Discuss: Rethinking the Criminal Justice System

Hello everyone,

We've just opened this section of the website up for public comment. We're eager to hear what you have to say about what our contributors are writing about criminal justice. Whether you agree or disagree, we want to know what you think.

We're asking that all of you maintain the highest level of civility. We understand that there will be things that you may violently disagree with. Perhaps you are not a fan of a particular contributor. Regardless, we ask that you respect this forum by not engaging in any name calling or personal attacks. The English language has over one billion words and an argument can be successfully made without resorting to insulting vocabulary.

Any comments in this forum that engage in name calling or personal attacks will be deleted. Anyone whose comment has been deleted is more than welcome to rewrite and resubmit their comment.
If you believe your comment has been deleted unfairly, please email us at cem@centerforemergingmedia.org.

Thank you!

Seriously, you might be the one person who finally exposes the truth to Baltimore voters by exposing the incompetence at the State's Attorney's Office. I'm glad you're out of there and look forward to more. Thank You!

I agree with Ms. Cryder about Ms. Jessamy's incompetance but take issue with her blaming the judiciary for letting violent offenders on the street. She sidesteps the fact that many of the cases against these so called violent offenders were weak to begin with--the result of police acting too quickly to accuse a person on their "hit list". Apparently Ms. Cryder does not understand that the loitering statute is unconstitutional. I don't think the people in these neighbohoods--whether or not they are victims--like seeing all the young black men being harrassed and arrested by police. The judiciary has not gone far enough to prevent the illegal arrest of Baltimore's citizens. Judges that do not have a background in criminal law have a child-like trust in the states attorneys and too often acquiesce to their requests. They hardly ever challenge statements made by prosecutors. Even the good judges allow people to plead guilty to charges that are weak or in which the police violated the constitutional rights of the defendant. There is a complete disregard for justice in the "justice" system by both prosecutors and judges and, like Ms. Croyder, they justify such suspension of the Constitution in the name of fighting crime. Ms. Croyder fails to mention the hundreds of people behind bars on very low bails that cannot get out because of their lack of funds or the high bails placed on people charged in very weak cases, cases that depend on a singe unreliable witness. At bail reveiw hearings, a judge can be presented with evidence of a person's actual innocence and still refuse to lower the bail because "they are supposed to consider the facts as the state presents them." The problem is not a failure to prosecute or lenient judges. The real problem is the overzealous prosecution of the poor, the failure of prosecutors to demand good (and legal) investigations by police and a judiciary more afraid of seeing their name in the newspaper than of allowing a gross miscarriage of justice. Thank god for intelligent prosecutors willing to dismiss bad cases rather than coerce a person into pleading guilty to a lesser charge and thank god for judges who have the integrity to do the fair and just thing rather than the safe thing. My only wish is that sometime in my lifetime I will see people like Paige Croyder, Pat Jessamy and many of the City's judges be subject to the same treatment and decisions they impose on others.

Thank you Page Cryder, you are saying what needs to be said.

On a related note,

many people in the general public do searches on Maryland's Judiciary case search to find out what exactly the CJS system was doing for a particular offender. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lot of technical jargon and abbreviations in the results. Sometimes you can't even tell if the person was convicted.

Would somebody who understands the legal stuff do an article that analyzes a typical case search and translate the jargon? This would be an excellent tutorial to help people get information about an offender so that they can make a solid argument to the media or politicians.

Ms. Croyder, as a retired court reporter I have heard it all and am sad to say that Judges Miller and Braverman represent the majority of the bench not only in Baltimore City but in the State of Maryland. However, things are not going to improve but will continually get worse since Maryland is a one party state; that party being the socialist liberal party and apparently their motto is "Protect the criminal at all costs and the hell with the victims."

Page Croyder continues to write thoughtful, accurate commentary about a failed city criminal "justice" system and so succinctly demonstrates in her articles what those of us who have watched all of this misery know: that it is likely hopeless, but still deserving of a white hot spotlight. Nice work!

I must say I am stunned by some of the comments made by Paige Croyder in this column. Has anyone verified that she graduated from an accreditied law school and has been admitted to the Maryland Bar? She must think we are in the Soviet Union or Hitler's Germany. She needs to review her American history. I suggest the John Adams HBO series for starters. Then maybe "U.S. Constitution For Dummies." Let me summarize for her: People living in the English colonies in North America got really ticked off by the way their monarchy was abusing them so they had a big war that lasted a few years and people died. Then to make sure citizens of this newly created nation would be safe from such tyranny they made a contract called The Constitution. In it they wrote down all the really important stuff like an independant judiciary which shall be a check against excessive executive power (police and prosecutors) and then added a list of the really, really important stuff like free speech, freedom of religion, right to a fair trial, right to confront accuser, right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, etc. As a lawyer, she also has an ethical obligation to maintain the integrity of the justice system, which I would think includes supporting judicial neutrality and independence.

Page, are you going to opine on the actions of the criminal defense attorneys caught intimidating witness a week or two ago (Ivan Bates drafting a contract for a defendant to pay off a victim and Leslie Stein telling a witness in jail that he will go home in a body bag if he snitches). Jessamy implies that these are rare occurrences. The fact that these two got caught in one week makes me thing that this is so commonplace that these two got so brazen to get caught. I heard of other stories about defense attorney camping outside a witness' house for hours after saying they didn't want to talk. How common is this? Is Jessamy going to charge them or even investigate this? Love to hear your thoughts.

Ms. Rowland, are you suggesting that a typical case of yours involves a person falsely accused of a crime (or do you just believe everything your client tells you)? How many cases would be typical, 80% of your cases? Please, let us know unbiased you are and tell us what percentage of your clients are innocent. Now, I don't mean those clients that have an excuse in your eyes (like he was just hanging around his friend when they decided to carjack some one and he just went along for the ride or he couldn't get a job so he dealt drugs because there is too much hassle in getting public assistance).

Also, it's sad those Young Lawyers couldn't explain that the people accused of a crime were a danger to the public safety and a threat to skip court which is why they were in chains before trial. Why don't you visit the Medical Examiner's office and see how many people like your clients end up in the morgue from the violence in Baltimore.

I understand that Ms. Croyder did graduate from law school. However, the question to be asked is did she ever sit in a court room and try a case? Did she ever speak to witnesses who contradicted the police or offered a different theory? The answer is no, she never tried a case. Ms. Croyder sat in an office at Central Booking and filled out paperwork stating that everyone charged should be held without bail or with the highest bail allowable. Ms. Croyder also sat in an office with Ms. Jessamy and determined what prosecutors derserved days off. She was a prosecutor like the President is the commander in chief, they sit and walled offices and tell people what do. Shameful.
Ms. Rowland is correct, people take deals after they tire of waiting 18 months for a jury trial while rotting in jail.

Page Croyder's name is spelled P-A-G-E; there is no i in her name. I could not help but notice that Ms. Rowland and Anonymous-08/25/2008 ("Paige Croyder-is she lawyer?") have made made the same spelling error.

Ms. Rowland: Your sarcastic remarks regarding Ms. Croyder's education ("Is Croyder actually a lawyer?") were not clever, in my opinion, rather an embarrassment --to you. Your comments reflected negatively upon you and you alone. It would be refreshing to hear your point of view without the childish digs.

Page Croyder was interviewed on the Ed Norris show on FM Talk Radio 105.7 recently, and in it she speaks of her law experience and credentials. It is a very good listen:

http://www.1057freefm.com/topic/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioI...