Evening star., 1934-11-04
PAROLE SYSTEM JUDGED
BYPROTECTION STANDARD
La Roe Says High Per Cent of Released
Prisoners Give No More Trouble
and None Erred Seriously.

| case OF these parOled ViolatorS, num-
bering only six out Of ITS, there was
nothing approaching felony or other
serious crime.
There have recently appeared in
the public press figures purporting to
show that the percentage of parole
violations is greater here than else
where. Such figures are apt to be
misleading unless carefully analyzed.
Our board Is so strict In specifying
the conditions of parole that some
PAROLES are subject to arrest If they
are found outside their home after
1890 pm.
Under some circumstances a pa
rolee may violate his parole by drink
ing alcoholic liquor, by violating the
traffic rules, by being careless about
making his reports, or even by 6riv-
ing car.
The board does not usually revoke
parole for trivial offenses, but even
for such minor offenses the men are
arrested and called before the board
for an explanation.
This classes them as violators of
parole.
Thus, the strictneSs of the board
increases both the number and the
percentage of parole violators.
Cites Three Illustrations.
The undesirability of abolishing the
parole system may be illustrated by
three typical cases.
Case No. is that of high school
junior, son of excellent parents, who
has a sweetheart in Virginia. He
"borrowS" a neighbor's Ford car for
the purpose of visiting her. confident
that he can get it back before the
neighbor returns from work. The
neighbor returns early. notifies the
police, who arrest the thief" He is
sentenced to a term of ten months.
After two months he appears before
the Parole Board. Both he and his
parents haze been terribly Inundated
and diSgraced. Seemingly it was a
proper case for probation. Breathes
there man so heartless that he
would keep this young fellow in
prison for eight more months?
Case No. 2: A respectable young
woman marrieS man only to find
that he is an opium fiend. He makes
her life so miserable for her that
she begins the use Of drugs, then he
deserts her. leaving her penniless. In
desperation she sells some of the
opium to enable her to buy food =,
She receives a sentence of from one to
two years, the judge probably feeling
that her addiction to the drug makes
incarceration desirable She improves
rapidly at Occoquan and at the end
OF one year appears before the Pa
role Board. apparently completely
cured. She says: Il thank God for
this year in Jail, because now I am
cured"
An interested friend offers her a
good clerical position. Both the
medical officer and the superintendent
of the prison strongly recommend her
release. Is it not clear that there is
no substantial advantage to be gained
from keeping her longer in jail? Are
Christian principles to be applied to
everybody except prisoners?
More Difficult Case.
Case No. is more difficult. A
prisoner with the alcohol habit has
shown a tendency to get into brawls
while intoxicated, and has stabbed
two different persons. He has never
caused trouble while sober. He has
served all but three months of two
year sentence and appears before the
Parole Board for release. The board
is advised that an organization SINH
lar to the c. c. c. organization, is
willing to employ him in a woodland
camp where he will have the best sur
roundingS and no opportunity of get
ting liquor The board has the diff
cult task of deciding whether to keep
him in prison for the remaining three
months of his term or to release him
under conditions where hist physical
and mental condition could probably
be substantially improved. II he is
kept in prison for those three months
he will then be released into society
without any safeguards whatever
The decision will hinge on the result
of the boards study of the prisoner
and his history.
In every case that comes before 1t
the board has before it a fairly COM
plete history of the prisoner; his pre-
viouS criminal record miraculouSly
produced from fingerprint records
and elsewhere; his work record in
prison; his employment history:
character study supplied by the insti-
tutional officials; any violation of
prison rules; a study Of the conditions
under which he would live If paroled;
prospects of job and complete med
ical report In addition the board
cross examines each applicant per-
sonally, sometimes at length. Each
case is thus carefully studied, and for
obvious reasons every doubt Is resolved
against the prisoner.
Law Is Held Defective.
The District parole law is defec-
tive. 1t makes prisoners eligible for
parole after serving only one-flfth of
their sentence. A gun-toter sentenced
for five years is eligible for parole at
the end of one year The Federal law
applicable in other jurisdictions speci-
f1es one-third instead of one-f1fth.
One-half would be still better. But
the form of the statute is far less i'm
portant than the efficiency and cour-
age shown in administering it.
The judges Of our criminal courts
are doing splendid job, but it is my
opinion that some of the sentences
imposed are too short, and this causes
the board some trouble Even in the
case of hold-ups with guns, where the
statutory maximum is Is years, it Is
not uncommon to find minimum
sentence of one year and a maximum
of two years. The Parole Board must
pass on such cases at the end of one
year, and the prisoner is released at
the end of two years even if the board
denies parole. 1t is my opinion that
the minimum sentence for hold-ups
with guns should be five years.
The Parole Board has a woefully in
adequate staff. 1t has only one parole
officer in charge of more than 200
paroles. This situation would be
fraught with great danger were the