Six Years For a Shove

By TChris, Section Juvenile Offenders
Posted on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 01:59:00 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Shaquandra Cotton, 15, shoved a teacher's aide. She claimed that the aide pushed her first, but a jury evidently believed the aide, and Shaquandra was convicted of a felony. Despite the absence of any serious injury, a Texas judge sentenced Shaquandra to remain in the Ron Jackson Correctional Complex, about 300 miles from her home, "until she meets state rehabilitation standards or reaches her 21st birthday."

Six years for a shove? How ridiculous. Even a day in the Ron Jackson Correctional Complex would be excessive.

The facility is part of an embattled juvenile system that is the subject of state and federal investigations into allegations that staff members physically and sexually abused inmates.

The case raises serious questions about the impact of race on juvenile sentences.

Creola Cotton, Shaquandra's mother, and activists argue that while [Judge] Superville sent Shaquandra to the state's juvenile prison system, he gave a white 14-year-old arsonist probation.

< What's A Powerpoint? | National Review: Be Gone Gonzo >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Six Years For a Shove | 22 comments (22 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

the post is misleading (1.00 / 1) (#2)
by Deconstructionist on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 05:43:52 PM EST

The operative phrase is "until she meets state rehabilitation standards." The "until 21" language just states the extreme limit of the Court's jurisdiction in a juvenile supervision matter. She will no doubt be back before the court for a review in a much shorter period of time.

All too often here things are presented in a misleading manner in what one must assume is an effort to sway the uninformed. Many times the resort to misrepresentation actually detracts from the purpose of the poster. There are real issues of concern about juvenile justice and those include the impact of race and class, etc. on treatment. There is no need to mislead people about the duration of a commitment in order to make valid points.

: Misleading? (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by squeaky on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 07:32:59 PM EST

Don't you think that other people can read? Obviously you think that a six year maximum sentence for a shove is fine? Sounds nuts to me.

: I wondered about that too (none / 0) (#3)
by roy on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 06:02:22 PM EST

But she's already been in the klink for over a year, which is a long time for a shove.
And after reading this this and this:

Nearly 90 percent of juveniles incarcerated inside Texas youth prisons were sent there on indeterminate sentences that could run as long as their 21st birthdays. But many of those inmates become eligible for release after serving only nine months, if prison authorities are satisfied that they have completed all the steps, or "phases," of an elaborate behavioral modification program.
...
The "phases" system also contains a built-in Catch-22 for youths, like Shaquanda, whose legal appeals are still making their way through the courts. One of the first phases that must be satisfied is a requirement that youths admit their guilt--an admission that would instantly compromise their appeals.
So yeah, she can get out before six years, but only by essentially giving up her appeals.

It raises serious questions (none / 0) (#1)
by Jen M on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 04:08:08 PM EST

about the judge's mental stability

Serious questions indeed... (none / 0) (#4)
by kdog on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 06:38:16 PM EST

My question is when the mercurial rise of authoritarianism will cease.

Even in my high school days, only 10 years ago, the punishment for a shoving incident would be after-school detention, or at most a suspension.

More madness...

the rest of the story (none / 0) (#6)
by diogenes on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 07:33:32 PM EST

The article itself state that the child's mother is not letting the child's record be made public. It would thus be reasonable to assume that there is a long prior history of delinquent behavior rather than that this is a Sunday School angel who is being sent to detention for one shove. I am willing to be corrected if someone knows the full prior history of this girl.

: Incorrect (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by LarryE on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 11:57:10 PM EST

There are three ways you need to be "corrected."
First, your ridiculous straw-figure argument about a
"Sunday school angel."
Second, your equally ridiculous assertion that precisely because you don't know the facts that it's "reasonable" to assume "a long history of delinquent behavior."
Third, even if your self-admitted "assumption" was true, it would still mean that you are defending the sentence based on information not introduced at trial.

Decon (none / 0) (#8)
by jondee on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 10:10:38 AM EST

how much do you know about the state of Texas's "rehabilitation standards" and how someone meets them; I mean, other than what most of us already know: that those without the means to hire Racehorse Haines are generally expected to assuage certain draconian, Wrath-of-God needs of the general populace?

I'm guessing ... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by Sailor on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 11:12:40 AM EST

... that if you don't participate in the nightly follies you don't get out.

BTW, someone earlier commented that "It would thus be reasonable to assume that there is a long prior history of delinquent behavior"
Guess again, even the prosecutor's office said she had no previous record.

Hubbard said that Shaquanda was offered two years' probation if she pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor assault, a plea deal that Creola Cotton refused because her daughter, who has no previous criminal history, said she did not shove or push the teacher's aide.

