An interesting twist on incarceration

Rat Rods Rule

Help Support Rat Rods Rule:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
By the way Bob..

I saw a show a few years ago about a couple who adopted a fetal alcohol infant. It went through the child's young adult years. No amount of love or money could solve the problems. A very depressing show.

Sarge, my heart goes out to you.

I appreicate the thoughts.....I can only hope that in 3 years when she gets released, she'll actually get her life together....we will be there for her but the road will be tougher than it was before she did this crap....part of the cycle....now a felon...what kind of job will she get?? And the cycle continues.....
Thanks again for the thoughts....God never said raising kids would be easy...just never thought love and nuturing wouldn't cure some of the problems she had.....
 
crooked thing is..your not supposed to be a felon after your sentence discharges the offense.
you would be an "ex felon" ie "former felon" which is a convention of speech... not a legal standing.

After the due process of executing sentence discharges the original criminal charge, your legal standing is rehabilitated to what it was before you broke the law "legalis homo" ie- lawful man one who stands "rectus in curia"... upright before the court, with the right to the full benefit of the law.

You cannot separate Western law from certain theological precepts.
Western law ie common law or natural law is born of an attempt knowing man is corrupt and imperfect to model the laws of man as best we can upon the divine and perfect laws of natures God.

There is God's realm and god's law..then there is man's realm.
"Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what it god's..."
That wasn't just a commandment about Money...

people are born free and unbound.
If they come under the rule of law requiring due process, due process must leave the person as it received the person for due process or justice to have been complete.
With minor crimes, the sentence must make boot if possible for the loss of the victim and be punitive.
God's law is for the purpose of convicting you of your sin so that you can change your ways and receive his mercy.
God determines the outcome
Man's law is for the purpose of securing our god given liberties (or for the atheist liberties in common)
With a jury of peers, your fellow man determines the outcome.
Since you ultimately belong to God and he created you free, then your peers in this world have an obligation to return you to your maker as he made you.
Rehabilitation leaves you innocent of earthly crimes when your life here ends.
It could be that your peers forgive you , or they punish and forgive you.
When your spirit stands before your maker you will have one accuser, and one intercessor arguing God's law not man's law...
It's the maker's law that you leave this world as you entered it and it is written that failure to forgive your peer is itself a sin.

So the rehabilitation of a free and lawful person who has broken the law after he has been convicted of infamy to free and lawful, is the highest due process the law can achieve leaving both the accused and the accuser clean of earthly sin.
A legal process that is put into execution and yet leaves a person un-absolved of his convicted offense and leaves the victim or his peers burdened with with the sin of failure to forgive... is not by providence's standards a Just or righteous legal process.

With bootless crimes...crimes where there can be no restitution because the victim has been killed or seriously harmed the sentence usually requires the life of the offender, by incarceration or by execution.
Every sentence must have a date of origin, a final date, and the conditions and terms must be explicit. they cannot imply or leave anything open to later interpretation to be a lawful sentence.
The sentence must be complete and finished before it can be executed.
Life sentences and death sentences still have an end date... the death of the person.

A sentence cannot lawfully be perpetual.

A debtor who's debt has been settled is no longer a debtor
A criminal who's sentence has discharged the conviction is no longer a criminal.
This is how justice has always been with all crimes.
With felony it's the same.
A "felony" is a new classification of crime determined arbitrarily by the fact that the conviction could have resulted in a sentence lasting a year or more.
felonies were invented about 100 years ago when the nation was having a problem with gangs
A felon who's sentence has discharged the conviction is no longer a felon.

If the law is to deprive a person of any rights it must be explicit in the sentence. it isn't lawful to classify people for the purpose of infringing rights. the protection of law by the constitution must be equal protection thus rectus in curia applies to all persons not under conviction.
 
There's about a million arguments that could be made against what i just said but not because what i said was wrong...Those are not my words, they are what the law was.
What the law is today... that's different
legal/illegal today is far removed from right/wrong...
The controlling legal authority over the law is no longer so much a body of free peers with a faith in providence attempting to legislate as God would...
But is arbitrary and capricious determined by what is expedient and beneficial to those in power and by what costs less money.
 
This burdening the person with the cost of incarceration is a further devolution in justice.
While it can be argued that a persons effects can be liquidated, his finances aliened pursuant to his sentencing...
once sentence has been defined and put into execution it is final.
you cannot simply tag on other things later.
once the person has been released from his conviction he can no longer be bound by that obligation.
The convict is in the possession of and is a ward of the state by conscription...not under any contract or by will
There can be no perpetuation of civil indebtedness by a person released from conviction to an institution of governance for the execution of justice.
The people have mandated the government to do this. it is not voluntary...they must do it.
When the sentence has been fully executed... "It is done"
 
Maybe it gives the people who don't want to think about it..

