Connect with us

Pennsylvania

After 5-year battle, Pa. probation reforms pushed by Meek Mill go into effect

Published

on

After 5-year battle, Pa. probation reforms pushed by Meek Mill go into effect


Redefining technical violations and reducing penalties

Theoretically, probation serves as an alternative to incarceration — offenders are allowed to go free but are placed under supervision, which includes certain conditions or rules that must be followed. Technical violations refer to a failure to comply with those conditions.

Conditions vary based on an offender’s crimes and background, but common ones include reporting to a probation officer, drug testing, counseling, maintaining steady employment, performing community service and paying restitution to victims.

But other conditions, Erin Haney said, are “tragically ridiculous and damaging,” resulting in frequent incarceration.

“In Pennsylvania, 54% of prison admissions are for supervision violations,” Haney said. “So there are more prison admissions for supervision violations than there are for people just committing new crimes.”

Advertisement

Haney cited the case of a man whose probation prohibited him from crossing county lines, making it difficult for him to find steady, well-paying work. Although he eventually did secure a job, he struggled to find affordable housing due to another condition that prevented him from living with his family since they also had a criminal record. On top of that, the man was required to pay fines and fees associated with his supervision.

“So what happened was they said, ‘Look, I have to choose between rent and paying my fines and fees.’ And the reality of it is, if I lose my housing, I’m not gonna be able to continue to abide by any of these conditions that you want me to abide by on supervision,” Haney said. “And unfortunately, instead of understanding that that was the situation, this individual’s probation officer found him in violation and incarcerated him.”

When the man was released, he had to look for a new job and housing, was given a longer probationary period with more stringent conditions and had higher penalties he was required to pay.

“And so each month, if he couldn’t pay, if they didn’t violate him, instead what they would do is extend his probation even longer, which meant he had that many more months of having to pay those fines and fees,” Haney said.

Courts were also able to revoke probation in favor of incarceration for squishier reasons — including indications that the defendant exhibited behavior that demonstrated it was likely they would commit a crime in the future, or in order to “vindicate the authority of the court.”

Advertisement

“The idea that a judge had indiscriminate authority to re-incarcerate someone simply to ‘vindicate the authority of the court’ was one of the most troubling aspects of the Commonwealth’s probation system,” Haney said. “This essentially allowed people to be deprived of their liberty not for committing a new crime, but merely for disappointing or disobeying the court in some way.”

Act 44 attempts to address these issues by prohibiting incarceration for minor technical violations, instead reserving imprisonment for more serious breaches like the commission of another crime, failure to complete court-mandated treatment or actions that pose a threat to public safety.

When technical violations lead to incarceration, the law limits confinement to 14 days for a first technical violation, 30 days for a second, and whatever “sentencing alternatives available at the time of initial sentencing” for third and subsequent violations.

Overall, the law mandates that probation conditions be as least restrictive as possible, and tailored to the individual’s personal needs and circumstances.

“So given the option between something that is incredibly invasive and intrusive or something that accomplishes the same goals with re-entry and rehabilitation and accountability and public safety, you have to go with the one that’s least restrictive,” Haney said.

Advertisement



Source link

Pennsylvania

Bill would create alert when children with autism go missing in Pennsylvania

Published

on

Bill would create alert when children with autism go missing in Pennsylvania


(WHTM) — Legislation is in the works for a statewide warning system to locate missing children with autism.

State Rep. Robert Leadbeter (R-Columbia County) announced the formal introduction of a bill to create a “Purple Alert” system. It would quickly notify police and community members when a child with autism, or other cognitive issues, is missing.

His bill is called “Aiden’s Law,” named for a young boy in Columbia County, who disappeared earlier this year and drowned in the Susquehanna River. Leadbeter said a “Purple Alert” system would fill a gap in Pennsylvania.

“So, individuals with cognitive disabilities are able to then, if they go missing, have an alert go out to law enforcement organizations that work directly with them and that’ll save time expand resources, and ideally result in a safe return home for the missing individual,” Leadbeter said.

Advertisement

In this bill, the system would mirror others like Amber Alerts for missing children in danger and Silver Alerts for missing seniors.



Source link

Continue Reading

Pennsylvania

Bethlehem man sentenced under Pennsylvania’s new AI child porn law

Published

on

Bethlehem man sentenced under Pennsylvania’s new AI child porn law


A Bethlehem man is among the first to be sentenced under a Pennsylvania law passed last year, making it a crime to possess AI-generated child sex abuse material.

On Monday, Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas Judge Kristie M. Marks sentenced 35-year-old Adam Erdman to two years, four months to 10 years.

Erdman in September pleaded guilty to felony possessing child sex abuse material. He faced a possible sentence of 5 to 10 years in prison.

Lehigh County District Attorney Gavin Holihan announced the sentencing in a news conference Monday afternoon. The DA credited U.S. Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, who introduced the new legislation and state Sen. Tracy Pennycuick, who championed the final version of the law last year.

Advertisement

“Before this law was passed, the use of AI to generate child sexual abuse materials went unpunished,” Holihan said. “Prosecutors like me need legislation like this to arrest and convict the criminals who use evolving technology to victimize others.”

Macungie-based attorney Michael Ira Stump, representing Erdman, couldn’t immediately be reached for comment Tuesday morning.

Bethlehem police on March 31 were called by Erdman’s estranged wife, who reported finding three AI-generated nude images of juvenile girls on his personal computer.

Prosecutors said Erdman downloaded photos of the children on vacation from their parent’s social media account, and then used artificial intelligence photo-editing software to make the children appear naked.

Erdman was charged on April 17.

Advertisement

The case was investigated by Bethlehem Police Det. Stephen Ewald and was prosecuted by Lehigh County Senior Deputy District Attorney Sarah K. Heimbach.



Source link

Continue Reading

Pennsylvania

Central Pennsylvania awarded over $1M for Chesapeake Bay Watershed conservation

Published

on

Central Pennsylvania awarded over M for Chesapeake Bay Watershed conservation


PENNSYLVANIA (WTAJ) — Over $17 million has been awarded to county teams across the Commonwealth for projects in reducing nutrient and sediment pollution in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.

Grants were awarded to counties with projects taking place over the next 12 to 24 months. Many different human activities cause nutrient pollution and eroded sediment to enter streams, rivers, and lakes. This pollution can come from fertilizer, plowing and tilling farm fields and can cause stripping away of trees and vegetation, and increasing paved surfaces. 

Here are the grants awarded in our area:

  • Blair County Conservation District: $308,095
  • Cambria County Conservation District: $200,000
  • Centre County Government: $566,399
  • Clearfield County Conservation District: $368,209
  • Huntingdon County Conservation District: $409,134

“Pennsylvania’s clean water successes are rooted in collaboration—state, local, federal, legislative, and non-governmental partners, and of course landowners,” Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Secretary Jessica Shirley said. “The work will continue to evolve, and our focus will remain on setting our collaborative partnerships up for success well beyond 2025. The momentum is real, and you can see it in our improved water quality.”

Get the latest news, weather forecasts and sports stories delivered straight to your inbox! Sign up for our newsletters.

In total, 222 projects were approved, and it’s estimated to reduce nitrogen by 113,493 pounds/year, phosphorus by 28,816 pounds/year, and sediment delivered to the Chesapeake Bay by 1.8 million pounds/year.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending