Discussion:
Did this guy have a right to die in the library?
(too old to reply)
Queenie
2008-03-13 18:09:10 UTC
Permalink
Or should we institute forced treatment?
__________________________________________________________
How helping the homeless can hurt them
C.W. Nevius
Thursday, March 13, 2008 (SF Chronicle)

When a homeless man named James Allen Hill overdosed and died in
the restroom of the San Francisco library last Friday afternoon, it
was a shocker.
A drug overdose in the public library? Really?
"It was an unfortunate and tragic incident for everyone," said
library spokeswoman Marcia Schneider. "Especially for the security
staff that handled it."
There will be those who will see Hill's death as a failure of the
system, another example of how the city neglects its poorest
residents.
That's not the story here. The city did anything but neglect Hill.
But his case does show a flaw, all right: Chronic and incorrigible
offenders avoid the consequences of their actions - aggressive
panhandling, public urinating or drunkenness - often through the help
of well-intentioned attorneys for homeless advocates.
And instead of being placed in treatment, the offender goes back on
the street and continues his destructive behavior.
Hill is a perfect example. A familiar nuisance in the Haight, Hill
slept in a garage doorway near the Panhandle and was a constant,
drunken annoyance to residents and police. From Aug. 27 of last year
to Jan. 22, Hill was cited at least 15 times by officers, mostly for
open alcoholic containers on the street and public drunkenness.

Time and again, those citations were dismissed.

Often cases like Hill's never even make it to court. The district
attorney's office says that is because homeless advocate attorneys
drag out the process as long as possible, creating a paper bottleneck
in the courts with "burden of proof" legal requests. There are so many
steps and appeals that any misstep can result in a dismissal, which
the DA's office says is why hundreds of "quality of life"' infractions
are thrown out.
To illustrate, Assistant District Attorney Paul Henderson went
through court records and found six cases in which Hill was
represented in court by Homeless Coalition attorneys. In what has
become a familiar refrain, those attorneys got three of the cases
dismissed before they came to trial.
In the other three active cases, prosecutors had offered to drop
the charges if Hill agreed to go into treatment for his alcohol
problem, Henderson said.
"In other words, we were saying, we don't want to prosecute him,
fine him, or send him to jail, but he's got to go to services. And
he's got to show us proof that he's gone," he said.

Attorneys fought citations.

The offer was declined as Hill's attorneys fought the citations.
They were still fighting them when he died.
"There's a really good chance we could have saved this guy's life,"
said Dariush Kayhan, the city's homeless coordinator.
Hill is the personification of the city's frustration with chronic
offenders. There wasn't any question about Hill's problems. He drank
to excess, used heroin, and careened out of control around the
neighborhood.
At one point Hill was so drunk that a police officer found him peeing
on a black-and-white cruiser.
Does this sound like someone who needs help? Not to the advocates,
or the high-powered local law firms who volunteer to do pro bono work
to keep people like Hill from convictions.
"It's frustrating," Henderson said. "If he had been convicted, he
would have been in treatment."
Attorneys who advocate for the homeless insist it is not that
simple. Elisa Della-Piana is an attorney for the Lawyers Committee
for Civil Rights, which often works for the Homeless Coalition and its
clients. She wouldn't confirm that Hill was one of her group's clients
but said the District Attorney's Office "has never offered a treatment
bed or treatment slot to any of our clients."
The distinction here may be what constitutes a "treatment service."
In any case, Hill didn't get it.

'An artificial hoop'

