June 27, 2024 • 22 mins
Addressing Mass Incarceration Creep with Judge Ray Headen
What if our justice system could be revolutionized by a simple, data-driven approach?
Discover the compelling insights of the Honorable Ray Hedden, who introduces the concept of "Mass Incarceration Creep."
In this final segment of the Disruptor Podcast, hosts John and Jan uncover with Judge Ray Headen the subtle disparities in sentencing that disproportionately affect poor Black males.
They emphasize the urgent need for comprehensive data analytics to ensure fairness and equality in our judicial system.
Ray shares his ambitious initiative to create a database that provides judges with crucial information to maintain judicial discretion while promoting just decisions.
Judge Headen discusses his initiatives to improve Ohio's judicial system by introducing data analytics and insights to ensure fairness and equality in sentencing.
The conversation touches on the socio-economic impacts, racial disparities, and potential cost savings of implementing a data-driven approach.
The episode emphasizes the necessity for legislative support and civic action to bring about meaningful change in the criminal justice system.
Comments or Questions? Send us a text
***
Engage, Share, and Connect!
Spread the Word: Valuable insights are best when shared. Share this episode with peers who may benefit from it if you find it insightful.
Your Feedback Matters: How did this episode resonate with you? Share your thoughts, insights, or questions. Your engagement enriches our community.
Stay Updated: Don’t miss out on further insights.
Subscribe: You can listen to our podcast, read our blog posts on Medium, Substack, and LinkedIn, and watch our YouTube channel.
Collaborate with The Disruptor and connect with John Kundtz.
Got a disruptive story to share? We’re scouting for remarkable podcast guests. Nominate a Disruptor.
Thank you for being an integral part of our journey.
Together, let’s redefine the status quo!
Tips are welcomed and appreciated, too!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Hi, this is John Kuntz of the Disruptor Podcast.
This is the third and finalsegment of our recording with
the Honorable Ray Hedden.
In this part, jan and I willdive deeper with Ray around the
concept he coined MassIncarceration Creep where we
(00:23):
will get into knowing and betterunderstanding the initiatives
Ray was doing and where he wasworking and how he felt it would
improve the overall judicialsystem in the state of Ohio.
In addition, it would save ustaxpayers money us taxpayers
(00:49):
money.
His attempt to bring data,analytics and insights, fairness
and equality into thesentencing process is something
that he had a passion for, and Ihope you learn about what he
was doing and I hope you takethe causes that Ray was trying
to work on as a judge andcontinue to move them forward as
(01:09):
part of his legacy.
Hey, ray, I want to move on toa concept that you brought up as
part of the prep, and I reallylike this because I see this
(01:33):
sort of concept happen all thetime in my world, but I really
didn't thought about it in yourworld and you bring up this
concept I think you've actuallycoined it, this mass
incarceration creep and I'd loveto have you spend a few minutes
just talking about how you cameup with that and sort of why it
is, and I think does then leadinto what you're trying to do to
(01:54):
fix the problem in the UnitedStates have some type of
relationship to the criminaljustice system.
Speaker 3 (02:08):
They're either in jail, on parole, etc.
And the question of data isfundamental in there and it has
only been pointed by me becausethis is new stuff and hopefully
we'll add to the rubric of thesolution to mass incarceration,
because mass incarceration isnot holistic.
It's made up of individualdecisions by individual judges
(02:29):
and individual prosecutors whocharge people with crimes, and
maybe charge some people withone crime and charge them with
another group of another crime.
Without data, we just don'tknow how all of that is playing
into, whether and how thereseems to be so much more impact
in our communities of massincarceration of poor black
(02:53):
males particularly than othergroups or other minority groups
in proportion to the population.
Obviously there's the issue ofwho's guilty and who's not.
That is absolutely going toalways be the case.
And no, I am not and no one elsein this movement is trying to
take away the discretion ofjudges to sentence as they
(03:16):
please, because that is whythey're elected, that is their
job.
So they are bound by our canonsof ethics and by our duty as
judges to send people to prison.
So in fact I'm totally againstthat.
But the issue of whether or notmass incarceration creeps into
(03:38):
our system because of lack ofdata is real.
If somebody commits the samecrime and gets two years and
another person who'sAfrican-American or whatever
gets 10 years, that extra eightyears, that's where the mass
incarceration is.
That's what I call the creepinto the system of mass
(04:01):
incarceration.
It's the individual differences, through the lack of data, that
sometimes judges just don'tknow, the prosecutors just don't
know, the defense counsel justdoesn't know, because, like all
of those people can use data toinfluence whether or not there
is like disparate treatment andinequality in the system.
