|
NASHUA 'C The lifestyle of a homeless alcoholic drove David Cull straight to sobriety 21 years ago.
For the past several years, Cull, 50, has offered other recovering addicts and alcoholics a smoother path. Cull runs two group sober houses in the city through the agency he founded, Soul Purpose Living.
The agency's two homes, the Hope House for men, off East Dunstable Road, and the Faith House for women, near Broad Street, are both single-family houses in residential neighborhoods west of the F.E. Everett Turnpike. Cull asked that the exact locations of the houses not be published, to help keep residents secure from old acquaintances of darker days.
'The idea is to integrate ourselves back into society,' Cull said. 'We're not bad people. We're just people who, because of addiction, have done some bad things.'
'People with substance abuse, they made mistakes and they hit the wrong road, they don't need to pay that price forever,' he said.
Cull has been running sober houses in Nashua since 2002, operating as Soul Purpose Living since 2004, he said. Soul Purpose runs two of the state's five official organized group homes for recovering addicts, and the only one for women.
The state could stand to have more, said Joseph Harding, director of drug and alcohol abuse prevention for the Department of Health and Human Services. Addicts need stable, safe housing to aid their recovery, he said.
'Housing is an important issue . . .
particularly for people who are in early recovery. A lot of times they've lost their jobs, and burned whatever bridges they had,' Harding said. 'They need decent housing to help them get back on their feet . . . and it's important for people in recovery to have good supports in place.'
There is no state oversight for sober houses, Harding said. Unlike addiction treatment centers and counselors, they aren't licensed and don't work under contract with the state, Harding said.
'We don't regulate them,' Harding said. 'I'm not sure if it's either a good thing or a bad thing. I think it's important that our treatment providers are regulated and that we hold them to high standards.'
Sober houses don't provide any formal treatment, however, just support. Recovering addicts need plenty of that, Harding said.
'I think it can be a very good thing,' he said, 'but like anything else, something can be good or bad depending on how it's run.'
Providing structure
Soul Purpose Living has financial and organizational problems as an agency, but the group homes themselves appear well-run. The houses are tidy, and residents seem enthusiastic about the program. The many rules are posted prominently.
Cull relies on house managers at each residence to help him manage the houses, he said. Faith House has room for nine women and is currently full, while Hope House has room for 11 men and currently houses seven, he said.
To be eligible for consideration, residents must have a criminal record clear of any violent crimes, including sexual assaults, and have completed a 30-day inpatient treatment program or a treatment program in jail or prison.
'The treatment programs give them the tools, and then they come here,' Cull said.
Soul Purpose doesn't offer any treatment itself, but residents are required to attend Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous meetings daily for the first 90 days and at least four times a week thereafter. They also must submit to random drug and alcohol tests and abide by an 11 p.m. curfew, Cull said.
The houses have a simple 'three-strikes and you're out' policy for violations, Cull said, and residents who relapse into drinking or drugging are dismissed immediately.
'There's structure here. There's rules,' Cull said, adding later, 'You need a lot of structure when you're trying to reclaim lives.'
Soul Purpose collects $135 weekly rent from each resident, and residents work to support themselves. Residents all are required to pitch in with household chores and to attend group, family-style meetings to hash out any issues or conflicts.
'This is a family atmosphere. These people are family. We need to treat each other accordingly, just like any family,' Cull said.
Cull and the house managers evaluate new residents and suggest various programs to help with any particular needs. Cull attends monthly meetings of the Greater Nashua Continuum of Care, a network of area social service agencies, to keep in touch with other providers who can help residents.
Residents who have suffered from domestic violence can work with counselors at Bridges Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Support. People with other mental health issues can get help through Community Council. The Nashua Pastoral Care Center offers household finance classes, and the Nashua Soup Kitchen teaches job search skills.
Cull expects residents to stay at least six months, and at most two years, he said.
'We don't want them to stay here two years. We have to look at where they're coming from and how they're doing, and just like a mother bird, we have to push them out of the nest,' he said.
Cull estimates that some 250 people have come and gone through Soul Purpose houses over the last several years.
