|
|
Post by Sapphire on Mar 23, 2011 15:58:44 GMT -5
What say you OOA? jobs.aol.com/articles/2011/03/15/state-takes-away-prisoners-earnings/?ncid=txtlnkuscare00000002&a_dgi=aolshare_facebookMan Saves $11,000 in Prison Wages, State Wants It Back Excuse me sir, but the state wants its money back. The state of Illinois says that Kenley Hawkins owes the entire $11,000 he managed to save earning $75 per week since 1982. The catch: Hawkins is a prisoner at the Stateville Correctional Center in Joliet, and the state paid him those meager wages while he's been incarcerated. The total cost of his stay in prison is estimated at $455,203.14. The 60-year-old prisoner is going to court to keep the state from seizing the funds in his bank account to partially satisfy that debt. It will be up to the Illinois Supreme Court to determine whether or not the state can repossess the wages paid to inmates. This will be the first time the court will address this particular issue. "To save $11,000 is miraculous, but the money we get from this guy means nothing to the state," John Maki, coordinating director of the John Howard Association of Illinois, a prison reform organization, told the Chicago Tribune. "This is not going to help create a prison culture that's more rehabilitative, which makes people less likely to offend again." It's likely to be an uphill battle if that's Hawkins' best argument. The prospect of having to pay the state back from meager prison earnings is probably not going to be a major deterrent to committing a crime. |
|
|
|
Post by Coldfront06 on Mar 23, 2011 22:24:24 GMT -5
I'm lost. He was paid these wages, he saved them instead of spending them...and now the state wants it back?? Its his...wasn't he allowed to save it? I don't understand this at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sapphire on Mar 24, 2011 1:01:17 GMT -5
I don't get it either Cold. It's punishing him for being smart and financially responsible and not blowing his money on cigaretts and ramen noodles. It seems they want to have him pay for his cost of being incarcerated, but if he didn't save anything they wouldn't be asking for it back so why now?
|
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Mar 24, 2011 6:34:47 GMT -5
I'll represent him. #leggo
|
|
|
|
Post by Noble Work on Mar 24, 2011 9:45:24 GMT -5
I'm trying to figure out what will 11,000 dollars do? It will not make a dent in the 455k+ for his stay in prison. Collecting this money will not do anything but make everybody mad, because there is still a balance. Who suppose to pay the balance? Him? His family? Taxpayers? 1982? Who gone hire him. He got some mad savings skills but the bank ain't gone hire him. Is he even eligible for state benefits? Probably NOT. Which means there will be no check coming in to garnish. Waste of time I tell you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Mar 24, 2011 9:51:10 GMT -5
Hmmm I am torn. Recidivism often occurs because a person does not have enough money when they leave prison to meet their basic necessities. On one hand I say yes he should be able to keep the money because as stated he did the smart thing and saved it. The State's receive another source of tax revenue by garnishing a portion of inmate's wages to defray expenses of incarceration (Permissible garnishments include taxes, room and board, family support, and victims' compensation according to PIECP). On the other hand I can understand if the state is only taking a small percentage that still leaves the remaining debt owed to state (although I would think labor and time served would suffice) and the victims. Most of the rulings have been in favor of the State's rights to seize the funds. www.aele.org/law/Digests/jail62.html |
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Mar 28, 2011 12:34:33 GMT -5
We can't just penalize him personally for financial responsibility. If the wages were legally earned, we either let him keep 'em or ALL inmates have to pay the state back for their stay. Can't pick and choose on a case by case basis.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Mar 28, 2011 14:13:30 GMT -5
^ You are 100% right what you do for one you must do for all. His lawyer could use that for their arguments.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kyng of JDs on Mar 28, 2011 15:19:20 GMT -5
I'll represent him. #leggo This is funnier than you will EVER know. |
|
|
|
Post by Kyng of JDs on Mar 28, 2011 15:22:23 GMT -5
I am pretty sure that when he was sentenced they told him that his sentence included a fine. If he pleaded guilty then he can't say anything about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Mar 28, 2011 16:13:02 GMT -5
I am pretty sure that when he was sentenced they told him that his sentence included a fine. If he pleaded guilty then he can't say anything about it. really? Sucks to be that dude! |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Mar 28, 2011 17:09:09 GMT -5
We can't just penalize him personally for financial responsibility. If the wages were legally earned, we either let him keep 'em or ALL inmates have to pay the state back for their stay. Can't pick and choose on a case by case basis. co-sign |
|
RubyPearl
OOA Interest
Smile at me first....
Posts: 39
|
Post by RubyPearl on Mar 28, 2011 18:58:23 GMT -5
Its called a daily subsistence fee. I'm sure there is some legal loophole in the books that will help this inmate keep his money. Sounds like he was a trustee and will it come certain privileges.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Mar 29, 2011 7:15:17 GMT -5
Take the money. While we are at it, confiscate the property of all inmates to cover the cost on incarceration. Don't we do that for nursing home patients before they can qualify for Medicaid, right? Maybe we should force spouses to liquidate all marital assets to cover the cost of incarceration.
