Currently Reading

Reform done right promotes safety and better outcomes for defendants

Next Story
Opinion // Open Forum

Reform done right promotes safety and better outcomes for defendants

With a criminal justice system plagued by persistent racial inequities, staggering incarceration rates and costs, and one of the highest recidivism rates in the country, our justice system is in dire need of reform.

But there’s a right way to reform the system, and there’s a wrong way.

The wrong way is to simply release tens of thousands of people from prison, having done nothing to address their underlying issues or to prepare them to re-enter society, and then throw up our hands when crime rates increase — as have property crime rates in San Francisco.

The right way is neither quick nor easy. To ensure lasting safety and justice for victims and defendants alike, we must reduce incarceration rates by reducing crime rates. Not by reducing the “reporting” of crimes, or re-categorizing harmful conduct so that it no longer is a crime. We need to address the societal drivers of criminal conduct, and the specific issues that cause an individual to re-offend.

Four steps to get us there:

Move away from a system focused on punishment and toward a rehabilitative and restorative justice model. The juvenile justice system provides a path. The sole purpose of our juvenile system is to rehabilitate young people. Every sentence, every probation condition, every placement is targeted at the underlying cause of a young person’s problem, whether it be mental health or substance abuse, a lack of economic opportunity, or gang influence. Working to address root causes has allowed San Francisco to significantly reduce the number of kids entering our justice system without a corresponding uptick in juvenile crime rates.

There is no reason a 19-year-old should be denied this rehabilitative focus while a 17-year-old benefits from it. We should incrementally expand these rehabilitative programs to the adult population, beginning with 18- to 24-year-olds. Once we show that such a focus can reduce incarceration and crime rates for “transitional age youth,” we can expand it to the rest of the adult population for qualifying offenses.

Adopt victim-centered reform. The San Francisco Police Department and District Attorney’s Office came under scrutiny this year for their (mis)handling of sexual assault cases. Survivors bravely came forward to describe a system of delays and disrespect from investigators and prosecutors that denied them the justice and dignity they deserve. So long as survivors are forced to wait hours for medical examinations, a statewide rape kit backlog exists, and police and prosecutors tell survivors that their word is not enough, these heinous crimes will go unreported, predators will remain free and others will be victimized.

Rethink the prosecutors’ role, starting with the measures of their effectiveness. Rather than a single-minded focus on conviction rates, we should judge district attorneys on the recidivism rates of those they prosecute. By doing so, we would shift their incentives from simply obtaining a guilty verdict to addressing the actual needs of the defendant. Prosecutors are well positioned to help in that assessment. In fact, the San Diego district attorney’s office has had early success with a project in which prosecutors work with the defense team, probation department and court to develop a plan for defendants so they can seek out the programs and skills while incarcerated that they will need to successfully re-enter society.

Prosecutors can highlight the staggering costs to the taxpayer of the prison industrial complex, costs that should be a factor in deciding whether (and how much) prison time is appropriate for a given crime.

Reduce barriers for formerly incarcerated people re-entering society. For decades, we have erected barriers to housing, jobs, voting and government services for people with criminal records. Not only is there no evidence these restrictions deter criminal conduct, there is mounting evidence that they increase the chances someone will re-offend.

We need to eliminate these barriers and, for example, allow the inmates who fought the devastating Tubbs, Thomas and Camp fires the opportunity to become firefighters when released. We should allow people on parole to vote, just as those on probation can. We cannot expect returning individuals to buy into a society that denies them a voice.

Such a fundamental shift in how we approach criminal justice will not occur overnight. But if we want a legal system that truly keeps us safe, it’s imperative that we start now.

Leif Dautch is a prosecutor, the former president of the San Francisco Juvenile Probation Commission, and a candidate for district attorney of San Francisco.