Offenders and Advocates Coalition for Change, Inc. (OACC) invites you to enjoy the first issue of The Connection Newsletter. The OACC itself was formed in response to the radical new approach to public safety that is being prompted by some public officials and agencies.

Our attention has been captured by audacious new correctional policies and criminal laws that tend to overly and unnecessarily punish offenders. The current system is being re-designed: programs and budgets for rehabilitation are being slashed, higher education has been completely eliminated, progression through the system for lifers has been excluded, and parole has been all but abolished for many offenders. These actions are done with relatively no input from offenders, their families, or community advocates who would like to see more even-handed correctional policies.

To partially remedy this oversight, the OACC envisions The Connection Newsletter as a rational, intelligent and calming voice in the storm of hotly debated public safety issues. Much of The Connection's information and opinions will be filtered through the eyes of offenders and their supporters; this is both a new and positive development because any debate where important views are either mute or soundless is rooted in unnecessary bias and discrimination. We believe all concerned voices should be heard, and we hope you find The Connection Newsletter informative, inspiring and entertaining.

Don't be surprised if you are roused from your bed tomorrow to read the following caption: "Maryland's Parole Statute Illegal for Over Forty Years".

Maryland's current statute regarding parole for prisoners serving parolable life sentences may have a "due process" flaw rendering it constitutionally deficient.

Conceivably, this issue would have been left in the shadow overcast of the public's view had it not been for a significant event recently reported in the media.

The matter of contention is the Maryland Statute (Article 41, 122(b)) which gives the Governor control over the parole of prisoners serving parolable life sentences once they have been recommended by the Maryland Parole Commission. The problem with the statute is that it is void of criteria or safeguards the chief executive must use in determining parole evaluations. As such, the statute may have a problem passing the "due process" requirement because it does not contain a minimum set of criteria to be considered before a final decision is made.

We need only to review what the Maryland legislature did in 1953 when it gave the current Parole Commission the power and authority to parole all prisoners except those serving parolable life sentences. The legislature mandates the Parole Commission use a set standard of criteria when making parole considerations. This criteria limits the possibility for arbitrary or capricious decision-making.

At present, the statute giving the Governor exclusive authority to parole "does not" contain any mandated standard criteria; thus, no due process safeguards are in place to prevent unaccountable or unreasonable decisions. Therefore, the statute itself must be redesigned to meet the minimum constitutional requirements.

Unless this statute is carefully redesigned, giving specific criteria to be followed by the State's Chief Executive, it will fall short of the constitutional requirements of protections against arbitrary decisions. Fundamental fairness in the parole process legally requires that this statute met the minimum constitutional requirements.

A recent incident involving the current Governor clearly illustrates the need for criteria and safeguards for offenders serving parolable life sentences. On September 21, 1995, the Governor made a press announcement where he stated his new policy of "no parole" consideration for persons serving life sentences.

Subsequently, this was tested in Maryland's courts and found to be an unconstitutional violation of the ex post facto laws. Judge Richard Rombro of the Baltimore City Circuit Court ordered the Parole Commission to resume reviewing life sentences and send their recommendations to the Governor for approval or rejection.

Does this court's decision bring to light an oversight in the parole statute, that it allows for an abuse of discretion?

Maryland's Article 41, 122(b) has a serious defect that allows for abuse. Until the State legislature addresses this issue, there remains a serious problem with the fundamental fairness in the parole process for all persons serving parolable life sentences.

Throughout the criminal justice system, a great debate rages around the issue of rehabili- tation. There are some who proclaim, "The system cannot rehabilitate offenders."

My personal opinion on this subject lies somewhere in between. I believe that many offenders can rehabilitate themselves if given opportunities and vehicles necessary to propel them toward constructive change. The following individuals have found that higher education is an essential component in the rehabilitative process.

Alando Edwards entered the system in 1975 with an Eighth grade education. Since that time, he has made tremendous progress in areas of education and rehabilitation programs:

1982: GED, Maryland Penitentiary

1987: A.A. degree, General Studies. Essex Community College

1991: B.S. degree, Management Science. Coppin State College

1991-1993: Alando was housed at Jessup Pre-Release Unit and earned work release status. He was employed as a cashier at Columbia Exxon. This experience gave him the opportunity to strengthen his skills in communication and proved he was responsible and able to work within a community setting.

1993-1997: Currently employed as a clerk in State Use Industries. Alando is responsible for maintaining and keeping records concerning inventories and all statistical data for the daily operation of production.

Active in rehabilitation programs, Alando is former President of the Lifestyles organization, chairman of Prisoners' Awareness Networking Committee, peer facilitator for the Alternatives to Violence program (AVP), and membership director of OACC. His personal goals upon release are to work with prison reform organizations as well as with the NAACP, and eventually to own his own business.

Note: On June 3, 1993, all lifers were removed from the camp system and returned to medium security institutions as a result of several high profile incidents concerning other lifers.

Living with AIDS: Oscar Walker, Jr.