(04:21):
And so that's what I'm hopingto have this database do is to
take the lead on massincarceration, stopping it and
liking this part of the rubricat universities and other places
where I haven't seen it yet.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
It's an interesting point because I think the one
point I want to jump on orhighlight it may not be
intentional, right, these aregood people trying to do good
things, but I think you'resaying and the three elements
that I started to see that canbubble up that your initiative
can solve is certainly fairnessamongst everybody, and it could
(05:00):
be fairness across geographies,or fairness across social,
economic or just race in general, but there's a huge taxpayer
implication, right, we all paytaxes in the state of Ohio.
If I can't use data to makegood decisions, I probably am
spending more money than I needto and there's just the
impression and probably thereality that there's racial
(05:21):
inequality throughout the system.
Speaker 3 (05:24):
Right, we don't have the data, so how do we really
know?
And literally, john, massincarceration creep is expensive
Because if we don't have thedata.
It's about $20,000 a year toimprison someone.
That's the cost of a collegeeducation.
Beyond that, there's costs tosociety and to human beings when
somebody over here gets getsfor the same crime three or five
(05:48):
years hopefully not talkingabout non-violent offenses,
drugs and a lot of it relates toconsecutive sentences and who
gets consecutive sentences andwho doesn't, and so all of those
kind of measures lead tostretches of sentences that
might be in need of researchdata.
(06:11):
It is not necessarily whetherthey're guilty or innocent.
It's really more about the datato make sure that the process
is truly fair.
We're talking about thedifferences between the
sentences.
Again, no one's trying to saythat judges can't sentence with
their own discretion, but ifthey don't have the data, maybe
(06:33):
that creed is unintentional, asyou said.
Speaker 2 (06:36):
So everybody that has ever heard of Lean Six Sigma
ever knows about the Swisscheese effect right, where you
have a whole bunch of pieces ofSwiss cheese lined up in a row
and, although they all haveholes in them, if the holes are
misaligned, that issues andprocesses won't be able to fall
through the Swiss cheese, butthose holes align and then
(06:57):
things can pass through the gapsand without data you can't
really figure out whether or notthe holes are aligned or
they're not aligned or if it'sjust happenstance.
Look at the business worldright, and we have real-time
tools that are able to monitordown to user click rate when it
comes to how they're interactingwith a site in real time.
(07:18):
I mean, if you can use thatdata ethically, then it really
blows things wide open.
I mean you are able to garnishinsights.
You put out something, the datacomes back, the data is what it
is and you gather insights fromsaid data that your job is not
to manipulate it.
Your job is to interpret thatand to make sure that this is
(07:39):
where it's sitting.
This is how it is.
But if you have these ability tomeasure and predict trends and
showcase, here is how this hasbeen over a period of time, I
was dumbfounded that that didn'texist, but with the tech that
we have today and all of theabilities that we have, there
really is no reason thatsomething like this shouldn't
(08:00):
exist.
I know that Uncle Sam is alittle bit slower when it comes
to adopting things, coming fromsomebody that spent six years in
the Air National Guard.
At this point, I think thatthese tools have been in the
business world for so long atsuch high capacity that there is
no excuse left on the board asto why the judicial system
shouldn't be using somethinglike this not only in Ohio but
(08:26):
also around the country, andalso from a conservative
Republican perspective even.
Speaker 3 (08:33):
It makes sense to invest in data.
Right now, what we're doingpotentially with mass
incarceration creep is makingour country less competitive.
That makes our country lesscompetitive.
That makes country lesscompetitive.
Well, that makes our countryless competitive.
That makes Ohio lesscompetitive.
That makes Cuyahoga County lesscompetitive.
Well, right now, employers arelooking to train ex-felons even
(08:54):
because, like literally, there'sso many jobs.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
And you said it costs what like $20,000 a year to
incarcerate.
There's no way that I wouldever make a business decision
that equates to $20,000 withoutdata-backed insights.
It's mind-boggling that we'remaking decisions on people's
livelihoods and then alsotaxpayer dollars to the tune of
$20,000 without data-backedinsights.
Speaker 3 (09:20):
And there are 50,000 people right now.
That's the size of Lakewood,ohio or Euclid, ohio, I believe.
Every man, woman and child isincarcerated in Ohio.
Our costs go up, ourinefficiency goes up.
Judges don't have the data.
They may stay like five yearswhen it could be probation.
(09:42):
If most of the judges are doingprobation in your county and
you've just given somebody fiveyears, you made up, like you
said, a hundred thousand dollardecision that, like literally,
doesn't always measure upbecause we don't have the data.
