Today’s New York Daily News contained an article about Carlos Alcarin, a convicted bank robber who skipped out on his sentencing in 1983 on attempted robbery charges. Since his escape he has been living crime-free in Brooklyn, NY until he was tracked down by cops in May.
A judge this week dismissed the charge and allowed Alcarin to go free. Prosecutors wanted him to serve the 1.5 - 4.5 year term he agreed to in a 1983 plea bargain.
While I admire the fact that he’s been living crime-free for the last 17+ years, I think he should serve at least part of his sentence. In essence, two things have happened: 1) he got away with his crime and 2) it sends a message to other criminals that if you skip out and enough time passes, even if you’re re-caught, you’ll probably get away with it.
Now, I’m not a heartless beast. I’m willing to allow for the fact that he’s been clean for the last 17 years to soften the sentence. However, I feel that some sentence (even if it’s only 30 days, or community service) is appropriate.
The floor is open for debate, gentlemen and ladies…
Wouldn’t it be nice if a huge bunch of career criminals decided to skip out and then remain crime free for 17 years?!! Surely would lighten up the load on the prison system. Just don’t think it will happen. Community service sounds like a good alternative.
Without more details of the crime, in reading the article I’m inclined to believe that the Judge made a good decision. Such a low plea agreemnt to me suggest that there may have been problems with the evidence, or that the con in this case played a minor role, in the crime. Just MHO, of course.
a) he still has loot hidden in a mine shaft somewhere, which I seriously doubt.
b) he didn’t have to be on the lam for 17 years constantly looking over his shoulder no doubt.
I don’t see where he has gotten away with anything.
I’m gonna dissent here.
I think he should serve his entire time, and then have another year or so for skipping out on his sentence.
We can’t set a precedent where people can run, and then just do what they were supposed to do in the first place, and avoid consequences just because time has passed. How do we know this guy was following the law and just did not get caught?
I say throw him in the slammer. My one concesion to the time that has passed would be to put him in a low security facility.
I agree with Needs2Know. This would be a great problem to have. I don’t think that his punishment should be anything more than maybe community service. He realized he did something wrong, and he stopped.
Why send him to prison, where he could get caught up in drugs and violence? Let him go, maybe just community service.
I might agree with that. However, the judge dropped the charges. I think he should have the conviction on his record and he should do, at a minimum, community service.
I think the judge made the right decision. Justice should be tempered with mercy, IMO, and a man who’s lived a blameless life for 17 years and who cares for his disabled mother seems to me to be a perfect candidate for mercy.
And I wouldn’t be any more approving if he got, say, community service. That would be a too soft “punishment” for the crime of attempted armed robbery. I credit the judge with refusing to tap him on the wrist in such a manner (pretending to punish him but not really doing so), and instead having the intellectual honesty to just straight-out do what she intended, which is to dismiss the charges.
I should point out that the nature of the crime is important, IMO. Though we don’t know the details, the judge seemed to feel the victims had not suffered lasting harm. If instead this guy had murdered somebody, I don’t think 40 years of blameless living should get him off the hook.
Are we saying that it’s ok if they just never do it again? The man plead guilty. He did it. He should now do the maximum he agreed to, plus.
And how do we know he’s been crime free for 17 years. I’m a liberal Democrat, but I’m not going to give the benefit of the doubt to a convicted felon who skipped out on his debt to society. Maybe he just improved his skill as thief, I don’t know.
Oh come on spooje & freedom2,
You’ve never done something ilegal and gotten away with it? This guy has been employed and acting as a care taker for 17 years without running afoul of the law.
Boy I wish we had the details of the case, it’d be so much easier to debate this if we knew the merits of the case.
I’d have to agree with stuffinb. I think Dubya might say the guy “grew up.” Like the way Dubya “grew up” from his coke habit, so it should be forgotten.
I’ve been wondering what Dubya will do with all the people in prison for coke possession and use, who have since “grew up.”
As far as I can tell there are three rationales for the state imprisoning a person.
Rehabilitation. It doesn’t look like he needs it.
Public Safety. Again, there doesn’t seem to be a need to keep him in prison to stop him from committing crimes
3.Retribution. While the system may have an interest in sending the message to criminals and society that crime deserves punishment, I don’t think that it applies in this case. I think that he’s already served his debt to society in the sense that he has been productive, crime free, etc. for the past 17 years. It’s hard to see how anybody benefits from the state extracting its pound of flesh at this point.
Unless the guy murdered or raped someone, he looks like a prime candidate for mercy.
Did the Judge actually dismiss the charges- ie say that he was, for all purposes “not guity”? or did the Judge simply commute the sentence? What was the Judges reasoning?
What is the standard? How long must someone remain free after fleeing incarceration before we “wipe the slate?” The fact that he was not arrested agin for 17 years is laudable. Does it cancel our his original crime and his subsequent flight? If so, how many days, exactly, must a felon remain free to earn amnesty? Is it a sliding scale?
You stayed on the lam for 6 years so you get a 30% sentence reduction. Too bad, one more year and we would have cut it in half.
Should he be sent to prison? Not IMO. Neither rehabilitation nor public safety seems to be a concern. Should he still serve a sentence? Yes. Many, many hours of community service, perhaps coupled with house arrest or other restrictions.
I strongly object to any solution which resulted in teh expungement of his criminal record (if that was indeed teh case). He should not be rewarded for flight from prosecution.
I don’t think deserves is the operative word here. As it stands now, the man is providing service to society by both caring for his disabled mother, and remaining gainfully employed. Imprisoned the state would have to pay for both his imprisonment and care for his mother. How would society be served?
More important perhaps is the fact that the original court minutes concerning the man’s crime were lost.
At the very least, the man should have gotten a suspended sentence.
spiritus - there are already such standards in place -> statues of limitations… the way i see it this isnt much different than if he had done the crime … and had not been caught till now… with the key difference being here he got convicted… but seeing as he has been a productive lawabiding citizen for longer than both his orignal sentence and (i would think) the statues of limitations on the crime… that there really isnt much of a point sending him to jail now… it would seem rather petty to do so… as to the message it sends to other criminals… well… its a mixed bag… excape and stay out of trouble long enough and you get a walk… but id rather the guy didnt go to jail and gave up his life of crime… than go to jail have it continue… or even go and be rehabilitated for that manner… i mean this way he save the tax payers some money…
Gotta love justice. Man does nothing for 35+ years after two hung juries couldnt’ convict him of murder. New DA, same old evidence, and he get his ass busted at age 73.
This guy hides out for 17+ years and gets off of a prison term. Just let it go.
Wonderful message we are sending here. Should have thrown the new york guy in jail for his full term.
I would think that letting him off is the least likely course to maintaining the peace. I’m all for mercy and forgiveness, but I don’t want my gov’t to feel it’s way through determining who goes to jail and who stays free. I want them enforcing the law.
I could be wrong here, but I don’t think there is any statute of limitations for an escaped convict.
Once again, I don’t really care how anything here feels. If enforcing the law seems petty, then change the law. For the law to be effective, it needs to enforced fairly and consistently.
Everybody does it…whats the big deal…?
I call this the “Clinton Mindset”
Every time I did something wrong, I knew it was wrong and I knew there was a consequence if I got caught. If you take away any consequences for getting caught, then we start to descend into a world where there is no law. People are not perfect, but it is crazy to argue that since we lack perfection we shouldn’t institute a set of standards to live by.
It is either bad and it should be against the law, or we should work to remove the laws from the books.
