Untitled document-16.pdf Lecture Notes
Document Details
Uploaded by ReverentPraseodymium2904
Austin Community College
Tags
Summary
This document discusses criminal justice topics, specifically focusing on examples from case studies. The speaker emphasizes the importance of constructive criticism and offers a discussion of exculpatory evidence as a key topic in the study of law.
Full Transcript
Want to know what you guys think of what I'm doing. 0:00 And I, I know, like somebody had said that and I know I can be kind of scatterbrained at times, and I don't mean to be....
Want to know what you guys think of what I'm doing. 0:00 And I, I know, like somebody had said that and I know I can be kind of scatterbrained at times, and I don't mean to be. 0:03 It's just, uh, I think I think it's part of it is just. 0:12 That's who I am. Um, and I don't mean to be, but I, you know, that can happen. 0:15 And then, uh, I've got a lot of balls in the air, and, uh, sometimes I feel like a juggler and and then, you know, the other thing is, I have a brain. 0:21 I don't know about you. Do you guys have run a brain? Like. 0:30 I swear, because I've been kind of in a bubble, you know? 0:33 Um, I feel like my memory is not what it normally has been, so. 0:36 Yeah, I see a couple of you feel that way also. Thanks, Arianna. 0:42 I hope I have. I really hope I have, uh, yeah. 0:46 Cecilia, I don't want to say that, but probably a little bit of age there for me too. 0:50 Just a little tiny bit. Okay. So let me pull up. 0:53 So. Oh, by the way, evaluations are out there, I don't know. 1:00 So I don't remember how that works. Um, for online classes, I should know. 1:05 Shame on me. But, uh, just to let you know, like, you know, if you want to give me criticism, the only thing I ask, 1:10 please, is that you, you know, kind of explain, like, so if you say, you know, you suck at your lectures. 1:19 Okay. What exactly do you mean? 1:26 You know what I mean? Because that's the only way that I can improve is if I know more about what you mean. 1:29 Just remember that I'm a human being to. I read these, and I really take them to heart. 1:35 And that's not saying that, you know, I want you to, you know, you know, feed me, uh, all these compliments. 1:40 No, I'm not saying that. I'm just saying that, you know, constructive criticism is always helpful. 1:47 Okay, so I did my little spiel there. Uh, thank you. 1:54 Audrey. That makes me feel so much better. Sometimes you just never know how it's going, right? 2:00 Because I don't get to see your beautiful faces, so, I don't know. 2:04 I can usually, you know, tell how it's going in a class by looking at people's faces and thinking, okay, that that joke didn't go over well or. 2:08 Yeah, they're they're bored to [INAUDIBLE]. But when you're on line, man, it's tough. 2:16 It's really tough. All right, my friends. So this is my favorite chapter. 2:20 Um, I think, you know, it's just a kind of, um, a cop fascination, if you will. 2:25 Uh, I never, ever want to be a part of the criminal justice system outside of talking about it. 2:31 I think we all feel that way. Um, but it is some interesting cases. 2:37 I've given you a couple as a choice for you. Discussion board number two. 2:43 You know, there's several issues in there that I think are interesting, um, that relate to this chapter. 2:47 So, you know, any of them would be interesting for you to write about. 2:53 All right. So, uh, the first part of chapter 13 talks about the Waco, um, the Waco incident with the biker shootout. 2:57 And I just for sake of time, I'm not going to be able to talk about that, 3:08 but I do want to mention that it would be very good within that section, it talks about exculpatory evidence. 3:12 Okay. In that section, which is the first part of chapter 13, it talks about the Waco bike shootout, which is really interesting. 3:21 Uh, you know, I like to always start a case out when I'm writing this chapter and, you know, it happened in 2015. 3:30 Take a look at it. It's got some really crazy stuff that happened. 3:37 But the one thing I really need you to take away from that section is the term exculpatory evidence. 3:41 So let me read you the definition and then I'll explain, uh, evidence that helps a defendant and may exonerate the defendant in a criminal trial, 3:47 evidence that helps the defendant and may exonerate the defendant in a criminal trial. 3:59 So one of the best cases. Okay. And I'm going to try and keep this short because I could talk about this case all day. 4:04 Yes. Incriminating. Incriminating evidence is when you know something is is showing that you're guilty, right? 4:13 So that's a good one, Lillith. So one of my favorite cases. 4:20 Very disturbing. I wrote about it in the seventh edition. 4:24 17th edition. This is the 17th enhance that we're looking at and using. 4:29 But it's the Anthony Graves case. This case is so disturbing. 4:33 Uh. He spent. So bad with numbers. 4:38 Once it was 18 years, and a majority of those, I want to say 15 or 16 of them were on death row. 4:42 And the case involves this, uh, man. 4:49 Oh. What's his name? He was a cousin of his. 4:52 Of his girlfriends that he met once. And he said that Anthony Graves was the one who committed a crime. 4:56 Well, let me tell you the crime really quickly. This, uh, this family. 5:05 It was a grandmother. It was, um, a teenager and two younger, uh, boys, I believe. 5:09 Somebody went in there, shot up, uh, some of the people, bludgeoned one of the kids and then set the house on fire. 5:16 And this guy. Oh, it's driving me crazy. I cannot remember his name, but he said, yeah, you know, he went to the funeral. 5:27 One of the kids was his son. He went to his son's funeral, remember? 5:34 They were set on fire and he had burn marks. So of course the police say, yeah, come on in. 5:38 We need to talk to you. They did a lie detector and he failed the lie detector. 