Crime and Punishment in Hawaii
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1996-03-10
Guests: Ken Williams (visiting professor of law); Ted Sakai (Director of Prison Services); Quentin Kawananakoa (State Representative)
Duration: 1:05:05

[00:00:00] Randall Roth: This is Randy Roth, host of the Price of Paradise radio show. We're broadcast live each Sunday morning at 8:00 on KHPR 88.1 and KKUA 90.7 and then rebroadcast each Sunday evening at 8:00 on KIFO 1380 AM. All of us who worked to bring this program to you do so as volunteers. Our goal is lively and informed dialogue. I guess you could say we're big believers in the marketplace of ideas. As long as there's lots of activity in that marketplace, we trust that the best ideas eventually will be recognized as such. Our airtime is paid for by the Hawaii Community Foundation, an organization that encourages grassroots efforts to improve the quality of life in Hawaii and that manages charitable funds with efficiency and compassion.

[00:00:37] Randall Roth: Our airtime is paid for by the Hawaii Community Foundation, an organization that encourages grassroots efforts to improve the quality of life in Hawaii and that manages charitable funds with efficiency and compassion. Our topic today is punishment: why and how we do it, whether or not it works, and alternatives that might make sense. Once in a while listeners ask us how do we come up with our topics and today's topic was the result of of a number of things that that my wife Susie and I came across over the last couple months. First of all, there have been several headlines that were along the lines of of the following: violence soars. Our society seems to be getting more and more violent, and the community seems to be more concerned about their safety.

[00:01:18] Randall Roth: Our society seems to be getting more and more violent, and the community seems to be more concerned about their safety. Secondly, we were listening to public radio one morning and a Professor Moran from Mount Holyoke College was quoted as saying, in his opinion, incarceration is no longer feared, that there no longer is a stigma to going to prison, that instead it's become a badge of honor and it's almost a happy occasion where there's a reunion of of gang members or or whomever. We saw the movie Dead Man Walking, and if you haven't seen it, a very moving movie. We felt like we'd been hit by a steamroller. Whether you are for or against the death penalty, Dead Man Walking is is an extremely moving experience.

[00:01:56] Randall Roth: Whether you are for or against the death penalty, Dead Man Walking is is an extremely moving experience. We read an article in the newspaper about a Singapore flogging video that school kids there are shown this video of of someone being flogged and that's explained to them that that's a common punishment for vandalism, sexual harassment, robbery, a number of of transgressions. And then finally we saw an article with the headline: punishment does cut crime. According to that, there's a study from a professor in Texas who says that often times criminal behavior is is the result of a rational decision and that the most effective way to prevent crime is to make the punishment so harsh and so certain that would-be criminals decide that the risk simply isn't worth taking.

[00:02:23] Randall Roth: According to that, there's a study from a professor in Texas who says that often times criminal behavior is is the result of a rational decision and that the most effective way to prevent crime is to make the punishment so harsh and so certain that would-be criminals decide that the risk simply isn't worth taking. Well, taking all of this into account or together, we thought gee it would be very interesting to hear a number of of different voices with different philosophical approaches to the issue talking about just why it is that we punish people who do something wrong and how it is that we punish them and and how we go about drawing the various lines between what we will do and and won't do, and we came up with this show.

[00:02:42] Randall Roth: Well, taking all of this into account or together, we thought gee it would be very interesting to hear a number of of different voices with different philosophical approaches to the issue talking about just why it is that we punish people who do something wrong and how it is that we punish them and and how we go about drawing the various lines between what we will do and and won't do, and we came up with this show. Our guests this morning are Quentin Kawananakoa, Ted Sakai, and Kenneth Williams. Quentin graduated from Punahou School, earned a bachelor's degree from USC, and a law degree from the University of Hawaii. He's clerked for Supreme Court Justice Frank Padgett and practices law with the case law firm.

[00:03:19] Randall Roth: He's clerked for Supreme Court Justice Frank Padgett and practices law with the case law firm. He's active in a number of community organizations such as the Prince Kuhio Hawaiian Civic Club, the Manoa Gardens Foundation, Haliʻa Aloha, Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs, and Royal Order of Kamehameha I. Oh, and by the way, he's a member of the State House of Representatives as well. Good morning, Quentin.

[00:03:43] Quentin Kawananakoa: Good morning, Randy.

[00:03:44] Randall Roth: Ted Sakai is the Chief of Staff for the Department of Public Safety. As such, he oversees all of corrections here in Hawaii. Prior to that, he was the head of of programs for the department. As head of the programs, he did the planning, the budgeting, and the administrating of inmate programs such as educational services, substance abuse treatment, sex offender treatment, food services, volunteer services, religious services, correctional industries, library services. He has his BA degree in political science and master's degree in business administration from the University of Hawaii at Manoa. He's involved in correctional committees such as the Board of Delegates for the American Correctional Association, Offender Programs Committee, and the Substance Abuse Committee, just to name a few.

[00:04:20] Randall Roth: He's involved in correctional committees such as the Board of Delegates for the American Correctional Association, Offender Programs Committee, and the Substance Abuse Committee, just to name a few. Ted, good morning.

[00:04:31] Ted Sakai: Good morning, Randy, thank you.

[00:04:33] Randall Roth: Our third guest, Kenneth Williams is a visiting professor at the University of Hawaii School of Law, and Kenneth hasn't gotten to the studio this morning just yet. I'm sure he'll be joining us a little bit later in the hour, and so we'll say a little bit more about Kenneth at that time. Well, I'm curious, Ted, did you read the articles in this morning's advertiser on page three in the focus section, the op-ed page? We had an article by Quentin Kawananakoa and Kenneth Williams. Did you get to see those?

[00:05:01] Ted Sakai: Yes, I did.

[00:05:02] Randall Roth: Uh quick reaction.

[00:05:03] Ted Sakai: Well, I think the the ideas that Representative Kawananakoa tosses out are are viable ideas and we need to take a close look at them, but I think the issue of punishment is is a very, very complex one and as a community, if we really are looking to institute punishment programs as a as a means of combating crime, uh we're going to have to be ready to do a lot of hard work and invest a lot of resources in our correctional system.

[00:05:36] Randall Roth: When you say it's a it's a complex problem, what's the old quote about for every complex problem there's a solution that's simple and appealing and wrong or something? Are you are you suggesting that uh that uh what Quentin has in his article, which are some real specific suggestions as to what we do, um you feel that that really doesn't capture what in your opinion would be the way to approach this?

[00:05:58] Ted Sakai: I think it captures a small part of the way we should approach it. Um for example, the idea of boot camps is something that uh Quentin tosses out. Boot camps have proven to be effective for certain certain people, certain age groups, and in under certain conditions. For example, boot camps that are successful not only instill discipline, but they also have a range of programs that uh addresses the needs of the the inmates who go to these programs. For example, they they need substance abuse treatment and and academic counseling and vocational training, and also there needs to be some follow-up because very often the effects of the boot camps are lost after the the individual goes back to his home or his neighborhood.

[00:06:29] Ted Sakai: For example, they they need substance abuse treatment and and academic counseling and vocational training, and also there needs to be some follow-up because very often the effects of the boot camps are lost after the the individual goes back to his home or his neighborhood.

