Mandatory sentencing violates basic rights as citizens
Editorial >By: Emerald Editorial Board
On June 16, 2000, Jeffrey "Free" Luers and Craig "Critter" Marshall torched three SUVs at the former Romania truck lot and then tried to set fire to the Tyree Oil Co., both in Eugene. They were later arrested and charged with a litany of felonies.
Luers pleaded not guilty to the charges, while Marshall pleaded guilty. Because of mandatory sentencing requirements, Luers received a 22-year-sentence for his crime; Marshall, having copped a plea with the state, received a sentence of a little more than four years. Marshall has slid into obscurity - or, among some activists who post to anarchist Web sites, has become an activist non grata - due to his surrender to the police. Yesterday, the court overturned Luers' 22-year sentence, ruling that he was improperly convicted of back-to-back prison terms, according to The Register-Guard.
During the initial trial, both Luers and Marshall maintained that they were environmental anarchists - freedom fighters for Mother Earth. At his trial, Luers attempted to explain his actions: "I did this because I'm frustrated that we are doing irreversible damage to our planet - our home." He would later say that he didn't want to "justify" his actions, apparently unaware that he had attempted to do just that.
For the past six years, Luers has spent his time trying to justify his actions. He clearly relishes his time as a "political prisoner," writing the sort of navel-gazing, angst-ridden dispatches: "They crammed these beliefs/down my throat/From the day I was born/until the day/I choked," writes Luers in a very bad poem. Luers has a lot to say, all of it posted on his Web site, each post more precious than the last.
The activist community of Eugene contends that Luers is a political prisoner. He is not. He wants to be a martyr. He is not. He is, unfortunately, somebody who got caught up in an extremist movement that promotes property destruction and the sort of behavior that can lead to injuries or death. Regardless, mandatory sentences are generally disproportionate, and this case is no exception. They exist to take away judicial discretion. They exist to be excessively punitive.
Oregonians do not have to support Luers or his cause to see that his sentence was excessive. He was given an opportunity to work with law enforcement officials and declined, leading to his 22-year sentence. But the state should not punish him for declining to cooperate with authorities, and his sentencing should have been left to the discretion of the courts, not wrongheaded laws.
Luers may be a model "activist" but he is not a model citizen. He is, nonetheless, a citizen and should be afforded his basic rights. Mandatory sentencing takes away our rights as citizens, as it unnecessarily interferes with the way the courts operate. You do not have to like Luers, his poetry or his demeanor to understand that.
PDF
1 comment:
I do not agree with the way oregonians have taken away the basic rights citizens have with their mandatory sentencing. You look at the inmates that are now serving time from those with a few days to those with the rest of their lives. Even if they work right along with the corrections department to complete everything that they ask them to do for their sentence. The corrections department at anytime can revoke them just because. The correction workers tell these men and women that if they cooperate and do as they are told they will get less of a sentence or the time they serve will be shorten, if the inmates slip up oh well their loss if the correction employes slip up and don't do as they say they will big deal its just the inmates loss and they have to deal with it or go to solitary and their sentence lenghtened. I believe the have rights just the same as those on the outside and if the workers mess up they should be made to fix the situation instead of ignore the screw up. I know this doesn't have alot to do with the mandatory sentendcing but its basic rights no matter how you look at it. If we continue at the rate we are going not only will our childrens children not have a livable habitat but most of them will be behind bars for nothing.
Post a Comment