'Out of that, we probably have about a 70 percent success rate,' Cull said, defining success as simply staying sober while staying in the house.
Group living is an important element of the program, Cull said. People with more experience in clean living can mentor newer residents, and they all encourage each other.
'Everyone here wants help,' Hope House resident Michael Donlon said. 'Everyone here is supportive.'
Donlon, 23, came to Hope House after a stint in Farnum House in Manchester, which in turn followed several months in jail after he was arrested for dealing drugs to support his own habit.
'I really liked what it was about,' Donlon said. 'You can't just come here and pay rent and hang out. You have to be active in the program.
'They have halfway houses; this is like a three-quarters house,' Donlon said.
Too often, Cull said, treatment centers and housing for recovering addicts get shunted into the poorest neighborhoods, where crime and drugs are more common.
'Why shouldn't they have a nice house, and take care of it?' Cull asked, adding later, 'Living in a neighborhood really gives these people a sense of responsibility, ownership and taking care of things. That's why I wanted the house out in a neighborhood. Why should we send all our 'problems' to places downtown?'
Both Soul Purpose homes are located on moderately busy streets in the midst of typically suburban neighborhoods. Neighbors in both areas opposed the homes when Cull went before the city zoning board last year. At the time, city zoning rules allowed no more than six unrelated persons in a single family house.
Cull applied for a variance to house up to nine persons in both houses, but the zoning board turned him down after a hearing April 12, 2005.
Several neighbors around each of the houses spoke against the variance request, complaining of noise, traffic and the overall effects of a group home in the midst of a single-family neighborhood. Minutes of the meeting, including their comments, are available along with this story on The Telegraph's Web site.
'When we filed, everyone was against us. They were all against us,' Cull said of the neighborhood opposition. 'I'll take some of that blame. . . . They're not educated. We hadn't explained things to them.'
The zoning board agreed to reconsider its decision, but rather than go through another hearing, Cull said he arranged for lawyers from the federal Housing and Urban Development office to meet with city officials and settle the matter.
The city has since changed its zoning rules, to allow one person for every 300 square feet in a single-family residence, according to the city's planning office, and both Soul Purpose houses fall within that rule. Cull hopes that the group's efforts to keep up their property and run clean houses will help ease neighbors' fears.
'I think their fears that they're going to have drug addicts raid their houses and shoot them, I think might be gone,' he said.
Rocky road
Cull mostly grew up around New England, he said, and he's lived in Nashua for several years.
'I've moved 35 times in three countries. My father was an alcoholic. . . . My whole family was alcoholics,' he said. 'I went to college, and I drank all through college.'
Cull had a girlfriend and a daughter on his way down to rock bottom, he said. That came in 1985, when his girlfriend demanded that they talk about his problem. He agreed, and got drunk to fortify himself for the occasion.
'I made believe that I was OK, and I was sober,' Cull said. 'As soon as she looked at me, she saw I was drunk.'
His girlfriend kicked Cull to the curb, and after wearing out his welcome with various friends and acquaintances, he found himself homeless in Lowell, Mass.
'I tried to live as a homeless person,' he said. 'I ended up on the street for one week, and I said, 'This is too much work.' '
'They know the soup schedules, the kitchen, the shelters, they shower at the YMCA. It's a lot of work,' he said.
Cull checked himself into Lowell General Hospital for detoxification, and later moved from a holding facility to a halfway house, he said.
'Back in those days, you could just walk into detox,' he said. 'Now, it's a six-week waiting period. Four to six weeks.'
Cull eventually bounced back. He was married for four years in the 1990s, and worked as a steel worker until getting laid off in 2002. Cull bought the men's house after his divorce, and it became an informal sober house, as he shared it with three and sometimes four other people he knew from AA, he said.
'We had a number of us that were staying sober living there,' he said.
Cull began working to formally manage the sober houses after being laid off from his job. He formed Soul Purpose Living, and he's been struggling ever since to build a financial foundation for the agency.
'I just felt spiritually that I needed to do more,' he said, adding later, 'When I felt like this is what I needed to do, it brought my spiritual level up.'