One of the primary reasons cases are dismissed is that advocates
demand a "traffic court response" to the infractions. That means the
arresting officer, who appears at court even though the homeless
person generally does not bother, must generate a written narrative of
what happened. Henderson sees it as "an artificial hoop" that is
designed to muck up the process.
In an appearance before the court this week to try to stop the
dismissal of cases, Henderson argued that a narrative isn't needed
when the charges are explained in the citation.
"The citation is its own authority," he said. "Every single county
in California accepts that, except San Francisco."
In fact, one of Hill's citations was dismissed for "lack of a
traffic court response." Here's a guy with at least 15 citations - not
to mention any number of times when police stopped him, poured out his
booze, and told him to knock it off - and he gets off because of a
lack of a written narrative for the arrest.
You will hear a lot about "criminalizing the homeless," in these
kinds of cases, but who's really being hurt here? It is annoying to
the residents to have a nuisance like Hill in the neighborhood, but
even the police don't want to lock him up.
"There are some extreme cases that we see on the street," Kayhan
said, "and the last thing we want to do is put them in jail. Here's a
guy who is really a classic example. The intent of the law is to find
another avenue to engage people who are participating in the kind of
harmful behavior that leads to misery and death. I see this as a
missed opportunity."
Of course, there is no question that the advocates believe in what
they are doing. They insist they are giving representation to the
powerless, standing up for homeless against the legal system.
And that's what they were doing last Friday, when James Hill died
on the cold tiles of a public bathroom, three months after his 37th
birthday.
_________________________________________________________

He glosses over the part about "what constitutes a treatment service";
what I have seen is that judges sentence people to treatment but there
aren't enough "slots" or "beds" available, especially for someone
without money.

Anyway, the charade of ticketing and citations isn't worth the effort,
it's just a waste of time. So we are agreed to let people die in the
streets, or, as in this case, the libraries, while pretending we're
doing something to prevent such deaths. OK, then let's not pretend to
be shocked about it when it happens.

Somehow I doubt the story would even have been noticed if he'd died
under a bridge somewhere...

~Queenie
~Queenie

"Screeeeeee Yeeeeeeeee!"
~Dana Gould
Tim May
2008-03-13 18:29:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Queenie
Or should we institute forced treatment?
_________________________________________________________
He glosses over the part about "what constitutes a treatment service";
what I have seen is that judges sentence people to treatment but there
aren't enough "slots" or "beds" available, especially for someone
without money.
Anyway, the charade of ticketing and citations isn't worth the effort,
it's just a waste of time. So we are agreed to let people die in the
streets, or, as in this case, the libraries, while pretending we're
doing something to prevent such deaths. OK, then let's not pretend to
be shocked about it when it happens.
Somehow I doubt the story would even have been noticed if he'd died
under a bridge somewhere...
1. The court system is largely at fault. This is not a matter of
"forcing treatment," but of properly jailing serial offenders. Wanna
bet that if I am ever arrested for public intoxication I'll be steered
into a plea arrangement which costs me $10K in lawyer fees and payments
to the court system? They shake down those with money, subsidize those
who drink up their mioney.

2. Absent court action, there is no grounds for _ever_ "forcing
treatment." This is what "due process," as clearly spellt out in the
Constitution, is all about. And this is why the DEMOCRAT-controlled
legislature in California, when Reagan was Governor, correctly
legislated that those not found guilty of an actual crime were to be
RELEASED from detention. (The famous "Reagan emptied all the mental
institutions" misinformation.) (And, as near as I can tell, every
single other state in the Union did the same thing--the era of
incarcerating people without due process ended around the end of the
1960s. Yet Democraps keep screaming that "Reagan emptied out the mental
institutions.")

3. Public libraries have become taxpayer-funded day care centers for
filthy, stinking drunks and dopers. Look to the Santa Cruz Library, and
why so many parents are choosing to _buy_ books at BShop SC and Borders
rather than let their children mingle with the tramps and bums.

Not surprisingly, public support for libraries is evaporating. And for
multiple reasons. (My local branch is a tiny place, a pale shadow of
the large libraries I used in the 1960s. The book collection is tiny.
And I seldom see anyone amongst the books. Mostly, it's filled with
kids who go there after school to wait until they can go home. A day
care center. They play on the computers, which are fully-occupied.
Might as well acknowledge that this is the era we are in, with
computers taking over from books. Myself, I use that branch because it
has high-speed WiFi, which I can't get in my rural mountain location,
and so I use it with my MacBook.)

4. The issue of "helping those who will not help themselves" is morally
bankrupt. These bottomfeeders are happy to live day by day, buying a
quart of vodka or a rock of crack. And if we bail them out, it just
enables them to buy more junk.