5:44 Carter. Thank you. Arianna. Yes. That's it. Carter. So the guy's name is Carter. 5:49 Told you run a brain. Uh, and he's the one who has. 5:55 He failed the lie detector. That's very true. Lilith, lie detectors are not. 5:59 Number one admissible in court. They are not. And number two, they can be, you know, not reliable. 6:03 But they are good tools, right? They're good tools for police to gauge the situation. 6:09 Listen, I took one, okay? I, uh, went through the process with the Central Intelligence Agency. 6:16 Uh, when I was in grad school, uh, I was going to work for them, and I had to go through a very extensive two week process in DC. 6:22 Learned a lot. And those things are very intimidating, very, very intimidating. 6:30 And so I think it's a great tool. If I had gone through that process, I might not understand it as much. 6:35 But it is a really great tool and kind of intimidating somebody. 6:40 Even though I had never done anything right, I'd never done anything, but it was just nerve wracking. 6:43 You're hooked up to things that measure, you know, your heart rate, you know, you're sweating, you know, just different things. 6:48 So this is a good tool for police to use. So he failed his lie detector. 6:55 Again this is not it is saying that the person is guilty and it can't be used in court. 6:59 But it does help because a lot of times people go, okay, all right, you caught me, I did it. 7:04 So Carter says, listen, I was there. I was there when this happened, but I didn't do anything. 7:09 It was Anthony Graves. Anthony Graves did this, and I was there, and I just was. 7:17 I don't remember how he explains it, but essentially he was in a daze. 7:23 What the [INAUDIBLE]? You're in a daze when somebody is killing innocent children. 7:27 And particularly your child doesn't make any sense. 7:31 Yeah, that's a good one, Ryan. Maybe he was saying he was in shock. 7:35 Uh, and so he points to Anthony Graves. Anthony Graves is arrested purely on this guy Carter saying he did it. 7:39 They look into him, he's shocked. 7:47 He doesn't understand what's going on, and they find that one of the Texas marshals did come across that he was at the time. 7:50 There's a, um, a jack in the box. I call it Jack in the crack, but there's a jack in the box. 8:00 And he was there, and the employee remembers him being there roughly at the same time that the police believe this crime happened. 8:07 And we're talking about that this place is miles away. 8:15 And he was with his girlfriend and his brother. Okay. 8:18 For some reason, this didn't come up in the case, which is, you know, mind boggling. 8:22 So to make a long story short, Anthony Graves sits on sat on death row because this person who he and met once, 8:29 he didn't even know this guy because this guy said he did it. 8:39 He did this. He's guilty. I don't know about you that, but that scares the [INAUDIBLE] out of me. 8:44 Okay. And we're talking about a case that happened. What was it? 8:49 Late 90s, early 2000. That just is mind boggling. 8:53 Okay. And Anthony Graves is African American, and I just do want to put that out there. 8:58 Uh, so Carter at one point tells Sebastian, who is the, uh, prosecutor in this case. 9:03 He says, you know what? I got to tell you the truth. It was me. I acted alone. 9:13 Anthony Graves didn't do anything. He's a he has already been found guilty and given the death penalty. 9:17 By the way, it's now Anthony Graves, his turn to go up for his trial. 9:22 And that's why Carter speaks out. Sebastian doesn't like this because he's a prosecutor. 9:26 And why doesn't he like this? What do prosecutors need or how are they chosen? 9:32 How is the prosecutor chosen? Anyone? 9:38 Anyone. Yes. Good. Cecilia. 9:42 They are elected. So this was a huge case. 9:46 And people wanted justice, right? You had children and an elderly woman who were brutally murdered. 9:49 Yes, they want justice because they are elected. 9:58 Ryan. So when this happened, people wanted somebody to be caught. 10:01 And I believe that when this was going down, it was close to Sebastian's, uh, election. 10:07 So when Carter says this and says, no, I acted alone. 10:13 You know I did it. So best is not happy about it. 10:17 He starts to threaten, uh, Carter and essentially saying that, uh, I don't know. 10:21 Do you want me to bring in your your girlfriend? Maybe she was involved, you know, kind of thing. 10:28 He winds up saying, okay, you know, he kind of blackmails him. 10:33 He goes on the stand and points to Anthony Graves, and Anthony Graves gets the death penalty. 10:37 All based on this one person's testimony. So he sat on death row. 10:43 Carter is executed when he's going to be executed. 10:48 Before he's executed, he confesses. 10:54 Because you're given a couple of words you can say before they do this. Your last words. 10:57 And he says. Charles. Uh. 11:02 Anthony Graves is innocent. I committed this crime alone. 11:05 Now when somebody is said this, this is not something small. 11:10 You're about to die. You know what I mean? This is something kind of huge. 11:15 Eventually, another prosecutor looks into the case. 11:18 They're able to challenge this to an appellate court. And finally, after something like 18 years, Anthony Graves is released. 11:22 Released after spending X number of years. Now, what they went after the prosecutor for is exculpatory evidence. 11:30 He had evidence like the, um, Jack in the crack. 11:39 Sorry. Jack in the box. Uh, the fact that Carter said, you know, I acted alone. 11:44 This is information that must be given to the defendant's attorney. 11:52 Because this could clear this person. Right? 11:57 Do you understand? So this is huge. It's really important to cases, but sadly, you will have prosecutors who will do these dirty things. 