Young killers serving life without parole may get chance at freedom

The Supreme Court, in a case involving two 14-year-olds, will consider whether such sentences are cruel and unusual. A California bill allowing parole for juvenile murderers will be addressed this week.

by Richard A. Serrano, Washington Bureau

February 25, 2012

Reporting from Chowchilla, Calif.

She started leaving home at 13, and soon she was gone for good. The streets drew her, the Barrio Pobre gang took her in.

She does not deny that at 16 she was there in Long Beach the night her boyfriend killed a younger girl in a gang dispute over a piece of jewelry.

Now she is 37, and though two decades have passed, Elizabeth Lozano still looks young — short, thin, with long black hair and expressive eyes. Even in her prison blues, she radiates youth, and she has won acclaim for reaching out to help teenagers in prison and others who are at risk of ending up there.

She was sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of ever being released, one of at least 2,500 inmates nationwide who were convicted of murder as juveniles, with no chance of parole.

"You feel hopeless," she said, of having the jail door slammed shut on someone so young. "The smell, the noise. You feel like you are going to die in here."

But now the U.S. Supreme Court and state lawmakers in Sacramento may give some of these inmates another chance. The court will hear oral arguments March 20, in two cases involving 14-year-olds, on whether it is unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment to put young juvenile murderers in prison without hope of release.

The justices have been moving toward greater protection for minors. They abolished the death penalty for juveniles in 2005, and in 2010 ruled out life sentences without parole for them except in cases of homicide.

In Sacramento, a state Senate-passed bill to make juvenile murderers eligible for parole fell two votes short in the Assembly last year but is up for reconsideration this week.

The attorneys for the 14-year-olds point to forensic evidence that a teenager's brain is not fully developed and that youths consequently take too many risks.

The research comes from Laurence Steinberg, a psychology professor at Temple University in Philadelphia. "Adolescents, because of their immaturity, should not be deemed as culpable as adults," Steinberg said. "But they also are not innocent children whose crimes should be excused."

Even if these inmates win in Washington or California, it does not mean they will all be released. They would have to prove to judges and parole boards that they deserve to go home, probably after they have served about 25 years. They would need to show near-unblemished prison records, true remorse and proof they can function in society.

Many will never get out. In the Chicago area, for instance, 17-year-old Johnny Freeman raped a 5-year-old and tossed her from a 14th-story window. Sixteen-year-old Peter Saunders bludgeoned an elderly woman, then from prison mailed a bomb-like device to a judge. David Biro, when he was a month short of 17, marched a husband and his pregnant wife down their basement stairs and shot them both.

Jennifer Bishop-Jenkins, sister of the soon-to-be-mother whom Biro killed, has worked tirelessly to block parole for juvenile murderers. "Most of these offenders are extremely guilty," she said.

Maggie Elvey, who lost her husband of 29 years in a 1993 murder in the San Diego County city of Vista, is also not persuaded. "They knew darn well what they were doing," she said of the two boys, 15 and 16, who beat him with a metal pipe. "Don't believe those teenagers didn't know the value of someone else's life."

Lozano knows that no matter what happens, it will not be easy for her to prove her case. For 20 years she has been preparing for just this moment, just this chance. "Every child is redeemable," she said.

She was the oldest child and only daughter in a family with six children, in a home where she said the kids were beaten and she was sexually assaulted by an uncle.

"I wanted to be a teenager, but I couldn't," she recalled in the crowded visiting room at the state prison for women in Chowchilla. "I was a floater. I became a runaway, and I had nowhere to run to."

She fled to Mexico after the shooting. Police found her four years later after she returned to Southern California as a mother. Her last moment of freedom was kissing her 4-month-old son goodbye. Kevin today is a high school senior, and this summer he plans to join the Marines.

Lozano was convicted of felony murder and robbery in the January 1992 shooting death of 13-year-old Tayde Vasquez in a fight over her jewelry at a park near the beach. Although Lozano later boasted that she shot Vasquez twice in the head, Lozano's boyfriend, Steven Green, testified at her trial that he alone killed the girl. An adult, Green was convicted separately and was also given life with no parole.

