|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
John Piland's Slush Fund Comes Home To Haunt Him |
Current rating: 0 |
by Mike Lehman
(No verified email address) |
17 Dec 2000
|
EDITORIAL
Which is morally more questionable: writing a bad check or politically profiting from those who do? |
A special prosecutor has been ordered appointed in a case involving what appears to be a political slush fund operated by Champaign County State's Attorney John Piland. Piland has contracted with a California-based company, American Corrective Counseling Services, for a bad-check restitution program.
The Dec. 16 edition of the News-Gazette (and other recent issues) has outlined how the program, run by ACCS, mis-identifies itself on correspondence to bad-check writers as being part of the state's attorney's office and then gives offenders a chance to avoid prosecution in exchange for a fee, on top of restitution, by paying ACCS $125 for "counseling". An ACCS employee has been allowed to use the official seal of the State of Illinois on her business card, which identifies her as being a direct employee of Piland's office.
It appears that the counseling consists of a brief class in why you shouldn't write bad checks. A part of the 10% kickback from the gross income from this scheme pays for the classes, but the real payoff for Piland is where the bigger part of the money in this fund seems to be going. Advertising is being bought on a regular basis in such publications as the News-Gazette, attributing this 'benefit' to the good graces of his office.
This shakedown scheme of the state's attorney is typical of many recent moves to "privatize" our justice system. Along with private prisons, schemes such as the one being engaged in here remove more and more of our constitutional rights beyond the scrutiny of Constitutional protection and judicial oversight. The impact of this is especially acute for low-income working people. They are the ones most susceptible to the economic coercion of such a system, unable to afford a credible defense, while being the ones most likely to have committed such an offense due to circumstances beyond their control.
It is unclear how the responsible exercise of prosecutorial discretion can occur under such ethically-challenged circumstances. Involving a profit-making motive in our justice system only discredits it. Removing our constitutional rights beyond judicial oversight and placing them under the control of profit-driven management undermines the legitimacy of any deserved punishment. When the character of justice a citizen receives is reflected in how much they can afford, we are all the poorer in this country. |
|
N-G and Piland |
by scumbag
scumbagbastard (nospam) usa.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
17 Dec 2000
|
Not sure how this relates or doesn't...
But the News-Gazzette failed to endorse Piland in November's election, choosing instead to endorse his Dem. opponent.
|
