Tossing a brick from an overpass onto a passing car was a senseless act, and the perpetrator should definitely be brought to justice. But charging Rakiem Campbell with first-degree murder was excessive. I’m pleased that Campbell will be punished by being sent to prison for 15 years, and that his charge was reduced to the proper one: vehicular endangerment.
He plead guilty to a couple other crimes in the process, and will also do time for those. The Journal Star reports, “In total, [his sentence is] 22 years, but with credit for time served and day-for-day ‘good-time’ credit, he could be released in slightly more than 10 years, said Kevin Lowe, one of his attorneys.”
I think justice was served as far as the charge and the sentence, but I do question a system that lets criminals out after serving less than half their sentence. Is this just to free up prison space? What is the reason for not requiring a full sentence to be served?
It is a shame we cannot come up with alternatives to prison. When this guy gets out, whenever it is, he will still be young, and will have probably done little more than graduate from an academy of crime.
I suspect the reason for not requiring the full sentence be served is to provide an incentive for “good” behavior in the DOC.
Good time credit applies to most, but not all, offenses.
(730 ILCS 5/3?6?3) (from Ch. 38, par. 1003?6?3)
Sec. 3?6?3. Rules and Regulations for Early Release.
(a) (1) The Department of Corrections shall prescribe rules and regulations for the early release on account of good conduct of persons committed to the Department which shall be subject to review by the Prisoner Review Board.
. . .
Most inmates also qualify an additional six months off for meritorious service. Again, probably as an incentive:
(3) The rules and regulations shall also provide that the Director may award up to 180 days additional good conduct credit for meritorious service in specific instances as the Director deems proper; . . .
Thanks, Kevin. That’s quite an incentive! I guess I don’t see a problem with this sort of incentive per se, but over half the sentence being knocked off seems a bit excessive, doesn’t it? Also, what would be an example of “meritorious service”?
Yeah, day-for-day and the meritorious credit often mean the inmate serves less than half his sentence. And with prison over-crowding, other credits have become popular at DOC. You can knock time off for treatment, counseling, education, etc. But, judges are aware of these credits, so presumably they’re already factored into the sentencing decision (i.e., if the judge wants the defendant to spend 7 years in prison, he better give him a 15-year day-for-day sentence — which would only be available in class 1 or X felonies and other enhanced class 2 sentences).
As for meritorious service? Well, it seems to me that just about anything will qualify, so long as the inmate behaves himself. Really. Over-crowding is no joke. The DOC looks for ways to shave time off their sentences.
I wrote briefly about sentencing in my post http://theususpects.blogspot.com/2007/08/of-pimps-and-prostitutes.html
It’s confusing, because most offenses are 50%, but some are 75%, 85% or 100%. It might be an interesting topic for a more in-depth post on my blog. I think there’s a lot of confusion out there about the sentencing statutes.
Baloney!
This dirt bag threw a brick at a car with the intent of doing damage…this is a crime. During that crime he killed someone…this is murder. The person he killed had hopes and dreams, a family, friends and was a law abiding productive member of society. On the other hand this moron has led a life of crime and obviously doesn’t have the moral fiber to consider the repercussions of his actions. And just think…in ten years he gets introduced back into society. What a crock!