Posted on 11/21/2004 7:15:41 PM PST by Former Military Chick
In a state that denies voting rights to tens of thousands of nonviolent felons, violent criminals and crooked public officials have slipped past the Clemency Board with their civil rights restored.
Florida's Clemency Board has restored voting rights to murderers, rapists, batterers, drug traffickers and corrupt public officials -- at the same time it barred thousands of lower-level criminals from the polls, a Herald investigation has found.
Marvin Beauchamp shot and killed his wife in front of their 8-year-old son after an argument at the dinner table.
Former Miami Beach Mayor Alex Daoud demanded bribe money from people who wanted to do business with City Hall.
Terry Freeman robbed two people at a Broward County hotel with a sawed-off shotgun.
All can vote, serve on juries, even hold public office.
But Josh Craddock, convicted at 22 for trying to steal car parts, can't.
''It doesn't make any sense,'' said Craddock, now 26, a sales manager living in Boca Raton. He was released from prison almost three years ago after his first and only felony conviction. ``It's obvious that I've been overlooked.''
Clemency rules are supposed to ban felons who commit serious crimes from regaining their civil rights without an extensive state investigation and a formal hearing. But The Herald identified at least 400 released from custody between 2001 and 2003 who had their civil rights restored even though they appeared ineligible under the state's clemency rules.
Dozens were convicted of violent crimes, such as battery on a police officer, arson, armed robbery -- felonies that require a Clemency Board hearing before civil rights are restored.
Scores got their rights back even though clemency rules bar them if they still owe money to crime victims. Others got rights restored twice in 10 years, which is prohibited. Some regained their rights even though they should have been rejected for at least two reasons.
Two hundred other felons who committed disqualifying crimes got their rights back through a loophole in the state's clemency rules.
''There's got to be a better way to manage it,'' said Attorney General Charlie Crist, a Clemency Board member, when told of The Herald's findings.
Gov. Jeb Bush, who leads the Clemency Board, would not comment on The Herald's findings. A spokeswoman for Bush released a statement Friday saying, ``The Clemency Board continues to work on ways to further streamline the clemency process.''
Overall, the cases uncovered by The Herald account for about 6 percent of the civil rights restorations granted to felons released from custody in the two-year period from 2001 to 2003.
It's evidence, civil rights advocates say, that Florida's $4-million-a-year clemency system is arbitrary, unbalanced and unfair. In the last six years, the Clemency Board has denied civil rights to thousands of drug abusers, forgers, thieves and other nonviolent offenders whose crimes warranted little or no prison time.
`WHOLLY IRRATIONAL'
''If the state is really committed to this as a legitimate government interest, why are they administering it in such a wholly irrational manner?'' asked lawyer Jessie Allen, with the New York-based Brennan Center for Justice, which has sued to force Florida to overturn its 136-year-old voting ban on felons.
``The system is highly unmanageable, demands tremendous government resources and creates gigantic space for errors.''
Most states automatically restore the civil rights of felons after they have served their time. Florida, however, demands that they apply to the Clemency Board, composed of the governor and the three members of the state Cabinet.
The Clemency Board uses a series of rules specifying who can regain rights without appealing directly to the board, which can take years. The Parole Commission decides which applicants are eligible for the faster process, used by 99 percent of all felons who have had their rights restored.
The work is complicated, time-consuming and loaded with pitfalls that can lead to errors.
Parole examiners must sift through court records, databases and criminal files from other states. Records are often incomplete or inaccurate. Some are missing altogether.
In many cases, convictions that are decades old still count against felons.
The Clemency Board, meanwhile, has repeatedly changed the eligibility rules. Under Bush, the board has revised the rules three times in the past six years.
The last change, in 2003, added eight more crimes that disqualify candidates from regaining their rights without a hearing.
''A total mess,'' said Jeffrey Jansen, a longtime parole examiner and supervisor who retired last year. ``They were changing rules all the time . . . so one part of the state would do one thing and another part of the state would do another.''
