County Issue / Sentencing Gang Members...

Charles Jordan, Father of drive-by shooting victim Jennifer Jordan

These types of stiff sentences are not only appropriate, they are necessary. The same type of sentence should be given to everyone who is in a car involved in a drive-by shooting. The car itself is a murder weapon in these cases. A few years ago, a law was passed that said, “Use a gun, go to jail.” Our society has to say something to these idiots committing drive-by shootings today along those lines, something that says: “Do a drive-by, get a maximum sentence.” Drive-by incidents used to be drive-by shoutings. Now they’ve become shootings instead. We need to do something to stop this, and I think that maximum sentences get the word across. As far as whether the sentence is a deterrent, I don’t care who it affects on the outside. It definitely is a deterrent to that person ever killing again. You stop thrill-killers in their tracks when they have to go to jail.

Kenneth I. Clayman, Ventura County public defender

When you are talking about a 16- or 17-year-old--as egregious as these crimes are to the family of the victim--I feel that some opportunity should be made somewhere in the life of the defendant for rehabilitation. The defendant could make a drastic effort in prison to rehabilitate himself, and there ought to be some way we can recognize that sort of transformation. If we want to give people an incentive to do well in the prison setting, there must at least be the belief that somewhere in the distant future he could get out. Of course, it is speculative as to whether sentences that deny the possibility of parole are such an increased deterrent. We do seem to see that, no matter how high sentences are, society is still regenerating people who do the same things that their predecessors did. I don’t have the answer whether extraordinarily long sentences, as opposed to other long but less terminal sentences, tend to have more of an effect. Essentially throwing away the key and giving criminals no chance to reform is a mistake.

Colleen Toy White, Ventura County assistant district attorney

I would say that these types of sentences are appropriate, because these are the most serious crimes we see. The total lack of regard for human life seen in these crimes calls out for these harsh sentences. When you see it from the perspective of the victims’ families, you realize how appropriate the sentences are. They don’t want to see members of their family have died and then not see the system deal very harshly with those responsible. Historically, we’ve seen that the prison system does not do a good job of rehabilitating these people. Although there is a possibility that someone could be rehabilitated, the probability of that happening is not high. Furthermore, the victim’s view of the justice system requires that criminals be punished. Obviously, you hope the sentences will deter younger gang members and possibly deglamorize this type of activity. The idea is that they will see there is no glamour in going off to prison and having everyone in the neighborhood knowing you’re not coming back.

Steven Z. Perren, Presiding judge, Ventura County Superior Court

The canons of judicial ethics do not allow me to comment specifically on sentencings, especially ones that are currently before the court. I can say, however, that as judges of this state, we take an oath to enforce the laws. The role of the courts is to interpret and administer the law, and in so doing, we must assume that these laws are accomplishing the purpose for which they were designed. We are given a wide range of options in sentencing that makes it possible to impose just and fair sentences. It is traditionally taught that the Legislature passes the laws and the judges interpret and apply them. But we don’t make the laws, nor should we comment on their appropriateness. The ballot initiative which provided for life in prison without parole was passed by the people of California through our direct democratic processes. Whether laws are enacted through the Legislature or through the people and the initiative process, they are of equal force. The court abides by this process.

Manuel Carbajal, Superintendent, California Youth Authority in Camarillo

I believe these types of harsh sentences are appropriate if they take into account two things. One, did the crime involve malice, and two, what is the mental capacity of the individual?If kids are raised around gangs, and their brothers and fathers are in gangs, they don’t think anything of their participation in this type of activity. That is why you have to look at the kids involved. If their mental capacity is such that they can’t tell between right and wrong, they should not be placed in prison for the rest of their lives. They are themselves victims who have been denied access to a normal upbringing--things so many of us take for granted, like education, family, jobs. The people in the state of California voted for life without parole for juveniles, but I wish they really knew the exorbitant cost of doing that. Life imprisonment is going to cost the state $17,000 a year. If we really want to eradicate this problem, we have to spend that kind of money at the base, and work with these kids at the elementary and junior high levels.