|
Comment on this article |
Email this Article
|
|
Piland Offers Evasions: Opportunity for Public to Confront Him on Oct. 27 |
Current rating: 0 |
by chris
(No verified email address) |
16 Oct 2004
|
|
|
I wanted to remind everyone about John Piland's debate with Julia Rietz on WDWS on I believe Oct. 27. I am hoping plenty of callers will confront Piland again on some key issues of his current administrating of justice, such as it is.
Watching the debate at the Levis Faculty Center the other night, I noticed Mr. Piland had some angry ideas and some contradictions he uses to explain away the reason he needs to leave office: he is too harsh on people of color and the poor, yet is willing to let a select few people who do just as serious if not more serious crimes off with light sentences. He has given his office over to the police for legal advice. "We want this person charged heavy" is not a call the policeman gets to make.
Piland likes to say the following: "There are only a handful of people who do crimes in this county and we have been aggressive in going after these few people."
Then if that is the case: why is it necessary to have 622 people sent to prison in 2002 [that's what he wrote in his campaign literature]? Has he sent that many of people in 2003? What did they do to get sent to prison? Were they sent to prison for drugs or violence? How is it he doesn't know the numbers if he is able to count such a specific amount of incercerated individuals? Who is he sending to prison? Mostly blacks? Mostly young people?
Piland likes to explain his failure to charge Luther Head, the U of I basketball player, for home invansion and burglary in November of '03, that it's not necessary to punish young people permanently for youthful, poor judgments. That explains why U of I students rarely suffer rough circumstances for their behavior.
If that's the case: why does the Public Defender's office say he is overcharging people with heavy felonys for small, criminal behavior? Why is retail theft and shoplifting treated as a Class 4 felony buglary under his administration? Why is the felony docket call so overcrowded now at the courthouse?
Mr. Piland says he didn't charge Luther Head because he is sensitive to what the victims in a crime wish to have happen and in that case, he didn't want the victims to go through the media circus that would have been involved in that kind of a high profile case.
So the question is: Did he consult with the victims of the Brady Smith case? What would the victims have said to the idea of his office plea bargaining out a $10 fine and probation for the person that molested them? Or was that a "youthful bad judgment" on the part of mid-40 year old Mr. Smith that Piland didn't want to punish permanently?
Just some ideas to maybe question Mr. Piland with when he comes on the show Oct. 27.
Editors Note
This article originally appeared as a comment to the following article:
http://www.ucimc.org/feature/display/20523/index.php |
Related stories on this site:
Vote NO to John Piland - He doesn't care about Crime or Justice, just his own selfish interest and promotion
|
