The Sun's article on expungement

"The past is never dead. It's not even past."   ---William Faulkner

Buz read with interest the Sun's story on expungement, and the mention of it by mjb on Baltimore crime blog. Some semi-idiotic ramblings:

• For many years in Bmore, when you got arrested on a minor charge, you were held in the police station lockup overnight, and your trial was held the next morning. To be honest, there weren't a heck of a lot of arrests for "humbles", unless that person needed to be arrested and police authority needed to be asserted. In any case, you got your day in court the next morning, and, yes, the Assistant State's Attorney nolle-prossed or stetted plenty of cases. And the judge gave PBJ to plenty of people. The person at least spent overnight in the lockup. I often approached the job with a sort of Zen-like philosophy that I wasn't too worried what happened in court: I made peace with the idea that getting arrested was the most they were going to get, unless............So Buz kinda got it in his mind that the conduct leading to the original arrest was "abated by arrest".
• Along came the Police Commissioner Frazier years and he was able to unload prisoner processing and holding to the state: Central Booking was created--supposedly improving "efficiency". Your court date was 30 days away, hanging over your head, and the new courtrooms for the now "newly" independent judges soon became circuses, overflowing with cases. The first waves of  "Zebra" operations and the Violent Crime Task Force arrests soon brought the new Central Booking to its knees, holding far more prisoners that it was supposed to.
• So, eventually, the idea, the notion of a trial (except for some felonies) went away. Go to any of the courthouses for District Court in the morning. The poor ASA has defendants and their lawyers lined up to "try" their case in less than 2 minutes, or discuss it or something. Judges can take a powder for a while. The first thing the ASA asks: 'who wants a postponement?' A  long line ensue by his table. Next: "who wants a jury trial"? another long line. Who want to be given PBJ for a guilty plea?" (This is rarer, since they're offered abatement now.) [Or were]. And, finally, the cases that do go to trial are almost always agreed "statements of facts". Hardly ever does a real trial take place in district court.
• So, the huge number of arrests continued thru the term of Police Commissioner Norris, who implemented New York style of policing in Baltimore. Central Booking and the courtrooms were becoming ever more chaotic. So, as a sort of bureaucratic response to an untenable situation, the ASAs assigned (sentenced) to Central Booking simply began reviewing cases and declaring them "abated by arrest." {See, the Electromagnetic Radiation emanating from Buz's brain somehow reached the brains of the ASAs, even though they were separated in time and space, often in years.} On a serious note, they were simply making a judgment that the crime was very minor, and it was not worth the effort to now require them to show up in court, go thru the whole process again, and end up with little or no punishment, and simply clog up the courthouses even more. (Of course, many would not show, leading to arrest warrants, and clogging up the system yet again.)
• Buz always took this to be a dismissal of the charges by the state's attorney's office. They were not making, in this case, any judgement as to the legality of the arrest. They were simply saying: "case closed".  The ASA is simply saying: ok, you were bad, minor charge, it's over, it was abated by the arrest. Though this may be unheard of anywhere else, it was a strange bureaucratic adjustment to a peculiarly Baltimore situation.
• Of course, there was also some percentage of arrests in which it was determined that there was "no probable cause." Those were dismissed in the same way. So, the open question there is how many of all these humble arrests were for really no probable cause or the officers were too careless, lazy, or stupid to actually write something worthwhile. (After a while, they began expecting "abated by arrest", so why bother writing anything hard: the ASA was just going to through it out, anyway. So it became an ever-spiraling self-fulfilling expectation and result.) Or were the ASAs pressured to rigorously declare these to be no probable cause.  I always thought no probable cause was a "bad arrest." So, I guess if there's anything illegal, this is where it's at. I just wish they'd never have used my term "abated by arrest". And of course, nobody then cared; no one was minding the store, the only thing that counted was that the arrests continue.
• The other "abated by arrest" charges are, in my mind, simply short-circuiting the nolle prosse process of saving the city the time and money of not having these folks come to court.
• Your consultant thinks that the vast majority of these arrests were legal. Look, all you gotta do is drive around town, especially in the evening, in many neighborhoods. People are littering with abandon--both little and big littering; drinking on the street, urinating, fighting, being disorderly; riding illegal dirt bikes and ATVs, gambling, drividng like crazy people, etc., etc., etc. Any dummy can get a humble arrest every day. Ya don't have make anything up. And this doesn't even count open drug-dealing and smoking.
• So now, we have Joe or Jane the miscreant, who gets locked up for something "minor", and now is shown the door at Central Booking and never has to come to court. They were told that either their case was abated by arrest or had no probable cause. So they left with the feeling that: a.) they didn't do anything wrong; b.) the police were picking on them because..........c.) they were the victim of this evil system  because "they" were out to get their poor selves and d.) there's nothing wrong with what they were doing and e.) let's go do it again and you know, these square, chump, punk law-abiders are pretty easy to get over on. And the law is weak, not as smart and tough as me; plus now I got my street cred; I got locked up by the man. No, I am the man. (There is only a bit of irony here in the folks who changed the slogan from Believe to Behave.)
• One can easily see the psycho-social leap that is made when a person feels impunity about committing little crimes evolves into committing bigger crimes--because they can. After all, the chumps (the evil system of us) won't do anything.
• Buz read the expungement article and the poster guy, who's been in and out of jail for 15 years, and just shakes his dumb head. The expungements granted under the new law are nice: they will probably actually help a very small number of people. The truth of the matter is that for the vast majority of employers, the explanation that the State's Attorney dropped your charges would be good enough (assuming that's all you got). The people in and out of jail many times, though, have larger issues than their humble arrests--which if they have more than one are big red flags in and of themselves. They say: don't hire me; I love street stuff; and I can't learn; lets go be tough and hang on the corner; we can do whatever we want; we know how to get over; rules are for those stupid nerds; those nuisance laws are really a nuisance; I should be able to do whatever I feel like.
• Buz sees very few people in his vocational coaching work even convicted of these nuisance laws. They usually nolle prossed. Open container, urinating, and related offenses often are an indication of substance abuse and alcohol issues. Same with possession charges. However, plenty of people can get jobs with these issues, if they deal with their problems sincerely and actually work at it. If you keep doing nuisance crimes, at some point, you are, in fact, a nuisance--no matter what the case results say--to yourself, your family, and the rest of us.
• The real problems are with guys (and some gals) who have convictions, often more than one, for assault: employers run the other way. And forget robbery, theft, and burglary convictions. Expungement really is a non-issue for them.