Cull started Soul Purpose along with a former partner as a for-profit property management company, and later reorganized the company as a nonprofit, he said. Cull credits a former business partner for the Soul Purpose name and credo: 'The soul purpose in life is to help people.'
In the long run, Cull hopes that the group housing model can be applied to other areas, such as people with mental or physical disabilities, to help teach independent living skills.
'Once this program works, we can use this as a model for all the populations with needs,' Cull said.
'I see the possibilities of people who don't have the luxuries that we have, the blessings that we have, and I see the possibilities that even the people who don't have what we have, they can have what we have,' he said, 'but it's going to take work, resources and housing to do it.'
Andrew Wolfe can be reached at 594-6410 or awolfe@nashuatelegraph.com.
-->
Gift Baskets
Online Bingo
Buy Poker Chips
Toronto Holiday Gift Baskets
Wine Gift Baskets
Auto Parts
Brian Moses Realty
Initializing : 15ms
Starting first parse
.Build 0: 0 ms (Misc)
.Build 3: 281 ms (Article)
.Build 4: 203 ms (Portal)
.Build 9: 16 ms (Content)
.Build 10: 63 ms (Ads)
Retrieve categories: 0ms
Read templates: 16ms
Read objects: 0ms
Scripts: 47ms
Parsing templates: 16ms
At Runtime:
Time used: 250 ms
Starting first parse
Criminal Background Check
CALAIS - An Ellsworth man who nearly ran over a police officer and then led police on a high-speed chase through the city earlier this week appeared in 4th District Court on Friday.
Police were uncertain as to Daniel Mutty's connection with Calais, but according to the Maine Sex Offender Registry he gave a vacant lot in Calais as his permanent address.
Mutty, 32, was charged with aggravated criminal mischief, criminal threatening, failure to stop for an officer, driving to endanger, and two counts of reckless conduct as a result of his June 14 chase through the city.
It began Wednesday when a teller at Bangor Savings Bank on North Street notified police that Mutty was attempting to cash a forged check at the bank's drive-through window.
A teller notified the Maine State Police that Mutty had altered his last payroll check from the company, and police notified banks throughout the state.
In Calais, another teller notified city police that Mutty was there and trying to cash another company check. When an officer went to the bank, Mutty fled. Eventually his truck rolled down North Street and hit a parked vehicle.
The officers found Mutty hiding about a block away.
In court on Friday, Calais attorney John Mitchell represented Mutty until a court appointed attorney could be assigned.
When the judge asked Mutty if he had any money he said, "they [the police] confiscated all my money." He then shrugged.
First District Attorney Paul Cavanaugh then told the judge about Mutty's lengthy criminal record that began in 1992 with assault. Mutty also was charged in 1993 with escape, criminal mischief and terrorizing. He was charged with terrorizing, burglary and theft and aggravated assault in 1994. He also was charged with failure to appear in 1997. In 2000, Mutty was charged with unlawful sexual contact and was ordered to serve five years in prison. That same year he also was charged with theft and terrorizing.
In 2001 he was charged with forgery and being a habitual offender. He was charged as a habitual offender again in 2002.
Cavanaugh said Mutty's criminal record stretched across three other counties - York, Hancock and Penobscot - in addition to Washington County.
The district attorney also told the judge that when Mutty was ordered to register as a sex offender he listed a vacant lot in Calais as his permanent address.
Cavanaugh then asked the judge to set a high bail for Mutty. "He's only been out three months. This requires serious bail," he said.
But attorney Mitchell reminded the judge that Mutty was innocent regardless of the seriousness of the charges. Addressing the question of bail, Mitchell admitted that although his client has had problems with the law he never failed to appear although he got "detoured on occasion to jail or prison."
Mitchell asked that once Mutty's attorney was on board they be allowed to readdress the question of bail.
The judge then set bail at $50,000 single surety or $25,000 cash with conditions. Mutty, who remained in the Washington County jail Friday night, is expected to be arraigned July 24 in Washington County Superior Court.
Criminal Background Check
The 67-year-old man sitting in the jury box inside a courtroom in the Pomona Superior Court wore a blue county jail jump suit and shackles.
When the judge, Jack P. Hunt, asked him Wednesday if he waived his right to a speedy trial, he replied "No," brushing off his attorney's advice to wait for the District Attorney's Office to decide if it will seek the death penalty.
"You better get geared up for death," Hunt told Kent Wesley Holman before closing his case file and handing it to the court clerk.
The St. George, Utah, resident faces two counts of murder and arson in the shooting deaths of his elderly brother and sister-in-law in their West Covina condo last summer.
It's been nearly a year since Holman was arrested, and the District Attorney's Special Circumstance Committee that recommends the death penalty after a conviction has not yet made a decision to do so in this case, officials said.
"It's very unusual," Kent Thomas, Holman's public defender, said about the length of time the committee is taking. "At this point in time, I really have no comment," he said. "But if they make the wrong decision, I'll have plenty to say."
Thomas said he feared "political correctness" might play a role in whether the committee recommends the death penalty, but did not elaborate.
Holman, who has no prior criminal record, allegedly drove from Utah to the West Covina home of Lavar and Adeline Holman, shot the couple, and set their garage on fire to cover up the crime, officials said.
He then drove back to Utah and turned himself in to police there. A gun, suspected to be the murder weapon, was found in Kent Holman's car, police said.
Family members have said the brothers were in a dispute over money. In 2004, Kent Holman filed a lawsuit against his brother to nullify what he claims was a wrongful lien over property in Utah.
The couple - Lavar, 83, and Adeline, 80 - were avid golfers and members of the South Hills Country Club. Lavar Holman was described as a stern businessman with a soft side, Adeline as a devoted wife.
Thomas, however, said there were troubles in the Holman family that may shed a light on Kent Holman's actions.
His father, brother and uncle all fell into a deep depression in their 60s and committed suicide by shooting themselves, Thomas said.
He said he believes Kent Holman fell into that same depression.
"Look at family tree. Here you see males in their 60s are picking up guns and killing themselves," Thomas said. "It's not a coincidence."
Although the deputy district attorney on the case, Michael Cabral, could not be reached for comment, Thomas said all those involved agree the incident was a terrible tragedy.
Holman family members attended some court dates following Kent Holman's arrest in August but have not spoken publicly about the case.
Criminal Background Check
In your recent article When is a bicycle more than a bicycle? you were writing with regard to California Law; is the law similar in Oregon? Mostly, I'm interested in the distinction between infractions and misdemeanors. So, getting a DUI on a bicycle doesn't "equal" a DUI in a car as far as penalty goes (no points on the driving record)? Does this apply to all moving violations, too? Where is the cut-off'?
Thanks,
J.C.
Oregon
Dear J.C.,
I'm glad you asked J.C., because it gives me a chance to take another look at BUIs. I have covered this subject before, but do not stay up on this cycling/drinking subject matter as closely as Big Jonny over at www.drunkcyclist.com (this is really not a link you want to open at work-editor). Now that summer is here, and those ice-cold beers are beckoning, it's important to know our rights and responsibilities under the law.
BUI: Infraction or Misdemeanor?
Let's start by looking at that DUI on a bicycle again. In When is a bicycle more than a bicycle? I said in passing "Even a DUI, which would be a misdemeanor if you're driving a motor vehicle, is only an infraction on your bicycle."
Well, that used to be the law. In 1984, The California Attorney General issued an Opinion addressing Section 21200 of the California Vehicle Code, which states that "every person riding a bicycle upon a highway has all of the rights and is subject to all of the provisions applicable to the driver of a vehicle." In this opinion, the Attorney General advised that a conviction for DUI under this section is an infraction.
However, in 1985, the California legislature added Section 21200.5 to the Vehicle Code, which makes it
unlawful for any person to ride a bicycle upon a highway while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or any drug, or under the combined influence of an alcoholic beverage and any drug." In California, a "'highway" is a way or place of whatever nature, publicly maintained and open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel.
And a conviction under Section 21200.5, California's BUI (Bicycling Under the Influence) statute, is NOT an infraction, it's a misdemeanor, so heads up to all you California cyclists. Especially to D.D., who has some beers riding on the outcome of the legality of riding in the lane.
