
My Decade as a Fugitive - wallflower
https://story.californiasunday.com/waymond-hall
======
DoreenMichele
Good read.

But stories like this always make me wonder how society is ever going to find
a path forward. The young idealist who saw a black man as a victim of the
system ended up fleeing from him and living in hiding to protect herself and
their child. But on the opposite end, some comments here feel this guy
deserves _no_ break at all.

How do we make a better world when it clearly doesn't work to say "You were
just a victim and you deserve better!" but it also doesn't work to err on the
side of "The beatings shall continue until morale improves."

I'm kind of glad to see he found some sort of path out, against very long
odds. We seem to do such a poor job of that at the societal level.

~~~
kstenerud
There are countries in Europe that have already made this better world. It is
possible.

~~~
DoreenMichele
Europe basically shipped its rejects to the US (and Australia), then likes to
claim moral superiority and better ability to play "let's all just get along."

~~~
mantoto
Wtf?

Any more information on your comment?

~~~
CDSlice
I'm assuming she is referring to the British shipping off their convicts to
the US and then Australia in penal colonies.

------
ilamont
He got a huge break at sentencing.

Assuming the cash economy will be greatly reduced in the year 2029, and tech
deeply entrenched in nearly everything we do, how will it be possible to live
"underground," either out of necessity or a desire to stay anonymous?

~~~
rosybox
I'm glad he got a break, for his sake and his family's, but if he had turned
himself in in 2005 he would probably still be in prison. I like that this
sentence encourages people to turn themselves in though, but I feel like it
also rewarded him for running from the law. I think our sentencing is too
harsh even for violent criminals. Even once violent people can change their
life around.

~~~
sysbin
I cannot make a choice that's truly my own when confined in a system and
without my choice being effected by the system. More simply put everything is
predetermined. So I think our sentencing is fundamentally too harsh when we're
punishing humans that didn't have control over their birth into a life that
will have whatever outcome that cannot change. I think the justice system
should keep that in mind when designing the process it functions under.
Although I think people prefer ignorance instead of reality.

~~~
lopmotr
If that's true for some criminals, then isn't it true for all of them? If not,
how would you distinguish the ones who used free will from the automatons? It
sounds ripe for unfairness. "Oh, my poor client was abused as a child, so it's
not his fault raped and tortured that toddler. Let him off lightly please,
your honor." while some other defendant can't think of a sob story because his
problem is an innate undiagnosed brain defect so he gets a harsher sentence.

Or are you advocating for lesser sentences for all crime in general? That's
something I think should be decided by measuring its effectiveness not people
feeling sorry for/angry at criminals, which is more a function of what the TV
shows them than reality. I'd like to see ongoing measurement of the effects of
sentence durations so they naturally adjust to suit changes in society. Maybe
that could be done by applying a random delta to each sentence duration then
measuring recidivism rates and continually adjusting the mean sentences
duration to minimize recidivism. Just at a guess.

~~~
sysbin
> then isn't it true for all of them?

Nobody can alter fate. Cause & effect starts at birth and is metaphorically
chained to the present outcome.

> Or are you advocating for lesser sentences for all crime in general?

One thing I'm certain on. The justice system shouldn't label a person a
criminal after the rehabilitation. Typically, I think crime needs to be
thought of like catching the flu. The outcome is more severe than the flu but
the process for treatment should be similar ideology. We have someone that
ended up in a bad situation without fault and even though people are socially
conditioned to think otherwise. That's something I believe should be changed
as well. People should be educated of how they didn't have "real" control over
the outcome of their life. Although I think the average person finds it hard
to grasp at first.

You mention undiagnosed brain defect and there has been a case where a tumour
resulted in a married man having sexual feelings for an underage girl. The
feelings were gone once the tumour was removed. The feelings did come back
though but same as the tumour and in the same exact spot on the brain. Thought
you might find that interesting if you haven't read about it.

~~~
lopmotr
> The justice system shouldn't label a person a criminal after the
> rehabilitation.

Except it doesn't usually provide rehabilitation. If it did, that would be
great. But as it is, somebody released from prison really is at high risk of
reoffending so people do need to be warned of their danger and protected from
them. If you could find a way to actually rehabilitate criminals, then I'd
agree, they'd become like normal people afterwards.

If it turns out that crime rates are unaffected by the reduced deterrent, then
good. But it does have to actually keep crime down, not allow it to increase
and I think that effectiveness of the justice system needs to be measured all
the time not just set at the height of public frenzy then forgotten about like
it is.

~~~
dieFledermaus
> _...somebody released from prison really is at high risk of reoffending so
> people do need to be warned of their danger and protected from them._

I think you've reiterated the OC's comment that you're replying to, without
realising it.

Let's assume someone gets arrested for a felony and does their time (e.g.:
pays their debt to society). At the point of release, in theory, they should
have no hindrances to reintegrating into society; yet, we know that this is
not the case for people in the states because things like a felony record can
keep you getting employed.

So, we've released a person from prison, who can't find a place to live
(depending on jurisdictions) and can't find gainful or meaningful employment
enough to survive on their own.

Is it any wonder, then, that the resultant _might_ be that they commit more
crime? At the very least, if they get caught, they have a guaranteed bed and
meals; which is a really shitty alternative, if you think about it.

Let's not forget that the system is incentivised for them re-offend because
putting bodies in the cells is what keeps the for-profit prison-industrial
complex running.

I don't pretend to have an answer, to be sure, but I think that a plausible
avenue of probing might be to truly treat an individual as if they've actually
paid their dues to society, once they've left the system. For example, a
person with a felony 10 years ago shouldn't _still_ be disbarred from
employment, as if it happened yesterday.