Crime/Security "discoveries" for the week

Buz realized that there was a whole of crime and security stuff going on in Bmore this week, but he has learned a couple of things and thought about some more things:

• I ran into a robbery detective and asked about the investigation of the holdup of the Wine Underground a few weeks ago. He said he didn't know anything; that "Citywide Robbery" unit was handling it. Oh, well, like, don't they tell you anything? Nope. Your consultant was not comforted to learn that the citywide robbery detectives don't ask anything of or tell anything to the district robbery detectives. Buz has never liked this strange breakdown of authority, wherein the detectives are physically housed in district station houses but report to bosses downtown--not to the district commander, who is allegedly responsible for crime in his/her (I don't think there's any "her" district commanders) district. Now we find out that they aren't even talking to each other!
• It looks like the State Prosecutor is trying to get Dixon on the same kind of stuff the feds got Norris on. 
• Buz has learned that a yoga studio was broken into in April. Since the initial report and smearing of fingerprint dust, there has been no followup by detectives. Your consultant wonders if there is a citywide unit which handles commercial burglaries and doesn't talk to the district unit which handles residential burglaries. I sometimes think that burglary is almost decriminalized in Baltimore anyway. If patrol officers don't catch 'em right away, they're probably not going to get caught.
• Dirty little secret: patrol officers make the overwhelming number of arrests for serious crimes like burglary and robbery. Detectives do all the followup stuff. Hence, the resentment that patrol officers sometimes feel toward their plainclothes brethren.
• Buz took a trip down to the Avenue early yesterday evening to Grano, the new pasta place (great place). The street was lined with thugs and junkies. One group looked like a scene from a George Romero movie. The other group, heavily muscled and thug-like, long white, dirty t-shirts, sweaty, and scary-looking were just hanging around. They weren't bothering anybody--but it was early yet, and they hadn't enough to drink. Both groups were blending in with the smokers of Zissimos bar. Both noticed the marked police car coming down 36th Street with 4 plainclothes "knockers" in it.
• Now, we know the merchants were upset when police used poor discretion in moving smokers along after the new law was passed, and they complained to the District Commander, and he said that that was a tough officer assigned usually to Park Heights, and he didn't know how not to enforce the law around white people, so they moved him back to Park Height so he could be mean--or something like that. Well, Buz looked at this crew and thought: you know, they really can't be good for business hanging around like that. But: Hampden merchants: good luck getting the cops to move loiterers now.
• Differential law enforcement? Hmmmmmmm.
• Betcha here's why Federal Hill curfew wasn't being enforced: 5 years ago: Sir, the park is closed, you'll have to leave. "What! I pay a lot of taxes! You can't tell me what to do! I live here! What's your name! Who's your supervisor?"     Later: Sergeant to Officer: what the fuck are you doing? Leave those rich people alone. Ain't you got nothing better to do? You go over west of Hanover Street and shake down some of those mf's with reefer.

