Did a Couple of Tech Entrepreneurs Just Fix Society's Crime Problem?

Silicon Valley entrepreneurs have founded a program that teaches convicts tech skills for the real world.

The 'Last Mile' program at California's San Quentin prison puts convicts behind computers instead of bars. (Photo: 'The Last Mile')

April 13, 2014 By Liana Aghajanian

Liana Aghajanian is TakePart's weekend editor. Her work has appeared in ForeignPolicy.com, BBC.com, Los Angeles Times, and TheAtlantic.com.

full bio

Eddie Griffin went to state prison in the '90s, after his cocaine addiction led him to three possession convictions—qualifying him for a penalty of 25 years to life under a now-defunct section of California's three-strikes law. He was sentenced to 27 to life. Such lengthy sentences are enough to stunt a convict's professional future and make for a difficult socialization into the world beyond the bars of San Quentin State Prison.

That alienation often results in ex-cons failing at gainful employment, leading to the high rates of ex-convicts returning to crime and beyond that, to a perpetually unsafe society and budgets crippled by judicial and prison costs. The situation needs a smart solution. Tech entrepreneurs Chris Redlitz and Beverly Parenti had people like Griffin in mind when they developed "The Last Mile," a program that introduces inmates to tech start-ups and instills confidence by teaching basic tech skills. 

Along with Kenyatta Leal, who spent 19 years in prison, Redlitz and Parenti created "The Last Mile," which teaches San Quentin prisoners business and entrepreneurial skills and places them in a paid internship program with Bay Area technology companies.

The program is named for the difficult transition from prison to successful livelihoods outside those walls. Nor is it just about fixing the criminal justice system: The program aims to improve the number of African American, Latino, and Native American participants in technology fields, where they are deeply underrepresented. 

While new federal guidelines to combat the school-to-prison pipeline aim to prevent the rise in incarceration rates, "The Last Mile" attempts to restore the social and vocational skills that have been lost as a result of long-term imprisonment. Among the startling facts the program encountered early on was that many inmates were incarcerated before the Internet existed.  

Participants go through a six-month program, meeting with the start-ups twice a week to learn about taking their tech-business ideas from paper to potential investors. Tech notables such as Guy Kawasaki and Half.com founder Josh Kopelman have been program mentors. 

Because social media is inescapable, inmates also learn how to build their brand and online presence. Volunteers then upload their messages for them, because inmates do not have full-time Internet access. 

The program concludes with an event called “Demo Day,” in which each participant pitches a business idea to an audience that includes potential investors. That's where Griffin, a 2013 graduate of the program, pitched his "At the Club" app, which offers live-streaming jazz performances.  

After Proposition 36 changed three-strikes laws to only apply to violent felons or those convicted of serious crime, Griffin wasresentenced and released in July 2013. He now works as a junior developer at Mindjet.

To ensure the model can be replicated elsewhere, Redlitz and Parenti recently tried the "Last Mile” program at the Los Angeles County Jail, where they will have a Demo Day next month, Forbes reported. 

The two plan to take their program nationwide.

Two state laws ruled unconstitutional

By Denny Walsh
dwalsh@sacbee.com

Published: Sunday, Mar. 2, 2014 - 12:00 am

A federal court judge has found two California laws that resulted from ballot initiatives – including the so-called “Victims’ Bill of Rights” – to be unconstitutional.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton of Sacramento said the state’s implementation of the laws improperly changed the punishment for crimes committed before the laws were enacted.

Proposition 9, a ballot initiative passed by the voters in 2008, and Proposition 89, passed by the voters in 1988, “retrospectively increased punishments, in violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the U.S. Constitution,” Karlton declared Friday in a 58-page order.

Karlton said that, for purposes of the case before him, “an ‘ex post facto’ law is one ‘that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime when committed.’ ”

Proposition 9, the so-called “Victims’ Bill of Rights” or “Marsy’s Law,” mandated longer periods of time between parole hearings, which Karlton said results in a risk of longer sentences for prisoners than they faced when their crimes were committed.

Proposition 89 granted the governor the right to review and reverse paroles already approved by the Board of Parole Hearings in murder cases. Karlton said every governor since passage of the measure has abused that power by blocking a large majority of the paroles they reviewed.

The judge issued an injunction blocking state enforcement of the two laws.

He ordered the board to revert to the law governing spacing of parole hearings prior to Proposition 9, which guaranteed thousands of prisoners an annual suitability hearing after a minimum term prescribed by law.

The judge ordered the governor to quit reversing already-approved paroles while applying the same factors the board considered.

The lawsuit before Karlton, Gilman v. Brown, is certified as a class action on behalf of all California state prisoners who have been sentenced to a life term, but with the possibility of parole, for an offense that occurred before passage of Proposition 9 on Nov. 4, 2008. The separate class challenging Proposition 89 consists of all prisoners doing life with the possibility of parole for an offense predating Nov. 8, 1988.

Proposition 9 eliminated the board’s discretion to set hearings a year apart, even when the board has made a finding of strong evidence a prisoner will be ready for parole in a year.

The initiative imposes a mandatory three years before the first parole hearing. Additionally, under the old law, the sentences of a significant number of prisoners were to continue beyond a minimum term only as long as the board found them unsuitable for parole. Under Proposition 9, those same sentences continue indefinitely unless the board finds “clear and convincing evidence” that the prisoner is suitable for parole in five, seven, or 10 years.

Karlton thus decided the 2008 law “creates a significant risk” of longer incarceration than was the case when the crimes were committed. He said he based the conclusion on evidence presented at a non-jury trial before him last summer and accounts of terms actually lengthened by the law that were submitted by prisoners’ attorneys.

This is the second time within the context of the same lawsuit that Karlton has expressed his dim view of Proposition 9.

In February 2010 the judge barred enforcement of parts of the measure, ruling that the Ex Post Facto Clause would likely allow life-term prisoners to prevail on the merits of their attack on reduced availability and frequency of parole hearings.

But, 10 months later, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the injunction, ruling that the proposition “does not create a significant risk of prolonging … incarceration.” The opinion rests on the part of the initiative enabling the board to advance a hearing to an earlier date when a prisoner can show “a reasonable likelihood” that they are suitable for release.

However, several examples of prisoner petitions for an advanced hearing show that the process “can be rendered meaningless or illusory,” Karlton said in Friday’s order. First, he said, the board has erected a hurdle regarding “change in circumstances or new information,” that a prisoner must clear before the board will even take an earlier look at the question of suitability. Second, the judge said, “when this requirement is spun off from the suitability requirement, it imposes an additional, substantive burden …”

As to Proposition 89, Karlton stated it is clearly not a “ ‘neutral’ transfer of final decision-making authority” from the board to the governor. “In practice,” he said, “the governors have used it to tip the scales against parole. Thus, while the governors could use the law to review parole decisions to ensure that they are accurate and fair, they appear to have no such concern about decisions that deny parole.”

The voters wanted to correct their perceived “weakness” in the existing law, “namely too many murderers being paroled too soon,” Karlton observed. “The governors have carried out the people’s will by putting their fingers on the scale and reversing 70 percent of parole grants for these class members.”

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/03/01/6200721/two-state-laws-ruled-unconstitutional.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/03/01/6200721/two-state-laws-ruled-unconstitutional.html#storylink=cpy

Finally Free: 2 Wrongly Convicted of Murder

2 wrongfully convicted in Brooklyn murder free 21 years later

Friday, February 07, 2014

           

">

  Web produced by Bill King and Jennifer Matarese, Eyewitness News

NEW YORK (WABC) -- There is vindication for two men who spent 21 years in prison for a brutal triple murder they say they didn't commit. 

Now, a new life begins for Tony Yarbough and Shariff Wilson, who were just teenagers when they were convicted of murdering Yarbough's own mother and sister, as well as the sister's friend.  For the first time in their adult lives Friday, they are waking up in their homes instead of a prison cell.  They were freed after a judge overturned their convictions, which came at the ages of 15 (Wilson) and 18 (Yarbough) after they were arrested back in 1992 in the grisly triple murder in Coney Island.

"I don't even know how to describe it," Yarbough said. "I'm overwhelmed right now. I'm so grateful."
The pair took their first steps as free men Thursday after the handcuffs were ordered off while family members cried and cheered.

"I just want to thank my lawyer and everybody that believed in me that I didn't do this crime," Wilson said.
On Thursday, Wilson celebrated a night of firsts -- the first black cherry soda, the first slice of pizza, the first chance to use a fork without looking over his shoulder.

"Upstate when they feed you, they give you a metal fork, but you have to turn it in before you leave," he said. "If not, they'll put you in a box."

The Brooklyn District Attorney's Office asked that the murder convictions be vacated against both men. Mom Annie Yarbough, 12-year-old sister Chavonn Barnes and her 12-year-old friend Latasha Knox were found inside a Coney Island project, stabbed and strangled, more than two decades ago. Tony Yarbough and Wilson had been out in the West Village when the killings took place and returned home to find the bodies.