12:00 And what is really sad is if you look at the end of the chapter, I talk about district attorneys who. 12:09 They want to be reelected. And this particular, uh, prosecutor, this district attorney got a slap on the hand. 12:17 He got his license removed. He got a fine. He got some community service. 12:24 Really? That's all he got after sending a man to death row for too much of his life? 12:29 It's mind boggling. Sorry. I just think it's such an important case again. 12:38 It's disturbing that any one of us could be in this situation. 12:43 Wrong place, wrong time. You know, uh, you never know. 12:47 Okay. And it's not like we're talking about a 1950s case, either, right? 12:51 Uh, Ariana says. What's even scarier is that he would have been executed if Carter didn't speak out. 12:56 Yeah. That is that's a good point, that if you hadn't had, you know, 13:02 this guy saying this and people going and people were fighting for Anthony Graves outside who did believe he was innocent, okay. 13:06 He had committed some petty, petty crimes, I think maybe 1 or 2, but really petty. 13:14 And then you had this evidence of this Jack in the box employee who says, yeah, I saw him. 13:19 He was here at X amount of time, which is believed to be the same time the murder was committed. 13:24 The murders rather. Okay, so exculpatory evidence. 13:29 Sorry. Just one of the cases that really bothers me. 13:32 And I wrote about it in the 17th edition. All right. 13:36 So there are different types of crimes, right? 13:40 We have felonies and we have misdemeanors. 13:44 Right. We have the Texas Penal Code. I talked about this in the beginning of the chapter and the Texas Penal Code. 13:47 Let me give you the definition. Sorry. 13:54 The Texas Penal Code is a body of laws that lists crimes and their punishment. 14:01 Okay, so it essentially tells you if you commit this crime, this is the possibility of what your punishment could be. 14:08 They come up with the with the penal code after every legislative session. 14:17 So they update it. Right. If there are new laws or if they are, um, updating existing laws. 14:22 Okay. So after I the legislative session, they will update the penal code. 14:30 And of course punishment varies, right, depending on what type of crime you've committed. 14:34 It could be anything from a fine up to imprisonment. 14:38 Right. Now, when it comes to the types of crimes, we're talking about what's called graded penalties okay. 14:43 Graded penalties. And just to give you an idea, in 20, what year is this? 14:51 I messed this up. 2016. This just gives you an idea because obviously we're looking at the 17th Enhanced Edition instead of the newer edition. 14:58 But as of 2016, there were over 2600 crimes that were listed as felonies. 15:08 A less serious crime is classified as a misdemeanor. 15:16 Right. And so we have these graded penalties. 15:20 Okay. That's for non-capital fences. 15:23 And harsher penalties for repeat offenders. So a graded penalty. 15:28 Let me read it. Depending on the nature of the crime. 15:34 Non-capital felonies are graded as first degree, 15:38 their second degree there's third degree and what's known as either fourth degree or state jail felonies. 15:41 Then there is the A, B, c. There's three types of misdemeanors, right? 15:49 There's a, b and c obviously A is the worst out of the misdemeanors. 15:53 Okay. So graded penalties is talking about first degree second degree third degree and then state jail felonies again known as fourth degree. 15:59 And if you look in your book in chapter 13 I give you a, uh, a table that gives you some of the crimes and what your punishment would be. 16:09 And I just want to just give you just a couple of those, because I think it's fascinating that some of these lie where they lie. 16:20 Go ahead. Ryan. What's up? So I actually have a question about the misdemeanors. 16:28 Uh, because I know any type of crime, whenever you're arrested and actually found guilty of something, it does go on your permanent record. 16:34 Now, what's something like a class C misdemeanor, for example? 16:42 It goes on your record. Does it wind up like stacking? 16:47 Um, uh, I'm trying to formulate a better phrasing this question a bigger thing. 16:52 Does it impact other. Uh, are you saying does it impact like other cases that may be against you? 16:58 Not exactly. More like, okay, saying I get a class C misdemeanor doing something one day, and then a few months later, 17:05 I'll get another class C misdemeanor, and then a year later, another class C misdemeanor. 17:13 Um, but they're on a different class C misdemeanors or it's on for the same thing. 17:19 Uh, okay. 17:25 The reason I bring this up is because the current event, uh, two that I did about, um, SB 20, uh, 1925, where it was against the homeless people. 17:26 Yeah. So I was curious. No, because basically that bill, you know, 17:39 for those who don't know that bill and states that the police can give a $500 fine and a class C 17:44 misdemeanor to any homeless person that is caught on public property for extended amount of time, 17:50 does not really clarify the extent and amount of time what that equates to. 17:56 But right. If, uh, the police were to catch a homeless person five, six, seven times in the same spot or different areas, 18:03 what that does it turn to a bigger crime or does it just stack? 18:13 No, I don't think so. Now, listen, I am not an attorney. I just play one on TV. 18:19 Right? Uh, I'm not an attorney, but, uh, there's a lot of discretion that's given to law enforcement. 18:24 It's like you said, sometimes it could be that, you know, because the law doesn't define the time. 18:31 It could be that they're like, okay, you know what? We gave you a warning. 