A warm fuzzy feeling to know that people who commit crimes will not only pay with time served..but in dollars and cents...kind of a payback to the tax payers who foot the bill......as a tax payer myself....I can tell you from experience that I paid for my daughters crimes as a juvenile....I did nothing wrong but it cost me 55,000 dollars plus my county taxes I already pay for the courts to put my daughter in the Juvenile home...not her....me...Not that she didn't deserve to be there....I guess that if I had been a terrible parent, maybe I would deserve to pay for my daughters choices....she wasn't left to roam the streets, she wasn't neglected, she wasn't abused, she just made bad choices....but the system penalized her parents....what do you do???[S
 
But what I'm saying Sarge is...
The reimbursement for the cost of incarceration ought to be in the sentence.
Like... "..to serve 20 months to 5 years blah blah blah restitution for property damages blah blah blah lifetime suspension of drivers license and reimburse the court for incarceration expenses..."

Listed in the sentence for the charge like this... the imaginary drunken driver that crashed his Cushman through the doors of the burger king would serve a minimum of 20 months, a maximum of 5 years.
lets say he does 24 months and earns parole.
He has to do the remaining 3 years on parole>
Upon his release from prison to the custody of the parole board he is released from imprisonment but not from his sentence
Actually since his sentence stipulates lifetime loss of driving privileges, his sentence does not end ie due process does not fully execute until the end of his life.
At 5 years the charge against him is NOT fully discharged. The law can no longer hold him in custody but that condition regarding his driving privileges persists until his demise.

Upon release from parole he can get all his rights back except his driving privileges unless he receives a pardon or commutation.
I'll say CAN get his rights back not MUST because not every state restores your rights when you are released from conviction. it's up to the grace and jurisprudence of the state.

If his sentence was nothing more than a straight 5 years sentence with no other explicit stipulations in the sentence...
...then at 5 years the charge against him for which he was convicted is discharged and he then must be released from all consequences of his conviction.

The state can reduce the conditions of the sentence if it chooses to but it cannot increase them or add to them after the original sentencing has occurred. In any changes to the sentence the convicted is due the benefit of the law.

Lets say the guy is a dirt bag with a foul mouth and a bad attitude and he has no remorse...
So he has earned ZERO good time
When he hits his tentative release date at 5 years from the beginning of his sentence and he is supposed to be a free and lawful man for having paid the price for the crime and now should be released...
no-one in government can come along at that later date and say
"This guy stinks... We changed our minds and were going to keep him locked up"...
Or
"We think the jury wet too soft on him... Were not just going to restrict for life his driving privileges but also were going to tack on the list his rights to vote and bear arms...were not even going to let him hold a job or father offspring".
They just cannot LAWFULLY do it.
This doesn't mean that they don't get away with doing it anyway who is going to stop them?
But then what does that make them? How can a good person respect that?

If the most powerful institution that was created by the law and is ruled over by the law cannot respect the law...
...then the people probably won't either.
And I think they know that and I think THAT is mostly why it is such a big deal to invest so much in covering up hypocrisy instead of setting things straight.

Whatever the people decide is the proper thing to do to a person convicted of a crime...they have one shot to get it right and so long as the convict doesn't acquire any further criminal charges while in custody...the thing is final.
The convicted can receive grace but he cannot justly be further or more greatly punished beyond the one original sentencing.
If the people decided the man needed to swing from a noose then they have to say so when they sentence him
If they decided to lock him up for a year then a year it is.
If the people decide to restrict any of convicts rights for life beyond what is necessary to lock him up and punish him they have to speak up and be specific about it at the sentencing and put it in there.

In my opinion if the people didn't specifically say in the sentencing that the guy under conviction has to reimburse them for incarcerating him then there is no court order incurring the liability for the debt.
Even if the people passed a statute saying that criminals had to reimburse the people for cost of their incarceration...the sentencing would still have to explicitly reference that statute for it to apply to the convict.
Just like with mandatory penalty laws... if the people passed a law saying first offense drunk driving shall be a minimum of 2 years or more in prison...
And a judge or a jury sentences the convict to a total of 6 months.
There would have to be an appeal by the state on the grounds it was an illegal sentencing to retry the case and get a new sentencing. During this appeal the convict may get lucky and have his conviction overturned and go free so the state is most likely going to let it stand..
But anyways they just cannot go in and alter the sentence. it is a completed court order>
They either have to execute the sentence or abandon it.
 
Last edited:
That is just direct costs. Add in medical and other indirect costs. Some watch dogs claim that $124.00 a day ($45,000.00 a year) is what is really spent.

I know alot of guys over the years at did the work release program. I have seen this happen with the work release guys. Some forgot that their fines come out first then any classes, and housing last. If a guy does't have a high dollar job most leave with a bill.

This is something that I'm very familiar with, here is the last public published report comparing public vs. private prisons in the state of Arizona.

http://www.azcorrections.gov/adc/reports/ADC_FY2010_PerCapitaRep.pdf
 

Latest posts

Back
Top