[00:06:46] Randall Roth: I know from past conversations with you, when when you use the word programs, uh I kind of start to see big dollar signs, that these programs tend to be more expensive than what I think citizens normally assume.

[00:06:59] Ted Sakai: Uh the programs can be expensive, but if we really want to do something about it, uh about the problem of crime, I think we as a community have to take a look at uh at making these investments.

[00:07:11] Randall Roth: Have to be willing to pay the price.

[00:07:13] Ted Sakai: I believe so.

[00:07:14] Randall Roth: Quentin, what do you think?

[00:07:14] Quentin Kawananakoa: You know, I think that's absolutely correct, and uh Ted was mentioning the concern about the costs of some of these ideas and that there may be other unintended ramifications that that come about from these simple solutions. But on the other hand, I think boot camps have tended to prove themselves. And uh as you had mentioned, Ted, with regard to cost, uh if we take a look, in Arizona, they spent $800,000 to construct the boot camp for a thousand inmates. That took first time offenders, nonviolent offenders off the street, first of all, gave them some direction, gave them some discipline, and uh at the same time opened up a thousand beds for our more hardened criminals and the violent criminals that we really truly have to get off the streets.

[00:07:40] Quentin Kawananakoa: That took first time offenders, nonviolent offenders off the street, first of all, gave them some direction, gave them some discipline, and uh at the same time opened up a thousand beds for our more hardened criminals and the violent criminals that we really truly have to get off the streets. So there there's a good cost balance there.

[00:07:58] Randall Roth: I want to come right back to you Quentin, but if my math is correct, Ted, $800,000 divided uh by a thousand inmates we're talking about $800 per head. I think when we build new prison space, we're talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars per head. Um doesn't sound terribly expensive to build a boot camp to me.

[00:08:18] Ted Sakai: Well, yeah, the boot camps can can be built for a lot lower cost than a traditional prison, but I think uh one thing that Quentin said needs to be remembered, and that is we need to to also create space for the more violent and recalcitrant prisoners and this is where we need to secure hard beds.

[00:08:39] Quentin Kawananakoa: You know, let me get also back, it's not only the cost because of uh construction and developing these boot camps, but apparently in Arizona, they have two guards for the prison, or for the boot camp, uh I guess on on duty at any given time. Now, 2,000 per, or two Two guards for 1,000 inmates Two guards for a thousand. Well, for a thousand boot camp.

[00:09:01] Randall Roth: Oh, I see, we don't call them inmates. Okay. Yeah, because, and I think that's important because there is a rehabilitative uh aspect to boot camps in that you're trying to take the the young or the youthful offender, the first-time, perhaps, uh offender, and set them on the right track before they really get into the uh worse elements that we find in our in our general population prison population.

[00:09:23] Quentin Kawananakoa: And that's another important point. If we take a first-time offender and throw them right into the the general population of our uh old triple C, the hardened criminals they're going to learn hardened ways and they're going to be encouraged to continue on their path of crime.

[00:09:38] Randall Roth: Okay, well we can come back to boot camps, but I want to get a couple of other basic thoughts out on the table before we uh invite calls. In your article, Quentin, you also comment that um corporal punishment for juveniles works, and when I hear the term corporal punishment, I guess the first thing I think about is is Singapore and and flogging. Uh is that what you had in mind when you use the term?

[00:09:59] Quentin Kawananakoa: You know, I had more in the mind of government spanking.

[00:10:03] Randall Roth: It is there is there a difference?

[00:10:05] Quentin Kawananakoa: Government measured spanking. I think there is, uh depending on the crime, the severity of the flogging or the caning or the, you know, there's a lot of No, wait a minute, if you don't hit them hard, how's it going to work? No, I agree though, we do need to make the the punishment or the the deterrent effect is definitely correlates to the to the level of the strike. So, I would be in the sound like I'm humming and hawing around. This is a tough one because you can get stuck into semantics about what you're doing, you know, you say you're beating children, and I'm certainly not in favor of beating children. However, I believe the deterrent effect of having some sort of uh punishment that a child can relate to, or a young person can relate to, is meaningful.

[00:10:40] Quentin Kawananakoa: However, I believe the deterrent effect of having some sort of uh punishment that a child can relate to, or a young person can relate to, is meaningful. When we give a $750 fine, as a as Mr. Faye may have received if he were back in Ohio, a $750 fine, perhaps also accompanied by some restitution, what does that really mean to the job Might not have made an impression, as big an impression on Well, his wealthy father would have paid the fine and maybe paid the restitution and the boy would have moved on.

[00:11:11] Randall Roth: Okay. Ted, I know sometimes the word deterrent comes up and I'm I'm curious just what your reaction is to that particular word. But yesterday I was listening to uh Hayden Burges on on his show which I I really enjoy, and one of the things that they were talking about was the the old Hawaiian kapu system and Kapu system, and uh they were talking about some of the what strike me is really minor transgressions could result in instant death and and you know I thought about and I thought I bet not too many people would were doing that. In other words, if if there is a harsh sudden punishment for some behavior, uh isn't there obviously going to have be some sort of deterrent effect?

[00:12:02] Randall Roth: In other words, if if there is a harsh sudden punishment for some behavior, uh isn't there obviously going to have be some sort of deterrent effect?

[00:12:12] Ted Sakai: I think I think this the Not I'm not promoting by the that we go back to that, but isn't there some deterrent effect to to flogging for example that really hurts? I I I think there is, but I think again this is a much more complex issue than it appears to be on the surface. It would have a deterrent effect for the majority of people who subscribe to the values and mores of the the larger society. I think when we talk about crime and fear of crime, we really talking about people who really fall outside, um people who don't necessarily believe uh or subscribe to the same kind of values that you and I do.

[00:13:06] Ted Sakai: I think when we talk about crime and fear of crime, we really talking about people who really fall outside, um people who don't necessarily believe uh or subscribe to the same kind of values that you and I do.

[00:13:41] Randall Roth: For example, you don't have to to threaten me with flogging to to prevent me from from committing any kind of crime at all. You don't even have to threaten me with a day in jail. Uh I'm I'm not going to commit a crime because I don't want to do it to someone else and because the way you were brought up That's right. Yes.

[00:13:57] Quentin Kawananakoa: But Ted, what are we telling these children that are, you know, they've been arrested 58 times, they've been convicted, you know, 48 of those times, and each time they go to court and the judge says, well, two days uh community work on your way. I mean, these kids are not learning the right lesson, and and so the level of punishment isn't there and it it really becomes a joke to these to these juveniles in many instances. And so, perhaps, you're correct. The hardened juvenile who goes out and murders someone, they're already beyond the point where something like corporal punishment might work. But when you have, you know, the first time youthful offender who does something, hey, and they they usually they would not usually do something bad, but for some reason they got wrapped up in something and did a a a crime, vandalism, uh drug use or otherwise, a good sharp, harsh, immediate punishment such as corporal punishment might change their change their direction.

[00:14:32] Quentin Kawananakoa: But when you have, you know, the first time youthful offender who does something, hey, and they they usually they would not usually do something bad, but for some reason they got wrapped up in something and did a a a crime, vandalism, uh drug use or otherwise, a good sharp, harsh, immediate punishment such as corporal punishment might change their change their direction.

[00:15:05] Ted Sakai: I I'm sure it would for for some kids, but I think for a lot of kids who who get caught up in the family court system or the correctional system, the adult correctional system, the first time we, as a as a community, notice this kind of behavior is not the first time they they've committed any kind of crime. This this something like that probably has been going on.

[00:15:23] Randall Roth: Well, we've got that one out on the table. I've got two more thoughts we've got to get on the table before we invite uh calls. Quentin, also in your piece, and I'm I'm going to read this, you say: lying in a bunk bed, watching the latest sitcom, lifting weights or earning a free college degree while in prison does not constitute pain for your crime nor does it deter prisoners from committing future crimes. I think you're suggesting that for the hardened criminal, someone who's beyond the the the public spanking or or the state, you know, measured spanking, someone who's beyond boot camp, that they need to do hard time. Tell us a little bit about your thoughts and we'll get Ted's reaction to that.

[00:16:03] Randall Roth: Tell us a little bit about your thoughts and we'll get Ted's reaction to that.

[00:16:06] Quentin Kawananakoa: Well, first, I think it's fair and it's just that if someone is a hardened repeat violent criminal, they should be paying for their own way. No longer can society afford to pay for them and let them relax or as I mentioned, earn a college degree without first paying back restitution to society and that should at least be what they're covering their own room and board. Second, I think that's important that people in prison or these violent criminals work at bettering themselves, work at learning some ethics, hard work ethics. We want to make prison uh a less favorable lifestyle than it is on the outside.

[00:16:51] Randall Roth: Well, let's get Ted's reaction to that.

[00:16:54] Ted Sakai: I I think we have all There's a lot of areas that we agree on this particular issue here. Um prison time should not be not be pleasant. We should not give the inmates uh the various things like the college degrees, and we don't. Um we we do offer opportunities for treatment and education. We've we've recently instituted a fee schedule for inmates. They they now have to pay part of the way. Now, we can't make them pay all of the way because they simply don't have the money and we do want them to take take advantage of the programs, but they do pay part of it now. Um as far as um the television, etc., I I know there has been some national publicity about these amenities that inmates get and there are some systems in the country where inmates have televisions in their rooms and even computers in their rooms, but Hawaii is not one of them.

[00:17:35] Ted Sakai: Um as far as um the television, etc., I I know there has been some national publicity about these amenities that inmates get and there are some systems in the country where inmates have televisions in their rooms and even computers in their rooms, but Hawaii is not one of them. In Hawaii, um we do provide television, but it's for the entire dormitory or the entire cell block, and they we have 40 or 50 people crowded around one television set at prescribed hours. Um and we do we do offer that because frankly it helps us to manage the group.

[00:18:22] Randall Roth: Okay. Last thought that we have to get on the table, capital punishment, the death penalty. Kenneth Williams, our our third guest who isn't here right now, has represented a number of death row inmates in Texas. Interestingly, he tells me that that he really doesn't have a a a moral opposition to the death penalty. And and in fact, for the Nuremberg trials, for example, for for Hitler-type situations, he thinks capital punishment is absolutely appropriate. But his points are quite interesting. He says number one, capital punishment, which doesn't necessarily offend him in theory, in in practice tends to be very discriminatory, uh for example against the poor as opposed to to the rich. And number two, he says it's phenomenally expensive, far more expensive than simply sending that person to jail for life, which of course is is not intuitive, it's counter-intuitive.

[00:19:04] Randall Roth: And number two, he says it's phenomenally expensive, far more expensive than simply sending that person to jail for life, which of course is is not intuitive, it's counter-intuitive. But uh his article in the paper this morning, oh, and he's on his way and we'll have him here in just a moment, but his article I think could basically be described as being against capital punishment. Quentin, in your article, you don't address that at all, but I notice whoever wrote the uh the headlines, attributed to you that you're against the death penalty. Curious, give me a quick thought or two on it and then we're going to ask Kenneth to uh share some thoughts about the death penalty.

[00:19:33] Randall Roth: Curious, give me a quick thought or two on it and then we're going to ask Kenneth to uh share some thoughts about the death penalty.

[00:19:37] Quentin Kawananakoa: Yeah, I was going to highlight that because that wasn't part of the title I sent in with my uh viewpoint. However, I I tend to agree with Ken with regard to the cost of uh the death penalty. It is prohibitive and we need to address that before we would consider uh instituting the death penalty. And I also agree that I'm not necessarily morally opposed to the the the death penalty. Capital punishment, again is uh uh is is possible.

[00:20:10] Randall Roth: Okay. Kenneth Williams, good morning.

[00:20:12] Ken Williams: Good morning.

[00:20:13] Randall Roth: Uh Kenneth is my colleague at the uh law school here at the University of Hawaii Manoa and uh has been with us for I guess about um a semester and a half. Yeah. Yeah. And you've got your article in the paper and I kind of summarized it just a little bit ago, saying that you don't have necessarily a moral opposition to the death penalty, but it's discriminatory, and it is expensive.

[00:19:00] Speaker 1: normally expensive, any additional thoughts you want to share with the people of Hawaii, who from time to time consider reinstating the death penalty?

[00:19:07] Ted Sakai: Well, I am from Texas. I don't know if you mentioned that, Randy.

[00:19:09] Speaker 1: I didn't.

[00:19:10] Ted Sakai: Okay. And my state executes around 18 people a year, and we have the highest death row in the country. And uh, it has just become prohibitively expensive to the point where the state can't afford uh, to execute as many people as it's doing. So, I have a real unique perspective.

[00:19:27] Speaker 1: There are a lot of people and I'll just, uh, I'll lump them together and call them conservatives, who would say, "Hey, it doesn't have to cost a whole lot." You know, you got these appeals after appeals after appeals, and it's just kind of ridiculous. So, the problem isn't that it's expensive, the problem is that you've got all of these so-called rights that these death row inmates have. How's your, what's your response to that?

[00:19:49] Ted Sakai: Well, the rights are important because the fact that we want to make sure we're executing the right person, we certainly don't want to execute an innocent person. And so, we would all agree that there has to be at least one run of uh, of appeals. And the Supreme Court, well, see, these rights are dictated by the US Supreme Court, so they're not going to go away the way some people might like them to.

[00:20:10] Speaker 1: Okay, Ted, any thoughts about the death penalty, and then I'm going to uh, unleash the flood gates. I'm sure we've riled a lot of people this morning and we're going to invite some calls, but any reaction to what you've been listening to?

[00:20:23] Quentin Kawananakoa: Sure, I I'll rile them up even more, because I do have a moral position. This is a personal position. I just don't believe that we should kill anybody. I think the the argument against the death penalty can be summarized. Someone back in the late 70s, I think, in a testimony here in the Hawaii Legislature made the statement and the statement was, "Why do we have to kill people to teach other people that killing people is wrong?" And that's sort of is where I am. I also believe that um, that that there's a real possibility, the rights are important because of innocent people who could be executed. Just last year, the governor, the former governor, uh commuted the sentence of a person who was in prison for a murder while while incarcerated, which normally would lead to a death penalty and he was commuted because this inmate was able to show that he wasn't there at the time the crime was committed.