In Oregon, there is no similar statute corresponding to the California statute prohibiting Bicycling Under the Influence. However, as in California, there is a Statute which provides that the vehicle laws apply to bicycles. Section 814.400 provides that
every person riding a bicycle upon a public way is subject to the provisions applicable to and has the rights and duties as the driver of any other vehicle concerning operating on highways...Under this section of the Vehicle Code, cyclists are subject to the provisions of Section 813.010, Oregon's DUI statute, and cyclists can and will be prosecuted for BUI in Oregon. And yes, in Oregon, a first conviction is a Class A Misdemeanor, and rises to a Class C Felony if there have been three convictions within the last ten years.
Infractions and Misdemeanors and Felonies...
Now that we've cleared that up, let's look at the different types of offenses. In Oregon, as in other states, the law distinguishes between different categories of offenses. Under Chapter 153 of the Oregon Revised Statutes, an offense may be either a violation or a crime. Offenses that are classified as a violation are punishable only by a fine, or by a combination of a fine and additional punishment, but may "not include a term of imprisonment." In other words, you can't go to jail for committing a violation. Many traffic offenses are violations, because the maximum punishment for the offense is a fine, rather than a term of imprisonment. In Oregon, violations are further classified as:
Class A Violations (carrying a maximum of a $720 fine);
Class B Violations (carrying a maximum of a $360 fine);
Class C Violations (carrying a maximum of a $180 fine);
Class D Violations (carrying a maximum of a $ 90 fine);
Unclassified Violations, which are designated as Class B Violations;Specific Fine Violations, which are punishable by a specific fine.
A crime, on the other hand, is an offense that is punishable by a combination of fines and additional punishment, including a term of imprisonment. There are two categories of crime: misdemeanors, and felonies. A misdemeanor is a crime that is punishable by a term of imprisonment of one year or less. In Oregon, misdemeanors are further classified as:
Class A Misdemeanors (carrying a maximum penalty of $6,250 and/or 1 year);
Class B Misdemeanors (carrying a maximum penalty of $2,500 and/or 6 months);
Class C Misdemeanors (carrying a maximum penalty of $1,250 and/or 30 days);
Unclassified Misdemeanors (carrying a penalty specified by the relevant statute)In contrast, a felony is a crime that is punishable by a term of imprisonment of one or more years. In Oregon, felonies are further classified as:
Class A Felonies (carrying a maximum penalty of $375,000 and/or 20 years);
Class B Felonies (carrying a maximum penalty of $250,000 and/or 10 years);
Class C Felonies (carrying a maximum penalty of $125,000 and/or 5 years);
Unclassified Felonies (carrying a penalty specified by the relevant statute)This scheme of classification is common across the United States, although the classifications and penalties will vary from State to State. Sometimes the terms will vary as well; for example, in Oregon, non-criminal traffic offenses are called violations, while in California, they are called infractions.
....and Points, Oh My!
In addition to the penalties for traffic offenses, states also count convictions against your driving record. In California, convictions count as "points" against your driver's license; in Oregon, the "Habitual Offender" Program keeps track of convictions. In both states, the goal is the same-to revoke the driving privileges of habitual offenders. Here's how they work:
In California, Section 12810 of the Vehicle Code identifies which violations will result in "points" applied to your driving record. Under Section 12810.5,
Any person whose driving record shows a violation point count of four or more points in 12 months, six or more points in 24 months, or eight or more points in 36 months shall be prima facie presumed to be a negligent operator of a motor vehicle.
A prima facie presumption means that the Department of Motor Vehicles will presume you are a negligent operator unless you present contrary evidence. If you are presumed to be a negligent operator, the Department of Motor Vehicles will suspend or revoke your driving privilege.
What's interesting to note about this statute is that it appears that violations by cyclists do not count as points against your driving record. Most of the point allocations are not applicable to cyclists; even the one catch-all section which states that "any other traffic conviction involving the safe operation of a motor vehicle upon the highway shall be given a value of one point" is only applicable to motor vehicles. In fact, the only provisions which can conceivably be applied to cyclists would be point allocations for reckless driving or for "any traffic accident in which the operator is deemed by the department to be responsible." This is interesting, because if you recall, the officer in When is a bicycle more than a bicycle? who stopped D.D. for riding in the left lane informed him that the "violation" would count against his driving record. The officer was not only wrong about riding in traffic lanes, he was also wrong about applying a conviction against the cyclist's driving record.
In Oregon, the "Habitual Offender" Program, established under Section 809.600 of the Oregon Vehicle Code, operates in much the same way. Under this program, a person's driving privileges will be revoked if that person has been convicted of 3 or more of the serious listed offenses within a five-year period, or 20 or more of other listed offenses within a five-year period. Many of the listed offenses are applicable to cyclists, so you will want to be careful about not receiving too many citations. One particularly relevant violation would be a conviction of BUI. This would count as one of the serious listed offenses, so in Oregon, three convictions of BUI within a five-year period will result in a revocation of your driving privileges, in addition to the penalties imposed for BUI.
A Cautionary Tale
Recently, D., a cyclist in Davis, California-designated as the nation's first Platinum-Level Bicycling Friendly Community] by the League of American Bicyclists-had an interesting experience with California's BUI law. One night after work, D. rode his bike to a bar, where he had a beer with some friends, before riding home. About an hour after arriving at his home, D. decided to go out for some food. On the way back home, he attempted to ride from the street onto the sidewalk, but in the dark, missed the driveway and hit the curb; he had no serious injuries, other than a case of road rash, but there was blood at the scene of his crash, and although he didn't know it, his cell phone had fallen and been left behind.
D. continued on his way home. Several hours after arriving home, and several beers later, there was a knock at his door; the police had arrived to return his cell phone. Smelling alcohol on his breath, and noticing a beer bottle on the table, and his road rash, the police asked if he would submit to a breathalyzer test. D. agreed to take the test, which registered a blood alcohol level of .15, nearly twice California's limit of .08. After administering the test, and returning his cell phone, the police left. Two weeks later, D. received a letter from the D.A. notifying him that he was being prosecuted for violating Section 21200.5 of the California Vehicle Code, California's BUI statute.
Now, this story has a happy ending for D.-he hired an attorney and pled "not guilty," and the prosecuting attorney decided to drop the charges. However, it presents an interesting example of how serious BUI cases may be taken, and thus, serves as a cautionary tale for other cyclists.
It also presents some interesting contrasts between BUIs and DUIs in California. Let's take a closer look at what happened.
In California, if you're operating a motor vehicle, you are deemed to have given your consent to a blood alcohol test if you are stopped for suspicion of DUI. If your blood alcohol level is .08 or higher within 3 hours of driving, there is a "rebuttable presumption" that your blood alcohol level was .08 or higher at the time you were driving. A "rebuttable presumption" means that the courts will presume your blood alcohol level was over the limit unless you introduce contrary evidence.
In D.s case (forget for the moment that he was operating a bicycle, rather than a motor vehicle), he had a blood alcohol level of .15 within 3 hours of operating his bicycle. The contrary evidence he would have needed to introduce at trial would be that he had several beers after arriving home, but before the test was administered. And that was really the problem with the prosecution's case all along-although D.s blood alcohol level was over the limit, there was no way to establish that it was over the limit while he was riding. Because of the time gap, during which D. was not under police control, it was impossible to prove that D. had become intoxicated before riding his bicycle, instead of after arriving home, as he claimed. The D.A. had an extremely weak case to begin with, and once it was obvious that D. was contesting the charges, the charges were dropped.
It's also interesting to note the similarities and differences between DUIs and BUIs in this case. As we saw above, under California's DUI statute there's a rebuttable presumption that you are over the limit if your blood alcohol level is .08 or higher within 3 hours of operating a motor vehicle. However, there is no such presumption in the BUI statute, which means that if you were cited under this statute, the D.A. would have to prove that you were actually over the limit at the time you were operating your bicycle.
This was a second fatal problem with the D.A.s prosecution of D.
If you are stopped for suspicion of DUI, you are deemed to have consented to a blood alcohol test. In contrast, there is no such consent if you are stopped for BUI. The statute does allow the cyclist to request a blood alcohol test, but the cyclist is not required to submit to a test.
