South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster has proposed doing away with parole in South Carolina and to use an alternative court system to deal with some non-violent offenders.
The idea was debated and certain changes were made in his original proposal during the past legislative session.
We hope the issue will again get the attention it deserves in next year’s session.
Several things to keep in mind:
South Carolina eliminated parole in 1996 for people who commit violent crimes.
In 1986, parole was eliminated in the federal system.
And in neither case did the prison population “explode” as some people say will happen if we further eliminate parole in South Carolina.
McMaster says the state of Virginia abolished parole in 1994.
In the 10 years before that, McMaster says the prison population was growing at a rate of about 154 percent a year.
Since parole was abolished, the growth rate has only been about 31 percent a year.
What McMaster is proposing is that a new court be created by volunteers — to be known as the “middle court.”
People found guilty and sentenced in circuit court of non-violent crimes could be considered for a different sentence to be set in the middle court.
That sentence would consist of such options as work to pay back the victim, education, drug counseling and other efforts to keep the person out of jail.
It would be based on the success being followed in some counties where there are special drug courts.
Also, the elimination of parole would end the guessing game by judges, defendants, victims and others about how long someone will really be in jail.
If a judge gives a person a sentence, that’s it.
It would end the painful process of victims having to go to Columbia to testify at parole hearings.
Dealing with non-violent offenders in drug court also costs less per year than keeping them locked up.
If they break the terms of the sentence set in the middle court they go to jail to serve the sentence set in circuit court. It’s automatic.
There may be a few more wrinkles to work out, but it’s something the General Assembly should seriously debate again next session.
Email
Facebook
Google
Twitter
Favorites
More
Advertisement