[00:21:20] Speaker 1: Well, that's, that's a pretty good indication he didn't do it.

[00:21:23] Quentin Kawananakoa: And and finally on the, in terms of costs, I think, uh, Professor Williams summarized the cost argument very nicely. He did leave out one thing, though, which is that the cost of corrections actually goes up when you have a death row.

[00:21:36] Speaker 1: Mhm. Well, I want to remind listeners that this is the Price of Paradise radio show. We sometimes call it Pop Radio. If you would like to ask a question or make a brief comment, please call us at 955-8821. If you're on a neighbor island, just dial 1-800-955-8821. Our topic this morning is punishment. Why and how we do it, whether or not it works and alternatives that might make sense. If you tuned in late and you'd like to catch the show in its entirety, you can do so tonight at 8:00 p.m. on KIFO 1380 AM. Our guests in the studio are Quentin Kawananakoa, a member of the State House of Representatives, Kenneth Williams, a visiting law professor here at the University of Hawaii, and Ted Sakai, the Chief of Staff for the Hawaii Department of Public Safety. As such, he oversees corrections here in the state. Again, if you'd like to ask a question or make a brief comment, just call us at 955-8821. Let's go first to Alvin in Kapa'a. Good morning, Alvin.

[00:22:36] Caller: Yeah, good morning.

[00:22:37] Speaker 1: Good morning.

[00:22:38] Caller: You're on the air. Oh, thank you. The question I wanted to pose to both gentlemen, Mr. Kawananakoa and Mr. Williams, is that no matter uh, what tactic they take, it's still costly to keep somebody in prison for the, you know, for the life of the prisoner. And I was able to talk to somebody that came from China, and they take a a different viewpoint. If you're convicted of the crime, they don't waste around waiting, you know, to give you due process, whatever. Uh, they'll just execute you and your family has to pay for the execution or they just dump your body. And what I'm trying to get at is uh, I guess, in extreme situations, then you could put the person to death, uh with no remorse, you know, insane, whatever. I guess you understand what I'm trying to get at.

[00:22:39] Caller: Oh, thank you. The question I wanted to pose to both gentlemen, Mr. Kawananakoa and Mr. Williams, is that no matter uh, what tactic they take, it's still costly to keep somebody in prison for the, you know, for the life of the prisoner. And I was able to talk to somebody that came from China, and they take a a different viewpoint. If you're convicted of the crime, they don't waste around waiting, you know, to give you due process, whatever. Uh, they'll just execute you and your family has to pay for the execution or they just dump your body. And what I'm trying to get at is uh, I guess, in extreme situations, then you could put the person to death, uh with no remorse, you know, insane, whatever. I guess you understand what I'm trying to get at.

[00:23:32] Speaker 1: Alvin, let's get a reaction to that. First, from Quentin Kawananakoa.

[00:23:35] Quentin Kawananakoa: You know, Alvin, for me, I've just started my first legislative session or legislature and I'm just beginning to understand the balancing that we need to do in society. And when we take a look at the cost of housing a prisoner for a lifetime, I'm not sure what it might end up, $800,000, a million dollars, um.

[00:23:54] Speaker 1: Let's ask Ted real quickly, uh, annually, approximately what's it cost to house a prisoner?

[00:23:58] Ted Sakai: Okay, I, just real quickly, I I can't do it real quickly because it's again, really complex. Because because most of our costs are fixed, and if if say we executed one person and we're it's costing us, uh, x dollars, to, to, uh, to to house 3,000 inmates, it would cost us about x dollars to house 2,999. So the costs really don't go down when you execute someone.

[00:24:26] Speaker 1: Okay, so no, not talking about executing someone, in terms of just what it costs per person to house somebody in Hawaii. Forget about the death penalty. Isn't it somewhere around $25,000 a year? It's somewhere around $25,000 a year, but that cost is is derived by taking the total cost of corrections divided by the number of inmates. It can be very misleading. It's very, very misleading. If we take one person out, the costs don't go down 25,000. Okay, I understand. Quentin, I'm sorry, I interrupted you. That's right.

[00:24:53] Quentin Kawananakoa: Well, on the other hand, if we take out 20,000, the costs go down. So, come over, yes.

[00:24:59] Caller: Could I interject? Let's, let's let Quentin finish because I interrupted him first, and we only interrupt somebody once. Go ahead.

[00:25:05] Quentin Kawananakoa: Very quickly then, the costs that's involved with housing that inmate, if we look at the other costs in society, that $800,000 over the life, how many babies could that save? How many, you know, children with, with the wrong nutrition can we correct at an early age? How many prenatal uh, babies can we save, you know, through prenatal care? I think that's a real tough balancing act that we need to address, because even if you make a mistake on a prisoner and they were innocent, each day when we perhaps build a skyscraper, we know there's going to be five innocent people that are going to die on that work site. I mean, that's a given. It's factored in.

[00:25:44] Speaker 1: Kenneth, what I think I'm hearing is the assumption that it would save money if we had capital punishment. I, Quentin, I I think that was inherent in what you were saying and Kenneth, I I think we have a difference of opinion on whether it would save money.

[00:25:59] Ken Williams: What I'm saying is that, we have to begin to understand and to balance the cost of housing an inmate for life as opposed to terminating their life, as harsh as that might be, and taking those monies that we would otherwise be spending per day per prisoner and and address it in other needs in our society.

[00:26:18] Speaker 1: Kenneth Williams.

[00:26:19] Ted Sakai: Well, the truth is, um, by the time someone is executed, they're executed on average, 10 years after they've been convicted of the crime. And during that time you spent, to give you an example, California spends $90 million per year annually, just on litigating death penalty uh, cases. So, wait just a second. Just for those folks who are on death row, $90 million every year. Right, to litigate the cases. That's not counting the amount of money uh, that they would they they spend on their room and board to house them. I think people like me have no idea how expensive it is once somebody's been put on death row. Right. And so you really don't save any money. In fact, studies have shown repeatedly that it's much cheaper to put the person in jail for the rest of their lives as opposed to executing.

[00:26:54] Ted Sakai: Right. And so you really don't save any money. In fact, studies have shown repeatedly that it's much cheaper to put the person in jail for the rest of their lives as opposed to executing.

[00:27:05] Ken Williams: I could question, but I think the the caller was asking, "What if we took this person and didn't go through the $90 million of litigation and simply put them up and said, "Hey, you were found guilty, no more appeals?" Well, that is what, that is what the caller said. No question about it.

[00:27:19] Quentin Kawananakoa: Let me, let me try this, this issue of costs from another angle. Texas has 110,000 prison inmates today. If they didn't have the death penalty, they would have 110,018 prisoners. Now, the cost of, of the care and custody of 110,000 inmates is not any different than it is for 110,018.

