January 16, 2004
Boundary County Prosecutor Jack Douglas lauded comments made Monday by Idaho Supreme Court Chief Justice Linda Copple-Trout during her State of the Judiciary speech on the success of drug courts in Idaho, something Douglas has been working to promote in Boundary County since he was appointed last January.
“Her comments support my idea that there are better ways to address crime and punishment than to simply lock everyone up,” he said. “There are certainly people whose crimes warrant incarceration, but there are also those who deserve a second chance, without the stigma of going to prison.”
Not only does it give the individual a second chance, Douglas said, it saves taxpayers considerable expense; both in processing cases through the courts and in housing inmates. Building even more prisons, Douglas said, will do little to rehabilitate people, but it will certainly cost the taxpayers a lot of money.
One of his first steps upon returning to the prosecutor’s office was to reinstate the Youth Accountability Board, and Douglas said the success of that program has been significant. He said the drug court is similar; rather than run low level, first-time offenders with a good chance of mending their ways through the jail system, give them a chance short of going through the courts.
In her speech, the chief justice said that no area is more troubling to her than the impact of drug and alcohol abuse on every aspect of life, and she called drug courts, 30 established just last year around the state, the “bright light in an otherwise bleak picture of society’s inability to curb illegal drug and alcohol use.”
Ada County and Magistrate Judge Eugene Marano in Kootenai County were the first counties to institute drug courts, and Coppel-Trout praised their success. In Ada County, only 19 percent of offenders who “graduated” from drug court were later arrested, compared to 77 percent of those who failed. The recidivism rate for those who go through the traditional court system is even higher.
“This is about getting the community involved to help those with problems straighten out their lives without the negative connotations that arise from going to prison, where there is little help,” Douglas said. “It’s about finding a reasonable compromise.”
The Youth Accountability Board has had similar success. Instead of being processed through the courts, where the brunt of any punishment often falls on the parents, juveniles charged with minor offenses can admit their guilt and face the “sentence” of a panel of adults, who mete out a much more personal and effective brand of punishment, requiring them to apologize to those they’ve hurt by their actions and make restitution, and by imposing requirements, such as essay writing, to make them recognize the true scope of what they’ve done.
If the juvenile fails to meet the terms of their punishment, they go to court, but not that many fail.
“Most recognize that they’ve done wrong and they want to make up for it,” Douglas said. “By giving them that chance, most are able to turn themselves around, and they’re better for the experience. We don’t want to turn our children into the hardened criminals of tomorrow if we can avoid it.”
While Douglas admits that funding isn’t available immediately to establish a drug court in Boundary County, he is a strong advocate that this is a direction the county should move toward.
“There is resistance,” Douglas said, “but you can’t argue the results. We don’t have to lock everyone up and throw away the key the first time they make a minor mistake. Giving them a chance to prove they can mend their ways with help from the people in a community rather than a judge in court doesn’t deny justice, and it’s better for everyone involved.”