The AAG's recommendation: worthless!
The Public
Hearing is a big deal for those Michigan prisoners fortunate enough to get one.
It often leads to freedom.
The Public
Hearing, as we have explained many times in the past, is conducted by the
Michigan Parole Board. Its purpose is to determine if a prisoner is fit and
ready to reenter society. It is held on the campus of a Michigan prison and chaired
by a member of the Parole Board. Another participant is an Assistant Attorney
General, who does the lion’s share of the questioning. For more than a decade, AAG
Scott Rothermel has participated in hundreds of such hearings.
I’m not going
to focus on differences of opinion with him. Today I want to focus on his recommendation to the Parole Board.
At the
conclusion of each session, Mr. Rothermel explains to the inmate that the final
decision regarding the outcome is completely up to the Parole Board. He does
not have a vote, he says, and can only make a recommendation. Then he goes on
to recommend against the prisoner’s release. Every time!
He once
explained that if the crime was of a serious nature, especially if it involved
injury or death, the recommendation is no parole. Automatic. Rehabilitation,
renewal, rediscovery, rejuvenation, and yes, conversion, may seem important
when considering a prisoner’s reentry to society. But not to the Attorney
General’s Office. The decision is made in advance.
I honestly
expected a different recommendation this week, because a Public Hearing was
conducted for my friend Jimmy. Two years after he was locked up, James decided
he was going to make a difference. For the next 30 years he worked with
state and federal officials to help solve crime. Up to 8 cases. Numerous
arrests, all the way to the federal level. A two-year investigation into an MDOC
fraud case saved the state millions of dollars.
Despite all
of this, despite the fact that Jimmy had letters of support from important
state and federal agencies with whom he had worked, despite the fact that he
had actually assisted the Michigan Attorney
General’s Office, and despite the fact that the Assistant Prosecutor who put Jimmy away submitted a letter supporting
his release…despite all of this, a recommendation against commutation! Can
you believe it?
True, the PB
often ignores Mr. Rothermel’s recommendation and approves the release of inmates who
have satisfactorily contended that they can and will be productive citizens.
Which then
begs the question: Where’s the integrity in a line of questioning that ends
with a recommendation already cut and dried? That recommendation means nothing.
Zero. Zilch. Nada.
Why does the
AG’s office persist with this policy? Perhaps it has appeal to the Attorney
General’s “law and order” support group. One thing is certain: If, perchance, that
prisoner screws up, the AG can always say, “See, I told you.”
Improvements
in this procedure are long overdue. The State of Michigan can do better.
Comments