[00:27:42] Speaker 1: Okay, now, this is going to be fingernails on the blackboard for you and and for Ken Williams, too. And Ken, you probably know this fellow, but there was an article uh recently in the newspaper. The headline is, "Punishment Does Cut Crime." And according to a fellow from Texas A&M, he says, "Punishment works. Incarceration works. It's that simple." And in fact, he thinks that death penalty works as well. Uh, I think it's safe to say that experts have differences of opinion on that.

[00:28:08] Ted Sakai: Uh, sure. Experts have differences of opinion on that. Yeah, sure.

[00:28:12] Speaker 1: Okay. Well, Alvin, uh, are you there again? Yeah, I'm still here. We lost. We lost you for a moment. Uh, quick reaction to what you've been listening to, and then we have to move on.

[00:28:20] Caller: Okay, I think they kind of drifted from what I was saying. Mr. Kawananakoa kind of touched on it and same with Mr. Williams. But China's policy is you're found guilty, they give you due process, all that other stuff. They don't wait around, they just get rid of you.

[00:28:37] Speaker 1: Okay. And to, to put one more thing in there, not too long ago on TV, they showed the cost factor of putting one inmate and they talked about a kid that was at the Farrington High School and he shot and killed another kid and it made the headlines. It cost approximately 40,000, and this was back in 1990-1991. So I'm sure the cost have gone up. So 25,000. Uh, no, it's probably doubled per person to keep them in prison. Alvin, thank you for your call. Really appreciate it. And I think one of the things I heard, as I was listening to Alvin, is that we all have a different sense for what due process is and, and just how quickly somebody can get something that, that we would all call due process. Uh, interesting thoughts. Let's go to Ed in Kalihi. Good morning, Ed.

[00:29:05] Speaker 1: Alvin, thank you for your call. Really appreciate it. And I think one of the things I heard, as I was listening to Alvin, is that we all have a different sense for what due process is and, and just how quickly somebody can get something that, that we would all call due process. Uh, interesting thoughts. Let's go to Ed in Kalihi. Good morning, Ed.

[00:29:23] Caller: Morning.

[00:29:24] Speaker 1: You're on the air.

[00:29:25] Caller: I didn't get to hear the rest of it. She put me on hold and I'm listening to another program.

[00:29:29] Speaker 1: Oh, okay. Well, they'll take care of that. That's, uh, thank you for telling us. Ed, what do you have for our guests?

[00:29:35] Caller: All right, anyway, I I wanted to see that, Mr. Kawananakoa. How many more legislators do we need to have that idea with in your, within their head to pass something?

[00:29:48] Speaker 1: Which idea? All of your ideas. The boot camp All of your ideas. He likes what he likes what he's hearing. Quite, quite a few. What are you? Quite a few, I'll see. Are you, it's a real good question. Quentin, would you do you sense yourself as being in the distinct minority, or is there a substantial minority, uh, in terms of the folks who take a relatively conservative hardline approach to this issue? tend to be more selective in who they accept into their prisons.

[00:38:03] Speaker 2: So the short-term experience has been relatively positive, but it's short-term.

[00:38:07] Speaker 1: Right. Basically, I think we're going to have to look at a model where there is there's there's going to be room for private corrections, but the the field remains the responsibility of government.

[00:38:18] Speaker 3: Quentin? Short-term short-term costs are persuasive. I mean, even Ted had mentioned at the at the forum that our per cost per prisoner per day is roughly $75. For the private sector prisons, it's roughly $25 to $35 per day. The difference is, you know, they include the cost of building the prison, they include health and or the benefits of their employees. Ted was mentioning that $75 per day doesn't even include the costs of building the prison, the depreciation costs, nor does it cost the cover the benefits to the employees, which is traditionally about 25% of the cost of your salary.

[00:38:58] Speaker 4: We're talking about dramatic difference in in the cost based on what I'm hearing.

[00:39:03] Speaker 1: There's, I think I think um, it's a little bit of comparing apples with oranges because

[00:39:08] Speaker 3: Or or watermelons, it sounds like.

[00:39:11] Speaker 1: Um, because we don't we don't have any private prisons in Hawaii, that the costs that that Quentin tosses out are are the costs in other states. Now, um, I think in the other states the cost of private corrections is probably lower, but I don't think the difference is that dramatic.

[00:39:27] Speaker 3: I I absolutely. I mean, we have higher call and costs here. We have higher usually wages here in the island. There are a lot of different factors. But even David Myers, the president of Corrections Corporation of America, which has houses some 28,000 prisoners across the United States, in Australia, in New Zealand, or in England, uh has mentioned that or he offered there at the forum, we'll come here, if you give us some land, we'll come here, we'll build the prison, we'll manage the prison, we'll operate the prison at a at a lower cost per day than what you're paying, lower than the $75 per day per prisoner.

[00:40:02] Speaker 4: Okay. I mean that's an offer, how can you refuse? David, you had a second question.

[00:40:06] Speaker 5: Yeah, my second question is, well, for example, my landlord is a police officer and he says that what happens is they arrest someone, he goes to prison and either he's turned away or they let out someone comparable immediately because there's just massive overcrowding.

[00:40:21] Speaker 4: There's the revolving door, as people refer to it.

[00:40:23] Speaker 3: Yeah, and basically open doors, prosecutor Kanashiro, or former prosecutor Kanashiro has said

[00:40:28] Speaker 4: Let me get Ted Sakai's reaction to that. I've talked to Ted about this before. Is there a revolving door, Ted?

[00:40:35] Speaker 1: Um, well, I don't know what kind of door it is, but there there certainly is a door. Um, we we are tremendously overcrowded. We our maximum capacity is somewhere like 2,600 and today we have about 2,900 inmates in our system, plus 300 in Texas. Uh just just to give you some numbers here. Uh since we moved the 300 inmates to Texas, we've we've already gained a 100 inmates in our system. So there is a great need or the the courts have a lot of people that they want to send to us. We we simply don't have room at at OCCC and at the women's facility in Kailua because we have court ordered capacities, and we can't exceed that, otherwise we're back in federal court.

[00:41:10] Speaker 1: We we simply don't have room at at OCCC and at the women's facility in Kailua because we have court ordered capacities, and we can't exceed that, otherwise we're back in federal court. So if we're at the capacity and somebody comes in, we got to look for somebody to release. You got to let them out. That's great. Okay. Quentin. You know, Ted is Ted is doing a wonderful job with what he's doing with what we're giving him from the legislature.

[00:41:33] Speaker 3: We hear this every day, or I do at the Judiciary Committee when the bills come through with regard to furlough and and then other uh uh means by which to alleviate the overcrowding and to comply with our consent decree. And we all neglect to increase sentences or truth in sentencing laws or diminishing the furlough projects or programs, and that's because we say we don't have the prison space. We the legislature have to realize that we need to fund prisons. We need to have an incarceration system that can house our criminals, and until we do that, Ted's in he has no choice. So I I I sympathize with him on that matter.