Lawyers have argued for years that there was never any physical evidence linking the men to the killings and the only evidence against Tony was Shariff's confession, which he recanted in 2005. He claimed police coerced him, and he has passed several polygraph tests since.
The game changer in the case came last summer, when the city's medical examiner revealed that the DNA found under Annie Yarbrough's fingernails matched evidence found in the 1999 killing of Migdalia Ruiz, who was found raped and stabbed to death in the Sunset Park section of Brooklyn. That murder happened while Tony and Shariff were already in jail, meaning the real killer had struck again and was still on the loose.
"There were a number of factors that led to the innocence of both of these guys," Yarbough's lawyer Philip Smallman said. "The DNA, I think, in many ways, is just the icing on the cake.

Family members reacted with joy and were overcome with emotion when the men were unshackled and set free.

"I'm just so excited," mom Gloria Wilson said. "I don't know how to act. He's like a new toy to me. That's my gift back to me."

Tony Yarbough was arrested so quickly after the crime that he doesn't even know where his relatives are buried. Thursday though, he had nothing but relief and heartfelt gratitude.
"I got Jesus in my life, there's no time for bitterness," he said. "I'm going to live my life to the best of my ability right now."

Tony initially received the maximum sentence of 75 years to life behind bars.
The real killer has never been caught or identified.

"It's pretty clear that somebody is responsible for four bodies and still hasn't apparently been taken to justice for those acts," Smallman said. "This case is a perfect storm of everything that can go bad in a criminal case."
The world is a very different place now, and Wilson says he is trying to decide whether to get an iPhone or a Samsung Galaxy.

Appeals Court Declines to Reconsider Decision

Next stop for Smith: U.S. Supreme Court

Kalvin Smith

Posted: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 9:00 pm

Michael Hewlett/Winston-Salem Journal

 

Attorneys for Kalvin Michael Smith, convicted in the 1995 beating of a manager at the former Silk Plant Forest store, will take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court after the lower court declined to reconsider its decision to deny his appeal.

James Coleman, one of Smith’s attorneys, said in an email Tuesday that they plan to file a petition in May to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking it to review the decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond, Va.

On Feb. 21, the appeals court denied a petition to reconsider its dismissal of Smith’s appeal. In January, a three-judge panel of that court upheld a decision by U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles, who ruled that Smith had failed to comply with the one-year deadline required for prisoners who want to appeal their convictions in federal court.

Smith’s attorneys had asked that the full 16-judge panel review the decision.
Smith, 42, is serving up to 29 years in prison for the beating of Jill Marker on Dec. 9, 1995. The assault left Marker with traumatic brain injuries. She now lives in Ohio under 24-hour care.
Smith has maintained his innocence, and his case has become the most prominent allegation of wrongful conviction in Winston-Salem since the Darryl Hunt case. Hunt was freed in 2003 and then exonerated the next year in the 1984 murder of Deborah Sykes, a copy editor for the now-defunct afternoon paper, The Sentinel. A DNA test led law enforcement to another man, who confessed to the crime. The Winston-Salem Journal published a series of stories in 2004 about the Smith case, raising questions about the police investigation and the prosecution.

Coleman and David Pishko, also one of Smith’s attorneys, had argued in the petition before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit that Eagles was wrong in ruling that Smith could have discovered certain evidence favorable to him before the deadline, which would have been Aug. 30, 2007. Smith filed his appeal in 2010.

Coleman and Pishko argued that Smith couldn’t have found the evidence because Forsyth County prosecutors suppressed it and didn’t turn it over as they were required to do.
It wasn’t until Aug. 30, 2007, for example, that prosecutors acknowledged that Marker did not identify Smith out of a photo lineup that contained Smith’s picture during a meeting with Winston-Salem police detectives on Oct. 31, 1996, the petition said.
Forsyth County District Attorney Jim O’Neill has said that the rules of professional responsibility prevent him from commenting on pending litigation. The N.C. Attorney General’s Office is representing Forsyth County prosecutors in Smith’s appeal.

In court papers, state prosecutors have defended Smith’s conviction.

mhewlett@wsjournal.com (336) 727-7326

Death Row Inmate Released After 33 Years of Wrongful Conviction

Death row inmate Glenn Ford released 30 years after wrongful conviction

Man found guilty of murder by all-white jury in deeply flawed trial had one of America’s longest-ever waits for exoneration

• Ed Pilkington in New York
• theguardian.com, Wednesday 12 March 2014 12.56 EDT

Glenn Ford, 64, talks to the media as he leaves the maximum-security Angola prison in Louisiana. Source: WAFB-TV 9

Glenn Ford has been freed from the notorious Angola prison in Louisiana having lived under the shadow of the death sentence for 30 years. He becomes one of the longest-serving death row inmates in US history to be exonerated.