18:37 You know, we gave you a second strike. Third strike, and you're still here. 18:40 Now we're going to cite you for it. So my understanding is if they cited them for it, right, they can cite him again, him or her, 18:44 whoever, if he's doing that again or whatever misdemeanor crime for a misdemeanor that fits. 18:53 So you could have, depending on what you've done even in one setting. 18:59 Again, I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not a 1,000%, but I believe this is this is the law. 19:03 You could have committed several different misdemeanors. 19:10 And, you know, let's say they're all see, my understanding is you can be cited individually for each one. 19:13 Right. And so they they are the maximum, as you said, is a $500 fine. 19:19 So it would just depend on the justice of the peace or the municipal court that sees it to decide, 19:24 you know, what they're going to level your fine to be. Uh, does that make sense? 19:30 It does. Thank you. I was just curious about that. And. 19:36 Yeah, that's a good one. Like, you know what? What does what do what does the state expect if they can't even afford a home. 19:39 And I think again, this is left up to the discretion of law enforcement. 19:48 This is what will happen to is that you have all these citations and these people cannot pay. 19:52 And then how are they going to pay? You know, they're going to they're uh, there's going to be a judgment against them. 19:58 I don't know how it works, but it is it is pretty ridiculous. 20:03 So I just want to give you some examples. Okay. So a first degree felony okay. 20:08 This would this could be murder. And this could be theft of property up to $300,000. 20:13 This is where you can get this is that's what a first degree felony is. 20:20 And you can get confined for up to 5 to 99 years, or a fine of $10,000. 20:23 There's a second degree felony. 20:29 And just to give you an idea, um, aggravated assault, it says the law says or the penal code says aggravated assault, including a spouse. 20:31 Why does it say that? Do you think? Aggravated assault, including a spouse? 20:42 What does that part of the law say? Why do they have to differentiate, including a spouse? 20:48 Okay, la la says domestic violence. Cecilia says abuse. 20:55 Ryan, what are you thinking? Uh. Uh, actually, I was about said the exact same thing that Lenglet and Cecilia were mentioning. 20:58 Yeah, I that's what seems logical to me. 21:06 Um, I haven't found a definitive answer on that, but it just seems logical. 21:09 Right? Unfortunately, there had been a period of time well into the 90s in which police could be called for a domestic dispute. 21:13 Right. And police would not be able to necessarily or didn't want to go after the spouse because, uh, they're just fighting. 21:23 They're married. It's okay. So now they put it in the law to say, it doesn't matter if you're married, right? 21:31 Same thing with rape. You can't say, well, we're married, I can. 21:38 I didn't write them. I mean, that's part of the marriage. 21:41 No, that's that's not it. So this is, you know, kind of to the times, right? 21:45 Audrey says they didn't do anything before. Absolutely. Unfortunately, I can attest to that. 21:50 Uh, my stepfather would harm my mother. 21:55 Police would come. This was in the late 80s and just be like, you guys need to stop. 21:58 Settle down. That was it. Um. Ryan says, or it's the husband's, right. 22:02 Yeah, they would say that. It's my right to treat my wife. 22:08 You know how I want. Or the the wife as well. Uh, a true Ariana. 22:11 It's unbelievable. Yeah. Cecilia. Good point. Now the police can't press charges, right. 22:17 And depending on the nature of the situation, you know, if it's beyond a squabble. 22:22 Absolutely. Depending on, you know, what kind of evidence there is right on the person. 22:27 Okay. So then the third degree felony is impersonating someone online. 22:32 And that is not to mean that I go on Facebook and pretend to be Cecilia. 22:39 Okay, we're not talking about that, right? We're talking about, you know, if somebody is trying to get a loan in your name, right, 22:44 they're doing it online or they're trying to usually have to it has to do with financials. 22:50 Right. And and so that is a third degree felony, a state jail or fourth degree felony. 22:56 It's called either one possession of four ounces. 23:02 Now by the way this has changed and I apologize. I should have written down what it has gone to. 23:06 But it used to be possession of four ounces to 1 pound of marijuana. 23:11 Um, I don't remember. It's still possession of marijuana, depending on the amount, but. 23:16 And listen, I don't know. What we're talking about. 23:23 First of all, I'm not very good in measurements, but somebody explained to me, I think about marijuana, it's light. 23:27 So if you're talking about four ounces, that's a pretty good amount for my understanding, right? 23:33 Yes. Uh, well, it has been decriminalized, right. 23:40 But you can still get fined for it. Um. Yeah, I need to. 23:45 I need to update myself on that. I don't know the I'm going by what we have in this chapter because that's what we have in this chapter. 23:49 Yeah. Four ounces. I would imagine again, I'm not good with the measurements, Maya, but I would imagine that's a lot. 23:57 Then there's class A misdemeanors. This is where you're getting into your this is a different graded penalty. 24:04 So if you're resisting arrest that in the penal code is a a class A misdemeanor where you can get confinement from one year, 24:10 uh, and a maximum fine of $4,000 and a class B misdemeanor is a terroristic threat. 24:20 I thought that was interesting. It's only a class uh, B misdemeanor. 24:26 And we're talking about you can be confined to 180 days. 24:31 Uh, and a maximum fine of $2,000. The last one is the class C misdemeanor, which I think is the most interesting. 