Finally, if you are convicted of DUI, you will receive two points against your driving record, while you will not receive points for a BUI conviction.
The bottom line in this cautionary tale is to be aware of your rights and responsibilities, be especially careful about providing any evidence to the police, even if you think you're innocent, and if you are cited for a BUI, you should consult with an attorney. A conviction under this statute is a misdemeanor, and although the fine is a relatively low $250, you will have a criminal record, and if you're under the age of 21, a conviction will also affect your driving privileges.
BUI is not illegal in every state, and where it is illegal, it is treated differently by each state, but it can have very serious implications, so every cyclist should be aware of the BUI laws in their state, and ride accordingly.
Good luck,
Bob
(Research and drafting provided by Rick Bernardi-law student- Lewis and Clark)
Now read the fine print:
Bob Mionske is a former competitive cyclist who represented the U.S. at the 1988 Olympic games (where he finished fourth in the road race), the 1992 Olympics, as well as winning the 1990 national championship road race. After retiring from racing in 1993, he coached the Saturn Professional Cycling team for one year before heading off to law school. Mionske's practice is now split between personal-injury work, representing professional athletes as an agent and other legal issues facing endurance athletes (traffic violations, contract, criminal charges, intellectual property, etc). If you have a cycling-related legal question, please send it to mionskelaw@hotmail.com Bob will answer as many of these questions privately as he can. He will also select a few questions each week to answer in this column. General bicycle-accident advice can be found at www.bicyclelaw.com.
Important notice:
The information provided in the "Legally speaking" column is not legal advice. The information provided on this public web site is provided solely for the general interest of the visitors to this web site. The information contained in the column applies to general principles of American jurisprudence and may not reflect current legal developments or statutory changes in the various jurisdictions and therefore should not be relied upon or interpreted as legal advice. Understand that reading the information contained in this column does not mean you have established an attorney-client relationship with attorney Bob Mionske. Readers of this column should not act upon any information contained in the web site without first seeking the advice of legal counsel.
Criminal Background Check
Hundreds of people in Pitt County recently walked together to raise more than $75,000 in support of the March of Dimes' efforts to save babies from premature birth.
WalkAmerica is the March of Dimes' biggest annual fundraiser. The money is used to fight against prematurity ' a growing problem that the organization says affects half a million babies born in the U.S. every year.
"I am proud that Pitt County was one of the thousands of communities nationwide that made WalkAmerica a rousing success," said Hans Engels, WalkAmerica chairman.
"I know we can make an enormous difference in the fight to find out why premature birth happens and what can be done to prevent it. With everyone's help, we move closer to the day when all babies will be born healthy and full term ' and more families will know the joy of having a healthy baby," Engels said.
WalkAmerica broke records in attendance in Pitt County. The money raised was almost three times greater than last year's totals. DSM and Dyneema presented a check for more than $50,000 to the March of Dimes at the WalkAmerica Awards and Appreciation Reception held at the Hilton Greenville.
Other Pitt County sponsors were Blue Cross/Blue Shield and Grady-White Boats.
The number of babies born prematurely each year has increased by 30 percent since 1983. In Pitt County, one in every seven babies was born prematurely in 2003. Some of those babies died; others face lifelong disability. The money raised in WalkAmerica supports research and programs to find out how to prevent premature births and how to help families who experience it.
The March of Dimes is a national voluntary health agency with the mission to improve the health of babies by preventing birth defects, premature birth and infant mortality.
Founded in 1938, the March of Dimes funds programs of research, community services, education and advocacy to save babies, and in 2003 launched a campaign to address the increasing rate of premature birth.
For more information, visit the March of Dimes Web site at marchofdimes.com or its Spanish Web site at nacersano.org.
Criminal Background Check
Convictions found for 24 juvenile center workers
By Richard D. Walton and Tim Evans
richard.walton@indystar.com
More than a quarter of employees who supervise youths at the Marion County Juvenile Detention Center have criminal convictions, according to a court official appointed to clean up problems at the center.