Speaker 2 (09:56):
You said, well, 50,000 and 20,000, that's a
billion dollars.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
just for everybody's reference, it comes down to
fiscal responsibility, right,both as taxpayers and the
government.
It comes down to fairness,right, making sure that person A
is being treated the same asperson B and person C and et
cetera, and then try to take outthis sort of implicit bias or
(10:20):
explicit bias, or even theracism in our systems.
And so I think you know thecost of not having this data is
huge.
You can take it to the nextstep.
You can do the back endanalysis, right.
So if person A commits a crimeand is guilty, but the data
suggests that probation is theright thing, then you can put
(10:42):
them on probation and you cantrack them.
You can track whether or notthey repeat or something happens
right or do they reform andmove on and become productive
members of society.
Or you can stick that personinto five years of incarceration
and then track them on the backend and see what happens when
they come out after five years,and then you can start to make
(11:03):
these.
In my world as a consultant,it's very simple.
We collect data, we documentfacts and findings which are
very binary.
They're true or false.
We draw upon those facts andfindings, we draw conclusions
and from those conclusions wemake recommendations to help you
guys as judges on being fairand equitable, but also on the
(11:26):
back end, to make sure that whatyou're doing is actually
accomplishing the goal ofhelping people become.
I think the goal is still to getpeople to come back into
society as productive members,and I think you make a great
point on this isn't about guiltyor not guilty, right?
The justice system, I think,does a good job of determining
(11:48):
whether or not you're guilty ornot.
It's what you do once you'redetermined to be guilty.
And how do you treat peoplefair and how do you have some
fiscal responsibility?
Again, you always follow themoney in these situations,
unfortunately, unfortunately.
But if we can be more fiscallyresponsible, then we can spend
that money on something thatmaybe can help others instead of
(12:10):
incarcerating them.
We can send them back to schoolor give them some training.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Or yeah, john, to your point that it costs twenty
thousand dollars a year toincarcerate somebody.
What are the alternate costs?
Right, the alternatives, butthat twenty thousand dollars a
year to incarcerate somebody.
What are the alternate costs?
Right, the alternatives, butthat $20,000 a year?
What if, rather thanimprisonment, you have like
probationary period, and thenthe sum of that money is
allocated to an educationalprogram or a trade program to
help that person get a job, or Ithink Jan that's a billion
(12:36):
dollars a year.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
Oh, a year?
Yeah, that's a billion dollarsa year.
Like I said, that's where themass occurrence.
If there's eight people everyyear collectively in Ohio,
15,000 people at $20,000 aperson, it's a billion dollars
for every year of incarceration.
So every time there's a decisionmade by a judge and I think I'm
one of the first judges whoraised the issue of cost a lot
(13:02):
of it comes down to what westarted to talk about at the
beginning, where maybe Iapproach problems differently as
a result of being plucked outof the inner city of cleveland
50 years ago and now being in aposition where I can state
things with a level of authoritybecause I have gone to the best
(13:26):
schools in the United States ofAmerica and maybe look at
things and say things that arereflective of the diversity of
where I come from, both from theinner city as well as from
bigger heights in Ohio, whichare very wealthy places, I think
this is a perfect time andwe're talking about financial
(13:47):
responsibility right now, butthe other part that I'm
extremely interested about youtouching on, Ray, is the social
effect, the social costs of massincarceration.
Speaker 2 (13:55):
So why don't we talk a little bit about the social
costs?
You know the billion dollars isa big number and, you know,
catches everybody's eyes.
But what up this way, when meand John talk about the
empathetic connection andunderstanding where somebody is
coming from, that's what I'mreally feeling right now is what
is those social costs that comewith mass incarceration?
Speaker 3 (14:15):
No doubt about it, and I think that's like the
unique perspective of me comingfrom Cleveland and the inner
city and knowing where peopleare.
And so when you look atfamilies, for example, in inner
city areas, there's decimationbecause black males are
(14:39):
incarcerated.
Because black males areincarcerated, literally,
families are.
You know, everyone talks aboutthe welfare queens, but how can
you have families when menaren't there?
They're incarcerated forwhatever reason.
We're trying to make it easyfor criminals.
What we want to be able to dois make our system fair and
(15:00):
hopefully, if our system is fair, then the other thing that's a
real problem right now, in 2020,is the lack of co-opness and
faith in our judicial system,and you have mothers seeing
their children go into thecriminal justice system as soon
as they become teenagers.
(15:21):
You get a decimation ofcommunities that are already at
the place where they're indanger of breaking the fabric of
middle class values or nevereven achieve that, and that's
what I was taught years ago whenthere were middle class values
(15:46):
and hard work the whole nineyards.
