Module #3 Response

[Stacey Fraser]

Module #3 – Doris Drugdealer

1. State the problem as simply and clearly as you can.
Should the governor grant her clemency?

2. Describe the values and point of view of Doris Drugdealer.
She regretted getting involved with drugs, the situation that led to her arrest.
She seemingly dedicated her life, after her escape, to her children, teaching
them to be responsible citizens and avoid drugs. She even volunteered for
an organization that accounted for government ethics and accountability.

3. Describe the values and point of view of her husband.
Her husband thinks his wife is a person of the highest integrity and compassion.

4. Describe the values and point of view of her children.
Unknown

5. Describe the values and point of view of her neighbors.
Mostly unknown other than commenting that it would not be useful to send her back to prison.

6. Describe the legal and societal issues.
Legally, she was convicted and sentenced to a crime. She later escaped and basically
hid from her crime for 34 years. Was she fairly sentenced in the beginning? Should
she also be convicted of escaping and adding more time? Just because, after her
escape, she became a grounded member of society (we think) and regretted getting
in the situation in the first place, should it all be ok now? What purpose does it serve
for her to be sent back to prison now? What sort of precedents would it set if
clemency is granted?

7. After discussing the issues and looking at different points of view, what is your reasonable point of view? Why? Include a brief description of your values.
My point of view continues to return to what is written as the law, a probable very black and white view. She was convicted and escaped because it was too “hard” for her. She might have potentially had other avenues, such as appeals but chose to escape and hide from the “law” and her own truth. Yes, it appears she went on to be a valuable member of society, but in my opinion, that does not “undue” what the law originally sentenced her to. Granting clemency, at this point is like saying it is ok to escape and it is ok to not go through proper channels for a release.

In reading the biases chart, I did not feel that I strictly identify with any one bias all the time. I believe my inclinations would gravitate towards the authority bias, the ambiguity bias, or the anchoring bias most commonly. This chart and its contents were fascinating to me, as I never have looked at an issue quite from any of these perspectives when considering my own biases.

[Tiffany Linscott]

I see your point of view Stacy. I feel the same that to not go through the proper motions to appeal, that it is disregarding the courts decision. In this scenario, she did improve her life, but what about so many others that did not get the opportunity to change their lives, what would they have done? I also feel that her sentence was black and white, they did not give mercy based on that she was a young girl and still had time to learn from her misakes.

Although, granting her clemency for her crimes may not sit well with those who have lost loved ones to drug addiction or to those that have served lengthy sentences for similar crimes as well.

After reading your take on her family and neighbors view, I see that I assumed higher regard based on the testimonials. I think it was my perception of generalizing the overall feel for her character.

Thanks for sharing your view!

[Gregg Caplitz]

As always Stacy a well reasoned argument.I think you are correct and that clemency would send the wrong message. It is unclear from the information presented why Doris originally received such a harsh sentence for sch a small amount of heroin and that could argue for early parole but clemency is not the desired result in my opinion. Great job.

[La Tonia A.]

Hi Stacy, after reading your post, I do agree with you. If she had accepted the outcome of her actions, she could have found other avenues to appeal her case, leading to a shorter sentence. But she chooses to escape and not take responsibility for breaking the law. I also find it ironic that Doris decides not to be held accountable by escaping from prison but volunteers with a government agency that promotes ethics and accountability, which is very contradictive.

Granting clemency would not be the best course of action to take. I agree it would send a message that it's acceptable to break laws and not be held accountable for your actions because you lived as a model citizen and created a new life for yourself.

[don]

My question would be -- were there sentencing guidelines for her original crime? What biases did the court exhibit in its original treatment of her? And how long should she serve for her original crime and now the added crime of prison escape. Interesting ideas.