I'm not (none / 0) (#9)
by Deconstructionist on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 11:02:50 AM EST

defending Texas' or any other state's juvenile justice system. I'm saying I don't approve of the tendency here to present things in a misleading fashion calculated to provoke emotional responses from the uniformed. It would be preferable to avoid headlining "6 years for a shove" and write something that is both accurate and persuasive.

Decon (none / 0) (#11)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 11:22:07 AM EST

Fughedaboudit. You're talking about TChris here.

Those zealots in his camp lap up his disinformation like manna from heaven, others, who think for themselves, quickly identify the obvious misleading stuff he writes and from then on know to question everything says.

Sadly, if he had even a modicum of even-handedness in his postings like Jeralyn does, many folks would likely be open to his message.

Ah well, he knows very well what he intentionally does, he just doesn't care.


it's worse than TChris wrote (none / 0) (#15)
by Sailor on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 03:04:03 PM EST

The sentences of many of the 4,700 delinquent youths being held in Texas juvenile prisons might have been arbitrarily and unfairly extended by prison authorities and thousands of youths could be freed in a matter of weeks as part of a sweeping overhaul of the scandal-plagued system, officials say.
Jay Kimbrough, a special master appointed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry to investigate the system after allegations surfaced that some prison officials were coercing imprisoned youths for sex, said he would assemble a committee to review the sentence of every youth in the system.
The goal, Kimbrough said, is to release any youth whose sentence was improperly extended without justification or in retaliation for filing complaints. In his initial review of sentences, Kimbrough said, he had found many questionable extensions, adding that some experts estimate that more than 60 percent of the state's youthful inmates might be languishing under wrongful detention.

Sounds more like... (none / 0) (#16)
by kdog on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 03:12:30 PM EST

a sick harem than a rehabilitation facility.

Maybe we should stop calling the youths delinquents, and reserve that description for their jailers.


In case it wasn't clear (none / 0) (#17)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 03:20:59 PM EST

My comment was a general comment about TChris and not specific to this particular thread, and I stand by the comment.

I haven't even read any of the links on this thread, no need, it goes w/o saying that even the possibility of 6 years for a 15 year-old for a minor incident is asinine.


In fact (none / 0) (#18)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 03:23:13 PM EST

this thread is a perfect example of what I described in my comment. TChris is the boy who cried wolf.


Umm, OK (none / 0) (#21)
by Sailor on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 07:42:45 PM EST

TChris called wolf when it should have been wolves.

I haven't even read any of the links on this thread

No $hit sherlock! Sorry SUO, but personal attacks without substance or review are beneath you.


: yawn (none / 0) (#22)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 08:30:54 PM EST

apparently your reading comprehension is lacking, or maybe you only read the part you selectively quote. The whole comment:
My comment was a general comment about TChris and not specific to this particular thread, and I stand by the comment.
I haven't even read any of the links on this thread, no need, it goes w/o saying that even the possibility of 6 years for a 15 year-old for a minor incident is asinine.
Nice try though!

previous record (none / 0) (#12)
by diogenes on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 01:56:10 PM EST

Most juvenile delinquents don't have a prior criminal record even if they have long histories of school suspensions, etc. Most of us here agree that it is a good thing that schoolkids don't always immediately get arrested for fighting, etc, whereas adult do. If this girl is so clean then her mother should allow the release of her records. The juvenile court had access to her full history (or should have) in making a presentencing investigation, but the folks here are able to pronounce what a just sentence is based on the word of the mother and some activists.

: Thats kind of the point.... (none / 0) (#13)
by kdog on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 02:19:20 PM EST

a random mother has more credibility than the Texas juvenile court system.
The proof is in the pudding, this child is in a cage....its madness my man.

: meaningless dictraction (none / 0) (#14)
by Sailor on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 02:46:57 PM EST

standard troll technique, whine about one little thing over and over and ignore the fact the racist court lets arsonists off with lesser sentences and ignore the fact that the TX youth system is run by pedophiles who prey on children and ignore the fact that she has already served a year for a shove and eligible for 5 more.
That's more than adults get.
Yet another standard sick wrongwing excuse: she had it coming.

I love it: (none / 0) (#19)
by jondee on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 03:28:47 PM EST

the "zealots" are those that have discerned an undeniable, impossible to defend pattern in the Texas penal system, while one of our resident social darwinists, says once again, in so many words, Im-alright-Jack.

No skin off your nose sarc. Fughedaboudit.

"patterns" (none / 0) (#20)
by diogenes on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 04:05:25 PM EST

How does anyone if this child is the victim of mistreatment by the Texas juvenile justice system without knowing her case history? Why doesn't the mother just release the files and let the facts speak for themselves? Don't shoot the messenger here.