Freeman, 32, can vote again even though he and two companions, using a shotgun, robbed two customers at a Dania hotel in 1992. He was sentenced to 18 months in prison. Clemency rules require armed robbers to appear before the board. Freeman got his rights back in 2002, no hearing required. He could not be reached for comment.
`HEINOUS CRIMES'
''Lower-level offenders should have their rights restored. But there are felons convicted of heinous crimes and when they committed these acts, they lost their rights and privileges,'' said Pat Tuthill, of Fort Walton Beach, a victims' advocate, whose 24-year-old daughter was murdered in Colorado by a felon five years ago. ``I don't feel that they should be out there voting and making important decisions that are going to have a direct impact on our communities.''
The Herald identified felons who appear unqualified simply by searching a Department of Corrections database -- one of the first places parole examiners are supposed to look when researching applicants.
''Sounds like the M-word to me,'' said Crist, referring to mistakes.
The Herald identified 200 other felons who committed disqualifying crimes -- including killings and rape -- but regained their civil rights without a hearing because of a little-known loophole in the clemency rules.
In 1985, Beauchamp shot his 23-year-old wife in the head with a shotgun as she washed dishes at their home in Delray Beach.
Convicted of manslaughter, he was sentenced to 12 years in prison but served four. His civil rights were restored in 1990, before there were rules disqualifying violent felons.
In 1999, he was convicted of another felony: selling cocaine. When the Parole Commission received his civil rights application, the murder wasn't held against him.
That's because the Parole Commission has a policy of not taking into account disqualifying crimes if the person had rights restored after that conviction, even though Clemency Board rules say all convictions count.
The loophole allowed Beauchamp to get his rights back a second time in 2002 when others convicted of far lesser crimes were rejected. Beauchamp could not be reached for comment.
The governor's office points out that Clemency Board members are given only the names of applicants deemed ''eligible'' by the Parole Commission and their most recent convictions, so the board would not know who may have a violent past before approving applications.
''We're trying to modernize this system, and it's not easy to do,'' said Florida Chief Financial Officer Tom Gallagher, a Clemency Board member. ``We recognize it.''
One of the problems is that the Parole Commission has just 55 examiners statewide.
Although the agency has repeatedly asked for more staff members, including 20 additional positions for this year, Bush has not included the request in his budget.
Civil rights advocates including Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, also say the system is stacked against indigent felons who don't have the funds or political clout to lobby their case.
''Some of it is connections. It's who you know,'' said Richard Greenberg, a Tallahassee defense lawyer, who often calls Cabinet aides on behalf of his clemency clients. He estimates that legal fees for civil rights cases run between $5,000 and $10,000, depending on how complicated the case is.
''Like anything else in Tallahassee, there can be some politics involved,'' he said.
EX-MAYOR GETS RIGHTS
Former Miami Beach Mayor Daoud got his rights back even though rules block felons convicted of public corruption from regaining their rights without a hearing. He was convicted more than a decade ago of tax evasion, obstructing a federal grand jury probe and taking bribes while in office.
Daoud said he applied for his rights in 2000. The Parole Commission sent him letters asking him to explain his crimes.
Daoud, 61, a lawyer, said he spent hours writing detailed responses. Last year, he got a certificate by mail restoring his civil rights -- with no hearing.
''I don't think the system could operate if they had a hearing for every individual,'' Daoud said. ``I think it's set up as a protective measure. My case wasn't just a static-type situation. I aggressively pursued my rights.''
This month, Daoud voted.
Most states don't disqualify felons.
If any freed prisoner in Florida wanted to, he could just move to another state.
Not while on parole.
Just checking in. You know this subject is of interest to me.
If they're on parole, their sentence isn't complete yet.
I'm glad we agree on that. I'm sick and tired of civil rights advocates arguing that criminals who have been released from prison but are on parole deserve to have all their rights restored.
I am of the opinonion that restoration of rights should depend upon good behavior after release and that it should not be available to violent criminals.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.