Crime and Security in Baltimore: random thoughts

A lot of crime and security stuff going on in good ole Baltimore:

• Two people murdered in Federal Hill in two days. The neighbors are upset! One woman gave the reasons for concern as: this is the "high rent district", we have the Ritz and the new Silo condos, Jenna Bush, etc. In other words, this is unacceptable. Yes, it was a rough weekend in Fed Hill, but the community association Prez, Paul Robinson, kinda summed it up: they're just not immune to the problems occurring in other parts of the city, and the community needs to come together to support the city and the police.
• Buz wonders if the thugs are engaging in some sense of eco-sensitivity by not driving all the way out to Leakin Park to drop off their dead. Or could it be the price of gas? Dirty little secret: Federal Hill is very close to high crime areas, Hanover Street is sort of the DMZ. One poster on Sunspot said heavy drug activity emanates from a Section 8 property at William and Warren. Dunno. I didn't see any last time I was in the area, but haven't been in the early morning hours for a while (barhopping is often past your consultant's bedtime at this time).
• I'm sure these two cases are "Red Balls" on the board down at Homicide at 601.
• Speaking of Homicide, there is an ad on Craigslist business jobs for the Commanding Officer Homicide Section, Baltimore Police. I am not making this up. It was posted June 9th. Perhaps one of my readers or Baltimore Crime readers or John Galt might apply.
• Members of campus law enforcement officers have spent all this money on emergency notification systems since V-Tech, but are still puzzling over how and when and who decides to use them. They're great for warning the student body of impeding thunder storms!

The student who graduated alone

Sheesh. The Sun's front page story about the Annapolis high School student who graduated alone--his classmates graduated without him--raised more questions in Buz's poor mind than the article answered. (from a security perspective of course):

Let's see if I got this right: a "threat" was received which caused school officials to not allow him to graduate with the rest of his class. Was this a reliable, actionable threat or anonymous, akin to a called-in bomb threat?

• Were the officials being overly cautious?
• Who's in charge here, "anyways"? The thugs or the government-like don't they have police downey there or something? (Of course, here in bmore, thugs can shoot at each other in a wild gunfight, two little kids get shot while swimming; we ain't got no police here, either anyways).
• He practiced all season and played games with his football team? Buz guesses no threats were received there?! Probably went out after the games? Under heavy police guard?
• Oh, and went to the senior prom, too! Buz guesses no threats, there! Wonder if he went to a pre-prom or after-prom party? In an armored truck under heavy police guard?
• And mom said he made amends to the folks he had been fighting with. ok
• And he even asked the judge for mercy on the kid that shot him. ok

So, we wonder what's all of that about. Is there more to this story? Buz is very glad that the nasty people threatening the young father of a 3-month-old don't threaten him for real important stuff like playing football and going to the prom. They only threaten his high school graduation.  Buz is at least glad he finished high school, and hopes he doesn't get threated at his new trade school or new job.

Random, alternative, Iconoclastic thoughts on the Zach Sowers case

Buz read with interest the articles about the Zach Sowers case and comments from the States Attorney's office spokesperson.