The center checked the backgrounds of 88 employees and found 24 with criminal records.
Eight of those workers have been suspended without pay for having serious offenses such as battery, drug possession and theft on their records.
Sixteen other employees will be kept on for now but face possible disciplinary action. The rest of the center's staff, about a dozen people who generally don't have contact with children, will undergo background checks next week.
Robert Bingham, Marion County's chief probation officer, who is assigned to reform the center, said pre-employment criminal background checks either were not conducted for at least 15 years or were sloppily and inconsistently performed, and that is "outrageous."
Failing to perform checks on new employees is counter to national standards for juvenile facilities, he said.
Friday's announcement brings to 34 the number of current or former Detention Center workers who in recent weeks have been criminally charged, suspended without pay or face scrutiny.
The eight suspended employees include guard Gates Robertson, 55, who was arrested on drug charges Wednesday.
In April, nine former Detention Center employees were charged with sexual misconduct with underage female detainees. The center's superintendent, Damon Ellison, was charged with concealing evidence and failing to report the allegation to child welfare authorities. He has resigned.
Bingham said responsibility for performing past background checks rested with Ellison and his then-boss, former juvenile court Judge James Payne.
Payne left the juvenile court post in early 2005 to head the Indiana Department of Child Services, the agency responsible for protecting Indiana's children. Eleven of the 24 found to have criminal records were hired after Payne left office, including five since Bingham's appointment in April.
Bingham blamed confusion during the leadership transition for the lack of checks on some recent hires.
Payne said Friday that all workers hired under his tenure underwent background checks.
"Everybody who was employed went through the county personnel . . . and the policy was that everybody went through a criminal check," he said.
"I don't know that anyone could have slipped through."
The county Personnel Department closed when city and county human resources functions were merged Jan. 1 and hiring became the responsibility of the Indianapolis Department of Administration and Equal Opportunity. Criminal record checks are required for all new city and county employees, but officials could not be reached Friday to explain how workers with convictions had been hired since January.
Payne acknowledged that the center had hired some workers with criminal histories and said that was done with knowledge of their records.
"In juvenile court, we believed in rehabilitation, and we looked at those offenses as part of that," he said. "I know we had some people there with criminal records. But those criminal records -- some of those were long ago; others were so minor as to be insignificant."
Thirteen of the workers with criminal records were hired during Payne's tenure, including Robertson.
Five others who got jobs under Payne were convicted of some or all of their crimes after they were hired.
Payne said his staff evaluated the offenses of prospective employees with criminal records to determine whether the incidents were serious or repetitive enough to disqualify applicants.
"I left that to the staff to figure out through interviews and other things," he said.
Bingham agreed that a minor criminal offense need not disqualify an applicant. "It depends on the circumstances. . . . We're supposed to be about giving people a new start."
Jane Jankowski, a spokeswoman for Gov. Mitch Daniels, who appointed Payne to his current job, declined to comment on Friday's developments.
Bingham said he ordered background checks for all current employees at the center after learning the checks might not have been done at the time of hiring.
"It is outrageous. It angers me," Bingham said "This never should have happened."
The 88 workers whose records were examined this week represented staff who worked most closely with juveniles at the center. Those who had criminal convictions were 17 youth managers, the equivalent of guards; six assistant shift managers; and one shift manager. The workers were hired from February 1991 through last week.
A recent report on the Detention Center by the National Partnership for Juvenile Services cited a staff turnover rate approaching 100 percent, overuse of room confinement to discipline residents, and too few surveillance cameras.
The report also cited a history of gang behavior at the center, contraband problems and poor youth supervision.
Detention Center officials have taken steps to improve security. These include the installation of a "hotline" that detainees can call if they feel threatened, reinforcing the rule that only female guards are to transport female residents, and boosting the starting pay of guards to $24,500 to attract high-quality employees.
Bingham said about 25 guards have been hired in recent weeks. However, with the new employee suspensions, the center is short 18 to 20 staffers. Probation Department workers will help fill the void until more people can be hired.
Criminal Background Check
|
Search This Site
Syndicate this blog site
Powered by BlogEasy
Free Blog Hosting
|