[00:42:11] Speaker 4: Okay. David, we appreciate your call. I've got to move on. First, I want to remind listeners that this is the Price of Paradise radio show. We're talking about punishment. Guests in the studio include Quentin Kovan and Kowa, member of the State House of Representatives, Kenneth Williams, a visiting professor at the University of Hawaii School of Law, and Ted Sakai, the Chief of Staff for the Hawaii Department of Public Safety. If you would like to ask a question or make a brief comment, just call us at 955-8821. On a neighbor islander, on the neighbor island the number is 1-800-955-8821. Let's go to Joe in Makiki. Good morning, Joe.

[00:42:47] Speaker 6: Good morning. I just want to make a comment about um capital punishment. Those people who are uh willing to have summary executions as it were, just to save the cost, have to be willing to put up their own lives on the line in case it happens to be the wrong person who was executed.

[00:43:06] Speaker 4: Yeah, I think that's a very good point. Kenneth Williams, uh you've done a lot of thinking about capital punishment. You're an expert in what we call due process of law. Uh you've represented death row inmates. Can you uh share your own thoughts about Joe's comment?

[00:43:22] Speaker 2: Yeah, I totally agree with Joe. Uh one thing I wanted to mention about what the earlier caller mentioned, uh he kept comparing uh our situation with China. Well, I don't think we want to emulate China. Uh that's the country that gave us Tienanmen Square, and it's now shooting missiles off of uh the coast of uh Taiwan. Uh that that's not a country known for due process. So I think the caller is exactly right that uh the problem with summary executions is that you're going to end up, the the the more you eliminate appeals, the more likely you're going to end up executing innocent people. And it's easy for someone to say in the abstract, well, we're willing to take that risk.

[00:43:54] Speaker 2: And it's easy for someone to say in the abstract, well, we're willing to take that risk. But um you know, the the person who is innocent, who's executed, well they're obviously uh really in harm's way.

[00:44:06] Speaker 4: Okay. You know this issue is going to take a lot of discussion and a lot of thought, and uh but one uh to answer the question, I think we do make that decision every day. There's construction workers that make that decision. There's people who clean windows that make that decision to take their life and to risk it in order to survive in our society. Life and death decisions. Well, yeah. And uh those are so I think it does occur every day and I think people would be willing to make that uh decision.

[00:44:33] Speaker 6: Well, but those are people putting their own lives, making a decision to put their own life in harm's way. But with uh if you have summary execution, what you're doing is society is making a decision that they're going to execute uh against that person's wish. They're going to execute some innocent people.

[00:44:49] Speaker 4: Well, you know, if we take it to one end, I wouldn't agree with it either, summary execution. You get picked off off the street, that's it, you get hauled into a back room and executed. But if you know, you go through a a jury trial process, you go through one appeal and perhaps a second appeal, you know, I think that's adequate. At that point uh we've probably done enough due process uh to to make a decision about what about capital punishment. I'm not sure, you know, uh how many appeals is someone afforded. Well and I know, Kenneth, you and I have talked about before, I've shared with you that I'm a bit claustrophobic and I'm understating this just a little bit. And and to me, the thought of being locked up uh is terrifying.

[00:45:19] Speaker 4: Well and I know, Kenneth, you and I have talked about before, I've shared with you that I'm a bit claustrophobic and I'm understating this just a little bit. And and to me, the thought of being locked up uh is terrifying. I mean, I I know I would react very irrationally and quite frankly, if you talk about torture, uh incarceration for me would be torture. Uh the death penalty, that would be a penalty and and and I again, I'm the exception rather than the rule. But if we never put anyone to death because of the fear that someone innocent would be put to death, if you'd listen to someone like me, you'd never put anybody in jail for fear that an innocent person would be tortured or at least, again, in my mind it's torture.

[00:45:44] Speaker 4: But if we never put anyone to death because of the fear that someone innocent would be put to death, if you'd listen to someone like me, you'd never put anybody in jail for fear that an innocent person would be tortured or at least, again, in my mind it's torture. How do you react to that?

[00:46:00] Speaker 2: Well, obviously it's a lot worse. You can redeem, uh quote unquote, you can redeem someone who's been incarcerated, who actually turned out to be innocent. Obviously we can release them, we can pay them money. Uh you can never redeem someone if they're executed.

[00:46:15] Speaker 4: That's a good point. Joe, quick comment, and then I've got every line filled, and I'm going to try to hit all of them in the next 10 minutes, Joe.

[00:46:22] Speaker 6: All right, just one comment about the people who are still willing to have very quick uh executions. There was a Supreme Court decision not too long ago, I believe, that said uh even though the person probably was innocent, they'd run out of their appeals in the state, and so nothing could be done for them. And so, I think we have to be very careful.

[00:46:40] Speaker 4: Thank you. Uh we go to Nancy in Manoa. Good morning, Nancy.

[00:46:45] Speaker 7: Aloha. Thank you. I also have two questions. Um first of all, in terms of monetary savings, the discussion has been so far in looking at execution uh capital punishment, but I'm wondering about savings on the front end. And particularly for Quentin, because he has a chance to vote on these issues, social services are being cut from from prenatal care on down and now um the possibility of letting kids out of school early to a society that has very few jobs to offer. So I'm wondering about saving costs in terms of actually affording people a decent life where they may not turn to crime ahead of time.

[00:47:26] Speaker 4: Nancy, let's get his reaction to that, and then I'll come back to you for your second question.

[00:47:30] Speaker 1: Limited resources, you're absolutely correct, preventative medicine, preventative uh I guess crime, uh all these things are the areas we should be focusing on. For too long we've been focusing on the symptom and not the cause or the root of the problem. But I would note that with uh an inmate who is not incarcerated, that is committing crime, continues to commit crime on the outside in society, it's estimated that those costs are roughly $425,000 per year.

[00:48:00] Speaker 4: Okay. Nancy, your other question.

[00:48:02] Speaker 7: Yeah, thank you. My other question um relates to an article that was in Friday's Star Bulletin about a program on Kauai that has intensive personal approach where it really helps people to turn their lives around rather than um focusing on just sitting doing time and coming out and ending up coming back in again.

[00:48:21] Speaker 4: Okay. Nancy, let me get Ted Sakai's reaction to that.

[00:48:23] Speaker 1: Yeah, that's the program we have at the Kauai Community Correctional Center. We have a very energetic and creative and dedicated warden there who has personally dealt with the inmates and and and asked them to to uh to make a commitment to change. He has instituted a very rigorous, rigorous program with a lot of discipline, sort of almost like a boot camp, a therapeutic community combination. Uh we we're really proud of their program, and we have uh we're going to watch to see how effective it is. We do have other examples in our system, at Waiawa, at the women's facility, we have a small therapeutic community that we like very much.

[00:49:03] Speaker 3: So there are pockets of success even though you yourself have said there are some areas in corrections that that need improvement in Hawaii.

[00:49:09] Speaker 1: That's correct. I believe we have some areas that we as a state can be proud of.

[00:49:13] Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you, Nancy. We appreciate your call. We go to Doug on the North Shore. Good morning, Doug.

[00:49:18] Speaker 8: Morning.

[00:49:19] Speaker 4: Uh do you have a question or comment for our guests?

