Indeed. Not that I support the concept of furloughs for violent criminals (I don’t), but there does appear to be evidence that there were some benefits to the program overall.
From the “establishment” – Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting: “It’s clear that “suburban,” as used by the New York Post, is a barely veiled code word for “white.”” cite.
To the “anti-establishment” – George Clinton: “God bless Chocolate City and its vanilla suburbs.” (speaking of DC, by the way.)
Face it: “suburban” is frequently used as a code word for white. I know you’d prefer to rely on its literal meaning, but there are those race baiters who are perhaps are too personally embarassed to actually use the term “white” when that is what they obviously mean, given the context. Imagine that: folks in politics not being forthright with their choice of words. Now I’ve seen everything!
Actually, while Googling, I came across this:
That’s no defense of Horton and what he did, but you did remind me of it.
I found a similar case, although admittedly not a worse one. Surprisingly, I found it on a site that is extremely–
–critical of Dukakis:
True, Zukoski didn’t commit the crime while on furlough, but he wasn’t exactly a shining light for the furlough program. Zukoski could have made almost as good a reason for ending furloughs for violent offenders.
I haven’t been able to further research the site’s claim that Horton’s “story” had been “repeated on several occasions in Massachusetts.” My version of Lexis-Nexis only carries the Boston Globe back to about 1988. Without Findlaw or something similar I can’t supply many more stories than that of Zukoski. Still, it’s interesting that the site implies that “several” other furloughed prisoners–some of whom, like Zukoski, may have been white–committed crimes similar to that of Horton.
Oh, bloody hell. So much for my coding skills. Here’s that link.
How about the Lawrence Eagle-Tribune, Duke? Cite:
Dunno how well the author’s claims against the paper are; FAIR didn’t exist in 1988.
well-supported, that is.
L-N Development only has the Eagle-Tribune going back as far as 1990, so no luck there either. 1988 with the Boston Globe is as far as I can go back, and even for that year L-N hasn’t loaded in all of the stories.
Since the crime was not committed on furlough, and didn’t involve a death, Zukosi was simply not as a good a choice as Horton.
As you acknowledge.
A semi-hijack, but I thought it was interesting. During my lunch-time research (yeah, I know, I should get out more) I saw more than one claim that “over 80 violent offenders” went AWOL on the Massachusetts furlough program during Dukakis’ governorship. None of these same cites, though, made any mention of offenses committed by these criminals on the lam (other than those by Horton and Zukoski).
OTOH, I did find two L-N cites of furlough-jumpers from Massachusetts who apparently stayed out of trouble during their time on the run. One guy went to California and started a family, even taking time out to appear as an extra in the film Colors. The other next resurfaced in appeals courts, appealing his original conviction (he probably would have been better off just staying on the lam, as at the minimum he would have had escape charges to face).
Still though, I wouldn’t say that Horton was the only furloughed offender to get in Big Trouble. Sure, he’s the only one that’s talked about now, and in the Boston Globe, and was the proximate cause of Dukakis’ ending of the furlough program. But without the Eagle-Tribune’s series of articles, I don’t know how long Horton would have retained media attention. We’ve got violent offenders up here in da Falls–I can’t remember any of their names, unless I went to Lexis. Without the same, I can’t answer for Horton.
Is it possible there weren’t any choices besides Horton? Thus negating the whole point of the ad in the first place, except as a play to racist fears. I mean, Shayna’s link states that 302 people received furloughs, and as far as anyone can find, Horton’s the only one who committed a crime while on that leave. Now, I think furloughs are a bad idea, but that doesn’t seem too outrageous a failure rate.
We’re really just arguing hypotheticals now. If the words of the people who conceived of and created the ad aren’t enough evidence, then nothing is.
Actually, as I pointed out, there is potentially conclusive evidence: the existence of a worse criminal, white, than Horton was. So it’s rather disingenuous to say that “nothing is” good enough evidence.
Even if I concede an underlying racist motivation in the creators of the Horton ad, my point is that, OBJECTIVELY, there is sufficient independent race-neutral rationale to choose Horton as the poster boy for why furloughs are a bad idea.
Horton’s crime while on furlough didn’t involve a death, either.
Correct you are. My bad - I confused the death for which Mr. Horton was initially imprisoned with the crime he committed while on furlough.
I amend my comment to:
Since the crime was not committed while escaped from furlough, and didn’t involve punching, pistol-whipping, stabbing, and kicking a man and raping the man’s fiancee, Zukosi was simply not as a good a choice as Horton.
Wow; so many chips, so many shoulders.
I use a C-cell battery.
I am guessing that this was re-opened in response to the creation of this thread.
We do not need two; I am closing this.