Women incarcerated as innocent bystanders
 

I was doing some research and I came across this. There are quite a few innocent women doing time due to thier association with drug users/dealers.

"Because women are often minor participants in criminal
economies (Radosh, 2002), they are especially
affected by mandatory minimum sentencing laws. For
example, under the drug-conspiracy mandatory minimum
laws, a woman can be incarcerated for several
years for driving her boyfriend to a place where he
buys drugs or for picking up the phone at her house
where he sells drugs (Gaskins, 2004). Women are
tied to these criminal elements because of personal
relationships, yet the court cannot consider these relationships
when sentencing (Raeder, 1993). Additionally,
women are less likely to be able to provide the
prosecution with insider information—the only consideration
that can shorten the mandatory minimum—because
they are less likely to know much about the
criminal activity. Furthermore, women may not want
to inform on their partners and family members, either
out of love or out of fear."


(Gaskins, 2004).
Sources: U.S. Census, Demographic Profiles, 2000; U.S. Census,
Educational Attainment, 2000.

From-
"Reducing the Incarceration of Women:
Community-Based Alternatives"
-Angela Wolf, Ph.D.
SPECIAL REPORT
from the National Council on Crime and Delinquency. 2006

That is very interesting... and scary at the same time.

I'm glad the exabf is out of my life, I could have been doing some time.

I know... it kinda makes me glad that I live over an hour away from ras, b/c if I had been closer by, who knows what kind of trouble I would have gotten into while trying to "help" her, as I saw fit at the time?

I have a friend whom something like that happened to. The drug was in there house. Never mind that she wasn't there or would have tested clean as she didn't use it.
She went to jail.

One of the reasons I get down kind of hard on some people.....wives, husbands of addicts.

Then what happens to the kids?

State custody.

Me too!

yeah... and what's even scarier is that my sister had, at one point, dragged my mom on one of her transactions (she told mom she was "paying someone off" and mom wanted to go to make sure she got back safely)... I shudder to think about what would have happened if HP had not been keeping mom safe that day!

Yeah, what happens to the kids. That is what I'm doing my research paper on, that's how I came across this.

I've come across some real horror stories. Kids left to fend for themselves for a time, etc.

Sometimes families are broken up even though the mom was not really what you would call a 'criminal'.

A spouse can not be forced to testify against the other spouse.
I am sure that with enough money and a good set of lawyers that law could be changed based on the above law.

But then again...if a dealer, family member or not is in my house...I will call the police.
There was a law that came out in the late 60s early 70s. Before the law..if you were as much as in the same house with a person smoking pot...you would get arrested along with them. The new law said that the person holding was the only one who could be arrested.
If a person is a partner in the working of a crime...they have brought trouble onto themself.

Family member or not...if they are a dealer.... 911

Must be state law?
My friend was at work.
They found a joint on the back patio.
Came back and arrested her later.

And lawyers cost money which she didn't have.

Just sad.

At least they let the grandparents take temporary custody until after court.

I had an interesting situation with a dealer this past spring...

I found out that one of my students was a dealer. This really tore me up inside, not only b/c I was having a really hard time with ras at the time, but also because I was developing such a bond with him (he was actually working in my class... not so for his other teachers- he made a B in my room and failed everything else, but he earned his B with flying colors). I am so thankful that nothing of that nature ever came up during my class... that is one of those things they don't prepare teachers to handle...

What I posted is based on California laws.

There have been many cases where the wife/girlfriend was not even aware of the amount of drugs in the home or dealing activity.

Aware does not equal innocent bystanders.

Harsh punishment for ignorance of "that" law would be more correct.

Still the children suffer...even if no one is arrested. Drugs in a home...children suffer.

If you have no knowledge of drugs in your home, that makes you innocent, doesn't it? Do you mean that she is complicit even if she has no knowledge of the activity her bf/husband is involved in?

I agree with raerae... I mean, it's one thing if you sit by and allow the drugs to wander into your home, but if you genuinely don't know it's happening?

hmmmmm.....just late night rambling....but bet you can't get arrested for giving car keys to drunk mate or etc. Or having 100 bottles of beer on the wall. Or for letting a raging alcoholic in the house.

That would be the problem and laws should have the burden of proof placed on the courts to prove you knew.
Innocent till proven guilty and not guilty because of association.
5 teens standing together, The police show up. One teen is a known dealer. The police want him. They arrest all 5 and charged the one who had the bag closest to him with possesion. The bag wasn't his but was place beside him so that the one who owned it wouldn't be the one caught. I would say he was guilty because of association but the judge said the burden of proof was not shown well enough to find him guilty.
He learned his lesson that day and has not been around drugs since.

If they are not of legal age you can be arrested.
Oh and giving keys to someone who is drunk(even if you don't know it)... Yes people do sue.
The paper said...I was irresponsible in my choices of who I allowed to use my car.

"Women are the fastest-growing segment of the U.S. prison population, with almost 80 percent of them incarcerated for drug offenses. The deep perversity of the system lies in the fact that women with the least culpability often get the harshest sentences. Unlike the guilty drug dealer, they often have no information to trade for a better deal from prosecutors and might end up with a harsher sentence than the dealer gets.

Then there are women like Kimba Smith, in California, who probably knew a few things but was so terrified of her abusive boyfriend that she refused to testify against him. ( Those who agree to testify, by the way, frequently are murdered before they have a chance to do so. ) Smith paid for her terrified silence with a 24-year sentence! "

-Walter Cronkite From his "DRUG WAR'S MANDATED INJUSTICE" published in the Domimion Post

I just posted this as an eye-opener for women who may be putting themselves (and thier families) at risk...

Not trying to argue, I just see it as not entirely fair.

and an excellent eye opener it is.

I don't see it as entirely fair either. Most laws that give mandatory sentencing are not fair. They are just feel good laws that politicians use to gain votes.

Thing is though unless a person is innocent...be it one day or 10 years...there is a cost when we don't do thing right.