[00:49:21] Speaker 8: Yeah, um, yeah, I was just wondering if the if the uh oh, the idea of parole has been a addressed and and it seems to me that the attitude on the street is is that there's always a lawyer or the sentence can be you know, lessened and, you know, and there's no really uh definite idea of punishment and I always thought if you abolished parole altogether, which is just kind of the system just kind of sets up the courts as a parental authority type thing. And if you abolished it all together that it would uh and there were definite sentences for each crime that everybody that the people you know committing these crimes would know if they were going to get caught, they would get this definite punishment.

[00:49:57] Speaker 8: And if you abolished it all together that it would uh and there were definite sentences for each crime that everybody that the people you know committing these crimes would know if they were going to get caught, they would get this definite punishment.

[00:50:10] Speaker 4: Okay. Doug, I I appreciate your comments. Um I I was planning to move on but our guests in the studio are kind of act like they have something to say. Quentin, why don't you give a comment and then I'm going to try to get to some more callers?

[00:50:22] Speaker 3: Well, what the caller uh has suggested has been done on a federal level, and it turned out to be a disaster with the US sentencing guidelines. They have mandatory sentences, right. The federal government, you get convicted of a crime in federal court, then you get a mandatory sentence.

[00:50:37] Speaker 4: And why do you say disaster and is that a consensus, or is that uh, you know, the opinion of one group and there is there another group out there that says no, it's been a success?

[00:50:45] Speaker 3: Well, of course, it's not a universal opinion, but I think there are a lot of people who share this opinion across political lines.

[00:50:51] Speaker 4: Why why why do you say it's been a disaster?

[00:50:53] Speaker 3: Well, because uh what's happened is the sentences have been excessive in a lot of cases and uh it's resulted in a lot of prison overcrowding. The federal government, uh you've got all these people being locked up who, for instance, haven't, you know, an ounce of marijuana, end up locked up for the next 40 years, and uh so I, you know, that's why a lot of people feel that so they've been they haven't worked.

[00:51:16] Speaker 4: Okay. Quick reaction from Quentin.

[00:51:18] Speaker 3: It certainly doesn't sound fair, but I believe that's with regard to, you know, three strikes and you're out uh type of sentencing, where the third strike might be as insignificant as a simple burglary.

[00:51:28] Speaker 4: So when you take discretion away from the judge, when you you have something totally rigid, inflexible, you're going to have problems?

[00:51:36] Speaker 3: No, I'm saying that I think that's actually, it's appropriate. I mean, someone's had three chances. They've done something with the first one. They had they they they murdered someone the second time, they they mugged someone, and the third time and the third time they happen to be carrying around some marijuana, and it it that's it. You know, how many times we have to tell you and go through the court process and and spend all these monies before we're finally going to pull the pull the plug.

[00:52:02] Speaker 4: Okay, well I remind listeners that this is pop radio. If you want to listen to the replay, it's on tonight at 8 o'clock, KIFO 1380 AM. I'm not going to give you the phone number because our lines are still full, but we're going to try to get to everyone before the hour is up. Let's go to Michael in Hawaii Kai. Good morning, Michael.

[00:52:18] Speaker 9: Good morning.

[00:52:20] Speaker 4: Do you have a question or a comment for our guest?

[00:52:22] Speaker 9: Question. Do other criminals pay price for their crimes? I believe they don't pay price. You destroy public property, you have to pay for destruction of private property. If you don't pay, crime does not crime does not pay.

[00:52:42] Speaker 4: So at a minimum restitution. We start from that, right?

[00:52:46] Speaker 9: I don't know.

[00:52:47] Speaker 4: Okay. Well, I'm going to take that as a comment because we we have to move on. Michael, I really appreciate you sharing your your thoughts with us this morning. Let's go to Mark in Moiliili. Good morning, Mark.

[00:52:57] Speaker 10: All right, good morning. Um, I have a real quick comment in two-part question and I'll get off the air. Uh, do you folks remember that gentleman last year that had murdered, gosh, I guess two decades ago, murdered a woman, was convicted, went to prison, came out, murdered another woman, went to prison, came out, murdered a third one, is now I guess standing trial. You folks remember him at all?

[00:53:22] Speaker 4: Um, yeah, they're nodding. Yeah.

[00:53:24] Speaker 10: Okay. All right. I think that was a comment.

[00:53:27] Speaker 4: Yeah, it was. Go on with your question.

[00:53:28] Speaker 10: You're right. Um, who really serves a life sentence in this state, number one? And number two, while we're talking about cost here, what about the cost to victims if we have a system that lets somebody out to commit additional crimes? I mean, Okay.

[00:53:42] Speaker 4: Let's get a reaction. First, Ted Sakai, how many people actually stay in for life, and then we'll ask Quentin to talk about the victims on this.

[00:53:50] Speaker 1: We we have a handful of people who have life without parole sentences. Uh, in order to get that, you have to have uh let me see, murdered a policeman, a judge, a witness or someone in prison, I believe.

[00:54:03] Speaker 4: It's a special category of murder.

[00:54:04] Speaker 1: A special category, right. Um, for other murders it's life with parole and that's where the paroling authority will come in.

[00:54:11] Speaker 4: Okay. Quentin, what about the victims in all of this? Are they forgotten or just where do they fit in?

[00:54:16] Speaker 3: I think that's a major concern for our society to begin to address the victims. What are we doing for the people our good citizens that are leading good lives and are being victimized on a daily basis? I mentioned earlier $425,000 is what a burglar uh the crime and the the cost to society. That's you, me, everyone here. Uh if we take a look at the index from 1994, the total index of crime, 78,763. That's incredible. That's one and what 12 people in the state of Hawaii are affected by or directly affected by criminals. There's an incredible cost to crime on the victims and we need to address it. And I would suggest that restitution is a is a first and appropriate mode to look at restoring uh whatever damage you uh you put on someone or stole from them or otherwise.

[00:54:51] Speaker 3: There's an incredible cost to crime on the victims and we need to address it. And I would suggest that restitution is a is a first and appropriate mode to look at restoring uh whatever damage you uh you put on someone or stole from them or otherwise. And secondly, um with regard to parole and and life sentences, we need to be a little we need to get uh a little harder on criminals, a little tougher.

[00:55:18] Speaker 4: Let me ask Ken Williams and Ken, I don't know if you've seen Dead Man Walking yet.

[00:55:21] Speaker 2: Yes, I have.

[00:55:22] Speaker 4: Uh to me, one of the most powerful parts of that movie and I've already shared with our listeners, I thought it was terribly moving, was the impact of a murder on the survivors, the family members who survive that situation and it seems as though the death penalty seems to be, at least in part, something that's intended to address their needs. What's your reaction to that?

[00:55:47] Speaker 2: Uh sure, the victims need uh their needs should be addressed also, but I think life without parole would also address their need. I think it's cruel in a way the way the death penalty works in that uh you have these criminals who are given repeatedly uh execution days, the courts intervene, they give stays. Uh life without parole allows a victim to have some finality. You know, the person goes to jail, they're in jail, and not have their hopes raised and dashed uh repeatedly.

[00:56:15] Speaker 4: Hadn't thought of that. Thank you Mark. We we have to move on. I appreciate your call. Let's go to Junior in Kaimuki. Good morning, Junior.

