Richard,
I know all about the site and about its history and about how it functions
at present. When one reads the information on the website, the Center for
Disability Rights sounds like a lovely organization. It began as one of our
Independent Living Centers, which are agencies that serve physically
disabled people. For all I know, it may still have worthwhile services. But
the functioning of its pooled trust accounts is definitely flawed. Websites
are the modern equivalent of magazine or newspaper advertisements. What you
read on a website, may or may not reflect the true nature of what it is
representing.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard Driscoll
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2017 4:45 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Should an Innocent Person Be Forced to Pay
for Their Arrest?
Miriam:
I found the following link by googling "Center for Disability Rights".
http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrT6V2tsXJYpsMA12cPxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTByM3V1YTV
uBGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMzBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1483940398/RO=10/RU=http%3
a%2f%2fcdrnys.org%2f/RK=0/RS=fL1OV7tuchry9dPZZ_I2H.ZbGi0-
I do not know about accessibility for you but the site is quite extensive.
Richard
On 1/8/2017 10:53 AM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
I talked with someone today who told me that the Center for Disabilitytrust.
Rights started out as a tiny Independent Living Center in Rochester,
New York, with a tiny budget, and because of this new mandate or
whatever it is, they now have a budget of millions.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2017 11:48 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Should an Innocent Person Be Forced to
Pay for Their Arrest?
How obscene!
So many good ideas run afoul of one giant snag...Humans. We are so
instilled with this capitalistic notion of profiting financially from
whatever we do, that we just can't keep our fingers out of any bit of
money laying around. Even as my heart goes out to those folks caught
up and destroyed by the greed of others, I know that I am unable to
reach out and help them. If anything can make me depressed, that is it.
Over the 22 years that Cathy and I have served the older blind and low
vision folks here on the Olympic Peninsula, we have seen many horror
stories.
People facing a bleak few years until the end of their lives, all
because they trusted someone, or some service, to help them. It
really strains my efforts to be a non violent person.
And these Greed Driven Bastards get craftier and craftier. Expose
them over here, and they pop up with a new scam over there.
How can we Americans trust one another or our government when there
are so many sharks swimming in our pool?
Carl Jarvis
On 1/6/17, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This article prompted me to tell you about one of the things IState.
discovered during my two month nightmare on Community Medicaid in New
York
There
is an agency called The Center for Disability Rights which, as far as
I can tell, is a New York State not for profit charitable agency. One
of its services is to maintain a pooled trust in which the funds of
disabled people are deposited so that the finances of the disabled
can be managed for them.
I believe that this was originally developed for developmentally
disabled people who were incapable of managing their own finances. At
some point, the service was extended to elderly and physically
disabled people who needed to receive medicaid benefits in order to
afford care at home. The idea was that their excess income, any
income beyond what is allowable by Medicaid, would go into the pooled
family to help me.The deal is that it costs $200 to open an account.
It costs $10 for the trust to pay each of 4 bills per month. If one
has more than 4 bills, each additional bill costs $20 to pay.
Additionally, it costs $50 each year for one's account to be audited.
The pooled trust keeps any money left in the account when one dies.
Bills are not always paid on time so that one might also be charged a
late fee. If one calls to check on payment, the responses tend to be
vague. You can check on line, but if you see that a payment has been
posted, there's no guarantee that it has actually been paid. At one
point, I called to complain and was told, "We never promise to pay
bills on time". Just imagine what is happening to the funds of
developmentally disabled people or elderly people with dimentia.
This is an example of how people with less money, pay more for things
than other people do.
Miriam
Kiriakou writes: "Donald Trump takes office in two short weeks. As
I've written previously, I don't expect much in the way of prison
reform or sentencing reform. Indeed, I've urged readers to take to
the courts for redress because we obviously won't get it from Trump
or the Republican Congress. As it turns out, the courts may be the
only place where civil liberties may still be protected."
Inmates at a Los Angeles jail. (photo: Lucy Nicholson/Reuters)
Should an Innocent Person Be Forced to Pay for Their Arrest?
By John Kiriakou, Reader Supported News
05 January 17
Donald Trump takes office in two short weeks. As I've written
previously, I don't expect much in the way of prison reform or
sentencing reform. Indeed, I've urged readers to take to the courts
for redress because we obviously won't get it from Trump or the
Republican Congress. As it turns out, the courts may be the only
place where civil liberties may still be protected.
The U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear a case about a Minnesota law
that allows local police departments to charge a "processing fee" for
any person arrested for any reason, even if they are found not guilty
of committing a crime.
Corey Statham was arrested in Ramsey County, Minnesota, and charged
with disorderly conduct. Two days later, the charges were thrown out
and Statham was released from the local lock-up. He had $46 in his
pocket when he was arrested. But upon his release, the local police
gave him back only $21. He had been charged a $25 "booking fee." And
to add insult to injury, Statham got his $25 back on a debit card,
which levied a fee of $7.25 for him to get his money back. In the
end, Statham, who was innocent of any crime, lost
$32.25 for no reason.
Many Americans drop $38.75 on dinner and don't give it a second thought.
But
for many others, it's a lot of money. And it is poorer people who are
more likely to find themselves in this predicament.