What I'm afraid of and whatneeds to be addressed from a
disruptive standpoint right now,is that the differences in
those who are economicallyintegrated, economically
integrated, socially integrated,who have the same values as
everybody else.
(16:07):
There is a disruption that needsto occur right there, because
so many people and I walk in myown community all the time are
without that.
You see it in the nature ofwhere people are surprised by
violence and the riots andthings of that nature
surrounding really somethingthat, and, when you think about
it in a way, our justice systemmissed it, and the claim of
(16:31):
places where there wasunnecessary violence by police
was something that had notnecessarily been addressed and
the violence occurred wasreflective of the social places
where people were, where thelack of being able to have a
voice, as well as the ability tohave people listen to that
(16:56):
voice, is something that we needto really address and is
beginning to be addressed in the2020s area, hopefully without
the violence anymore.
Obviously, that was not the wayto go, but people shouldn't be
surprised, though, because whatI'm really trying to do as a
judge is to make sure that stuffis addressed fairly and equally
(17:20):
, and people need to hear thatwe're caring and that we're
concerned and that there's aproblem.
We want to have the data toaddress.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
There was a lot of pent up demand.
I think that again shook up thesnow globe, which it was not
pleasant but it was probablynecessary.
We've had this great discussion, ray, and you've brought up
some really great points justabout how long it's been around
and some of the problems thatyou're trying to fix and how you
(17:51):
disrupt this sort of status quowithin the judicial system.
As we wrap up, I've doubled inthe details in these things,
right, so we've identified theproblems.
We empathize with yourconstituents and the
stakeholders.
How do you vision going forward?
What are the next steps?
Those kinds of things, and thenwe can wrap up this podcast
(18:14):
importance of now.
Speaker 3 (18:16):
It can't be underestimated again.
That's why I wanted to use thehonest term inflammatory
language, because it's so easyfor this issue to continue.
Blue River Task Force hundredsof thousands of dollars spent on
documents over the last 25years saying that data is needed
and yet nothing has been done.
There is a reason why thathasn't occurred and what we need
(18:39):
to make sure is that, likewhatever we do right now,
because this is a moment in timewhere momentum is out there and
it is on the side of justiceand fairness and rightness that
has to be done.
I've been a leader on it.
I want other people to join inthe leader.
That's why I'm on this podcast.
Speaker 1 (18:59):
What can the average Joe citizen do within the state
of Ohio to help your cause.
Speaker 3 (19:03):
The database is a legislative effort, so it needs
to be enacted into law.
It is the Ohio General Assemblyand the governor will see
legislation in 2021 to enact thebeginnings of the criminal
sentencing database.
When you vote, you make sureyou also contact your
(19:26):
legislators to make sure thatthey know that this is silly not
to have data in the 21stcentury and the performance of
our judicial system.
So those are tangible stepsright now that can be taken by
anyone.
Be aggressive, be out there.
Don't be silent, because it hasproven over 25 years that
(19:47):
silence will just let the statusquo continue.
I love it, all right.
Speaker 2 (19:52):
I appreciate everybody taking the time to
tune in today.
John, I feel that a lot ofeyebrow moments and a lot of
light bulb moments throughoutthis entire episode.
So this is why I'm reallyexcited that the disruptor is a
thing.
All of these amazing people outthere doing these disruptive
things, shaking the snow globe,trying to improve, really
(20:13):
improve the quality of life ofeverybody involved in all of
these processes right, nobodyever comes into these positions
being an innovative disruptorwith the intention of like, okay
, I'm going to try to shake thissnow globe just so I can take
it and look at the beauty for asplit second and then smash it
on a brick.
Generally, they come in, theyshake the snow globe and just
(20:33):
watch all of the beauty thatcomes out of that disruption.
Judge, I really admire thisbattle you've been fighting for
years.
Getting to the point when I wasgoing back through and I was
listening about the life storyand everything like that.
One thing that really stood outto me just now is you said you
(20:54):
still go and you walk aroundyour old neighborhood and really
stay in touch with that piece.
There's this quote from a poemcalled If by Rudyard Kipling.
Right, and I read this poemevery morning and it really
stuck out to me when you saidthat.
And it says if you can walkwith kings but maintain the
common touch, and the entirepoem is about how you can really
(21:17):
become a man and stand on yourown two feet and live your life
with character, and live yourlife with integrity and with
values.
That statement right theresolidifies Ivy League schools
the ability to be a great personin law, being appointed to a
judicial seat, but walking withkings and maintaining the common
touch.
(21:37):
There's no other reason thatyou want to vote for Ray.
Outside of any of those otherreasons.
Let it be because he has notlost that common touch, and I
think that is extremelyimportant when it comes to
somebody sitting in that seat.
Bless you, thank you, john.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
I'll let you wrap up.
I just want to say, actually,that those are really inspiring.
That poem is inspiring.
I think Ray does fit that bill.
I wanted to say, ray, thanksfor coming on our show, john,
thanks for hosting us and havingus have the faith in us trying
to build this theme out of theDisruptor series, and I wish you
(22:18):
all the best of luck, ray.
And uh, I'm glad you're myfriend, and uh, it will just
keep.
We'll keep disrupting and we'llkeep moving forward.
Buddy, thanks, thank you.
Hi, this is John Kuntz of the Disruptor Podcast.
This is the third and finalsegment of our recording with
the Honorable Ray Hedden.
In this part, jan and I willdive deeper with Ray around the
concept he coined MassIncarceration Creep where we
(00:23):
will get into knowing and betterunderstanding the initiatives
Ray was doing and where he wasworking and how he felt it would
improve the overall judicialsystem in the state of Ohio.
In addition, it would save ustaxpayers money us taxpayers
(00:49):
money.
His attempt to bring data,analytics and insights, fairness
and equality into thesentencing process is something
that he had a passion for, and Ihope you learn about what he
was doing and I hope you takethe causes that Ray was trying
to work on as a judge andcontinue to move them forward as
(01:09):
part of his legacy.
Hey, ray, I want to move on toa concept that you brought up as
part of the prep, and I reallylike this because I see this
(01:33):
sort of concept happen all thetime in my world, but I really
didn't thought about it in yourworld and you bring up this
concept I think you've actuallycoined it, this mass
incarceration creep and I'd loveto have you spend a few minutes
just talking about how you cameup with that and sort of why it
is, and I think does then leadinto what you're trying to do to
(01:54):
fix the problem in the UnitedStates have some type of
relationship to the criminaljustice system.
Speaker 3 (02:08):
They're either in jail, on parole, etc.
And the question of data isfundamental in there and it has
only been pointed by me becausethis is new stuff and hopefully
we'll add to the rubric of thesolution to mass incarceration,
because mass incarceration isnot holistic.
It's made up of individualdecisions by individual judges
(02:29):
and individual prosecutors whocharge people with crimes, and
maybe charge some people withone crime and charge them with
another group of another crime.
Without data, we just don'tknow how all of that is playing
into, whether and how thereseems to be so much more impact
in our communities of massincarceration of poor black
(02:53):
males particularly than othergroups or other minority groups
in proportion to the population.
Obviously there's the issue ofwho's guilty and who's not.
That is absolutely going toalways be the case.
And no, I am not and no one elsein this movement is trying to
take away the discretion ofjudges to sentence as they
(03:16):
please, because that is whythey're elected, that is their
job.
So they are bound by our canonsof ethics and by our duty as
judges to send people to prison.
So in fact I'm totally againstthat.
But the issue of whether or notmass incarceration creeps into
(03:38):
our system because of lack ofdata is real.
If somebody commits the samecrime and gets two years and
another person who'sAfrican-American or whatever
gets 10 years, that extra eightyears, that's where the mass
incarceration is.
That's what I call the creepinto the system of mass
(04:01):
incarceration.
It's the individual differences, through the lack of data, that
sometimes judges just don'tknow, the prosecutors just don't
know, the defense counsel justdoesn't know, because, like all
of those people can use data toinfluence whether or not there
is like disparate treatment andinequality in the system.
(04:21):
And so that's what I'm hopingto have this database do is to
take the lead on massincarceration, stopping it and
liking this part of the rubricat universities and other places
where I haven't seen it yet.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
It's an interesting point because I think the one
point I want to jump on orhighlight it may not be
intentional, right, these aregood people trying to do good
things, but I think you'resaying and the three elements
that I started to see that canbubble up that your initiative
can solve is certainly fairnessamongst everybody, and it could
(05:00):
be fairness across geographies,or fairness across social,
economic or just race in general, but there's a huge taxpayer
implication, right, we all paytaxes in the state of Ohio.
If I can't use data to makegood decisions, I probably am
spending more money than I needto and there's just the
impression and probably thereality that there's racial
(05:21):
inequality throughout the system.
Speaker 3 (05:24):
Right, we don't have the data, so how do we really
know?
And literally, john, massincarceration creep is expensive
Because if we don't have thedata.
It's about $20,000 a year toimprison someone.
That's the cost of a collegeeducation.
Beyond that, there's costs tosociety and to human beings when
somebody over here gets getsfor the same crime three or five
(05:48):
years hopefully not talkingabout non-violent offenses,
drugs and a lot of it relates toconsecutive sentences and who
gets consecutive sentences andwho doesn't, and so all of those
kind of measures lead tostretches of sentences that
might be in need of researchdata.
