Evening star., 1934-10-14

removed from the Judge. Many judges
would undoubtedly be glad to be re.
lieved of duty which they know the!
can perform only in an unsatisfactory
way.
For half a century it has been tht
well-considered judgment of those re-
sponsible for the vocational rehabili.
tation Of convicted offenders, and, II
more recent years. of a growing mum.
Der of police officials. prosecuting Off
GERS and judges, that the function o.
determining innocence or guilt of Of
tenders should be separated from tht
functions of determining what treat
ment, training. work or reQuital serv.
ice will be required of offenders and
deciding when they will be permitted
to 60 outside of institutional walls OF
buildings.
Scientific determination of sentence
should be achieved through a State
sentencing, clemency and parole
court. The creation of such a court
would effectively coordinate the work
of courts and penal institutions. The
problem of handling the criminal is
one process from the arrest to re-
absorption into society. 1t should not
be broken into half a dozen discon-
nected parts, as it is now. A central
court, whose sole duty it would be te
determine the initial sentence and
periodic re-sentence, or reclassif1ca-
ton, could bring to bear all of the
scientific skill available for the re-
education of the criminal and would
be able to set the time of parole intel
ligently and carry out supervision o1
the parole with background of al
the knowledge obtainable about the
man.
I formed a special Commission on
other problems in Indiana.
This outstanding group of experts
recommended that such a court be
created. consisting of a member OF
the Supreme Court of the State, des-
ignated by the Governor to represent
the judiciary, and the directors oi
the divisions of classification, educa-
ton and training and of probation
pardon and parole of the Department
of Public Welfare: That, in consider
ing recommendation from the State
classification center that the super
intendent of such center be a men,
Der of the court in dealing with al
cases held under his Jurisdiction; and
that in passing upon the eligibility
for parole of persons alleged to have
met the requirements established by
the court the superintendent of the
institution where such inmate is then
confined be an ex-ofhcio member for
the determination of such eligibility
Services Of Psychiatrists.
The personnel of the court would
differ in other respects from most
courts of the land in that it would
have the continuous services OF
psychiatrists, psychologists, social
workers and vocational advisers
This technical staff would study the
man, assemble their information and
present it to the Judge with recon-
mendation for preliminary sentence
No definite sentences would be given.
The man might be given minimum
of one year with the understanding
that he would come up for parole
hearing at the end of that time.
During the year further study OF
the man would be made and careful
records of his development in the
institution prepared. A summary OF
this information would be made
available to the judge before the
hearing and at the hearing the tech
nical staff would sit with the judge.
The man would be brought in and
his case would be considered with him.
The decision might be to grant parole
at once, or it might be to dismiss the
case for six months. Then he would
reappear before the. court. There
would be nothing perfunctory about
the hearing. 1t would be sympathetic
but businesslike. It would bring
about not uniformity in sentences for
the same offense, but uniformity of
policy and consistency in treatment
Of the criminal.
The chief weaknesses which have
appeared in our existing legal ma
chinery and which have hampered
the development of central SEN
fencing, clemency and parole courts,
have been:
1. The prevalence Of perjury in
courts and in institutions encouraged
by the methods and procedure Of
American courts.
2. The bargaining which grew out
of pleas of guilt in lieu of trials.
8. The poor quality of so many in
stitutional officers and employees, due
chiefly to their lack Of professional
training and to the poor salaries paid.
4. The interference Of politics,
which in recent years has taken the
form of business and professional
criminal support of racketeering in
American cities.
S. The unwillingness of State Leg
islatures to appropriate necessary
funds to pay for or to support the
continuance of sufficient number Of
experts either In institutions or in bu-
reaus of police or in public welfare
departments to permit government to
compete on terms Of equality with
the brilliant and resourceful persons
employed by the criminal.
The purpose of a State sentencing,
clemency and parole court might be
accomplished In slightly different
way. Il the law Ia 20 changed that