Either pay him or don't pay him. That's the point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Mar 29, 2011 9:12:59 GMT -5
^^ WOW I did not know that about nursing home patients. Aww goodness that is harsh. What if the couple is still technically married but separated still take away the spouses assets?
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Mar 29, 2011 9:53:36 GMT -5
Church. Tabernacle. Choir. I'm talkin 'bout EV-E-RY-THING! Don't we do that for nursing home patients before they can qualify for Medicaid, right? |
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Mar 29, 2011 10:14:17 GMT -5
^^ WOW I did not know that about nursing home patients. Aww goodness that is harsh. What if the couple is still technically married but separated still take away the spouses assets? The couple has to be broke before they can qualify. Also, teh government goes back 60 months into your finances to make sure you didin't just transfer assets away from your name to avoid having to liquidate them. |
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Mar 29, 2011 10:21:52 GMT -5
Don't you have to have under $1500 (in total assets) to qualify? ^^ WOW I did not know that about nursing home patients. Aww goodness that is harsh. What if the couple is still technically married but separated still take away the spouses assets? The couple has to be broke before they can qualify. Also, teh government goes back 60 months into your finances to make sure you didin't just transfer assets away from your name to avoid having to liquidate them. |
|
|
|
Post by Sapphire on Mar 29, 2011 11:10:05 GMT -5
My thing is why pay inmates anything? If you're incurring billions of money to house them then don't give them any money. But if you give it, especially as earned wages, they should be able to keep it IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Mar 29, 2011 11:39:00 GMT -5
^ because the state and feds are getting cheap labor and inmates still have "rights" to a certain extent so they just can't work them for free why the government benefits 100% from the free labor.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sapphire on Mar 29, 2011 11:41:46 GMT -5
Well if they're making him pay it back then it was free labor. Don't tease me by "loaning" me money as compesation for services rendered and then tack on a service charge to the same amount.
|
|
|
|
Post by LejaOMG on Mar 29, 2011 12:33:48 GMT -5
^^elsewise he coulda been buying cigarettes and ramen noodles, cheese curls and toilet sausages
|
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Mar 30, 2011 7:33:58 GMT -5
I am pretty sure that when he was sentenced they told him that his sentence included a fine. If he pleaded guilty then he can't say anything about it. A fine is a completely separate issue. He would def have to pay that by one means or another. I thought we were commenting on the core costs of his incarceration. Look at it this way, felons typically return to a life of crime because they cannot legally make $$$ to support themselves. Maybe the $11K will be enough buffer to keep him from re-offending. *shrugs* |
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Mar 30, 2011 9:11:36 GMT -5
Give the man his money...that's just the system and "the man" trying to keep a brotha down LOL (joking)! They must want him to be a repeat offender becuase if you take his money away ohhhhhhhhweeeeeeeee aint no telling what he might do.
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Mar 30, 2011 9:28:50 GMT -5
How long will $11k really allow him to support himself, though? He still needs to be able to find work, and I think we can all agree that part is exponentially harder for a convicted felon...and likely even more so in this economy. Look at it this way, felons typically return to a life of crime because they cannot legally make $$$ to support themselves. Maybe the $11K will be enough buffer to keep him from re-offending. *shrugs* |
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Mar 30, 2011 9:32:33 GMT -5
Agreed, but starting from $0 and starting from $11k are different. If he shacks up with a GF and doesn't have a drug/alcohol problem, he could last a while on that.
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Mar 30, 2011 9:34:34 GMT -5
Gotcha
|
|
|
|
Post by QUIET As Kept on Mar 30, 2011 9:39:51 GMT -5
Interestingly enough, I wonder how much of that $11K he'll end up spending on court costs & attorney fees
|
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Mar 30, 2011 9:51:24 GMT -5
Interestingly enough, I wonder how much of that $11K he'll end up spending on court costs & attorney fees I'm sure some attorney would take it on pro bono for the publicity or just in good faith. Or a local law school's law clinic may let one of their third year law students work on it. I am sure legal clinics and human rights' organizations are throwing themselves at him to help because they believe there is a violation of his rights or perceived laws. |
|
|
|
Post by Kyng of JDs on Mar 30, 2011 13:18:21 GMT -5
I am pretty sure that when he was sentenced they told him that his sentence included a fine. If he pleaded guilty then he can't say anything about it. A fine is a completely separate issue. He would def have to pay that by one means or another. I thought we were commenting on the core costs of his incarceration. Look at it this way, felons typically return to a life of crime because they cannot legally make $$$ to support themselves. Maybe the $11K will be enough buffer to keep him from re-offending. *shrugs* The fine is not a separate issue. The executive by way of the correctional system may impose the fine before OR after the prison term. If he copped to it, then we are arguing semantics. The state is going to get the money no matter how the reasoning is "framed." |
|
{=}http://s2.images.proboards.com/cool.gif{/=}