"The girl was shot at point-blank range in the head," prosecutor Julianne Walker recalls. "Over some gang rivalry. Two young girls, 16 and 13. Ugly. Ugly."

At her sentencing, Lozano apologized to the Vasquez family. "All I could say was I was sorry," she said. "That I was sorry for Tayde's life being taken."

When the judge gave her life with no parole, she said, "I couldn't breathe. It was hard to breathe for a long time."

For the first five years she kept to herself. As a lifer with no chance of parole, she initially was barred from prison self-help programs; they are reserved for inmates who actually might get out. But, she said, "I didn't want to die in here."

So she started remaking herself. She co-founded a Juvenile Offenders Program. She gave Skype presentations to hundreds of teenagers in the Central Valley. She volunteered on a "Scared Straight" project for at-risk kids. Once a high school dropout, she is working toward a college degree. She also works a janitor detail at the prison, clearing trash.

Her file is filled with testimonials lauding "her work ethic, positive attitude and exemplary behavior." In interviews, the staff was complimentary, as were other inmates. The young ones see her as a mentor.

"Now she's a grown woman," said Alicia Freyding of Mexicali, Mexico, a former inmate who last year bunked with Lozano. "They've taken half of her life, and I think that has just made her stronger."

Lozano said she cheers when other prisoners are paroled and is hopeful for herself. "We cannot keep throwing away children," she said. "How can we say children cannot turn their lives around?"

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-court-juveniles-20120226,0,7583931,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fighting L.A.'s gangs with families

Officials say L.A. Deputy Mayor Guillermo Cespedes' effort, known as the Gang Reduction and Youth Development program, is working.

by Jim Newton

February 27, 2012

In a large conference room at City Hall East, more than 100 gang-intervention workers gathered last week to hear about a new approach to heading off gang violence and the destruction it causes. They had come to hear a family tell its story.

The mother did most of the talking, guided by a counselor. She was there with two of her children, a son and a daughter, and they'd been through the wringer. An older daughter had gotten in trouble, deeper and deeper. She'd neglected her schoolwork and fought back when her parents tried to discipline her. She ran away from home, got pregnant. "The road she was on," the mother said, "was not good."

As the mother and father became increasingly preoccupied with trying to set their older daughter straight, they had less time to spend with their younger children, and soon those two began to show signs of trouble as well. Their grades dropped; the boy's interest in sports flagged.

Gripped by the sense that they were losing control, the parents called for help. It came in the form of a local organization, whose counselor dove into the life of this young family, escorting the kids to school, arranging for tutors, counseling the parents. Slowly, life settled down. The son got glasses, started doing his homework and brought up his grades; the younger daughter joined a program for future executives and thrived.

Asked to explain what got his attention and turned him around, the boy responded, "Jesus," then quickly added, "and the ladies."

The counselor for this session was Harry Aponte, a nationally recognized gang-intervention expert from Philadelphia, and he patiently waded through the family history as the audience of intervention workers listened, many taking notes.

This family-centered approach represents a new tack in Los Angeles' long quest to divert young people from gangs. The philosophy behind it is that focusing on a single troubled child isn't enough. Schools and neighborhoods surround children, but their families are their core of support and thus the most natural people to help them.

"We're shifting the focus from the individual to the family," Deputy Mayor Guillermo Cespedes explained. "Every family has a problem-solving mechanism that gets jammed. We're trying to address that."

Police and others credit Cespedes' efforts, known as the Gang Reduction and Youth Development program, with making steady progress against gang violence in Los Angeles. Last year, crime overall in the city continued its long decline (though homicides ticked back up by a single killing, from 297 to 298), and the drop in gang crime continued to outpace that for crime generally. Fewer gang members fired shots or were themselves shot, and gang crimes overall fell by more than 15%, from 5,537 to 4,694. (Again, homicides were an exception, though a relatively small one: 170 killings in 2011 were attributed to gang violence, up from 161 the year before.)