To continue to punish them, indirectly, is - obviously - not going to work in
anyone's favour, not the person who committed the crime and not society - who
should be as concerned with their re-integration with society as much as
they're concerned with the offender being "punished to maximum extent of the
law".

------
WalterBright
> I faced 44 years to life, but when it came time to sentence me, the judge
> cited my family, my steady work, my character references, and most
> importantly, ten years being crime-free.

I'd give him a big break on sentencing for those reasons, too.

~~~
Gunax
I am going to say something I know will be controversial: none of those should
matter.

For one, his ability to evade justice for 10 years should not allow him to get
off easier.

Nor should things like having a family. Why should I go to prison for longer
just because I decided not to have kids?

As for working: that's what you're supposed to do. You don't get extra credit
for that.

Everyone is willing to discuss racial disparities in sentencing. But what
about family structure disparities? What about people who want to go live in
the woods Unabomber style? Sentencing should not be a popularity contest. When
someone is pointing a gun at you, you probably would not care either.

~~~
erikpukinskis
Not just having kids, but taking care of them. Because it demonstrates you are
taking care of more than yourself.

If you were the caretaker for an elderly parent, or you foster animals, or you
mentored other at risk kids, I think it would also cast you in a similar
light.

------
JackFr
To be clear, he was guilty of every crime with which he was charged. Home
invasion. Armed robbery. Leading cops in a high speed chase.

The words ‘sorry’, ‘regret’, ‘remorse’ or ‘responsibility’ appear no where in
this piece. This man is practically drowning in his own self-regard and self-
pity.

He and he alone is the author of his misfortune.

~~~
JabavuAdams
He didn't kill or injure anyone, and then he turned his life around -- on his
own. The daily actions of living a better life outweigh mere words in a story.

He robbed a bunch of drug dealers. Should he go apologize to them? It's quite
likely that they have turned out worse than him.

~~~
lotsofpulp
Unless you want judges or juries to start deciding which victim deserves a
crime inflicted upon them, I don’t see why it matters who he robbed.

He was also given a great opportunity in life, and threw it away by choosing
to get drunk and getting into fights, enough times that he had a police
record. Society can’t afford to let everyone go through a “get drunk and fight
people, commit armed robbery, go on the run, come to senses” moment.

Also, I wouldn’t be spending my time associating with my dad if I knew he had
been beating my mom and she had to run and hide from him with her children.

~~~
JabavuAdams
You seem to be coming from a punitive mind-set, yet also arguing about what is
best for society.

It is better for society (AFAICT from this one piece) that this guy got the
outcome he got. It has a better chance of breaking the generational cycle of
poverty and criminality.

Regarding associating with his Dad -- there are many reasonable reactions.
Kids need fathers. When trying to understand other people's behaviour, as
frustrating as it might be, it's generally a mistake to think "well, I
wouldn't do that." It's often more productive to ask "why would someone do
that?".

EDIT> Regarding the nature of the robbery victims ... from a punitive stance
hey they were drug-dealers. Outlaws shouldn't expected to be protected by the
law. From a societal harm-reduction stance ... well, they got scared and
robbed, not physically injured or killed. That should factor into the
reaction. Depriving the subject's child of a father who seems to have reformed
is probably worse than incarcerating him because even unharmed drug dealers
need the protection of the law.

Mindless application of the law is not a good thing.

~~~
JackFr
You’re hanging a lot on the fact that he robbed drug dealers. What we know
from his words is that he _thought_ he was robbing drug dealers. But again to
be clear, the reason he was robbing drug dealers is cause he thought they had
the most money, not out of some sort of justice ethics.

Mine was the grandparent post, and nowhere do I claim that he deserves more
punishment or to know what is best for society.

My only claim is that this man has very little regard for others and that his
situation is the foreseeable consequence of bad choices.

------
newsbinator
> After four years together, Kim and I had a daughter

To me this was probably the most reckless part of the story.

Why would a person facing the rest of his life in prison bring a child into
the world, knowing he'd likely abandon her as painfully as his dad abandoned
him?

~~~
DoreenMichele
Most children aren't actually planned. They are just a consequence of sex.

~~~
saagarjha
Source? I feel like most married couples who have children are generally
trying to have kids, though they may not have planned it exactly.

~~~
JabavuAdams
Highly socio-economics dependent. This was my thinking too. I've since met
mothers who believe "If you have a kid with some shady dude and he leaves, at
least you get to keep the kid." Also there are the upper-middle-class third
kid "oopses".

------
concordDance
I guess the lesson here is to not have children with someone bouncing in and
out of prison.

~~~
JabavuAdams
People never seem to learn that lesson, though. Also in some communities every
attainable father is bouncing in and out of prison.

~~~
orthoxerox
These communities should have free access to sperm banks.

------
crb002
The guy has steady work yet the court rips him away from his family? What’s
the point?

------
asdf21
... Wouldn't the statute of limitations pass after 10 years?

~~~
austinl
It doesn't exactly work like that — you can't just go into hiding to wait out
the time. Since there was a warrant out for his arrest, and marshals were
actively looking for him, I'm assuming the limit was suspended.

See: [https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/criminal/criminal-law-
bas...](https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/criminal/criminal-law-
basics/california-criminal-statutes-of-limitations.html)

~~~
onetimemanytime
in some countries you can though, even if sentenced, so it's not a dumb
question. The idea is that after, say, 15 years (jail or not,) you've been
rehabbed, making jail moot.