Some thoughts:

• If I ever become a big shot with a fancy, schmancy office and lots of money and stuff, I don't think I'll hire Marty Burns to be my PR person.
• I'm sure the comments made by Burns caused tremendous distress to Anna Sowers, and even your consultant found them distressing. Even if she really believed those things, she should have kept her mouth shut. What was the point? The reporter was asking her about Anna's proposed Zach's law. (We never did find out the official State's Attorney position on that, incidentally). Maybe Ms. Burns need to go back on her medication.
• Your consultant wonders if Burns was verbalizing some thoughts going through the State's Attorney's office before and/or after the trial, or if she was reflecting the thoughts of her boss, her own thoughts or what.
• It sounds more to this experienced cop like the possible arguments the defense attorneys might have thrown out in negotiations for the plea.
• Sleeping like a baby? How would she know? Betcha , 3-1, Ms. Burns never went to the hospital and never actually saw Zach.
• Comments like hers tend to make people want to leave the city, and wonder why they still live here. This is what the State's Attorney's spokesperson feels/thinks about murder victims and their spouses?!
• At the risk of offending my dear readers, I must say that with the limited evidence the state had, both reading reports at the time and now, they got the best deal one could have hoped to get against the defendants. If Anna really wanted her blood to boil, she would have been granted that at a trial for these bums. The defense attorneys would have had a field day: making fools of the evidence and pointing fingers at each other's clients, and making the police, and lab technicians look foolish (whether they were or not); and perhaps helping their client invent some story about how he actually didn't do it and pointing the finger at someone else; one or more of the "flipped" co-defendants of Trayvon could have reneged on their deal or "forgot" crucial details previously agreed to, or said the police tricked or coerced them. The risks of going to trial were enormous--with a possibility one or more would have been acquitted and/or convicted of very minor charges. See the recent article when an attorney told the Sun "nobody flipped". Huh? I thought the other 3 plead guilty and had agreed to testify at trial against the main player-Trayvon Ramos.
• We have some solace in knowing that very likely Ramos will serve about 30 of his 40 years sentence. In my work with "ex-offenders", it has been consistently the case that violent criminals serve about 75% of their sentences, before getting out on parole. So, he'll be 47 or so when he gets out, and unlikely to be able to get any kind of decent job or housing on  his own. In addition, there will be more younger thugs out there ready to do him like he did Zach, since he'll no longer be so young and "tough", but probably as cowardly as ever. And it is quite likely he'll go back to prison within 3 years of his release (on average 53% do). He is also under a suspended sentence.
• And the other thugs will serve about 6 out of their 8 year sentences. And they will all be on parole with suspended sentences. Buz feels a little sorry for the one kid who is in solitary 23 hours a day, when it became common knowledge that he was the one who first broke under police questioning. There's a good chance he'll be beaten or stabbed before he gets released, and may well be murdered after his release. (Of course, all of these guys are prime candidates for getting murdered in Baltimore). Buz feels less sorry, of course,  because we know some or all of them were involved in a series of robberies both in the city and county east side. There were probably more than even the cops think, and probably some which weren't reported.
• Don't know much about Jessamy; only saw her at community meetings a couple of times many years ago. However, I don't agree, and think it's unethical for anyone to post her home address--much as you disagree with anything about her. [Actually, I don't like the idea of the state putting everything, including your home address on the web anyway. There's plenty of nuts out there; we don't need to make it any easier for them to express their nuttiness].
• Regardless of Jessamy herself, your consultant has found the vast overwhelming majority of prosecutors in her office to be dedicated public servants in a thankless job for a community that has a huge thankless component. Often the prosecutor has little to work with, as in the Sowers case. {Testimony of co-defendants is shaky ground on which to try a case, particularly in the city}. From what I read, both at the plea and recently, the state had a strong common-sense case and a strong circumstantial case, but with the wrong jury.................??? Who knows what might have happened? Would the defense have found someone to say they saw him "sleeping like a baby" or that his injuries were not consistent with stomping. Remember, it only takes one juror to be swayed by dumb arguments.
• When prosecutors are going for a plea, they almost always discuss it with the victim and/or the victim's family, outlining reasons why, and the risks involved in going to trial. Usually, the family agrees. My understanding is that Anna did not agree. Unfortunately, crime is considered legally to be against the state. In this case, the prosecutors decided to ignore her wishes for a trial and proceeded with a plea bargain, "in the interest of public safety". Part of the bargain would be not to prosecute should Zach die; that's why they were able to get such "long" sentences. So an autopsy was irrelevant at this point; we don't know why Burns is even bringing that up--except, perhaps, to "prove" somehow that the defense attorneys might or might not have been right about the stomping not having occurred? Sheesh. Even if he was just tripped and sustained those injuries, by say, hitting his head on a car bumper, so what. The injuries were caused by the robber-thugs. (Buz doesn't really believe the others just, like, stood around and didn't do anything.)
• In any event, Burns needs to get fired, and get the Douche-bag of the Year award for stupid press comments.

