OUR VIEW: Forgiveness proposal not in the best interest of justice
By Darrell Ehrlick, editor, on behalf of the Winona Daily News editorial board,

Minnesota State Sen. Julianne Ortman has proposed a new bill, which is currently working its way through the Senate, aimed at forgiveness. Her explanation of the legislation appears on this page.

It turns out, though, this new bill is really a textbook example in the law of unintended consequences. Forgiveness is one thing; forced forgetfulness could end up putting Minnesotans at greater risk.
This new bill would allow convicted felons to request their public conviction and court records sealed — effectively deleted from public view. Out of sight, out of records, out of mind. Granted, the bill allows for only one expungement — a court-ordered sealing of the conviction — but the public would not be able to tell whether an employee, a teacher, a baby sitter or a Sunday School teacher had a felony conviction. The bill also would require a public hearing in order for the expungement to take place; but once a record is sealed, it would wipe the conviction off the books.

Ortman and those who support the bill tout the moral righteousness of this legislation — that it gives those convicted another chance. If it passes, it may indeed give felons another chance — including another chance to prey on society, leaving the public with no ability to check court records.

Most important, the legislation is dishonest. By wiping away convictions, the court would be a party to covering up the truth — that some members of society are convicted felons. Where is the moral righteousness in forcing an entire justice system to lie?

Part and parcel to paying one’s debt to society after committing a crime is living with a past and taking responsibility for it. Forgiveness shouldn’t be a matter of simply asking the court to remove a record. Forgiveness is about being accountable for a less-than-perfect past and committing to a different future.

Ortman’s bill would require judges not only to be the arbiters of justice, but also psychologists. If this new legislation passes, judges will now have to decide if the offender has “fully rehabilitated” himself or herself — a judgment that’s better left to other professionals.

The bill is also naïve — it would purge records from the court but cannot restrict databases online or records in print. Ortman’s proposed legislation wouldn’t eliminate the record from newspapers, which oftentimes carry court records and convictions. Moreover, with the proliferation of Web-based databases, felony convictions may vaporize from the court system but still be out there, even if abbreviated in old editions of newspapers. This is a recipe for confusion, funded by the taxpayers. The idea that a felony will suddenly disappear stopped with the advent of Google.

Ortman argues that without the ability to expunge records, we are condemning felons to a life of crime and a cycle of poverty and despair. But that’s not true. A criminal record is indeed an obstacle, but not insurmountable. Recidivism is more often the result of bad choices and bad habits, not a result of a justice system that has meted out punishment for offenses committed.

This new legislation would continue to clog an already overtaxed court system. It means more cases, more hearings and a justice system that grinds closer and closer to a halt. Once the court has made a decision and the appeals process exhausted, it is time for that case to leave the court.

If this law were to pass, it would mean that those convicted of DWI crimes — even ones where another person was seriously injured — would disappear. It would mean those convicted of white-collar financial crimes where millions were taken could be wiped clean. While the convicted felons may get a second shot, those with life-changing injuries, or those whose live savings has been decimated, will not get the same chance. What message does this legislation send to those victims?

For employers charged with protecting their business and their employees’ safety, this bill poses a real threat. By allowing the court to hide records, it opens employers up to certain liabilities. We seriously doubt the forever-cash-strapped legislators are going to cough up the cash to cover a business’s legal expenses when it hires a felon who gets an itch to repeat a bad habit.

Ortman’s bill speaks a lot about forgiveness and ignores the fact that it would force the public to forget information vital to its safety.

Finally, forgiveness is a moral quality — and like any moral principle, it’s darn hard to legislate. Putting forgiveness into legislation is indeed admirable, but the real effect won’t be reconciliation or restoration, instead the elimination of an important balance needed to ensure public safety and mete out justice.

The Winona Daily News editorial board also includes publisher Rusty Cunningham, online editor Jerome Christenson and photo editor James A. Bowey. To comment, call (507) 453-3522 or send e-mail to letters@winonadailynews.com.

.

More News:

Advertisement