24:35 Yeah, that is interesting. Lilith, uh, a class C sexting. 24:43 Sexting that is sending or possessing sexually explicit images of people who are 17 or younger by a minor. 24:49 So my understanding of that, let me read it again. 25:01 Sexting, which is sending or possessing explicit images of people 17 or younger by a minor. 25:05 Um. So my too much, too much conversation going on about about the weed. 25:13 I'm sorry I brought that up. It's an Austin thing, I think, because even in the class, there's some distraction on that. 25:19 But, uh, the sexting, my understanding as the law is written or is the penal code is written, 25:25 is that if you're sending messages between, you know, that are inappropriate, right? 25:32 We're talking about it says sexually explicit images and the person is 17 or younger. 25:38 Okay. Uh, then you can get in trouble even if you're a minor. 25:46 Right? If it's somebody who's 15 sending pictures to a 15 year old, it doesn't matter. 25:51 You can both get charged with a class C misdemeanor, right? 25:56 Yeah. I mean, it could be classified. I mean, I would think that more. 26:01 Explicit. I don't know how to say this without sounding wrong, but yes, I do agree that it's a type of child porn. 26:08 Uh, I just think. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Maybe more action. 26:15 Yeah. Okay, that sounds that doesn't. 26:19 I don't know how to explain how I'm thinking about it. It is a form of child pornography, but it's a little different in some ways. 26:23 Right. Not by much. All right. The next. 26:29 The next thing I need you to know is enhanced punishment. Okay. 26:33 Enhanced punishment. Let me get to my notes where I want to be. Okay. 26:37 So when we're talking about enhanced punishment, there are three types of crimes where one can be charged with enhanced punishment. 26:40 So we're talking about if you are charged with organized crime, if you're a repeat offender. 26:50 Or if you commit a hate crime. So one of those organized crime, a repeat offender, will crime. 26:58 And of course a hate crime is a crime based on race, ethnicity, religion, age, gender, disability or sexual orientation. 27:04 So this is somebody going after you essentially for who you are. 27:17 Right. Um, so those are three types of crimes that can can get enhanced punishment. 27:21 Enhanced punishment is the next higher degree of felony the next higher degree of felony. 27:28 So for example, let's say you committed you you have committed a you're a repeat offender. 27:35 So you've been charged several times with the second degree felony of aggravated assault. 27:42 Okay. Let's say it's been several times. If that happens, the prosecution can can go after an enhanced punishment. 27:47 Where instead of you getting a second degree felony, you would get a first degree felony. 27:58 I hope that makes sense. Or let's say, you know, you have been charged with organized crime. 28:04 They could go after you and not try to seek enhanced punishment, but they have that option on the table for that crime or hate crimes. 28:09 Uh, yeah. We're going to talk about hate crimes in just a minute. Okay, so a capital felony. 28:17 When we're talking about a capital felony, this is a crime in which death penalty is on the table. 28:24 Okay. When you have a crime where death penalty is possible, there are two stages, right? 28:30 The first stage is, uh, the trial of guilt or innocence. 28:38 Okay. If you are found guilty, then it moves to the second stage, 28:43 where the jury determines whether to give you life in prison without the possibility of parole or the death penalty. 28:48 Okay. So we're talking when we're talking about a capital felony case. 28:59 We're talking about a death penalty case. And it depends on the circumstances of the crime. 29:03 It's not a necessarily straight murder. I don't know how, because you could murder someone, and it could be like vehicular manslaughter, right? 29:09 Uh, there has to be, you know, certain factors that line up for it to be a capital felony case, which we'll talk about later. 29:18 Okay. Uh, just really brief. 29:25 I don't want to spend a lot of time on this, but drug crimes. I decided to write about this because there's a lot of of cases, uh, 29:29 a lot of people sitting in jail or in prison related to possession of controlled substances. 29:37 Right. And we're talking about a lot of those people have mental illness. 29:44 They're homeless, they're impoverished, and usually a combination of all three. 29:48 Right. And prisons cannot handle these cases. 29:53 They cannot handle them. They're not equipped to, you know, so it's really sad because they'll sit there and face time, 29:57 maybe given medication while they're there for their mental illness. 30:03 And then once they are released, it's like you're on your own. Um. 30:07 What else do I want to say about that? Uh, now, I do want to just mention that there are drug courts, right? 30:11 We have seen a big change. Republicans and conservatives used to be really, really big about lock up drug offenders and throw away the key. 30:18 Yeah. I don't know if you remember Rush Limbaugh. He was an extreme. 30:27 You know, he was extreme to the right. He would talk about how, you know, drug offenders should be hung up. 30:31 Right. Uh, yeah. And not only is it interesting how that he died of lung cancer, 30:37 but it is also interesting that he would talk about drug addicts and how much he hated them and how despicable they were. 30:43 And then not too long after that, he gets hooked on OxyContin. 30:50 So it's, you know, it's kind of it's it's an interesting situation, but it it really was we saw a lot of conservatives. 30:56 We saw a lot of Republicans who really were like, okay, let's throw the book at them. 31:03 But then they started to realize it's incredibly expensive, right? 