(Why bail out someone who chooses to drink away his life? Why not bail
out someone making minimum wage? And if we bail out the minwage
workers, why not bail out the next higher up on the ladder? And so on.
This is the same reason I don't support pubicly-funded "job training"
for the unemployed--surely those making $7 an hour have even MORE
reason to get job training, so that they can advance. Rewarding the
bottom dwellers is unfair to those slightly higher up, and has the
predictable unintended consequence of subtly encouraging more people to
become unemployed, so that they can "qualify" for handouts.)

5. It is good that this piece of shit died. Twenty thousand more to go,
just in San Francisco alone.


--Tim May
Queenie
2008-03-13 19:01:50 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:29:27 -0700, Tim May
Post by Tim May
1. The court system is largely at fault. This is not a matter of
"forcing treatment," but of properly jailing serial offenders. Wanna
bet that if I am ever arrested for public intoxication I'll be steered
into a plea arrangement which costs me $10K in lawyer fees and payments
to the court system? They shake down those with money, subsidize those
who drink up their mioney.
I see people picked up for drunk in public all the time, they're let
go after a few hours and get an appointment with a nice judge.
Post by Tim May
2. Absent court action, there is no grounds for _ever_ "forcing
treatment." This is what "due process," as clearly spellt out in the
Constitution, is all about. And this is why the DEMOCRAT-controlled
legislature in California, when Reagan was Governor, correctly
legislated that those not found guilty of an actual crime were to be
RELEASED from detention. (The famous "Reagan emptied all the mental
institutions" misinformation.) (And, as near as I can tell, every
single other state in the Union did the same thing--the era of
incarcerating people without due process ended around the end of the
1960s. Yet Democraps keep screaming that "Reagan emptied out the mental
institutions.")
So people who are suffering from gravely disabling mental illness
should be allowed to rot in the streets, even though we know that they
can be returned to sanity with our new and effective medications? Lock
them up for pissing in an alley, but don't "force" them into
treatment. But this isn't a criminal issue; it's a health issue. The
argument here turns to treating people with serious health issues: the
Constitution says what about that?

Side note: the complaint that Reagan emptied all the mental wards is
incorrect in more than one way: for one thing, the mental health
advocates and family members of the mentally ill were actively
supporting the plan to empty the state mental hospitals. But. The
idea wasn't that mentally ill people whould just go out into the
streets, rather that people would be treated in their home
communities. This plan came about because of the discovery of
significantly effective medications and the outpatient clinics that
supposedly would spring up in local communities would be able to offer
supportive day treatment. Not that there was funding for such
clinics. That all fell apart, for many reasons, including the fact
that mentally ill people don't take their meds very well, and now we
have the insane in the streets. And libraries.
Post by Tim May
3. Public libraries have become taxpayer-funded day care centers for
filthy, stinking drunks and dopers. Look to the Santa Cruz Library, and
why so many parents are choosing to _buy_ books at BShop SC and Borders
rather than let their children mingle with the tramps and bums.
Perhaps we'll get to the point where one has to show a valid library
card, or perhaps a bar of soap, heh, to be allowed into a library. How
hard can it be to keep drunks and other disruptive people out of the
library? There are still many people who gain legitimate benefits
from the library; I took my kids there every week when they were
little, we all got books and videos. My daughter, a college student,
likes to go to her local SF library to study. She says that they have
"a lot of stuff" there, new books, resources, etc. Why should we let
go of the idea of a free, quiet and comfortable place for learning?
Post by Tim May
Not surprisingly, public support for libraries is evaporating. And for
multiple reasons. (My local branch is a tiny place, a pale shadow of
the large libraries I used in the 1960s. The book collection is tiny.
And I seldom see anyone amongst the books. Mostly, it's filled with
kids who go there after school to wait until they can go home. A day
care center. They play on the computers, which are fully-occupied.
Might as well acknowledge that this is the era we are in, with
computers taking over from books. Myself, I use that branch because it
has high-speed WiFi, which I can't get in my rural mountain location,
and so I use it with my MacBook.)
4. The issue of "helping those who will not help themselves" is morally
bankrupt. These bottomfeeders are happy to live day by day, buying a
quart of vodka or a rock of crack. And if we bail them out, it just
enables them to buy more junk.
I noticed you said "who will not" but what about those who "cannot"? I
love this:



(Dana Gould on teenage panhandlers...)