I found the same thing to be true when I was released from prison,
where I spent 23 months after blowing the whistle on the CIA's
torture program. I had $55 left in my commissary account. When I was
released, I was given the money on a debit card that charged me $6
every time I tried to use it - even for a balance inquiry. I got
about $30 out of it before I threw it away, empty. The rest of the
money had gone to fees. I was fortunate, though. I had friends and a
family to help me.But what about the prisoner who needs that money to survive when he'syear.
released? It seems to be little more than official theft.
Fees are at least as high outside the federal program and in states
other than Minnesota. Kentucky, for example, bills people held in its
jails for the cost of incarceration - even when those people are
exonerated or if charges are dismissed. Five towns in Colorado levy
the same kinds of fines, and Colorado law demands that individuals
file a lawsuit if they want their money back.
In Statham's case, he filed a suit against Ramsey County, saying that
he had a presumption of innocence and that the county had no right to
keep his money. The County's defense was that it "provided the debit
cards for the convenience of the inmates." It admitted that it was
difficult to argue that the non-refundable $25 fee was constitutional.
Still, the county's attorney said that people innocent of crimes "can
do it [try to get their money back] as soon as they have the evidence
that they haven't been found guilty." He admitted, though, "There's
some legwork involved."
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Paul ruled in Statham's
favor last year and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case later
this
Ramsey County announced that it would neither submit a brief in thewhere civil liberties may still be protected.
case nor defend its actions. The Court ordered the county to file a
brief, however, leading observers to believe that it will force an
end to the practices of charging processing fees to innocent people
and gouging those who are not.
________________________________________
John Kiriakou is a former CIA counterterrorism officer and a former
senior investigator with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. John
became the sixth whistleblower indicted by the Obama administration
under the Espionage Act - a law designed to punish spies. He served
23 months in prison as a result of his attempts to oppose the Bush
administration's torture program.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work.
Permission
to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader
Supported News.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference
not valid.
Inmates at a Los Angeles jail. (photo: Lucy Nicholson/Reuters)
http://readersupportednews.org/http://readersupportednews.org/
Should an Innocent Person Be Forced to Pay for Their Arrest?
By John Kiriakou, Reader Supported News
05 January 17
onald Trump takes office in two short weeks. As I've written
previously, I don't expect much in the way of prison reform or
sentencing reform. Indeed, I've urged readers to take to the courts
for redress because we obviously won't get it from Trump or the
Republican Congress. As it turns out, the courts may be the only
place
The U.S. Supreme Court will soon hear a case about a Minnesota law
that allows local police departments to charge a "processing fee" for
any person arrested for any reason, even if they are found not guilty
of committing a crime.
Corey Statham was arrested in Ramsey County, Minnesota, and charged
with disorderly conduct. Two days later, the charges were thrown out
and Statham was released from the local lock-up. He had $46 in his
pocket when he was arrested. But upon his release, the local police
gave him back only $21. He had been charged a $25 "booking fee." And
to add insult to injury, Statham got his $25 back on a debit card,
which levied a fee of $7.25 for him to get his money back. In the
end, Statham, who was innocent of any crime, lost
$32.25 for no reason.
Many Americans drop $38.75 on dinner and don't give it a second thought.
But
for many others, it's a lot of money. And it is poorer people who are
more likely to find themselves in this predicament.
I found the same thing to be true when I was released from prison,
where I spent 23 months after blowing the whistle on the CIA's
torture program. I had $55 left in my commissary account. When I was
released, I was given the money on a debit card that charged me $6
every time I tried to use it - even for a balance inquiry. I got
about $30 out of it before I threw it away, empty. The rest of the
money had gone to fees. I was fortunate, though. I had friends and a
But what about the prisoner who needs that money to survive when he'syear.
released? It seems to be little more than official theft.
Fees are at least as high outside the federal program and in states
other than Minnesota. Kentucky, for example, bills people held in its
jails for the cost of incarceration - even when those people are
exonerated or if charges are dismissed. Five towns in Colorado levy
the same kinds of fines, and Colorado law demands that individuals
file a lawsuit if they want their money back.
In Statham's case, he filed a suit against Ramsey County, saying that
he had a presumption of innocence and that the county had no right to
keep his money. The County's defense was that it "provided the debit
cards for the convenience of the inmates." It admitted that it was
difficult to argue that the non-refundable $25 fee was constitutional.
Still, the county's attorney said that people innocent of crimes "can
do it [try to get their money back] as soon as they have the evidence
that they haven't been found guilty." He admitted, though, "There's
some legwork involved."
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Paul ruled in Statham's
favor last year and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case later
this
Ramsey County announced that it would neither submit a brief in the
case nor defend its actions. The Court ordered the county to file a
brief, however, leading observers to believe that it will force an
end to the practices of charging processing fees to innocent people
and gouging those who are not.
John Kiriakou is a former CIA counterterrorism officer and a former
senior investigator with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. John
became the sixth whistleblower indicted by the Obama administration
under the Espionage Act - a law designed to punish spies. He served
23 months in prison as a result of his attempts to oppose the Bush
administration's torture program.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work.
Permission
to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader
Supported News.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