31:07 It's incredibly expensive to house people for these crimes. 31:12 So they started to kind of pull back their they started to do some, uh, helping nonviolent offenders, offenders, easing parole criteria. 31:16 And then they also established drug court. So any county with over 500 or excuse me, with 550,000 people or more, have to have a drug court. 31:26 What's up Ryan? Uh, I just find it. 31:38 I don't want to say ironic that we lock. Drug users and drug dealers up one. 31:42 There's plenty countries out there that have rehabilitation programs that go okay. 31:49 Why are you doing this? Are you doing it because you get to do it. 31:56 Cool. That's, you know, let's get you off this because obviously it's not, you know, it's killing you. 31:59 Are you doing it because you don't have a job? Make a steady job. 32:05 Okay. Won't that help, you know, cough up your resume and get you back into workforce things of that nature. 32:09 And yet here in America, it's like no drugs are just so bad. 32:15 Like everybody up and then like, no Rush Limbaugh, no hang them from trees side, you know, and it's like, no, they're human beings. 32:20 There'd been point into a very troubling situation. 32:28 And instead of helping them, you just want to kill them. 32:34 No. Right. And like what's what's stopping somebody. 32:37 Yeah. Living in on you and hanging you or killing you make. 32:43 Come on. Exactly. Well, and Cecilia brings up a good point. 32:48 America is very far behind. You know, this is we're just now really starting to see. 32:51 And it's still a taboo subject, but we're still really starting to see the acceptance more of addiction is, uh, a it's a disease. 32:56 It's a disease like diabetes. And people can't it's hard to wrap their minds around that. 33:06 And Cecelia brings up another good point. It's not just heroin or, you know, cocaine or, you know, meth. 33:11 We're also talking about like, for instance, with Rush Limbaugh, prescription drugs, 33:18 which is becoming quickly, particularly during the pandemic, a major problem. 33:23 Right. And we see a connection. 33:27 Ariana brings it up, a connection with, you know, mental health care is a big issue, but we just don't pay attention to these health issues. 33:29 I'm sorry. Go ahead. No problem. 33:37 I just wanted to add that he was a chronic smoker, so no surprise that he got lung cancer. 33:40 Uh, but that apparently he claimed himself to be cured after seeing a faith healer, uh, and then obviously died. 33:48 Very interesting. Yeah, I, I mean, cigarets are a an addiction. 33:57 I have an addiction to soda. I will admit it. And television, I love TV. 34:03 It's really sick. Uh, but soda is kind of my vice, you know? 34:09 So we all have different addictions, right? And Rush Limbaugh was no different. 34:13 But, yeah, it goes back to some of these things we're saying is that there is a connection of why someone does this. 34:18 And instead of addressing the issue, we go, as Ryan said, straight to let's punish you, lock you up and throw away the key. 34:24 Thankfully, they started to see. At least they started to see the issue and change things. 34:32 People started to see the dollar signs of it. I don't particularly care for it that way, but at least there were changes. 34:39 So drug courts are interesting because they allow people to go in and to not have to serve time and to get into a program, uh, for recovery. 34:46 Couple problems with that. If you do research, is that the people who would most benefit from these drug courts can't go to them when our courts open. 34:56 When when is the court open? What hours? Is it on the weekends? 35:07 Is it late into the evening? Yeah. Business hours. 35:11 Uh. Business hours. And so you're talking about people who work. 35:15 Maybe they don't have a car. How are they going to get there? Maybe they have children. 35:19 What's going to happen with their kids? They have to. Under a program that the drug court creates is often that they have to go in. 35:23 You know, certain times, you know, and have random drug tests and you got to pay for it. 35:30 It's not free, you know? And plus you got to take time off of work and all these things. 35:35 So a lot of individuals and we see that particularly people who are minority are not able to do it for the reasons just said. 35:39 And the other problem is a lot of lawyers don't even tell their clients that this is an option. 35:48 So. All right. Uh. Oh says there's a new movie with Michael Keaton coming out about the opioid addiction. 35:54 Oh, yeah. Uh, I've had a lot of students who have faced this problem, you know? 36:02 So, uh, it's something that is kind of near and dear to my heart in that regard. 36:07 Okay. So let's see, um, let's go ahead and go on to hate crimes. 36:13 So when we're talking about hate crimes, we have to talk about the James Byrd Jr hate crimes. 36:17 That how many of you heard of James Byrd Jr and what happened to him? 36:22 I'm curious. Okay. 36:26 Good. Lilith is heard. Anybody else heard about James Byrd Jr? 36:29 Okay, good. I've had a lot of students who don't know about it. 36:34 Um, and of course, with CRT, uh, it's probably not going to be taught too much. 36:38 I'm talking about critical race theory, right? So this is a case involving, uh, in 2000. 36:45 Now, what year was 1999? 1998. 1998. 36:52 Uh, a black man in Jasper, Texas. Jasper, Texas is a tiny little town very much filled with, uh, division amongst whites and blacks. 36:56 So it's 1998, one of the most horrific crimes. 37:06 You know, during that time, uh, James, Virginia was walking home from his family who had a party. 