As the Gealic heckler said "Screee yeee!"

But it's inhumane to allow mentally ill people to rot in the streets.
And libraries.
Post by Tim May
(Why bail out someone who chooses to drink away his life? Why not bail
out someone making minimum wage? And if we bail out the minwage
workers, why not bail out the next higher up on the ladder? And so on.
This is the same reason I don't support pubicly-funded "job training"
for the unemployed--surely those making $7 an hour have even MORE
reason to get job training, so that they can advance. Rewarding the
bottom dwellers is unfair to those slightly higher up, and has the
predictable unintended consequence of subtly encouraging more people to
become unemployed, so that they can "qualify" for handouts.)
So helping the mentally ill encourages the mentally healthy to become
psychotic?
~Queenie

"Screeeeeee Yeeeeeeeee!"
~Dana Gould
d***@yahoo.com
2008-03-14 05:06:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim May
1. The court system is largely at fault. This is not a matter of
"forcing treatment," but of properly jailing serial offenders. Wanna
bet that if I am ever arrested for public intoxication I'll be steered
into a plea arrangement which costs me $10K in lawyer fees and payments
to the court system? They shake down those with money, subsidize those
who drink up their mioney.
When one of my former friends was intoxicated behind the wheel but not
at fault when his vehicle was rammed, it still cost him $11,000,
probation, and weekend work camp to remove homeless people's
belongings from under bridges. He was a good driver, he held his
liquor so well I didn't even know he had been drinking. The other
driver (DWC) wasn't even cited because of the alcohol issue and even
tried to sue my friend. The other driver was clearly at fault but all
the cops did was run with the ball when they smelled my friend's
breath.
Post by Tim May
2. Absent court action, there is no grounds for _ever_ "forcing
treatment." This is what "due process," as clearly spellt out in the
Constitution, is all about. And this is why the DEMOCRAT-controlled
legislature in California, when Reagan was Governor, correctly
legislated that those not found guilty of an actual crime were to be
RELEASED from detention. (The famous "Reagan emptied all the mental
institutions" misinformation.) (And, as near as I can tell, every
single other state in the Union did the same thing--the era of
incarcerating people without due process ended around the end of the
1960s. Yet Democraps keep screaming that "Reagan emptied out the mental
institutions.")
Interesting about the dems.

Mental health needs to be kicked out of the medical profession.
Alcoholism and drug problems are _medical_ issues. Poverty is not.
So Queenie, the "mental" health ideologue, can go to hell.
Post by Tim May
3. Public libraries have become taxpayer-funded day care centers for
filthy, stinking drunks and dopers. Look to the Santa Cruz Library, and
why so many parents are choosing to _buy_ books at BShop SC and Borders
rather than let their children mingle with the tramps and bums.
This is apparently true. http://www.alternet.org/story/50023/
snip
Post by Tim May
Might as well acknowledge that this is the era we are in, with
computers taking over from books. Myself, I use that branch because it
has high-speed WiFi, which I can't get in my rural mountain location,
and so I use it with my MacBook.)
Somewhat ditto here except I wish I had Tim's money so I can buy
myself
a MacBook.
Steve Thompson
2008-03-14 11:11:33 UTC
Permalink
Geoff Miller
2008-03-13 19:53:31 UTC
Permalink
Queenie <***@pacbell.net> writes:

[bum slips the surly bonds of Earth in library restroom]
Post by Queenie
He glosses over the part about "what constitutes a treatment service";
what I have seen is that judges sentence people to treatment but there
aren't enough "slots" or "beds" available, especially for someone
without money.
What does availability have to do with what constitutes a treatment
service? If the person never even gets that far, what the service
consists of is academic.

(Just as an aside, C.W. Nevius is a woman.)
Post by Queenie
Anyway, the charade of ticketing and citations isn't worth the effort,
it's just a waste of time. So we are agreed to let people die in the
streets, or, as in this case, the libraries, while pretending we're
doing something to prevent such deaths. OK, then let's not pretend to
be shocked about it when it happens.
The fact of it happening can't help but be shocking when it occurs
in view of the public, even if the possibility of it should be well
known.
Post by Queenie
Somehow I doubt the story would even have been noticed if he'd died
under a bridge somewhere...
Probably not. Cacking it in the restroom of a library is much more
"in your face."
Post by Queenie
"Screeeeeee Yeeeeeeeee!"
~Dana Gould
Huh? is that a "sometimes I just wanna holler!" thing?



Geoff

--
"If Hitler had looked like Jim Morrison, who knows what
shape the world might be in today?" -- Jeremy Clarkson
Queenie
2008-03-13 20:43:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geoff Miller
[bum slips the surly bonds of Earth in library restroom]
Post by Queenie
He glosses over the part about "what constitutes a treatment service";
what I have seen is that judges sentence people to treatment but there
aren't enough "slots" or "beds" available, especially for someone
without money.
What does availability have to do with what constitutes a treatment
service? If the person never even gets that far, what the service
consists of is academic.
It's one thing to say "we offer treatment services", but it's
meaningless unless it's the appropriate treatment. Years ago I
covered an evening outpatient counselor while he was on vacation; in
the group was a heroin addict court-ordered to treatment, but three
evenings a week in an outpatient program turned out to be simply a
sales opportunity to a captive audience for this guy.
Post by Geoff Miller
(Just as an aside, C.W. Nevius is a woman.)
Thank you.
Post by Geoff Miller
Post by Queenie
Anyway, the charade of ticketing and citations isn't worth the effort,
it's just a waste of time. So we are agreed to let people die in the
streets, or, as in this case, the libraries, while pretending we're
doing something to prevent such deaths. OK, then let's not pretend to
be shocked about it when it happens.
The fact of it happening can't help but be shocking when it occurs
in view of the public, even if the possibility of it should be well
known.
Well, this is going to be happening more and more in the view of the
public, come the Next Great Depression.
Post by Geoff Miller
Post by Queenie
Somehow I doubt the story would even have been noticed if he'd died
under a bridge somewhere...
Probably not. Cacking it in the restroom of a library is much more
"in your face."
Post by Queenie
"Screeeeeee Yeeeeeeeee!"
~Dana Gould
Huh? is that a "sometimes I just wanna holler!" thing?
Play the youtube link and you'll hear the "Gaelic" version of screw
you....

Plus the funny riff on teenage panhandlers.

~Q.

"The States, pursuant to their parens patriae power, have a
substantial interest in institutionalizing persons in need of care,
both for their own protection and for the protection of others. {...}
A number of influential lower court decisions have also found a
significant right to treatment or "habilitation, although the Supreme
Court's approach in this area has been tentative."

http://supreme.justia.com/constitution/amendment-14/34-liberty-interests-of-the-retarded.html
s***@gmail.com
2008-03-13 23:50:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Queenie
Post by Geoff Miller
[bum slips the surly bonds of Earth in library restroom]
Post by Queenie
He glosses over the part about "what constitutes a treatment service";
what I have seen is that judges sentence people to treatment but there
aren't enough "slots" or "beds" available, especially for someone
without money.
What does availability have to do with what constitutes a treatment
service? If the person never even gets that far, what the service
consists of is academic.
It's one thing to say "we offer treatment services", but it's
meaningless unless it's the appropriate treatment. Years ago I
covered an evening outpatient counselor while he was on vacation; in
the group was a heroin addict court-ordered to treatment, but three
evenings a week in an outpatient program turned out to be simply a
sales opportunity to a captive audience for this guy.
SF treats the homeless like feral cats by making it possible to lead a
homeless life, rather than putting them in permanent housing.
Post by Queenie
Post by Geoff Miller
(Just as an aside, C.W. Nevius is a woman.)
Thank you.
O Rilly?

"Crouching Father, Hidden Toddler" humorously applies the soothing
wisdom of the Tao to the chaos and confusion of new fatherhood.
Celebrated columnist and father of two, C.W. Nevius examines the
challenges that plague first-time fathers - from baby-drool stains on
business suits to what to do with a dirty diaper.
Queenie
2008-03-14 00:21:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Queenie
Post by Geoff Miller
[bum slips the surly bonds of Earth in library restroom]
Post by Queenie
He glosses over the part about "what constitutes a treatment service";
what I have seen is that judges sentence people to treatment but there
aren't enough "slots" or "beds" available, especially for someone
without money.
What does availability have to do with what constitutes a treatment
service? If the person never even gets that far, what the service
consists of is academic.
It's one thing to say "we offer treatment services", but it's
meaningless unless it's the appropriate treatment. Years ago I
covered an evening outpatient counselor while he was on vacation; in
the group was a heroin addict court-ordered to treatment, but three
evenings a week in an outpatient program turned out to be simply a
sales opportunity to a captive audience for this guy.
SF treats the homeless like feral cats by making it possible to lead a
homeless life, rather than putting them in permanent housing.
Post by Queenie
Post by Geoff Miller
(Just as an aside, C.W. Nevius is a woman.)
Thank you.
O Rilly?
"Crouching Father, Hidden Toddler" humorously applies the soothing
wisdom of the Tao to the chaos and confusion of new fatherhood.
Celebrated columnist and father of two, C.W. Nevius examines the
challenges that plague first-time fathers - from baby-drool stains on
business suits to what to do with a dirty diaper.
Well. Guess I'll have to do my own due diligence...

Best Quote About Him In A Chat Room: "I think the author's attitude
was formed by all the wedgies the heterosexuals gave him in the locker
room."

Huh. OK, next call.

~Queenie
Peter Lawrence
2008-03-14 17:27:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Queenie
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by Queenie
Post by Geoff Miller
(Just as an aside, C.W. Nevius is a woman.)
Thank you.
O Rilly?
"Crouching Father, Hidden Toddler" humorously applies the soothing
wisdom of the Tao to the chaos and confusion of new fatherhood.
Celebrated columnist and father of two, C.W. Nevius examines the
challenges that plague first-time fathers - from baby-drool stains on
business suits to what to do with a dirty diaper.
Well. Guess I'll have to do my own due diligence...
BTW, here's his photo from his blog:
Loading Image...

- Peter
George_Kleist
2008-03-17 20:52:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Queenie
Or should we institute forced treatment?
__________________________________________________________
How helping the homeless can hurt them
C.W. Nevius
Thursday, March 13, 2008 (SF Chronicle)
   When a homeless man named James Allen Hill overdosed and died in
the restroom of the San Francisco library last Friday afternoon, it
was a shocker.
   A drug overdose in the public library? Really?
   "It was an unfortunate and tragic incident for everyone," said
library spokeswoman Marcia Schneider. "Especially for the security
staff that handled it."
   There will be those who will see Hill's death as a failure of the
system, another example of how the city neglects its poorest
residents.
   That's not the story here. The city did anything but neglect Hill.
But his case does show a flaw, all right: Chronic and incorrigible
offenders avoid the consequences of their actions - aggressive
panhandling, public urinating or drunkenness - often through the help
of well-intentioned attorneys for homeless advocates.
   And instead of being placed in treatment, the offender goes back on
the street and continues his destructive behavior.
   Hill is a perfect example. A familiar nuisance in the Haight, Hill
slept in a garage doorway near the Panhandle and was a constant,
drunken annoyance to residents and police. From Aug. 27 of last year
to Jan. 22, Hill was cited at least 15 times by officers, mostly for
open alcoholic containers on the street and public drunkenness.
Time and again, those citations were dismissed.
   Often cases like Hill's never even make it to court. The district
attorney's office says that is because homeless advocate attorneys
drag out the process as long as possible, creating a paper bottleneck
in the courts with "burden of proof" legal requests. There are so many
steps and appeals that any misstep can result in a dismissal, which
the DA's office says is why hundreds of "quality of life"' infractions
are thrown out.
   To illustrate, Assistant District Attorney Paul Henderson went
through court records and found six cases in which Hill was
represented in court by Homeless Coalition attorneys. In what has
become a familiar refrain, those attorneys got three of the cases
dismissed before they came to trial.
   In the other three active cases, prosecutors had offered to drop
the charges if Hill agreed to go into treatment for his alcohol
problem, Henderson said.
   "In other words, we were saying, we don't want to prosecute him,
fine him, or send him to jail, but he's got to go to services. And
he's got to show us proof that he's gone," he said.
Attorneys fought citations.
  The offer was declined as Hill's attorneys fought the citations.
They were still fighting them when he died.
   "There's a really good chance we could have saved this guy's life,"
said Dariush Kayhan, the city's homeless coordinator.
   Hill is the personification of the city's frustration with chronic
offenders. There wasn't any question about Hill's problems. He drank
to excess, used heroin, and careened out of control around the
neighborhood.
At one point Hill was so drunk that a police officer found him peeing
on a black-and-white cruiser.
   Does this sound like someone who needs help? Not to the advocates,
or the high-powered local law firms who volunteer to do pro bono work
to keep people like Hill from convictions.
   "It's frustrating," Henderson said. "If he had been convicted, he
would have been in treatment."
   Attorneys who advocate for the homeless insist it is not that
simple.  Elisa Della-Piana is an attorney for the Lawyers Committee
for Civil Rights, which often works for the Homeless Coalition and its
clients. She wouldn't confirm that Hill was one of her group's clients
but said the District Attorney's Office "has never offered a treatment
bed or treatment slot to any of our clients."
   The distinction here may be what constitutes a "treatment service."
In any case, Hill didn't get it.
'An artificial hoop'
   One of the primary reasons cases are dismissed is that advocates
demand a "traffic court response" to the infractions. That means the
arresting officer, who appears at court even though the homeless
person generally does not bother, must generate a written narrative of
what happened.  Henderson sees it as "an artificial hoop" that is
designed to muck up the process.
   In an appearance before the court this week to try to stop the
dismissal of cases, Henderson argued that a narrative isn't needed
when the charges are explained in the citation.
   "The citation is its own authority," he said. "Every single county
in California accepts that, except San Francisco."
   In fact, one of Hill's citations was dismissed for "lack of a
traffic court response." Here's a guy with at least 15 citations - not
to mention any number of times when police stopped him, poured out his
booze, and told him to knock it off - and he gets off because of a
lack of a written narrative for the arrest.
   You will hear a lot about "criminalizing the homeless," in these
kinds of cases, but who's really being hurt here? It is annoying to
the residents to have a nuisance like Hill in the neighborhood, but
even the police don't want to lock him up.
   "There are some extreme cases that we see on the street," Kayhan
said, "and the last thing we want to do is put them in jail. Here's a
guy who is really a classic example. The intent of the law is to find
another avenue to engage people who are participating in the kind of
harmful behavior that leads to misery and death. I see this as a
missed opportunity."
   Of course, there is no question that the advocates believe in what
they are doing. They insist they are giving representation to the
powerless, standing up for homeless against the legal system.
   And that's what they were doing last Friday, when James Hill died
on the cold tiles of a public bathroom, three months after his 37th
birthday.
_________________________________________________________
He glosses over the part about "what constitutes a treatment service";
what I have seen is that judges sentence people to treatment but there
aren't enough "slots" or "beds" available, especially for someone
without money.
Anyway, the charade of ticketing and citations isn't worth the effort,
it's just a waste of time.  So we are agreed to let people die in the
streets, or, as in this case, the libraries, while pretending we're
doing something to prevent such deaths.  OK, then let's not pretend to
be shocked about it when it happens.  
Somehow I doubt the story would even have been noticed if he'd died
under a bridge somewhere...
~Queenie  
~Queenie
"Screeeeeee Yeeeeeeeee!"
  ~Dana Gould
Well, at least you didn't get his "pee" on your shoes, Queenie.
Queenie
2008-03-17 21:21:12 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:52:08 -0700 (PDT), George_Kleist
Post by George_Kleist
Post by Queenie
Or should we institute forced treatment?
__________________________________________________________
How helping the homeless can hurt them
C.W. Nevius
Thursday, March 13, 2008 (SF Chronicle)
Well, at least you didn't get his "pee" on your shoes, Queenie.
I've gotten pretty much used to pee, Georgie, but getting blood on my
shoes freaks me out.

~Queenie
George_Kleist
2008-04-01 20:09:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Queenie
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:52:08 -0700 (PDT), George_Kleist
Post by George_Kleist
Post by Queenie
Or should we institute forced treatment?
__________________________________________________________
How helping the homeless can hurt them
C.W. Nevius
Thursday, March 13, 2008 (SF Chronicle)
Well, at least you didn't get his "pee" on your shoes, Queenie.
I've gotten pretty much used to pee, Georgie, but getting blood on my
shoes freaks me out.
~Queenie
It's blood on your hands that you need to worry about, darling.
Getting shit on your shoes is another matter entirely.

Geoff Miller
2008-03-19 04:25:20 UTC
Permalink
George_Kleist <***@yahoo.com> writes:

[...]


Lick my balls, "George."



Warmest regards,
Geoff

--
"Jesus - it's like having William F. Buckley haunt your forum..."
--aredant pays me an unintended compliment in alt.support.childfree
Veronique
2008-03-21 02:45:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geoff Miller
"Jesus - it's like having William F. Buckley haunt your forum..."
--aredant pays me an unintended compliment in alt.support.childfree
http://www.chron.com/apps/comics/showComic.mpl?date=2008/3/19&name=Prickly_City



V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
Geoff Miller
2008-03-21 03:54:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Veronique
http://www.chron.com/apps/comics/showComic.mpl?date=2008/3/19&name=Prickly_City
Excellent!

Of course, it appears that the author (like a lot of liberals) uses
specific pundits they don't like as convenient placeholders for all
conservatives. Which is why lefties are often so quick to dismiss
all right-wingers as "dittoheads" because of the term for Rush
Limbaugh's fans.

But in this case, the prototype is obviously Bill O'Reilly. And
I've got to admit that as much as I like Mr. O (especially when he
banters with Dennis Miller at 5:30 or so on Wednesday afternoons),
his habit of cutting people off in midsentence annoys me, too.

If his position on a given issue is so righteous and compelling,
then he shouldn't have to resort to interrupting his opponents.
And if the problem isn't rudeness but limited airtime, then I'm
sure he has enough clout to get Fox News to grant him more of it.
Either way, it's still his fault.



Geoff

--
"Anybody can fuck a pig; it takes a Marine
to fuck a pig to death." -- Dan Hillman
Veronique
2008-03-21 04:20:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geoff Miller
http://www.chron.com/apps/comics/showComic.mpl?date=2008/3/19&name=Pr...
Excellent!
Of course, it appears that the author (like a lot of liberals)
Scott Stantis is a lib'ral?

"PRICKLY CITY is a comic strip about the friendship between Winslow, a
coyote pup, and Carmen, a straight and narrow kind of kid. PRICKLY
CITY offers a conservative perspective on political and social events
within an ongoing storyline. As Carmen might say, 'We may not be
correct but we will always be right.'"


(He did three days worth of WFB tribute, BTW.)


V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
Geoff Miller
2008-03-21 16:41:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Veronique
Scott Stantis is a lib'ral?
I have no idea. I never even heard of him until I saw that cartoon
last night. I don't get into online comics to nearly the extent
that a lot of people do.

Whatever Stantis's political orientation (or is it a "preference?")
may be, my point is that it *is* typical of liberals to stereotype
all conservatives in the mold of whichever right-wing pundit is the
subject of that day's two-minute hate.
Post by Veronique
(He did three days worth of WFB tribute, BTW.)
I'll check it out.



Geoff

--
"Anybody can fuck a pig; it takes a Marine
to fuck a pig to death." -- Dan Hillman
George_Kleist
2008-04-01 20:03:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geoff Miller
[...]
Lick my balls, "George."
Warmest regards,
Geoff
--
"Jesus - it's like having William F. Buckley haunt your forum..."
--aredant pays me an unintended compliment in alt.support.childfree
You have balls????

"The Greatest Libertarian Lie: 'First, do no harm.'"
~Carlos Slim Helu
Loading...