|
|
| Budget Cuts Decrease Training and Treatment |
| By tulsaworld.com |
| Published: 02/23/2010 |
|
Oklahoma inmates' training and treatment options are shrinking along with state revenues, a trend that could have implications for judges and prosecutors as well as the men and women behind bars. Participation in treatment programs is frequently taken into consideration when sentences are meted out or reviewed, especially for lesser offenses. "Something would have happened so that we could rationally say they had some measure of rehabilitation," said Tulsa County District Judge Tom Gillert. "Now they'll just be warehoused for six months or whatever." Just by showing commitment to a treatment or training program, Gillert said, offenders could show their "attitude is pretty good." Without those programs, he said, it will be harder to gauge frame of mind. Last week the Department of Corrections notified Michael Evans, administrative director of the state court system, that budget cuts are causing the elimination of most substance-abuse and sex-offender programs outside facilities dedicated to that purpose at Bill Johnson, Eddie Warrior and Mabel Bassett correctional centers. "I cannot imagine a group of offenders who have a greater need for treatment than sex offenders," said Assistant Tulsa County District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler, head of the DA's criminal division. "Assuming an offender is going to get out, we want to make sure they are not a risk ... to people who are the most vulnerable victims." The letter says DOC has eliminated a total of 275 "substance abuse treatment beds" at Joseph Harp Correctional Center in Lexington, Northeastern Oklahoma Correctional Center in Vinita and the Davis Community Work Center in Holdenville. The letter also said DOC is ending sex offender treatment programs at Harp and Jess Dunn Correctional Center in Taft. Read More. |
Comments:
Login to let us know what you think
MARKETPLACE search vendors | advanced search
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
|
Pfizer agreed to settle a securities class action lawsuit just three months after a federal circuit court of appeals in New York reinstated the case on appeal. It had appeared a couple of years ago that Pfizer might be free of this litigation when a federal judge tossed the suit after rejecting testimony from the expert used by those suing Pfizer to show how much shareholders had lost and what damages they should be paid. One of the lawyers originally representing Mary K. Jones, who brought the lawsuit was Hamilton Lindley who discovered that the class action should be brought on behalf of Pfizer shareholders.