(06:11):
It is not necessarily whetherthey're guilty or innocent.
It's really more about the datato make sure that the process
is truly fair.
We're talking about thedifferences between the
sentences.
Again, no one's trying to saythat judges can't sentence with
their own discretion, but ifthey don't have the data, maybe
(06:33):
that creed is unintentional, asyou said.
Speaker 2 (06:36):
So everybody that has ever heard of Lean Six Sigma
ever knows about the Swisscheese effect right, where you
have a whole bunch of pieces ofSwiss cheese lined up in a row
and, although they all haveholes in them, if the holes are
misaligned, that issues andprocesses won't be able to fall
through the Swiss cheese, butthose holes align and then
(06:57):
things can pass through the gapsand without data you can't
really figure out whether or notthe holes are aligned or
they're not aligned or if it'sjust happenstance.
Look at the business worldright, and we have real-time
tools that are able to monitordown to user click rate when it
comes to how they're interactingwith a site in real time.
(07:18):
I mean, if you can use thatdata ethically, then it really
blows things wide open.
I mean you are able to garnishinsights.
You put out something, the datacomes back, the data is what it
is and you gather insights fromsaid data that your job is not
to manipulate it.
Your job is to interpret thatand to make sure that this is
(07:39):
where it's sitting.
This is how it is.
But if you have these ability tomeasure and predict trends and
showcase, here is how this hasbeen over a period of time, I
was dumbfounded that that didn'texist, but with the tech that
we have today and all of theabilities that we have, there
really is no reason thatsomething like this shouldn't
(08:00):
exist.
I know that Uncle Sam is alittle bit slower when it comes
to adopting things, coming fromsomebody that spent six years in
the Air National Guard.
At this point, I think thatthese tools have been in the
business world for so long atsuch high capacity that there is
no excuse left on the board asto why the judicial system
shouldn't be using somethinglike this not only in Ohio but
(08:26):
also around the country, andalso from a conservative
Republican perspective even.
Speaker 3 (08:33):
It makes sense to invest in data.
Right now, what we're doingpotentially with mass
incarceration creep is makingour country less competitive.
That makes our country lesscompetitive.
That makes country lesscompetitive.
Well, that makes our countryless competitive.
That makes Ohio lesscompetitive.
That makes Cuyahoga County lesscompetitive.
Well, right now, employers arelooking to train ex-felons even
(08:54):
because, like literally, there'sso many jobs.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
And you said it costs what like $20,000 a year to
incarcerate.
There's no way that I wouldever make a business decision
that equates to $20,000 withoutdata-backed insights.
It's mind-boggling that we'remaking decisions on people's
livelihoods and then alsotaxpayer dollars to the tune of
$20,000 without data-backedinsights.
Speaker 3 (09:20):
And there are 50,000 people right now.
That's the size of Lakewood,ohio or Euclid, ohio, I believe.
Every man, woman and child isincarcerated in Ohio.
Our costs go up, ourinefficiency goes up.
Judges don't have the data.
They may stay like five yearswhen it could be probation.
(09:42):
If most of the judges are doingprobation in your county and
you've just given somebody fiveyears, you made up, like you
said, a hundred thousand dollardecision that, like literally,
doesn't always measure upbecause we don't have the data.
Speaker 2 (09:56):
You said, well, 50,000 and 20,000, that's a
billion dollars.
Speaker 1 (09:59):
just for everybody's reference, it comes down to
fiscal responsibility, right,both as taxpayers and the
government.
It comes down to fairness,right, making sure that person A
is being treated the same asperson B and person C and et
cetera, and then try to take outthis sort of implicit bias or
(10:20):
explicit bias, or even theracism in our systems.
And so I think you know thecost of not having this data is
huge.
You can take it to the nextstep.
You can do the back endanalysis, right.
So if person A commits a crimeand is guilty, but the data
suggests that probation is theright thing, then you can put
(10:42):
them on probation and you cantrack them.
You can track whether or notthey repeat or something happens
right or do they reform andmove on and become productive
members of society.
Or you can stick that personinto five years of incarceration
and then track them on the backend and see what happens when
they come out after five years,and then you can start to make
(11:03):
these.
In my world as a consultant,it's very simple.
We collect data, we documentfacts and findings which are
very binary.
They're true or false.
We draw upon those facts andfindings, we draw conclusions
and from those conclusions wemake recommendations to help you
guys as judges on being fairand equitable, but also on the
(11:26):
back end, to make sure that whatyou're doing is actually
accomplishing the goal ofhelping people become.