Oscar is one of a great number of Maryland prisoners now living with AIDS. When he entered the system, he immediately took advantage of educational opportunities and began his transformation for a better life. However, a short time thereafter, he was diagnosed with AIDS.

A.A. degree, Human Services. New C.C.B.

B.S. degree, Social Science. Coppin State College

1981: Barber's license. Patuxent Institution

1993: Personal development and career training

In Oscar's Own Words: "Living in confinement is a traumatic experience, but compounding this existence apprehending one day - perhaps tomorrow - my body will succumb and surrender to this fatal disease is a daily nightmare.

"Entering DOC I was muscular, healthy and strong, but today my frame is steadily deteriorating, and those who once viewed me as physically strong, now observe me as feeble and disabled.

"AIDS is a monster and a beast that does not discriminate -- it's a disease that slowly drains the life from your body by attacking your organs. Every day I am in pain, and with the pain comes the wasting -- loss of weight, appetite, energy and strength. Thrush -- infection of the mouth caused by fungus. Seizures -- convulsion, uncontrollable movements of body limbs accompanied by unconsciousness and the inability to control urine or stool and pneumonia.

"Finally when these symptoms run their due course, life as I know it will be over. PLEASE! Refrain from any behaviors that cause AIDS. Once acquired, there is no known cure!

Note: The very same night I completed his biography, Oscar Walker, Jr. died Tuesday, November 11, 1997.

James Wells is 49 years of age, incarcerated since 1997. He entered the system with only a seventh grade education, but like Alando, he has made colossal achievements and he had to overcome many obstacles to acquire a quality education. He anticipates one day re-entering society as a productive citizen.

1980: GED, Maryland Penitentiary

1988: A.A. degree, General Studies. Essex Community College.

1995: B.S. degree, Psychology. Coppin State College.

James is currently employed as a Laubach school tutor on the intermediate level, and the school's slogan is, "Each one, teach one." He has also written a manuscript, Narrow Vision, and it is presently being reviewed by publishers for publication.

He is working with "Prisoners Against Teen Tragedies" (PATT), a teens awareness program that works with today's troubled youth. James considers this a great program simply because it gives him an opportunity to give something back to our youth.

James has made the transformation from an irrational belief system, and now he fully understands that illiterate patterns of thinking will never allow one to reach their full potential.

Personal goals upon release are counseling youth, entrepreneurship, and acquiring a Master's degree.

Legislation repealing the Governor's authority to approve lifers' parole is once again being introduced to the General Assembly during the 1998 legislative session. In our next issue, we will provide more details concerning both "lifers' bills".

Have you ever wondered why there is so much ease when it comes to passing legislation that, in essence, is anti-prison? Has the thought ever entered your mind why funds for educational endeavors have either been curtailed or limited to a select few? Do you have questions regarding newly developed policies that make it more difficult to progress through the penal system? Has parole been an elusive dream? If you have answered yes to more than one of the above inquiries, we have a common interest, and I hope you continue reading this article and become stimulated by thoughts, ideas and viewpoints presented.

As an offender who has been confined for more than sixteen years, I have been somewhat privy to an array of legal, attitudinal and policy changes that reflect a trend toward the concept, "lock 'em up and throw away the key." This concept has its genesis, in part, to the proliferation of violent crimes in our cities and surrounding suburbs. The public has made it perfectly clear they are fed up with crime, those who commit crimes, and repeat offenders of crimes. Therefore they exert their efforts towards lobbying legislators, the governor, Department of Public Safety, judicial districts, and various police entities. While I acknowledge the need for concrete measures that will aid in decreasing violent crimes, I would caution against knee jerk reactions that are by design short term resolutions and have the potential of exacerbating the dilemma.

Fear and revenge, instead of understanding the problem, has become a motivating stimulus in many instances. Many in society seem to think that those of us who commit crimes are predators to be treated less human while incarcerated and be eternally banished from participation in normal societal life. This attitude is an impetus for changes in both law and policy. It is also a driving force in dried-up funds for educational and vocational pursuits.

The spirit of OACC is imbued with perception of how best to deal with as well as alter negative impressions associated with offenders and ex-offenders. It includes the notion that as humans, we are also subject to mistakes, but we should not be viewed as lepers and ostracized from the rest of society indefinitely, if at all.

The OACC has four component parts: 1) lifers' issues; 2) non lifers' issues; 3) community/public relations; and 4) aftercare. I feel confident that the concerted efforts of offenders and advocates will produce "net gains" if we eliminate certain barriers of progress such as words and beliefs like: "I can't.", procrastination, apathy and so forth.

This journey will not be an easy one, but one nonetheless that must be embarked. Let us become comrades united in the struggle to improve our lot and to bring about a better understanding between offenders and those who feel the need to extinguish the light of liberty and life. We must somehow assuage the fears and counter the prejudice society has towards offenders and ex-offenders.

The Maryland Commission on Criminal Sentencing Policy, in its announcement of a November, 1997 meeting in Montgomery County, for the first time actually listed its legislative agenda. Here are three of them: