The Second Look Act is a federal legislative proposal aimed at reforming long-term incarceration by giving people in prison a chance to have their sentences reconsidered after they have served a significant amount of time. First introduced by Senator Cory Booker and Representative Karen Bass, the Act addresses the fact that many individuals are serving extremely long sentences—often from the height of the “tough-on-crime” era—without any opportunity for review, even if they’ve changed or rehabilitated themselves. Under the Second Look Act, anyone who has served 10 years or more of a federal prison sentence would be eligible to petition the court that imposed their sentence to reevaluate it. This does not guarantee release, but it does require a judge to hold a hearing to determine whether the person’s sentence should be reduced, modified, or left in place. During this hearing, the judge considers multiple factors: the person’s rehabilitation, behavior while incarcerated, age at the time of the offense, current age, risk to public safety, and any additional evidence of change or maturity. Importantly, individuals who file for a second look would have the right to legal counsel during this process. Victims and prosecutors would also be notified and have the opportunity to be heard, ensuring that all perspectives are included in the judge’s decision. However, the judge ultimately has the discretion to make an independent determination, unlike clemency or parole, which require executive or board-level approval. The purpose of the Second Look Act is to correct injustices of over-sentencing and to support the idea that people can change. Many individuals who have served 20, 30, or even 40 years pose little to no risk to society but remain imprisoned under outdated sentencing policies. Research consistently shows that those who have been incarcerated for decades and are released in later life have very low rates of recidivism. This Act also aligns with the goals of reducing mass incarceration, lowering costs to taxpayers, and promoting racial and social justice. It is especially important for people sentenced at a young age or under mandatory minimums who were never given the chance to prove they’ve changed. The Second Look Act also supports broader reform efforts like the First Step Act, but goes further by restoring judicial discretion and recognizing human development over time. Although the Second Look Act has not yet been passed into federal law, it has been reintroduced several times with growing bipartisan interest. In the meantime, several states—such as Illinois, Maryland, and Connecticut—have introduced their own “second look” sentencing reforms or pilot programs, showing the national momentum behind the idea. The Urban Law School and similar institutions can support the Second Look Act by raising awareness, educating families, training legal advocates, and lobbying lawmakers. Every season is the right time to push for justice, dignity, and second chances. Let me know if you'd like this styled as a brochure, blog post, or part of a legal toolkit.

Double Jeopardy: Legal Breakdown Definition: Double jeopardy is a constitutional protection under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states, “...nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.” This clause ensures individuals cannot be prosecuted or punished multiple times for the same offense. Protections Offered by Double Jeopardy 1. Protection Against Retrial After Acquittal Once a person is acquitted (found not guilty), they cannot be tried again for the same crime, even if new evidence surfaces. Example: If a jury finds someone not guilty of murder, the government cannot retry them for the same murder. 2. Protection Against Retrial After Conviction After a conviction, the defendant cannot be tried again for the same crime. However, they may appeal the conviction, and if overturned, a retrial could occur. Example: If someone is convicted of robbery and serves their sentence, they cannot face charges for the same robbery again. 3. Protection Against Multiple Punishments for the Same Offense The government cannot impose multiple punishments for the same crime. This applies to sentencing in a single trial or subsequent punishments for the same conduct. When Double Jeopardy Applies Double jeopardy protections apply when: 1. The Same Sovereign is Prosecuting Double jeopardy applies only to prosecutions by the same government entity. For example, federal and state governments are considered separate sovereigns, so one can prosecute after the other for the same conduct under different laws (dual sovereignty doctrine). 2. A Valid Trial Begins Protections apply once a jury is empaneled and sworn in, or in a bench trial, when the first witness is sworn. 3. The Case is Resolved Protections apply after a final resolution, such as acquittal, conviction, or dismissal with prejudice. Exceptions to Double Jeopardy 1. Separate Sovereigns Doctrine Federal and state courts can prosecute for the same conduct if it violates both federal and state laws. Example: A person acquitted of a state murder charge may still face federal civil rights charges for the same act. 2. Mistrials If a trial ends in a mistrial (e.g., hung jury or procedural errors), the government can retry the defendant. 3. Appeals by the Defendant If the defendant successfully appeals a conviction, the government can retry the case unless the appellate court rules there was insufficient evidence for a conviction. 4. Civil vs. Criminal Cases Double jeopardy does not apply between civil and criminal cases. A person acquitted in a criminal case can still face a civil lawsuit for the same act. Example: O.J. Simpson was acquitted of murder in criminal court but found liable in a civil wrongful death lawsuit. 5. Lesser Included Offenses If a defendant is acquitted or convicted of a greater offense, they cannot later be tried for a lesser included offense stemming from the same conduct. Example: Acquittal for first-degree murder bars prosecution for manslaughter based on the same act. 6. Continuing Conduct Double jeopardy does not protect against prosecution for new or ongoing criminal acts that occur after the initial trial. Relevant Case Law 1. Blockburger v. United States (1932) Established the "same elements test" to determine whether two offenses are the same for double jeopardy purposes. If each offense requires proof of a fact the other does not, they are considered separate offenses. 2. Heath v. Alabama (1985) Affirmed the separate sovereigns doctrine, allowing separate prosecutions by state and federal courts. 3. United States v. Dixon (1993) Clarified that the same elements test determines whether successive prosecutions violate double jeopardy. Practical Considerations Strategic Charging by Prosecutors: Prosecutors may charge crimes strategically to avoid double jeopardy issues, focusing on charges they believe will secure a conviction. Collateral Consequences: While double jeopardy prevents retrial, it does not shield defendants from collateral consequences like parole violations or deportation proceedings. International Perspective Many countries recognize double jeopardy protections but differ in scope and application. Some, like Canada and the UK, allow retrials in exceptional circumstances, such as the emergence of new evidence. Conclusion Double jeopardy ensures fairness in the legal system by preventing repeated prosecutions and punishments for the same offense. However, its application involves nuances, particularly concerning separate sovereigns, mistrials, and appeals. Understanding these complexities is essential for both defendants and legal practitioners.

