One size fits all justice never works. States that in the past enacted tough laws charging juveniles as adults and in many cases throwing them in prison for life without a key are now rethinking these laws.

They're responding to new research on the adolescent brain, and studies that indicate teens sent to adult court end up worse off than those who are not: They get in trouble more often, they do it faster and the offenses are more serious.

"It's really the trifecta of bad criminal justice policy," says Shay Bilchik, a former Florida prosecutor who heads the Center for Juvenile Justice Reform at Georgetown University. "People didn't know that at the time the changes were made. Now we do, and we have to learn from it."

States considering changes: Colorado, Connecticut, California, Michigan, Illinois. The article is filled with details.

America can't jail itself out of its juvenile crime problem. We can't keep putting law enforcement and punishment over prevention.

The expertise of the family court and the juvenile court system serves a vital function in our society. As I wrote back in 1998 when Congress was considering some ill-advised juvenile crime legislation:

The value of prevention over the pure "lock-em-up" mentality was shown by a Rand Corporation projection: While a $1 million investment in new prisons would prevent 60 serious crimes a year, the same $1 million, if invested in parent training, could prevent 160 serious crimes a year. And if the same amount were spent on graduation incentives for disadvantaged students, there might be 258 fewer serious crimes a year.

Say Hello to the new Firedoglake. What a great bloglift (yes, we coined that phrase.) Lots of new features and a terrific design.

It's balmy and beautiful here in Key West and I'm honored to be receiving NORML's annual Al Horn Award this evening. I'll be back home late tomorrow night.

What have you been reading and thinking about this weekend?

Peter Baker of the Washington Post blogs in defense of WaPo's spreading lies about Obama:

Two furors stoked by the blogosphere over the last 24 hours neatly illustrate the changing political climate in the United States these days and underscore the depths of suspicion, anger and hostility out there as the country tries to pick a new leader. . . . [L]iberal bloggers ripped The Washington Post for publishing a story on untrue rumors that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is secretly a Muslim. . . . [A]ny legitimate criticism and sober-minded discussion of the issues raised get drowned out by the loudest, most vituperative voices. The net result is not dialogue, but a contest of outrage.

That, my friends, is a textbook red herring. And, last I looked, CJR was not a vituperative liberal blogger and the CJR writer stated that "In The Washington Post this morning, reporter Perry Bacon Jr. wrote what may be the single worst campaign ‘08 piece to appear in any American newspaper so far this election cycle." And indeed, Baker has little substantively to say in defense of the WaPo story. This seems his best shot:

The reporter wrote the story because a voter in Iowa told him that Obama is a Muslim and he was struck that people remain so ill informed. . . . But somehow a story intended to debunk the false claims, trace their origin and explore the challenge they present the campaign in trying to quash them spawned a furious eruption among liberal bloggers accusing the Post of spreading the rumors.

This is disingenuous to say the least. I feel confident that the Obama campaign wasnot pleased with the story. Does Mr. Baker wonder why? Perhaps Lyndon Johnson can explain it:

[O]ne of Johnson’s favorite jokes is about a popular Texas sheriff running for reelection whose opponents decide to spread a rumor that he f[***]ks pigs: “We know he doesn’t, but let’s make the son of a bitch deny it.”

An accuser's motive to lie might be apparent to the accused, but what happens when the accused isn't allowed to learn the accuser's identity? Despite the administration's assurances that Guantánamo detainees will receive fair trials, Omar Ahmed Khadr will begin his trial with a significant handicap: he won't know who will be testifying against him.

Defense lawyers preparing for the war crimes trial of a 21-year-old Guantánamo detainee have been ordered by a military judge not to tell their client — or anyone else — the identity of witnesses against him, newly released documents show.

The right to confront witnesses is essential to a fair trial. How can a detainee's exercise of that right be meaningful when the detainee doesn't even know who the witness is?

Defense lawyers say the order would hamper their ability to build an adequate defense because they cannot ask their client or anyone else about prosecution witnesses, making it difficult to test the veracity of testimony.

In the administration's view, the vague fear of "terrorist retaliation" against their anonymous witnesses outweighs the accused's right to know the identity of his accuser. So much for the empty promise of fair trials for the Guantánamo detainees.

Via Kagro, it gets worse:

[Rudy Giuliani's then- girlfriend when he was married to Donna Hanover, Judi] Nathan's detail was approved by the NYPD after a stranger made an unspecified threat to her. The commissioner at the time was Bernard Kerik, who was recently indicted on tax fraud charges in an unrelated matter. "It wasn't about her being the mayor's girlfriend," Kerik said. "The person spoke to her by name and made comments to her."

Kerik signed off on all of this. Makes Rudy's support for Kerik, even after being informed of his alleged criminal activities, easier to understand.

Distributing Vicodin to people who don't have a prescription for it is conduct that typically results in the kind of harshly punitive criminal sentence that has become the trademark of the war on drugs. Unless the drug distributor is a business like Cardinal Health Inc. The DEA "is suspending its license to distribute controlled substances from its Auburn, Wash. facility" because it sold Vicodin to a "pharmacy that allegedly dispensed excessive amounts based on illegitimate prescriptions from Internet pharmacy web sites."