37:09 Uh, some some individuals pull up in a truck and they're three white men, and they say, hey, come on, we'll give you a ride. 37:16 So he hops in the back of their truck. They go about a mile down to where they can't be seen. 37:25 They get out of the car. They beat him up. They tie his ankles, uh, to the back of the truck, and they take off. 37:29 They drag him for miles, uh, to his death. 37:39 You know, uh, the. What do you call him? The, uh, coroner says that he was alive for all of it until they took a sharp turn. 37:44 He is, uh, whipped around, hit something, and decapitated. 37:54 So the whole thing is is horrific. 37:58 But also, I just think about the unimaginable pain he must have been in the. 38:02 These three white men. Uh, they two of them get the death penalty. 38:08 One gets life without parole. Um, and the reason the the one person doesn't get, uh, death penalty is because he was not directly participatory. 38:13 Uh, so because of this, in 2001, they passed the Johannesburg Junior Hate Crimes Act. 38:26 And in this act, it goes to what hate crimes, as we defined earlier, this is if someone commits a crime against you because of who you are, 38:32 whether that be your gender, because you're disabled, because of your race, your religion, your sexual orientation. 38:41 But as I think somebody mentioned, this is a really sad part of it is that this law does not protect against oops, 38:48 does not protect against offenses based on the victim's sexual identity or expression. 38:57 Okay. 39:05 And so this is really sad because according to research, transgender people are 28 times more likely to experience physical violence than others. 39:06 Think about that 28 times more likely to experience violence. 39:19 And they are not the individuals who are. Protected. 39:23 Okay. And yeah, that's a good point, Ariana. Uh, it just keeps going up higher. 39:27 And there there are some cities. Dallas, Austin, Fort Worth, El Paso that have ordinances, local ordinances, which is a local law. 39:33 Right. Just affecting that city that protect transgender Texans. 39:42 Now often if you see on here it says DA's which are prosecutors, they will often use what's called a plea bargain. 39:49 Okay. And a plea bargain is where they will allow the defendant to plead down to a lesser crime, uh, 39:56 or receive a shorter sentence, plead down to a lesser crime, or receive, uh, a shorter sentence. 40:05 Why would they do this? Why not just hit him hard and go for whatever they're convicted of? 40:11 Or possibly I should say I'm sorry. What? They're, uh, allegedly being charged for. 40:17 Anyone. Uh. 40:26 Quite really. Go ahead. Ryan. Doesn't have to do with something that they are trying to. 40:33 Oh, I had it. And then I lost it. That's me. 40:42 So I'm going to mute myself until. No worries. 40:47 Happens to me every day. Uh, so it's good to see a fellow person who brain farts. 40:51 So. Yeah. Uh, faster. Uh, conviction. 40:56 Yes. Because at least if they do a plea bargain, right, they can kind of ensure that this person serves time or has a record. 41:00 Right? 41:10 Whereas and it's also a good way for the district attorney to tell the voters, I saved you money because a trial costs, uh, a lot of money, right? 41:11 So there's kind of different pros to it. Although it's infuriating as a victim to see that happen. 41:20 But again, at least there is a charge against this person. Um. 41:27 Okay. I'm sorry. Let me go back to do. Doo doo doo doo doo doo. 41:31 Always come into myself. I don't know what that's about. All right, so let's talk about, uh, I don't know how to say this without coming off wrong, 41:37 but the death penalty, it's one of my favorite talk topics to talk about because it's still. 41:46 So there's so many crazy facets to it. 41:52 Right? So Texas is one of 31 states, along with the federal government, that imposes the death penalty, uh, for the most serious of crimes. 41:55 So just it's really interesting to note that before 1923, it was counties that came that, 42:09 excuse me, they carried out executions by hanging, should say by hanging. 42:19 So before 1923, the state of Texas said, counties, you're going to deal with this, you're going to deal with executions. 42:24 And the method is going to be hanging very simple, you know, uh, effective after 1923, the state said the legislature required, 42:33 you know, what, the state needs to be the one to execute offenders, and they move to, uh, electrocution. 42:44 And so kind of the idea here is that going into electrocution means, you know, we become more progressive. 42:51 That's a sick way of thinking about it. But that was, you know, the message in some ways, Texas wanted you to get it now between 1964 and 1982. 42:59 There were no executions that occurred in Texas. Now, this wasn't just, oh, out of the bottom of their heart. 43:11 Texas decided to stop. No, a lot of this had to do with the Furman versus Georgia case. 43:17 One of the most important cases in that the death penalty, um, scenario in this case, 43:23 the Supreme Court ruled that the state's use of death penalty was unconstitutional. 43:30 Why? Why did this the Supreme Court say that the use of. 43:37 The death penalty by states was unconstitutional. 43:45 What's the what's the rationale behind that? Anyone. 43:48 No ideas. Cruel and unusual punishment. 43:58 Say again. Say again. Cruel and unusual punishment. 44:02 Okay. Okay. Um, it it could be a facet of that. 44:06 So that's. You're not wrong, Olivia. There is a facet to that. 44:10 Although the argument has been that it's not cruel and unusual because the punishment fits the crime sort of thing when when they talk about cruel. 44:15 Unusual, which is kind of mind boggling. They're talking about, like, if you, uh, are using, uh, if something is above what what how do I say it? 44:26 What is, uh, what is equal to the crime? 44:38 So for example, if somebody is commits petty theft and you execute them, that is cruel and unusual because it's way above. 