AQOZv9zokFUwxQEi4lGA9N0QRJbL9lQF_tHRfRx0YXUm1R-CpTWl-M1VqrGdZz_AgsTf1c5_dfw8Yfdw7okAGEa2.mp4 Dontavius Carter killed last night at Washington State Prison. Please keep his family in your thoughts and prayers during this difficult time.  #death #prisoner #gdc

Black girls are disproportionately affected by sex trafficking worldwide, with alarming statistics revealing the scope of the crisis. Globally, it is estimated that tens of thousands of Black girls are trafficked each month, driven by systemic inequalities, poverty, and racial biases. In the United States alone, Black girls account for 40% of all sex trafficking victims, despite being only 13% of the female population. Many victims are as young as 12–14 years old, targeted due to vulnerabilities like unstable housing, abuse, or lack of social support. Worldwide, the numbers grow even more staggering as traffickers exploit racial hierarchies and economic disparities in regions like Africa, the Caribbean, and Europe. Despite these overwhelming figures, Black girls are often overlooked in anti-trafficking efforts, underscoring an urgent need for tailored interventions and justice reforms.

https://www.missingkids.org/poster/NCMC/2031908/1

Domestic Violence is no joke people. If you're a victim of domestic violence leave that situation immediately before it's too late. #mentalhealth #domesticviolenceawareness #domesticviolenceprevention

Eyewitness identification has long been a contentious issue in the field of criminal justice. Numerous studies and cases have demonstrated that eyewitness testimony can be unreliable and susceptible to various biases and errors. Here are some key points and evidence that highlight the problems with eyewitness identification: 1. Misleading Information and Suggestibility Post-Event Information: Research shows that people's memories can be influenced by information they receive after an event. If witnesses are exposed to misleading information, it can alter their recollection of the original event (Loftus & Palmer, 1974). Police Suggestions: Police procedures, such as lineups and photo arrays, can lead to suggestive cues that influence a witness’s identification. This phenomenon is known as "confirmation bias," where witnesses may feel pressure to conform to what they believe investigators expect. 2. Memory Fallibility Nature of Memory: Memory is not a perfect recording of events but rather a reconstructive process that can lead to distortions. Factors such as stress, the presence of a weapon (the "weapon focus" effect), and the passage of time can significantly affect a witness's memory. Stress and Trauma: High-stress situations can impair memory formation and retrieval. Studies have shown that witnesses under stress are less accurate in recalling details (Yuille & Cutshall, 1986). 3. Cross-Race Effect Own-Race Bias: Research indicates that individuals are generally better at recognizing faces of their own race compared to those of other races, which can lead to misidentifications in cross-racial encounters (Meissner & Brigham, 2001). 4. Inconsistent Testimony Eyewitness accounts can vary significantly over time. Studies have shown that eyewitnesses often provide inconsistent statements during different interviews, raising questions about the reliability of their memories (Loftus, 1979). 5. Wrongful Convictions A significant number of wrongful convictions have been attributed to mistaken eyewitness identifications. According to the Innocence Project, eyewitness misidentification played a role in approximately 70% of the wrongful convictions that were later overturned through DNA evidence. Notable cases, such as that of Ronald Cotton, highlight how faulty eyewitness testimony can lead to long-term incarceration of innocent individuals. 6. Judicial Reforms In light of the issues surrounding eyewitness identification, various jurisdictions have implemented reforms, such as double-blind lineup procedures, where the administrator does not know who the suspect is, and clearer instructions for witnesses, to minimize the potential for errors. Conclusion Overall, the body of evidence suggests that eyewitness identification is fraught with issues that can undermine its validity. While it can sometimes provide useful information, it should be approached with caution and corroborated with other evidence to ensure a fair and accurate judicial process.

Date of birth: March 31, 2009 Hair: Black Eyes: Brown Height: 5’3″ (160 cm) Weight: 110 lbs (49 kg) Child Find Case #: 13274 Autumn was last seen on November 24, 2023 at around 9:40AM on Upper Riverdale Road in Riverdale, Georgia. She was wearing an ankle-length white puffy jacket with fur on the hood, gray sweatpants, and her hair up. If you have any information or have seen Autumn, please call the Clayton County Police Department at 1-770-477-3550 or Child Find of America at 1-800-I-AM-LOST (1-800-426-5678).

No experience requited, hiring immediately, appy now.This position is a work from home position. You will not need to come into the office. No Experience Needed. Benefits: Health Insurance, 401K, Vacation & PTO. (APPLY) An Amazon Customer Service Associate is a critical part of our mission to deliver timely, accurate and professional customer service to all Amazon customers. This vital position requires an action-oriented, flexible problem-solver who will assist customers in expediting orders and correcting post-sales problems. Associates communicate with customers primarily through phone and email and utilize a variety of software tools to navigate customer accounts, research and review policies and communicate effective solutions in a fun and fast-paced environment. Amazon Customer Service - Work From Home $16-$35/hr https://g.co/kgs/VzpzEx