I think the goal is still to getpeople to come back into
society as productive members,and I think you make a great
point on this isn't about guiltyor not guilty, right?
The justice system, I think,does a good job of determining
(11:48):
whether or not you're guilty ornot.
It's what you do once you'redetermined to be guilty.
And how do you treat peoplefair and how do you have some
fiscal responsibility?
Again, you always follow themoney in these situations,
unfortunately, unfortunately.
But if we can be more fiscallyresponsible, then we can spend
that money on something thatmaybe can help others instead of
(12:10):
incarcerating them.
We can send them back to schoolor give them some training.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Or yeah, john, to your point that it costs twenty
thousand dollars a year toincarcerate somebody.
What are the alternate costs?
Right, the alternatives, butthat twenty thousand dollars a
year to incarcerate somebody.
What are the alternate costs?
Right, the alternatives, butthat $20,000 a year?
What if, rather thanimprisonment, you have like
probationary period, and thenthe sum of that money is
allocated to an educationalprogram or a trade program to
help that person get a job, or Ithink Jan that's a billion
(12:36):
dollars a year.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
Oh, a year?
Yeah, that's a billion dollarsa year.
Like I said, that's where themass occurrence.
If there's eight people everyyear collectively in Ohio,
15,000 people at $20,000 aperson, it's a billion dollars
for every year of incarceration.
So every time there's a decisionmade by a judge and I think I'm
one of the first judges whoraised the issue of cost a lot
(13:02):
of it comes down to what westarted to talk about at the
beginning, where maybe Iapproach problems differently as
a result of being plucked outof the inner city of cleveland
50 years ago and now being in aposition where I can state
things with a level of authoritybecause I have gone to the best
(13:26):
schools in the United States ofAmerica and maybe look at
things and say things that arereflective of the diversity of
where I come from, both from theinner city as well as from
bigger heights in Ohio, whichare very wealthy places, I think
this is a perfect time andwe're talking about financial
(13:47):
responsibility right now, butthe other part that I'm
extremely interested about youtouching on, Ray, is the social
effect, the social costs of massincarceration.
Speaker 2 (13:55):
So why don't we talk a little bit about the social
costs?
You know the billion dollars isa big number and, you know,
catches everybody's eyes.
But what up this way, when meand John talk about the
empathetic connection andunderstanding where somebody is
coming from, that's what I'mreally feeling right now is what
is those social costs that comewith mass incarceration?
Speaker 3 (14:15):
No doubt about it, and I think that's like the
unique perspective of me comingfrom Cleveland and the inner
city and knowing where peopleare.
And so when you look atfamilies, for example, in inner
city areas, there's decimationbecause black males are
(14:39):
incarcerated.
Because black males areincarcerated, literally,
families are.
You know, everyone talks aboutthe welfare queens, but how can
you have families when menaren't there?
They're incarcerated forwhatever reason.
We're trying to make it easyfor criminals.
What we want to be able to dois make our system fair and
(15:00):
hopefully, if our system is fair, then the other thing that's a
real problem right now, in 2020,is the lack of co-opness and
faith in our judicial system,and you have mothers seeing
their children go into thecriminal justice system as soon
as they become teenagers.
(15:21):
You get a decimation ofcommunities that are already at
the place where they're indanger of breaking the fabric of
middle class values or nevereven achieve that, and that's
what I was taught years ago whenthere were middle class values
(15:46):
and hard work the whole nineyards.
What I'm afraid of and whatneeds to be addressed from a
disruptive standpoint right now,is that the differences in
those who are economicallyintegrated, economically
integrated, socially integrated,who have the same values as
everybody else.
(16:07):
There is a disruption that needsto occur right there, because
so many people and I walk in myown community all the time are
without that.
You see it in the nature ofwhere people are surprised by
violence and the riots andthings of that nature
surrounding really somethingthat, and, when you think about
it in a way, our justice systemmissed it, and the claim of
(16:31):
places where there wasunnecessary violence by police
was something that had notnecessarily been addressed and
the violence occurred wasreflective of the social places
where people were, where thelack of being able to have a
voice, as well as the ability tohave people listen to that
(16:56):
voice, is something that we needto really address and is
beginning to be addressed in the2020s area, hopefully without
the violence anymore.
Obviously, that was not the wayto go, but people shouldn't be
surprised, though, because whatI'm really trying to do as a
judge is to make sure that stuffis addressed fairly and equally
(17:20):
, and people need to hear thatwe're caring and that we're
concerned and that there's aproblem.
We want to have the data toaddress.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
There was a lot of pent up demand.