Ford was released on the order of a judge in Shreveport after Louisiana state prosecutors indicated they could no longer stand by his conviction. In late 2013 the state notified Ford’s lawyers that a confidential informant had come forward with new information implicating another man who had been among four co-defendants originally charged in the case.

He was sentenced to death in 1984 for the murder the previous November of Isadore Rozeman, an older white man who ran a Shreveport jewellery and watch repair shop. The defendant had worked as an odd jobs man for Rozeman. In interviews with police Ford said that he had been asked to pawn a .38 revolver and some jewellery similar to that taken from Rozeman’s shop at the time of the murder by another man who was among the initial suspects.
Asked as he walked away from the prison gates about his release, Ford told WAFB-TV, “It feels good; my mind is going in all kind of directions. It feels good.”
Ford said he did harbour some resentment at being wrongly jailed: “Yeah, cause I’ve been locked up almot 30 years for something I didn’t do.

“I can’t go back and do anything I should have been doing when I was 35, 38, 40 stuff like that.”
Dr Phillip Rozeman, nephew of the victim, told the Shreveport Times said that district attorney’s office had alerted the family in advance that new evidence had been obtained that, had it been available 30 years ago, might have had an impact on the verdict or death sentence. “We understand that and actually believe the DA is acting honourably. This is positive reflection on the criminal justice system that does the right thing for people.”
Ford’s conviction bears all the hallmarks of the glaring inconsistencies and inadequacies of the US justice system that are repeatedly found in cases of exoneration. The fact that despite serious qualms among top judges about his conviction this innocent man was kept on death row for so long is certain to be seized upon by anti-death penalty campaigners.

Among the many all too typical problems with his prosecution was the composition of the jury. An African American, Ford was sentenced to death by a jury that had been carefully selected by prosecutors to be exclusively white.

His legal representation at trial was woefully inexperienced. The lead defence counsel was a specialist in the law relating to oil and gas exploration and had never tried a case in front of a jury; the second attorney was two years out of law school and working at the time of the trial on small automobile accident insurance cases.

At the trial the state was unable to call any eyewitnesses to the crime, nor was it able to produce a murder weapon. Instead Ford was convicted largely on the testimony of a witness who was not a detached observer – she was the girlfriend of another man initially suspected of the murder.

Under cross-examination the witness, Marvella Brown, admitted in front of the jury that she had given false testimony. “I did lie to the court… I lied about it all,” she said.

In another classic element frequently found in exoneration cases, cod science provided by “expert” witnesses also helped to put Ford on death row. One such expert testified that the evidence pointed to the defendant because he was left-handed; another expert told the jury that particles of gunshot residue had been found on his hand; and a third talked about fingerprint evidence implicating him.

The testimony from all three expert witnesses was later shown to have been at best inconclusive, at worst wrong.

Ford continued to profess his innocence throughout the 30 years. In the appeal process that ensued, the Louisiana supreme court, the state’s highest legal panel, acknowledged that the evidence against him was “not overwhelming” and that the prosecution case was open to “serious questions”, yet it decided to keep him on death row.

More recently it emerged that state prosecutors had failed to disclose evidence to Ford’s legal team that could have been crucial in his defence. It included evidence from confidential informants pointing the finger at Ford’s co-defendants, who faced initial charges that were then dismissed as the prosecution bore down against the wrong man.

In a statement Ford’s current lawyers, Gary Clements and Aaron Novod, said they were pleased by the exoneration. “We are particularly grateful that the prosecution and the court moved ahead so decisively to set Mr Ford free.”
Ford becomes the 144th death row inmate to be exonerated over the past four decades, underlining the perils of innocent people being sent to their deaths in America’s capital punishment system. Yet despite such warning, several states such as Alabama, California, Florida and Missouri have taken recent steps to speed up the process of executions and whittle down the recourse to appeals in a way that had such expedition applied in Ford’s case would already have seen him put to death.
Richard Dieter, an authority on capital punishment at the Death Penalty Information Center, said that Ford’s case “painfully reveals the fallibility of the death penalty and the risks we take with every death sentence. Some states are trying to speed up executions instead of addressing the underlying problems that have led to such mistakes.”
David Love, executive director of Witness to Innocence, an organisation of exonerated death row survivors and their loved ones, said that attempts to speed up the time from conviction to death showed that for some politicians “it’s more important to have finality than to have justice. I believe that’s a misguided approach. As we see more and more innocent people like Glenn Ford released from death row, that’s a wake up call that we have to look at our broken system.”
Ford will now go through the long process of trying to rebuild his life on the outside. Under Louisiana law he can apply for compensation of up to $25,000 for each year lost to detention, but only up to a ceiling of $250,000.
As for the Isadore Rozeman case, it has now officially reverted to the status of an unsolved homicide. The local district attorney’s office said that an investigation is under way into “certain individuals” suspected of having been involved in the murder.

