The radicals in the woke movement speak a great deal of gibberish about “holistic justice,” making it sound like a valid scientific concept when, in fact, it’s just a get-out-of-jail free card for criminals. Pamela Price talks about it all the time, as if “a holistic approach to justice” is the solution to all the crime and misery in Oakland and Alameda County. But, of course, once you get past the gobbledegook and double talk, you’re left with Price’s real agenda: letting criminals under the age of 25 go free, paroling dangerous predators, firing dedicated prosecutors, and—of course—going after cops with the vengeful hatred of the true Oakland wokester.
What, to people like Price, is “holistic justice”? “[N]ot just addressing the immediate criminal case of the defendant but also the underlying life circumstances that can contribute to client contact with the criminal justice system.”
This gets us back to the notorious “root causes” argument that wokes love to invoke in excusing criminal violence. Let’s take a murderer we’ll call Sidney. He’s a repeat offender who’s been arrested at least a dozen times, for everything from assault and battery to auto theft, domestic violence, possession of a stolen gun, strongarm robbery, drug dealing and repeated parole violations, and who has just been arrested again for murder. Obviously a menace to society who should not be on the streets. But to Pamela Price, in considering Sidney’s case, we must take into account not only the “immediate criminal case” (i.e., the murder), but “the underlying life circumstances that can contribute to client contact with the criminal justice system.”
I love that phrase “client contact with the criminal justice system.” It makes it sound as if the murderer was randomly exposed to the legal system, like an innocent person accidentally infected with COVID. Can we please call this what it actually is? The murderer was arrested by law enforcement when enough evidence against him was procured to suggest that he was the murderer, and an indictment was issued.” That’s how you properly use the English language—not with a bungled neologistic construction (“contact with the criminal justice system”), but a simple statement of facts.
Beyond the gibberish is the woke demand that the jury considering Sidney’s case be forced to take into account his “underlying life circumstances.” Poor Sidney came from a broken family! His father was in jail. His single-mother mom was poor and herself had a lengthy record of shoplifting, drug dealing and assault. Poor Sidney was abused and misled by the gangs he looked up to, and who steered him, despite his better instincts (his mother was a good Christian), into a life of crime and predation. Poor Sidney suffered from frequent depression, and once tried to take his life by overdosing on fentanyl. (He was saved by a cop who administered Narcan.) Poor Sidney was a good boy, misunderstood by society (or so his mother tearfully testified in his behalf), who deserved to be given a new chance. “Those were his underlying life circumstances!” his public defender thundered. “You, the jury, are obligated, in the name of public safety, to take these things into consideration in rendering your verdict!”
In the event, the jury found him guilty of murder in the second degree, but before the Judge could pronounce sentence, Pamela Price reduced the charges to several misdemeanor counts, and a day later Sidney was freed. Two days later, he stabbed a man to death in a quarrel over money from a drug deal gone wrong. The media pounced: it was a national sensation. “D.A. frees killer who killed again!” Price refused to comment. Her spokesperson said she could not talk about an ongoing criminal case. After a few days, the furor died down. Three months later, no one remembered Sidney’s name, except the family of the man he had killed. Three months after that, Pamela Price announced her bid for re-election. She said her efforts to promote holistic justice “have been a great success and have shown that our carceral system is a failure.” Price was re-elected in a landslide, the same year Oakland set a record 187 murders in a single year. Of those, 92 were dismissed by Price because the killers were below the age of 25. Of the remainder (95), Price allowed 78 out on bail; of those, 77 disappeared with a trace. Of the remaining 17, Price reduced charges from murder to misdemeanor assault. None of the felons received a jail sentence in excess of seven months. In the two years after that, at least 104 were involved in further violent crimes, including murder. Price’s conclusion was, “We could have reduced the recidivism rate even more, if we’d had the courage and boldness to invest in rehabilitation programs that actually work.” She called for an investment of $450 million in Alameda County on “rehabilitation programs based on a holistic perspective” and suggested that the “brave social justice warrior, my good friend Cat Brooks,” be put in charge of the program. When asked where the money would come from, Price said from further cuts in Alameda County’s biggest police departments (Oakland, Berkeley, Hayward, Fremont, Livermore) and added that, if that wasn’t enough, “Property taxes on rich homeowners as well as business taxes on billionaire corporations should be considered.” Within three weeks of that pronouncement, the following companies announced they were leaving Oakland permanently: Kaiser Permanente, Clorox, Blue Shield of California, Cost Plus, Pandora, Zhone and Marqeta. Progressive City Council member Carroll Fife tweeted, “Good riddance to bad racist rubbish.” With barely enough money to pay the interest on its debt, Oakland announced the closure of the following departments: Police, Fire, Parks, Transportation, and Social Services. “However,” Mayor Sheng Thao smilingly reassured the public, “we were able to double the budget of the Department of Violence Prevention!”
And so goes another Tale of Holistic Justice!
Steve Heimoff