Maureen Keogh
Republican
https://www.facebook.com/KeoghForCaroline/
1. In your opinion is there a difference between being tough on crime and being smart on crime?
There is absolutely a difference between being “tough on crime” and “smart on crime”. In a time when we are facing extensive challenges, everyone needs to work smarter. We are all working with limited resources and need to use them wisely. While defendants may be charged with the same or similar crimes, prosecutors need to review each case independently with an eye towards the appropriate result for the situation. I believe you can be tough and also be fair and exercise good judgment. To take a position on a specific type of crime and state that it will be handled the same way every time, without considering that all crimes and defendants are different, is to oversimplify the issues involved in the criminal process. “Tough on Crime” may be a good campaign slogan, but is not necessarily a good prosecutorial policy. “Smart on Crime” is what we should all strive for.
2. Should minor offenses be decriminalized, resulting in fines instead of jail time?
At this time the State Legislature is decriminalizing certain crimes. As a State’s Attorney my responsibility would be to enforce the laws as they exist. The State’s Attorney does not write or pass legislation. However I do believe that every prosecutor needs to be open minded when it comes to addressing minor offenses. Criminal convictions and jail time have lasting impacts on defendants long after they leave the courtroom. All prosecutors must be mindful of the impact they can have on a person’s future opportunities.
Whether I believe something should be decriminalized would be based upon what type of crime is being discussed and the manner in which the Legislature is proposing to “decriminalize” it. Clearly traffic laws and criminal laws may differ; juveniles and adults may differ. My opinion would also be impacted by how the “decriminalization” handles first offenders and repeat offenders. I would be willing to consider all legislative proposals to decriminalize.
3. Do you favor using pretrial risk assessment? Will you recommend pretrial supervision?
I do favor pre-trial risk assessment. It can be a valuable tool in determining the needs of victims and defendants. Pre-trial detention can protect victims, but can also cause a defendant to lose their job, their home, and access to valuable resources.
In my private practice, I have had defendants placed on pre-trial supervision and support this in appropriate situations. It has been very successful in keeping victims protected, while helping my clients stay employed and continue to support their families. When prosecuting a case, the safety of the victim and community are paramount. However, a defendant losing their job and not being able to support their family does not benefit the community. A balance must be stricken on a case by case basis.
4. Would you work to expand criminal diversions in which willing victims and offenders are offered mediation?
There are many situations where criminal diversion and mediation would be appropriate. A major component of any prosecution is to make sure that you are addressing the needs of the victims while still addressing punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation. Mediation can give a victim the opportunity to address a defendant and explain the impact on them. Additionally, diversion programs can be effective in offering defendants an opportunity to avoid criminal convictions while learning a valuable lesson. For example, community service can be educational and rewarding and introduce a defendant to contacts in the community, and in some circumstances potential employers. Helping a defendant feel like a part of the community and showing them support can assist in encouraging them not to re-offend. Diversion programs can also be used to provide mental health treatment, addiction treatment, and other support that cannot be offered in jail/prison.
5. Would you support reentry programs to improve employment opportunities for inmates returning from state prison sentences?
Reentry programs have been shown to be invaluable in helping inmates be successful in returning to the community. Inmates leaving state prisons need support in finding housing, employment, and other resources that foster success. Without a program, they enter the community with a criminal conviction and no way to navigate their new situation.
6. Would you support mental health screening and treatment of pretrial detainees?
Mental health screening can be appropriate when indicated. In any situation where mental health is a contributing factor, a screening can be vital in identifying the issue and beginning the process of addressing it. Many citizens have no access to mental health treatment and as a result issues go undiagnosed. If a defendant’s conduct is driven by an underlying mental health concern it is a disservice to the defendant, the community, and the courts when it continues to be ignored. Failing to address mental health issues can result in an individual re-offending and potentially harming others.
