martha doesn't have to do that since she owned the company.
He gets out and appeals the ruling and the Appeals court says the judge was wrong, he gets his Court fees back and the ex gets to keep the money even though he wasn't in contempt. After spending all that money and I would imagine a good bit of time he was able to get rid of his record, and this was for civil contempt.
I thought that when you paid your money you cleared the charge and everything just went away. If I got this right, the bottom line is that anyone that is jailed for civil contempt has a criminal record and they can't get rid of it even though they have done what they are supposed to do.
That sounds a lot more like you would punish a criminal instead of some one involved in a civil law suit.
How the heck can anybody, once they have a criminal record, ever expect to get a decent job again? I guess Martha Stewart did it.
But every job application I have ever filled out asks you that and then tells you to explain it on a separate piece of paper. I guess Martha doesn't have to do that since she owned the company.
Use the search engine on this site to "google" "expungement." Currently, there is no method in South Carolina to expunge arrest records and jail records related to civil contempt. Technically, this is not a criminal conviction, but the State still obtains your mug shot and your fingerprints and (conceivably) your DNA. Where they go, nobody knows.
Post a Comment
<< Home
