OK, my friends. I think that with the last posting of Bradley, I end up the conversation. His words were good plus now is a few of us talking (although we have the fourth highest "views" in the criminal section of the forum - who is watching and not talking?? Who is out there?? Spooky stuff this web reality.)

John, I accept your admonishiment for stepping out of bounds but I think you know I did it for the right reasons of trying to move the ball to improve the system in light of a vacuum of ideas and a developing crisis. Moreover, the "cut probation terms" proposal I made was the modest, prudent one we discussed in the prior posting, having judicial review of early discharges but changing the presumption of release at eligibility. Ideally, this would have reduced the terms and population is a methodical prudent way. I did not proposed cutting probation terms per se as others have proposed.

Hey, what I said to the leadership in 2003- that we were headed for a crisis, is were we are today. My last projection, was my best projection. Moreover, the capacity shortfall of today would be a lot higher if it is not for the fact that they are releasing inmates at rates higher than in the last six or seven years. If they would have adopted the original budget cuts proposed in 2003, it would have been a disaster. And believe me, a lot of those guys actually believed they could have made those cuts. More astonishing was the fact that very few of them understood how quickly this system can get out of balance because of lack of capacity or alternatives and how that would have negatively impacted public safety and increased costs.

I wish we could have done it the way we did it during the Punishment Commission- those were the best years. We all worked together, argued together, you all supported the use of good information for policy making, and, at the end, we adopted good policies that more or less we all agreed with. Yes, and we had great jokes together. Oh, well, some profane, but nobody got offended.

We are getting old (I just got an invitation to become a member of AARP -what is with that?!!) and, John, our kids are no longer little babies like in those years. A new generation has taken over as is supposed to be in a dynamic democracy. The new generation has a different style, a combatitive style, a divide and conquer style, a do it-my-way-or-the highway style. John, it is different from before, that is for sure. Maybe that is what we need, who knows. I wish them well. We will see the result in the next few years.

Let me emphasize again, I have great respect and appreciation for your job and what you do for Texas. I have great appreciation for Bradley, Kepple and my friends at TDCAA. I have never done a web conversation like this - too public, too subject to future misrepresentations, etc - but I did it at the urging of Kepple because at the end, when all is said and done, we have important perspectives that needed to be discussed. However, we all share our desire to have a safer Texas, a more effective justice system and a system that protects our freedoms.

Heavy stuff!!

I am headed for the Carribbean where life is slower, worries are less, and people strongly believe that natural forces that you have no control over shape your existance a lot more than what we tend to think here. I am ready for my doses of that healthy attitude!!

Thanks Breen, Leonard and others.

Good Doc signing off!

As a probation officer and only from that perspective do I post, the mandatory early termination talk is practically irrelevant. The offenders that likely would qualify are the same type offenders that already seek early termination or in the alternative require little of our time and financial resources.

What we need is more funding for alternative sanctions and decreased caseloads. We would benefit from more intensive supervision of fewer offenders per officer and more sanctions for the offenders that repeatedly commit technical violataions.

There is a perception that the probation component of the system will be asked to do more with little or no additional funding because it appears to be cheaper than building new prisons, but at what cost to society? My fear is that probation will continue to supervise increasing numbers of violent offenders with stagnant or decreasing funding, little or no alternative sanctions, and no prison bed when they violate and are revoked (whether it's a third MTR on technicals or a new offense). Probation can't be the hammer hanging over the offender head without prison beds being the anvil.

Recommended reading:

Swift and Sure
By Judge William J. Cornelius

If some form of early termination passes, do we
then have to include a probation instruction, similar to the parole instruction, in jury
charges?