[00:56:22] Speaker 11: Good morning.

[00:57:00] Speaker 1: nobody can argue with the statistics. But I think they would say if the people who are being put to death really have been found beyond a reasonable doubt to have committed a murder, and if they've, you know, had all of these attempt, or these, these appeal opportunities, that the fact that other people aren't also being put to death, doesn't change the fact that they deserve that fate. What do you think about that?

[00:57:24] Ken Williams: Well, they deserve to be punished. But remember that the more people we execute, the more money it's going to cost. You are talking about a just this prohibitive expense.

[00:57:33] Speaker 1: So it's not just the discriminatory application of the death penalty, it's that it just doesn't make sense in dollars and cents.

[00:57:40] Ken Williams: I think I think the other part of the equation is, you know, everybody needs to have a reasonable opportunity to be convicted, and that's uh I don't know if we have a level playing field between the rich and poor on that.

[00:57:51] Speaker 1: I I think Ken the statistics, well and they are they aren't in your article, but it's hard to argue with the statistics. It's hard to suggest that there is a level playing playing field out there. Okay. Junior, you had a question?

[00:58:03] Caller: Well, yeah, I just say the level the playing field should be level. The other the question is, I wonder if Mr. Williams would be against uh would be for capital punishment for mass murderers such as uh Hitler or Ikeman.

[00:58:14] Speaker 1: Kenneth?

[00:58:15] Ken Williams: Uh yes, actually I would. Uh for mass murderers, I would be in favor of the death penalty.

[00:58:20] Caller: So basically, it it's it's it's not whether you kill a few people, but a lot of people whether you're for the death penalty.

[00:58:26] Ken Williams: Well, yeah, because in those cases, uh you're not going to have problems with discrimination. Uh they're not they don't happen that often, so you uh the costs are not going to be prohibitive. And uh you just give it to everyone who, yeah.

[00:58:37] Caller: So basically you are for you are for the death penalty and you think it's just cost and discrimination so that make it uh uh prohibitive.

[00:58:47] Ken Williams: Right. Uh the fact that it costs so much so factors

[00:58:50] Speaker 1: Junior, Junior, we get your point. We get your point. It's it's an interesting Thank you, Junior. You know, Ken, it I'm fascinating you and I have had a number of talks. I'm just fascinated by the fact that uh you know, you've done pro bono work for death row inmates. You're not philosophically opposed to the death penalty, but you do see it as being terribly discriminatory and outrageously expensive. It's it's an interesting position. Real quickly, Graham on the Big Island, and Graham it's got to be real short because I want to give our guests an opportunity to kind of sum up their thoughts and address what hasn't come up yet. Graham?

[00:59:23] Caller: Right, a quick question for Ted to Kai. Uh what proportion of people currently incarcerated would he estimate are, in fact, a danger to society if they're now let out and what proportion wouldn't be represent no danger to society if let out.

[00:59:38] Speaker 1: That's that's a good question. Cuz I think a lot of people think maybe the prisons are filled with people who had an ounce of marijuana or whatever the mental picture is. Good question. What percentage do you think are probably dangerous to society?

[00:59:53] Ted Sakai: Well boy, that's that's a real tough one. Um, because I really don't know the inmates individually anymore because I'm I'm downtown. But every, basically, uh we got about 17, 1800 people locked up who have been convicted of serious felonies.

[01:00:08] Speaker 1: Well, that's an indication, I guess. Okay. I you know, and we've got people on the line and I apologize we're just not going to be able to get to everyone. I appreciate everyone's attempt to to get in this morning, but we're down to the last few minutes, and I want to give each of the guests in the studio an opportunity to take a minute or so to to add any thoughts that need to be added or to emphasize anything. Quinton, Kavana, Nikola, let's start with you.

[01:00:32] Quentin Kawananakoa: You know, clearly we need to address our overcrowding in prisons. We need to help out, uh, Ted Sakai and and get more resources so we can house our violent criminals. And uh, it's also, we need to take a look at our overall system. And until it becomes a speedy, uh, until apprehen- apprehensions are speedy, and we have rapid trials, and above all, tough, concentrated punishments, we we will never have safe streets for our good citizens.

[01:00:59] Speaker 1: Okay. Kenneth Williams.

[01:01:01] Ken Williams: I think there's a a big misperception in society about uh crime and the the level of a crime. The New York Times had a story about a year ago, um, uh, showing that uh there are more people actually in prison now than we've ever had in our uh countries uh history.

[01:01:16] Speaker 1: And I guess compared to other countries we have an awful lot of people.

[01:01:19] Ken Williams: A lot an awful lot of people. Right, exactly. In fact, we have as many people in the prison system as we have in colleges and universities. Oh, my goodness. And I think what that suggests is that, and the crime rate is actually down throughout the uh nation, and I think what we ought to be looking at our ways possibly uh alterna- we ought to take a look at the whole system, I think.

[01:01:41] Speaker 1: And, you'll go ahead and finish.

[01:01:42] Ken Williams: Well, we should take a look at the whole system and uh look at it from standpoint of not needing to lock more people up. I think we've locked up quite a number of people, but maybe some ways of preventing uh these uh crimes from taking place in the first. And I guess that goes back to what Quinton was saying about the balancing act that needs to be done. Right. Right. Ted Sakai.

[01:02:01] Ted Sakai: I I think that's that's the key, is this balancing act. So we we do need more more bid space, we need hard bid space uh in order to run our system properly, but we also need to look at other kinds of alternatives. There, there are some people who can be housed in boot camps, who could be put in other kinds of programs in the community. The other thought I'd like to get out is we really have to talk about, uh we we really need to think about what does our community expect our prison system to do. You know, are we for punishment, deterrents, do we just separate some bad people, are we for rehabilitation, or all of the above?

[01:03:08] Speaker 1: You know, that's that's the big question, isn't it? What's the if if we have to prioritize, what's our primary reason for putting those people in jail? Are we just trying to punish them, get them out of society's hair, uh put them aside where we can rehabilitate them? What do you think, where do you think we are right now, or don't we have a clear sense of it?

[01:03:13] Ted Sakai: I don't think we have a clear sense right now and I think that's that's the reason we're we're our system has become so so much in the public eye. Uh we we house a lot of mentally ill people. I don't know why we have them, but there's no place else for them.

[01:03:09] Speaker 1: You know, so oftentimes we get muddled on on the periphery, and if we just go to the core and see what that basic fork in the road looks like. Mhm. Quinton?

[01:03:17] Quentin Kawananakoa: I was going to just say that punishment needs to be harsh enough to deter criminals. Number two, if we get to the point, then we start working on rehabilitation. The first and foremost is to make the crime hard uh or the punishment uh strict enough and harsh enough to make it a deterrent.

[01:03:33] Speaker 1: Well, guess what that guess what that music means. I want to thank our guests, uh Kenneth Williams, Quinton Kavana-Nikola, and Ted Sakai. Our producer is Susie Roth, our Director of Operations Jeff Filardi. You've been listening to the Price of Paradise Radio Show. I'm Randy Roth. Aloha.