Race and Class-Based Criminal Sentencing Disparities

Like everyone else in the world, I've been following the high profile cases, John Walker Lindh,
the "American Taliban" and the Knoller/Noel dog mauling case in San Francisco, in particular.
With both of their respective sentences, having been announced within a 24 hour timeframe, I
cannot help but compare these cases with the recent resolution of another criminal case that is
known to but a few, that of a good friend of mine from my New York childhood, Timothy Mills

We all know that John Walker Lindh, fought shoulder to shoulder with the most feared and
despised enemy that this country has ever known. The "American Taliban", when first
apprehended, was subject to a myriad of charges, the most severe of which, treason, carries with
it the ultimate criminal penalty. We will never know whether he contributed to the death of John
"Mike" Spann, the CIA Agent who interviewed Lindh minutes before the insurrection that cost
Spann his life, and cost the Spann family its husband, father and financial support. Yet, the
decision was made from on high that two ten-year prison terms were the appropriate term for this
offense. Is this justice? I doesn’t seem just to me.

The criminal negligence of Marjorie Knoller and Robert Noel cost Diane Whipple her life, long
before her time. Was this couple completely oblivious to the level of risk at which they placed
their neighbors, in general, Ms. Whipple, in particular, whose only mistake was to leave her
home that day? Obviously, an appeal of Judge Warren’s disposal of the murder conviction is
appropriate since it is arguable that the missing "malice aforethought" may have been supplied
by a depraved heart reckless disregard of the consequences that Noel and Knoller, as attorneys,
had to know would eventually occur by continuing to expose these untrained killer dogs to a
defenseless public. An innocent life has ended, and without a successful appeal by the
prosecutor, these offenders will be free in less than two years. Is this justice? This doesn’t seem
just to me either.

My friend, Timothy Mills was just "allowed" to enter into a plea bargain that will keep him in a
federal prison for 20 years to life. That is, by far, the most severe sentence of these three cases.
He was an accessory before the fact in a crack cocaine transaction in his newly adopted home
state of North Carolina. He wasn’t the kingpin, nor was he the dealer. He introduced a wired
police informant, whom he had mistaken as a friend, to a drug supplier. His family wasted
$26,000. for a defense attorney who could not have impacted the outcome in any way other than
to negotiate Tim away from life without parole under Federal sentencing guidelines. Tim was no
angel. He had a criminal past, which involved a weapons charge, and he probably had some past
involvement in the drug game; but twenty years to life?

He had, in recent years, however, been concentrating on his music production and recording
studio that he, his sister and mother had invested in several years ago. I understand that he was
becoming quite successful as a music producer. It seems apparent that there were some in his
local community who felt that he might have been too successful. He was apparently showing off
his contacts to this young associate who had been turned by the Feds. He is now a 45-year-old
inmate who, with any luck, may see the light of day at retirement age. His mother, nearing
retirement age, has resigned herself to the probability that may she never again see her only son
as a free man. His five children will all be adults when they are able to touch their father again.
Even if he was convicted of an actual possession with intent to distribute offense, does this result
seem just?

I cannot help but to take note of the relationship between these cases, factoring in their relative
severity and the consequences of the criminal acts at issue with the race and class of the
defendants. There is an ongoing debate about the disparity in sentencing that has been a by-
product of the "urban war on drugs". Would my friend, Tim, have even been targeted for
investigation had he been white, middle class, an attorney or the son of a prominent attorney? I
think we all know the answer to be "probably not". The debate will continue for as long as even
first time drug offenders are sentenced to hard time, while those whose acts result in death are
able to plead bargain to lesser crimes. As an attorney, I understand the burden of proof
requirement for severe cases and the prosecutors’ unwillingness to hold fast for the most severe
charges, running the risk of an acquittal or overturn on appeal. I also understand that Lindh may
possess some valuable information with national security implications. Both dispositions,
however, have left me feeling cheated, and I’m sure that I share that feeling with the victims in
both cases.

To underscore my point, take note of the headlines that appeared in the Washington Post
describing the Knoller and Lindh cases. I have italicized key words to make a point.
"Marjorie Knoller, the San Francisco lawyer whose dog mauled her neighbor to death last year,
was sentenced today to four years in prison for involuntary manslaughter"

"John Walker Lindh, the suburban Californian who converted to Islam and later volunteered his
services to an enemy army in Afghanistan, pleaded guilty yesterday in federal court in
Alexandria to fighting for the Taliban in a deal that will send him to prison for up to 20 years".

Notice the highlighted classifications. These classifications had a bearing on the sentences
imposed and it is this type of classification in sentencing that creates the disparity when Federal
drug guidelines are imposed for victims in the war on drugs who are, for the most part, urban
African American males, the easiest targets.

Not being a criminal attorney, there is little that I may be able to do to affect the outcome in the
case of Timothy Mills and I grieve over that fact for my friend, his professional and hard-
working mother and sister, all of whom I’ve known for about 35 of my 46 years. Perhaps this
letter may spur someone who has the power to influence Tim’s case and others like it, to
participate in this ongoing debate.

This fall, after their recess, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider, among other issues, the
Constitutionality of the California "Three Strikes" law with regards to two cases, Lockyer v.
Andrade, No. 01-1127, and Ewing v. California, No. 01-6978. "Three Strikes" Laws are designed
to result in life terms for victimless offenses.

Perhaps this would be a good time to revisit the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, that
states
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual
punishments inflicted"

In layman’s terms, the punishment should fit the crime. Neither race nor class are mentioned in
that language. Does a life sentence fit the crime of being an accessory to a victimless crime? I
suppose we’re about to find that out this fall.
Clifford E. Pulliam,
Davidsonville, MD