Alarm Sales in the neighborhood.

Both Friday and Saturday, just past, saw the Medfield neighborhood inundated with crews of door-to-door alarm selling guys. Buz thought they were an alarm cult. They all wore fancy white Polo shirts with the words "Pinnacle Security" on them, though some shirts said other things, in addition, like "GE", leading you to believe that they were worked for General Electric.

Now, since Buz used to sell things door-to-door when he was in high school (a couple of years ago!), he has great compassion for people trying to sell stuff that way.

However, these folks raised all sorts of red flags in your consultant's poor pea brain.

After listening to the guy's good pitch a moment [punctuated by lovely pictures of a mom with babies], I was alerted to the fact that "free" had been mentioned several times. They would install an alarm system in-my house for free! Just for putting a sign in my yard! Huh!? Since when is anything that valuable free? He implied it was an offer only for the first three houses in the block or neighborhood (or something), so they could then use us to market to others.

When I asked for his card or brochure, I was bluntly told: we don't have any; we don't work like that. Oh. In other words, one must say yes or no right now. I said no. That was on Friday. {I think that counts as 3 red flags right there!}

On Saturday, another salesman came to the door, to proudly state that several of my neighbors had bought alarms "for free". When I derided this, ands asked him if he were working for free, he said well, the equipment is free. You just pay for the monitoring. Ok, how much is the monitoring. "About 30-something a month". "And you're a very smart guy for saying nothing is free".

Buz later learned that the wireless system installed "for free" for one of my neighbors was in return for a THREE YEAR MONITORING CONTRACT AT $46.99/MONTH! Buz does not think it is wise to lock yourself in that long a contract, nor does he think that price is competitive.

I wonder what others think, and what they pay for their alarms, and what happens if they have to end their contract.

Buz also learned thru searching that there is a site for rating alarm companies, alarmsystemsreview.com. He is unsure what to make of it at this time. But Pinnacle and several companies there had very negative reviews for hard sell tactics and poor service.

Let me know what you think!

Riot in Fells Point!?

I just got this email from a tourist to our town who was visiting from Rhode Island for the Red Sox series. I wonder if ppatin or any other readers out there have any knowledge of this event in Fells Point, and to what degree this is normal behavior on warm spring/summer weekends.

All thoughts welcome!
Here's what she sent: (As Dave Barry might say, I am not making this up)

"Thank you in advance for reading this Buzz.......man I have, I guess, a strange question for you. Found you on your website in my googling.

I am from Rhode Island. My boyfriend took me to Baltimore this past weekend to see the Red Sox play (awesome games I might add). we stayed at the Admiral Fell Inn at Fells Point. Neither of us had a clue about the high crime rate until we were immersed in it.

Something terrible happened right outside our hotel in the middle of the night - Sat 5/31 - Sun 6/1 - about 2AM.......on the corner of Thames and Broadway. I am totally perplexed because every attempt to find out exactly what happened has turned up nothing - getting obsessed here. I am wondering if it is because it was unsubstantial in the big crime scheme there, or if it is covered up, etc.

I have been to the Baltimore Sun, police blogs, etc - - NOTHING.

It involved MANY people (maybe 100??), SO MANY police - someone (or someoneS) were badly hurt - people there were horrified, even the people who were involved which seemed to be a crowd that was not immune to this type of violence. It as frightening - awakned to screaming and then yelling which lasted forever, it seemed......nearly a riot - at least 50 people fighting in the street (seperate small fights which the police didn't seem to be doing to much about, though their bilyclubs were out and ready throughout!)......went on for quite some time. Hotel guy the next morning just said it was a fight, maybe gangs, and that there was "a lot of blood'. then, nothing.

The problem is this - I am not seeking info out of morbid curiosity. But I need closure from it - it was all so surreal lthat night.....and then I came home on Sunday night and can barely sleep. I am panicky all of a sudden, obviously more traumatized by it than I thought. I never witnessed anything like it. My boyfriend was freaked also. We were actually worried they would try to overtake the hotel!!

How can somethng so awful be unreported to the public????

Can I have information related to it so i can close it out and put it to rest???"


Lisa in Little Rhody

"PS) wonderng if my instincts are on.........I was scared with goosebumps whenever we were on Pratt St.....just terrible vibes there. Am I making sense??"