[speaker001:] what do you think about um the way the criminal justice system handles trials
[speaker002:] well you know they tell you that you get tried by a jury of your peers
[speaker001:] yeah
[speaker002:] but you know it's pretty hard to try let's say the man down the street that's living on Social Security or somebody that's on a limited income to be tried by a jury of his peers if most of the people like the juries that I've served on are businessmen
[speaker001:] uh-huh
[speaker002:] okay now they don't understand that you know maybe he needed fifty dollars so he held up the seven eleven
[speaker001:] yeah
[speaker002:] okay they don't understand that because they have fifty dollars all the time so you know I think that it a a trial by your peers should be exactly that someone in your own age bracket someone that you know you can't really do it ethnically you know but you could do it you could probably get it a little closer but then there's another thing that I disagree with in Texas is sometimes you have a jury of six and sometimes you have a jury of twelve
[speaker001:] yeah yeah
[speaker002:] and I don't know why they do that do you have any reason do you know of any reason why they do that
[speaker001:] well I think the six is called a Grand Jury and that's mostly to decide whether or not the person's actually going to stand trial or it's whether they're acquitted or whether they're actually going to be accused of
[speaker002:] okay I see
[speaker001:] you know and held over for trial
[speaker002:] okay I don't know much about the Grand Jury how do you feel about the in Texas I noticed since I've been here in twelve years that they they break up the the trial and then the sentencing part of the trial
[speaker001:] yeah I don't know I I think that uh I know that judges aren't supposed to be crooked however
[speaker002:] well we know there's a few out there
[speaker001:] yeah it seems like if you break the sentencing away from the jury and give it you give it to one person you're letting there be a whole lot more of an opportunity for something to either go wrong or for you know if if if the judge is not of high moral standards he could be bought off at much easier than twelve people could
[speaker002:] um-hum yeah it's yeah would be pretty hard well I don't think you know I don't think that if I was the criminal that I would like the judge passing sentence on me if the jury found me guilty then they should be able to decide at the same time what my punishment should be and I think it's not only that it's a waste of our money we have to have a trial for this person then two weeks down the road we have to sentence sentence excuse me set a sentencing date so now we're back in court again and that's more money spent
[speaker001:] um-hum it's not so much that I that I haven't seen a lot of really bad sentences passed either by trials or by judges what bothers me is that uh they really don't mean anything
[speaker002:] no
[speaker001:] someone could be sentenced to thirty five years and yet you know the the parole system uh it's going to let them out in in three years for good behavior
[speaker002:] and it's not working either
[speaker001:] no it's not
[speaker002:] it seems that we have more and more repeat offenders I know I don't know how you all are there where you're at but where we're at now our jails are overcrowded we just built a brand new one two years ago
[speaker001:] um-hum oh I think they're all overcrowded
[speaker002:] and it's overcrowded
[speaker001:] they've uh I think I heard Fort Worth that uh
[speaker002:] so now they start turning them loose
[speaker001:] they've been ordered to do something because their jail is so overcrowded they're not allowed to accept any new inmates now what are they supposed to do
[speaker002:] they turn them loose
[speaker001:] well no I mean they're not allowed to accept any new inmates
[speaker002:] yeah
[speaker001:] so what are they supposed to do with people that they need to put in jail you know
[speaker002:] well the way it it seems the way it's been working here's
[speaker001:] there yeah
[speaker002:] go ahead it seems the way it's been working here is they let those out that have spent two or three years out of their five to twenty sentence or five to life
[speaker001:] um-hum something that is working and I I I really like the system of house arrest where uh a someone's wear someone wears a bracelet
[speaker002:] yeah they yeah and they
[speaker001:] like a ankle bracelet that's a monitor and they are not allowed I mean the some of them are even allowed to work they can go to their regular job they come home they have to be home by such and such a time
[speaker002:] they keep
[speaker001:] they're instructed uh so that this this electronic monitor is turned on at at a certain time and it connects them up to a system where they know their whereabouts
[speaker002:] yeah all right
[speaker001:] and uh they can put a they usually install a video monitor in the house and when the parole officer calls to check on them they're instructed to turn it on and stand in front of it
[speaker002:] all right
[speaker001:] so that they can see that this person is actually at home in their house doing what they're supposed to be doing and that's working rather well that's a good system that allows people to actually continue to be productive members of society while
[speaker002:] yeah it would allow the
[speaker001:] they're
[speaker002:] yeah instead of being completely penned up
[speaker001:] you know paying back for whatever crime they've committed
[speaker002:] and that way it would give you know the probation department and parole department they've got to be overloaded with as many criminals as we have here in in Lubbock
[speaker001:] oh yeah
[speaker002:] and that would give you know at least they don't have to drive all over town trying to find one guy or trying to see six or seven people