I think that again shook up thesnow globe, which it was not
pleasant but it was probablynecessary.
We've had this great discussion, ray, and you've brought up
some really great points justabout how long it's been around
and some of the problems thatyou're trying to fix and how you
(17:51):
disrupt this sort of status quowithin the judicial system.
As we wrap up, I've doubled inthe details in these things,
right, so we've identified theproblems.
We empathize with yourconstituents and the
stakeholders.
How do you vision going forward?
What are the next steps?
Those kinds of things, and thenwe can wrap up this podcast
(18:14):
importance of now.
Speaker 3 (18:16):
It can't be underestimated again.
That's why I wanted to use thehonest term inflammatory
language, because it's so easyfor this issue to continue.
Blue River Task Force hundredsof thousands of dollars spent on
documents over the last 25years saying that data is needed
and yet nothing has been done.
There is a reason why thathasn't occurred and what we need
(18:39):
to make sure is that, likewhatever we do right now,
because this is a moment in timewhere momentum is out there and
it is on the side of justiceand fairness and rightness that
has to be done.
I've been a leader on it.
I want other people to join inthe leader.
That's why I'm on this podcast.
Speaker 1 (18:59):
What can the average Joe citizen do within the state
of Ohio to help your cause.
Speaker 3 (19:03):
The database is a legislative effort, so it needs
to be enacted into law.
It is the Ohio General Assemblyand the governor will see
legislation in 2021 to enact thebeginnings of the criminal
sentencing database.
When you vote, you make sureyou also contact your
(19:26):
legislators to make sure thatthey know that this is silly not
to have data in the 21stcentury and the performance of
our judicial system.
So those are tangible stepsright now that can be taken by
anyone.
Be aggressive, be out there.
Don't be silent, because it hasproven over 25 years that
(19:47):
silence will just let the statusquo continue.
I love it, all right.
Speaker 2 (19:52):
I appreciate everybody taking the time to
tune in today.
John, I feel that a lot ofeyebrow moments and a lot of
light bulb moments throughoutthis entire episode.
So this is why I'm reallyexcited that the disruptor is a
thing.
All of these amazing people outthere doing these disruptive
things, shaking the snow globe,trying to improve, really
(20:13):
improve the quality of life ofeverybody involved in all of
these processes right, nobodyever comes into these positions
being an innovative disruptorwith the intention of like, okay
, I'm going to try to shake thissnow globe just so I can take
it and look at the beauty for asplit second and then smash it
on a brick.
Generally, they come in, theyshake the snow globe and just
(20:33):
watch all of the beauty thatcomes out of that disruption.
Judge, I really admire thisbattle you've been fighting for
years.
Getting to the point when I wasgoing back through and I was
listening about the life storyand everything like that.
One thing that really stood outto me just now is you said you
(20:54):
still go and you walk aroundyour old neighborhood and really
stay in touch with that piece.
There's this quote from a poemcalled If by Rudyard Kipling.
Right, and I read this poemevery morning and it really
stuck out to me when you saidthat.
And it says if you can walkwith kings but maintain the
common touch, and the entirepoem is about how you can really
(21:17):
become a man and stand on yourown two feet and live your life
with character, and live yourlife with integrity and with
values.
That statement right theresolidifies Ivy League schools
the ability to be a great personin law, being appointed to a
judicial seat, but walking withkings and maintaining the common
touch.
(21:37):
There's no other reason thatyou want to vote for Ray.
Outside of any of those otherreasons.
Let it be because he has notlost that common touch, and I
think that is extremelyimportant when it comes to
somebody sitting in that seat.
Bless you, thank you, john.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
I'll let you wrap up.
I just want to say, actually,that those are really inspiring.
That poem is inspiring.
I think Ray does fit that bill.
I wanted to say, ray, thanksfor coming on our show, john,
thanks for hosting us and havingus have the faith in us trying
to build this theme out of theDisruptor series, and I wish you
(22:18):
all the best of luck, ray.
And uh, I'm glad you're myfriend, and uh, it will just
keep.
We'll keep disrupting and we'llkeep moving forward.
Buddy, thanks, thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Boysober
Have you ever wondered what life might be like if you stopped worrying about being wanted, and focused on understanding what you actually want? That was the question Hope Woodard asked herself after a string of situationships inspired her to take a break from sex and dating. She went "boysober," a personal concept that sparked a global movement among women looking to prioritize themselves over men. Now, Hope is looking to expand the ways we explore our relationship to relationships. Taking a bold, unfiltered look into modern love, romance, and self-discovery, Boysober will dive into messy stories about dating, sex, love, friendship, and breaking generational patterns—all with humor, vulnerability, and a fresh perspective.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com