44:42 Um, okay. So the reason they decided to do it, according to the textbook, uh, Audrey is kind of on to it. 44:49 More, uh, she says more blacks were killed. Yes, because they found that it was arbitrary and racially being applied. 44:56 So you would have, uh, uh, blacks who committed crimes and white who committed the same crime, and they would get different punishments. 45:04 And you were more likely to see, uh, uh, black men, particularly, right, who were given the death penalty, whereas, uh, a white man who, 45:14 again, did the same crime would not receive that punishment and arbitrary meaning that there wasn't any set kind of rules. 45:25 It was like, uh, you get you get the death penalty and you get the death penalty. 45:31 Kind of an Oprah moment there, if you will. All right, so we come back here. 45:36 So Texas had to rewrite its death penalty laws. 45:44 Okay. They had to rewrite its death penalty laws in 1973 to meet the court's standards for fairness. 45:48 And so what they did is they kind of set up some rules to say this is what would be considered a capital, uh, a capital felony case. 45:54 Uh, the first execution after Furman wasn't until 1982. 46:04 We also became the state at that time that use lethal injection. 46:09 We were the first state to use lethal injection again. 46:14 Looking as though we're being progressive, right? We went from hanging to electrocution. 46:19 Now we've got this cleaner way of murdering. 46:23 Yeah, getting rid of people by, um, using lethal injection or using drugs. 46:28 Uh, just wanted to to chime in. 46:37 I, I know you mentioned this in the recorded lecture, but I just wanted to chime in that actually both methods of lethal injection, 46:39 first of all, they're not administered by actual medical professionals because actual medical professionals would never do that kind of thing. 46:50 Uh, secondly, um, they're actually both now kind of under review. 46:58 Um, because the Paralympics, um, don't always work because these aren't administered by. 47:06 Professionals. They're just administered. But whoever. 47:14 Um, and if, uh, paramedics and and the. 47:18 Yeah, the the anesthetics aren't administered properly, then you feel I believe it's some sort of potassium thing that stops the heart. 47:24 And that is supposed to be absolutely excruciating. It feels like your actual blood is on fire. 47:32 So yeah, we just when we try to use. Yeah, that's a good one. 47:39 When we used to use the three drug prong process, which we'll talk about in a little bit. 47:43 There was one of the drugs that, uh, was used to euthanize animals, you know, and it we eventually moved to a different drug. 47:48 But there are arguments about this drug as well, because we went to a one drug process and they. 47:58 It's a synthetic. 48:05 It's not the original drug, because the manufacturer of that drug was a European manufacturer, that you're executing people with this drug. 48:06 Uh. We're stopping. So what did Texas do? 48:15 They decided to go to a compounding pharmacy, which are not regulated by the FDA and have, 48:18 uh, you know, this is where you kind of try to get as close to the original drug as possible. 48:24 And they're using that. And inmates have sued, saying we're not guinea pigs. 48:30 That's cruel and unusual. How can you be using us? And to my. 48:35 I don't think there was a ruling on that. I think it was actually thrown out. 48:39 There has been cases bringing forward that, um. 48:43 It's cruel and unusual to use, uh, these drugs, uh, for execution. 48:48 But the courts have said. No, it's it's it's not within the realm of cruel and unusual. 48:53 So I don't know where it's at as of today, but yeah, it's going to be a hard upward because so many people, 48:58 so many Texans and many Americans are okay with with the death penalty. 49:05 Okay. So we use the lethal injection. And over the past 30 plus years, Texas has executed more capital felons, uh, than any other state. 49:11 Okay. We have we have killed, uh, individuals. 49:22 We have executed individuals at even higher rates in California. 49:27 California has a their number one in terms of population, right? 49:31 We have one of the highest rates of execution, even in the whole world. 49:36 Okay. Uh, he used to execute individuals. 49:41 Um, every we're talking about every, uh, every other month to every month, like, we're talking about 1 or 2 individuals. 49:45 I mean, it used to happen so often, whereas California was, um, maybe executing 1 to 2 individuals a year. 49:53 Big difference. We started to see things change around. 50:04 Was a 2015 when they when they moved from they they used to allow juries to choose between the death penalty and life with the possibility of parole. 50:08 They've changed it now to death penalty and life without the possibility of parole. 50:20 So why did we see a slowdown? Yeah. That's recently. 50:26 That's recently. Ryan. Why did we see a slowdown? 50:30 Why did Texas start to see a huge difference now in the amount of individuals that were being executed? 50:34 Since roughly about 2015. Any ideas? 50:41 So the jury now has when they had the option of death penalty and life with the possibility of parole. 50:48 Right. Jurors I mean, that's a that's a really hard decision. 50:57 Think about that. You have to have that on your shoulders for the rest of your life, that you were part of sending someone to die. 51:01 So, you know, oftentimes but oftentimes in that situation of life with with the possibility of parole versus death penalty, 51:08 they were scared to say, oh, it's possible this person could get out. 51:16 And these are some really heinous crimes. Right. 51:20 When they move to life without the possibility of parole, that's what we started seeing more jurors say. 51:2