[speaker001:] yeah um-hum I've I've really I could go on for hours about the criminal justice system and what I think we ought to do about it but
[speaker002:] sometimes it's pretty messed up isn't it
[speaker001:] well something that I really don't understand is when someone goes to jail
[speaker002:] um-hum
[speaker001:] and they have a job in jail and they work that they should I and this may sound cruel but I do not think that they should be allowed cigarettes I mean they're in jail for crying out loud what do they need cigarettes for
[speaker002:] yeah well see and there's another thing about the justice system that I don't like and there's a lot of people that tell me that that maybe my thoughts are wrong I came from California
[speaker001:] um-hum
[speaker002:] and when you're in jail they take you out just like they do in Alabama or anywhere else in what they call a chain gang and they clean the city parks
[speaker001:] um-hum oh I think that's a wonderful idea
[speaker002:] and they clean the city streets but you know we have criminals in jail that do nothing but sit on their duff all day and here it costs us seventeen to eighteen thousand dollars a year to support a prisoner and I know yeah but I know families myself that have three and four children in Lubbock that don't make that much
[speaker001:] more than that more than that I know
[speaker002:] and they're not you know they're not doing anything to support themselves while they're there
[speaker001:] the thing that the thing that gets me is that while we're supporting them they're working when they get out of jail they get handed all that money
[speaker002:] yeah yeah
[speaker001:] that really ti cks me off I think that while they are in jail and they are working their wages should go like I don't know they could uh some percentage like eighty five percent of their wages should go toward their room and board
[speaker002:] yeah yeah well
[speaker001:] figured on um a whatever basis how much it costs to actually support them for a year
[speaker002:] um-hum see now I also believe in
[speaker001:] and when they get out they should have uh I don't know you know some reasonable amount of money
[speaker002:] yeah
[speaker001:] to start like a couple of thousand dollars but there should be a limit over which they that it all goes back to the State anything that they've earned while they're in prison should go back to the State except for that you know there needs to be some allowance for when someone gets out that they have some money to start with
[speaker002:] yeah to help yeah but at least they would at least that way they would be helping pay for their own
[speaker001:] exactly absolutely that's the part that I really think we need to change
[speaker002:] and something else that I would and something else that I would like to see is is uh victim reimbursement you know because they you know like you say these guys are in jail and they're working they're getting paid but the guy that they messed over to get there or they stole something from or beat to death or has nothing you know our our victims are victimized period and the law has no
[speaker001:] has nothing right
[speaker002:] no uh regulations to deal with that they they know how to deal with the penal system and they know how to deal with the criminal but they don't know how to deal with the victim because we as citizens I guess haven't laid anything up there for them to deal with on that aspect
[speaker001:] absolutely yeah
[speaker002:] but it's but I sure don't I I strongly disagree with any judge passing sentence on a person himself there that
[speaker001:] um-hum I think it works much better if it's if it's the actual jury
[speaker002:] yeah because well the see the jury is dealing with the seriousness of the crime the jury gets to see the whole trial as does the judge but you know if if they figure there's
[speaker001:] um-hum
[speaker002:] maybe litigating circumstances or something like that whereas maybe the judge does just doesn't care you committed this crime so I'm just going to throw the book at you whereas the jury may have a little
[speaker001:] uh-huh
[speaker002:] shall we say sympathy you know he did this but you know why did he do this is there is there a basis for it
[speaker001:] yeah in some cases that it it would work that way in some cases it would work the other way
[speaker002:] yeah in some cases where the judge says okay I'll give you you know two to three years and then
[speaker001:] the jury would would slam them and and I think that that the jury probably has more of a right to sentence than the judge all the time
[speaker002:] yeah well they have a stronger debate too because there's twelve people there they have to decide whether or not he's guilty and then they can sit in the at the same time and decide what his punishment would be and you'd have more than one person's input on it
[speaker001:] uh-huh yeah I think that's probably a much fairer way
[speaker002:] and you know we're supposed to be and I quote in a democratic society so you know if you can find me guilty then you ought to be able to pass sentence
[speaker001:] yeah
[speaker002:] and a lot of jurors not that I know of but you know a lot of jurors may just sit there and say yeah he's guilty but I don't have to deal with it from here you know so the judge takes care of all of that
[speaker001:] yeah it might be more it may would be more work for the jury but it would be a more responsible way to deal with it
[speaker002:] yeah it would uh serving yeah serving on the jury would be definitely more responsible you'd have to be a definitely more responsible person
[speaker001:] the thing that I I don't really like I I don't know if uh a lot of jury selection processes that I've seen have been a