All things that Glitter are not gold. There is no talks about making sure that folks get jobs after prison

Female Convicts Make High-End, Italian Fashion Goods

Convicts throughout the world have a famously tough time finding work after leaving prison.Employers tend to discriminate against ex-cons, and the criminal justice system rarely prepares prisoners adequately for re-entry into the workplace. But the Italian government is leading the way, at least in this regard. It's created the Sigillo fashion brand, and all of the products under that label will be created by female prisoners and sold in high-end fashion stores.

In the Rebibbia prison in Rome, female convicts are being trained in the art of handbag-making. Any inmate who chooses to participate in the program will earn a salary of 600 euros per month (or roughly $800), according to AFP. No less an authority than Fendi heiress Silvia Venturini Fendi herself supports the project. The handbags will retail for up to 40 euros (or $53), and will be available in fashion stores throughout Italy "within months," reports Business Standard. 

Ten inmates have already agreed to participate in the program. Another 40 from across Italy are expected to join them. Officials hope that the training will lead to employment for them after prison. The Italian justice ministry has invested 400,000 euros for the program. Charities have kicked in an additional 400,000.

The program at Rebibbia is instilling an entrepreneurial spirit in its inmate participants, according to news reports. "When I get out of here, I would like to open a shop," said a 33-year-old who was born in the Ukraine, and identified by AFP only as Natalya. She also said that she and her fellow convicts find professional fulfillment from the program. "When we create things and they are sold, are appreciated, then we enjoy our work."

More: How Convicts Get Jobs Without Lying

According to Nanda Roscioli, a former Italian justice ministry employee, this professional training of inmates is "unique" in Italy. As to why the job training is only open to women, she said the "subordinate" minority in Italian prisons face conditions that are "harsher, more barbaric" then what men face. "The aim of the project is to give female detainees the tools to be in the marketplace once they are released."

Of course, Italy's ex-cons are hardly alone in their struggle to find employment. A study in New York City found that job applicants with a criminal conviction are nearly 50 percent less likely to be called for an interview or receive a job offer. As a result, many former convictsturn to nonprofit organizations, such as the Philadelphia-based Baker Industries, which trains ex-cons for free. The organization also helps its members find housing and clothing.

The Rebibbia participants, for their part, are optimistic about their employment future. "With this job I'm sure everything will be okay with me. I've learned a lot here," Kalu Uwaezuoke Chinedum Ike, a 40-year old Nigerian facing drug trafficking charges who's currently imprisoned at Rebbibia, told AFP. "When I get out I want to have a more normal, a calmer life."

11 Products You Didn't Know Were Made By Prisoners

• Photo: AFP/Getty Images1 of 12
• Photo: Alamy2 of 12
• Photo: Getty Images3 of 12
• Photo: Shutterstock/Rafal Olkis4 of 12
• 5 of 12
• Photo: Getty Images6 of 12
• Photo: AP7 of 12
• Photo: AFP/Getty Images8 of 12
• Photo: Flickr: rocor9 of 12
• Photo: Getty Images10 of 12
• Photo: AFP/Getty Images11 of 12
• Photo: AFP/Getty Images12 of 12

FULLSCREEN

Get out of jail bonus: Coffee beans

When some inmates leave the slammer, they roast coffee beans. I Have a Bean, owned by Second Chance Coffee Company, is a roasting plant in Illinois that helps ex-convicts restart their lives. The facility roasts six different kinds of coffee bean, from Costa Rica to Ethiopia.

Passport to the Future: Accessing Higher Education in an Era of Mass Incarceration

Check out this film from filmmaker Jeremy Robins and producer Benay Rubenstein, Founder of College Initiative and 2011 Soros Justice Fellow!


Passport to the Future: Accessing Higher Education in an Era of Mass Incarceration from Jeremy Robins on Vimeo.