So impressed is Police Chief Charlie Beck with the program's contribution to reducing gang crime in Los Angeles that, in an interview with Times reporters and editors last week, he said he's judging the field of mayoral candidates in part by which ones would keep the office structured as part of the mayor's staff. That configuration is useful, Beck explained, because gang crime is not spread evenly throughout the city, and giving the council oversight of the efforts means that there are pressures to spread its resources across 15 districts, rather than concentrate them where they are needed. "If [the program] becomes a council department again," he said, "it's not going to have the focus it has now."

Meanwhile, the approach is continuing to evolve. Driven by the program's determination to fuse research and real-world experience, Cespedes says he and others have concluded that families need to be at the center of the program's efforts. Hence the training last week at City Hall.

During his 90 minutes with the family, Aponte listened carefully as the mother and her children spelled out the elements of their success as well as the challenges that lie ahead. The older daughter has just had her baby and is living in a group home. The younger children still have a long way to go in school, and the temptation of gangs will not recede with just one strong report card.

But Aponte also recognized the family's progress, its emergence from a long stretch of tough work. "You're celebrating life," he observed. "You've gone through a dark alley, and now you're celebrating."

The mother nodded, as did her children. Aponte turned to his audience to emphasize the point: "They will not lose this.... This is their trophy to take home."

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-newton-column-gang-intervention-20120227,0,1828923,print.column

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the FBI

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Guard Against WMD
Inside the Biological Countermeasures Unit, Part 2

Part 2 of an interview with Special Agent Edward You of the Biological Countermeasures Unit in the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Directorate.

Q: What other responsibilities do WMD coordinators have?

Mr. You: At the local level, WMD coordinators act as resources for our partners, and they also engage in threat assessments and investigations. Coordinators are dedicated professionals who have their own career path within the FBI, and they go through an extensive training and certification program. With regard to training, we have partnered with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to provide training locally, regionally, and internationally. We are able to educate the scientific community about threats and provide situational awareness about security issues that may not have been considered. In turn, the scientific community advises law enforcement about the current state of the field and assists us in identifying over-the-horizon risks. The life sciences field is advancing so rapidly that it is difficult to stay current. We rely on the expertise of our business and academic partners to ensure that our agency is addressing issues appropriately and effectively. Synthetic biology is a case in point.

Q: What is synthetic biology?

Mr. You: It is the application of engineering and computer science principles to the life sciences. It is an evolutionary step in techniques in DNA sequencing and synthesis that are used to modify naturally occurring organisms, such as yeast and bacteria, and “reprogram” them to impart novel functions not normally found in nature. For example, synthetic biology allows you to program bacteria to efficiently produce bio-diesel fuel, medicines, and building materials.

Q: Why is synthetic biology important in terms of WMD?

Mr. You: Consider a company that produces synthetic DNA. They have the ability to generate the necessary genetic information to potentially produce bacteria and viruses, even high-consequence biological agents—such as Ebola or Bacillus anthracis (anthrax)—that are regulated by the U.S. government. Companies have adopted screening measures to prevent uncertified individuals from purchasing genetic information for these high-consequence agents. Through our outreach efforts and subsequent federal guidance, companies now know to contact our WMD coordinators when they encounter suspicious orders. The FBI can conduct further assessments, provide information back to the companies, and initiate investigations if warranted. As a result, industry was very happy to have a vehicle for reporting and vetting suspicious activity. We really filled a need with this program, and it has been very successful.

Q: How will you continue to be successful going forward?

Mr. You: We will continue working with industry and the scientific community. Because we provide a service and act as a resource for our partners, our outreach has grown at a rapid pace—we can't keep up with demand in terms of speaking engagements we are invited to or contributions to biosecurity policymaking. When we started our outreach program five years ago, we were out knocking on doors in the scientific community, trying to spread our message. Now they are inviting us in. They obviously they see the value of what we're doing to protect the public and the scientific process.

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2012/february/wmd_022412/wmd_022412

.