A license suspension sounds serious, doesn't it? Not to Wall Street analysts.

Shares of Cardinal Health Inc. edged higher Friday as analysts said the Drug Enforcement Administration's action to suspend the company's controlled substances license at its Washington facility won't materially affect its bottom line.

And why is that? (more ...)

Criminal trials are fraught with peril, and no defense is ever perfect. Credit Robert Udell for his stand up decision to testify that he mistakes during his defense of Cynthia Sommer, who was charged with murdering "her Miramar-based Marine husband."

Sommer, 34, was convicted by a jury in January of first-degree murder in the death of Sgt. Todd Sommer. Prosecutors said he died of arsenic poisoning. ... Udell said Friday he failed to call witnesses to refute testimony about where the arsenic – found in some of Todd Sommer's bodily tissues – could have come from.

Udell also admitted opening the door to evidence that his client used her husband's life insurance proceeds to enlarge her breasts.

She was depicted as a widow who partied and had sex with several men instead of mourning her husband's death.

Superior Court Judge Peter C. Deddeh granted Sommer a new trial.

Appellate courts often tell us that jurors are presumed to follow the trial court's instructions. Every now and then, reality intrudes. Jurors are always instructed to base their verdict on the law and evidence presented during the trial; they are not to consult sources of information outside the courtroom. That didn't stop jurors from trying to look up a witness' MySpace page in a sexual assault trial after hearing evidence about the page's content.

During the trial, the two jurors ended up looking for the home page of KJ, one of the alleged victims, whose mother had testified that she was withdrawn and not interested in older males.

The fact that KJ had a MySpace profile had come up during testimony. KJ had posted a comment on her page saying "remember my face because I'm going to be famous someday" and, according to the defense, used the account to communicate with older boys.

The bulk of the page had been restricted to invited friends by the time the jurors viewed it, but the West Virginia Supreme Court sensibly reversed the conviction to protect the integrity of the verdict.

more...

Rudy's latest story that the cops were complaining about late payments falls apart:

New questions were raised today about Rudy Giuliani's explanation for submitting police security expenses to obscure city agencies while he was mayor of New York and carried on a secret affair with his mistress, who also was given use of a police driver and city car. Giuliani said Thursday the unusual billing practice was not intended to hide anything but instead to speed payment of American Express credit card bills.

But the current New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said today he knew of no problems with the delay of payments before Giuliani was mayor, when Kelly served under Mayor David Dinkins, or since.

He said all bills for the police details for Dinkins and now for Mayor Mike Bloomberg are handled directly "through the police department."

Update: It's over. The guy surrendered. NY Times report here. The suspect has been identified as Leland Eisenberg, in his 40's, with a history of mental illness and previously known to authorities.

Update (TL): Live video news coverage here. Web coverage at WMUR. The Clinton Campaign has released this statement. There may still be two hostages.

****

A man claiming to have a bomb strapped to his body burst into Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign office in Rochester, N.H., today and took at least two volunteers hostage, New Hampshire television stations reported.

"There is an ongoing situation in our Rochester, NH office. We are in close contact with state and local authorities and are acting at their direction," the Clinton campaign said in a statement.

The campaign confirmed to Manchester's WMUR that two workers were taken hostage. The report quotes a witness who said a woman and her baby were released by the hostage-taker.

The Giuliani campaign is now backtracking on its claims that prior mayors also used obscure agencies to bill expenses:

Joe Lhota, a deputy mayor in Giuliani's City Hall, told the Daily News Wednesday night that the administration's practice of allocating security expenses to small city offices that had nothing to do with mayoral protection has "gone on for years" and "predates Giuliani."

When told budget officials from the administrations of Ed Koch and David Dinkins said they did no such thing, Lhota caved Thursday, "I'm going to reverse myself on that. I'm just going to talk about the Giuliani era," Lhota said. "I should only talk about what I know about."

The New York Times reports the statistics Rudy Giuliani uses to tout his accomplishments as Mayor of New York don't back him up.

Is he done yet?

Matt Yglesias writes:

Dana Goldstein remarks after watching the Republicans debate that they "are terrified of the words 'George W. Bush.' A smart Democrat would force her or his Republican opponent to face up, as often as possible, to the legacy of his party's leader." . . . I think Democrats need to worry about a possible Republican blurring strategy on Iraq especially if the Democratic nominee voted for the war. . .

Just so. What always is missing from Yglesias' analysis on this is what the current Congress can do - stand up to Bush on funding the Iraq Debacle:

President Bush sternly pressed Democrats to approve money to fund the Iraq war "without strings and without delay" before leaving town for the Christmas holidays, something congressional leaders have already indicated they will not do.

I liked Harry Reid's response:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., responded that Democrats will get troops the money they need as part of a "war strategy worthy of their sacrifices." "Bush Republicans have indefinitely committed our military to a civil war that has taken a tremendous toll on our troops and our ability to respond to other very real threats around the world," Reid said.

Now the hard part, just saying no. That is what Democrats need to do. It is good policy. It is good politics.