Sunday, July 5, 2015

Officer's death prompts parole review

Throwing open the prison doors to put an inmate out on probation is always a gamble, but there are times when it’s plainly just a losing bet.

Officer's death prompts parole review

Rafael Jones
Rafael Jones

Throwing open the prison doors to put an inmate out on probation is always a gamble, but there are times when it’s plainly just a losing bet.

The release of the ex-con charged in the fatal shooting of Police Officer Moses Walker Jr. just before the Aug. 18 attack clearly is a case where law enforcement officials would, in a heartbeat, turn back the clock.

Had the accused gunman, Rafael Jones, 23, not been on the streets that day with his alleged accomplice, Chancier McFarland, the 19-year police veteran Walker could have reached home safely after working an overnight shift.

But apart from the fateful encounter during what police said was a robbery, it’s the likelihood that the courts and probation officers may have let Jones slip from their grasp a second time that has caused Gov. Corbett to order a much needed inquiry.

Do you support Gov. Christie's go-slow approach to enacting New Jersey's medical marijuana system?
No, seriously ill or dying patients are suffering needlessly during the two-year delay
Yes, Jersey's just trying to avoid other states' abuses that led to a booming recreational pot business
No, looks like rules requiring patients to travel far are meant to thwart the program
Yes, might give the state time to scrap the whole idea

Following disclosures in The Inquirer, Corbett on Thursday put state Board of Probation and Parole officials to work on an in-depth probe of Jones’ initial prison release and possible missteps in the days following that, if avoided, might have landed Jones back in custody.

First and foremost, the probe must determine why Jones wasn’t put under house arrest for violating his probation as ordered July 25 by Common Pleas Court Judge Susan I. Schulman. Certainly, the drug test that Jones failed in early August should have been a red flag. And Jones’ parole officer was reported to have tried to get his supervisors’ OK for an arrest warrant.

Even if probation officials are found to have followed protocol to the letter, the events surrounding Jones’ release point up a serious flaw — in that state officials acknowledge that delays happen routinely in setting up electronic monitoring for some convicts put on house arrest. By contrast, Philadelphia probation officials under the courts’ direction employ a better system of refusing to release prisoners until they can be fitted with monitoring devices.

In addition to Corbett’s inquiry, necessary reviews of parole procedures in this case are being sought in both the state House and Senate. With that said, it’s important to assure that any reforms arising from the Jones case are calibrated carefully.

Both Pennsylvania and New Jersey parole systems have been roiled by controversy in the past over the release of convicts who went on to commit murder and other crimes. After the 2008 halfway house release of the killer of Philadelphia Police Officer Patrick McDonald, as well as the parole of a Philadelphia-area Warlocks motorcycle club member who killed Franklin Township Police Sgt. Ippolito “Lee“ Gonzalez in 1995, the parole of all prisoners was suspended while inquiries were conducted.

The long-term goal of the investigation into Jones’ case, though, has to be to make parole less of a gamble — not shut it down completely, since that risks untenable, runaway prison costs and undue hardship for convicts who’ve paid their debt and eager to stay out of trouble.

Most convicts get out of jail at some point. Fixing flaws in parole procedures will keep fewer offenders from returning to crime.

We encourage respectful comments but reserve the right to delete anything that doesn't contribute to an engaging dialogue.
Help us moderate this thread by flagging comments that violate our guidelines.

Comment policy: comments are intended to be civil, friendly conversations. Please treat other participants with respect and in a way that you would want to be treated. You are responsible for what you say. And please, stay on topic. If you see an objectionable post, please report it to us using the "Report Abuse" option.

Please note that comments are monitored by staff. We reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable. Personal attacks, especially on other participants, are not permitted. We reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions.

Additionally comments that are long, have multiple paragraph breaks, include code, or include hyperlinks may not be posted.

Read 0 comments
comments powered by Disqus
About this blog

The Inquirer Editorial Board's Say What? opinion blog showcases the work of the editors and writers who produce the newspaper's daily and Sunday opinion pages.

Find out more about The Inquirer's Editorial Board here.

The Inquirer Editorial Board
Also on
letter icon Newsletter