One of the best things that ever happened to Noah Schultz was being treated like an adult when he was 17 years old.
He was dealing drugs – had been since he was 12 – when he pistol-whipped another drug dealer in Portland, Ore.
It was April 2009, and Schultz wasn’t much concerned about the consequences. He was spending his time on the streets – not in school. His parents had their own problems, and he relied on a gang for support.
Schultz knew nothing about a law called Measure 11 – until he found himself charged with attempted murder. About three years after he was born, Oregon voters passed Measure 11 to require minimum-mandatory sentences for certain violent crimes. It also required youths 15 and older to be tried as adults for these violent crimes.
Pistol-whipping someone is violent. Schultz was sentenced to 7.5 years in the Oregon Youth Authority, most of it spent at MacLaren Correctional Facility.
By the time he got out in 2016 he had graduated high school, earned an associate’s degree from Lane Community College and two bachelor’s degrees from Oregon State University in human development and sustainability. He’s a youth counselor now and a partner in a Portland clothing company. Sounds like he’s doing pretty good, better than some young men who have never been incarcerated.
Except Schultz, now 26, has been adopted by a brand new gang – criminal justice reformers who want to overturn Measure 11. They don’t think juveniles who commit violent crimes should be tried as adults.
Schultz has been making the rounds of media interviews, the school lecture circuit, a TEDx talk and pitching a documentary that was made about him called “Perception: From Prison to Purpose.”
More significantly, he appeared earlier this month before Oregon’s Senate Judiciary Committee to testify in favor of changing Measure 11.
“When a young person goes into facilities and are given such a large amount of time . . . it’s like a cold shower,” Schultz told the committee.
Well, yes. That’s the point. A cold shower can get a young man’s attention in a way that a nanny lecture about consequences can’t.
Schultz has a good story to tell, but he is being used by people like Bobbin Singh of the neutral-sounding Oregon Justice Resource Center, which is anything but neutral. The organization promotes changes in laws that benefit criminal offenders.
Singh recently appeared on Oregon Public Broadcasting’s radio show “Think Out Loud” with another young man to push for overturning Measure 11. (That young man had severely beat an elderly woman.)
When Schultz testified at Senate Judiciary, Singh sat next to him.
“Due to developments in brain science, the state of Oregon should re-evaluate how and why we incarcerate our children, who are some of our most vulnerable…,” Singh said.
Dr. Alisha Moreland-Capuia, a psychiatrist at Oregon Health and Science University, gave a quick lesson in the latest brain science.
“Each of us was born with a proclivity for survival…,” she said. “When sperm meets egg, that’s when brain development starts.”
The development starts at the bottom of the brain and works its way to the top – the cortex – where it doesn’t stop developing until about age 26. Until the cortex is fully developed, the bottom of the brain can take over, leading humans to act instead of thinking first (presumably doing things like pistol-whipping somebody who’s cheated you on a drug deal).
The problem, as described by Moreland-Capuia, is that there are multiple things that can disrupt the brain development process: poverty, trauma, hunger, insults, psycho-social stressors, anything that interferes with having basic needs met.
She compared these disrupters to Freddy Krueger, the scary killer featured in the movie “A Nightmare on Elm Street” and subsequent film, television and video game sequels. In Moreland-Capuia’s scenario, young folks who find themselves involved in the criminal justice system have been chased by Freddy Kruegers in the form of various traumas and deprivation. It has interfered with their brain development.
“An 18-year-old may look like an 18-year-old, but the brain may not catch up…,” she said. “Is it humane to charge someone in this system when their brain is literally not developed to that point? They may not have an 18-year-old brain.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee listened politely. Sen. Dennis Linthicum (R-Klamath Falls) ventured to wrap his head around what it all meant.
“We’ve created an environment where we somewhat eliminate individual freedom and responsibility…,” he said. “How do we come to grips that individuals have responsibility?”
Moreland-Capuia said the old way of doing things is not going to lead to “opportunities for grace and healing and a future. … We need to extend this whole thing to 25.”
She added that some psychologists believe emerging adulthood extends until 40.
“Honestly … it breaks down on gender lines, but I don’t want to start a fight,” she joked.
What Moreland-Capuia and the other criminal justice reformers don’t appreciate is that the reason voters overwhelmingly supported Measure 11 is that they were being chased by the Freddy Kruegers, too – the Freddy Kruegers who were getting off with light sentences even though they committed violent crimes.
The reformers are now trying a new approach: using science as a weapon to change the law. Disagree with them, and you risk being called anti-science.
I’ll take that risk. Science is forever evolving. Because some scientists want to extend adolescence to the mid-20s and beyond doesn’t mean we all have to go along.
Society has a right to establish laws that restrict certain behavior. If someone’s undeveloped cortex prevents him from behaving in a nonviolent manner, then for the common good he can await adulthood in a controlled environment.
In some of his public pronouncements, Schultz calls himself a “school-to-prison pipeline victim,” which makes no sense. He is not the victim.
Prison helped Schultz change his life for the better. Without Measure 11, where would he be today – a Freddy Krueger pushing drugs, stealing, assaulting? How many children would he have created to be raised by the state Department of Human Services?
During an appearance on KGW-TV where Schultz was featured giving a school talk to teenagers, one of the news hosts noted how the kids treated him like a “rock star.” He is charismatic and in a position to influence others.
Too bad Schultz complains about having to bear the label “felon” and how much harder it is for felons to find a job or housing. It’s a tiresome complaint considering how tough life can be for non-felons.
Schultz may not know it, but the judge who sentenced him in 2009 was himself a felon. Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge Kenneth R. Walker was sent to prison for committing property crimes when he was 18. It’s a fact he doesn’t hide.
He committed his offenses years before Measure 11, back when crimes like burglary and car theft could land someone in prison for at least a brief stay.
Today it takes many burglary convictions to finally earn a spot in prison, and car thieves are prolific in Portland.
If Walker were 18 today and committing property crimes, who knows how long before anyone would stop him.
– Pamela Fitzsimmons
Related:
I’m retired and things change I know. I guess the concepts of reward and punishment have gone out the window. From my experience they worked, admittedly by the time I was winding down my career it was changing. Behavior that wasn’t tolerated at the start of my career was allowed towards the end.I say something on with another comment about the shooter in Florida.
I’m happy for Noah. I can’t help but feel he was rewarded. I know good kids who didn’t get rewarded.
What’s to say? You make the family unit an enemy of society and decry Christianity as a contemptible superstition and an ongoing hate crime . . . well.
Amy Wax on the loss of bourgeois values:
The causes of these phenomena [societal collapse] are multiple and complex, but implicated in these and other maladies is the breakdown of the country’s bourgeois culture…. The loss of bourgeois habits seriously impeded the progress of disadvantaged groups. That trend also accelerated the destructive consequences of the growing welfare state, which, by taking over financial support of families, reduced the need for two parents. A strong pro-marriage norm might have blunted this effect. Instead, the number of single parents grew astronomically, producing children more prone to academic failure, addiction, idleness, crime, and poverty.
All cultures are not equal. Or at least they are not equal in preparing people to be productive in an advanced economy. The culture of the Plains Indians was designed for nomadic hunters, but is not suited to a First World, 21st-century environment. Nor are the single-parent, antisocial habits, prevalent among some working-class whites; the anti-“acting white” rap culture of inner-city blacks; the anti-assimilation ideas gaining ground among some Hispanic immigrants. These cultural orientations are not only incompatible with what an advanced free-market economy and a viable democracy require, they are also destructive of a sense of solidarity and reciprocity among Americans. If the bourgeois cultural script — which the upper-middle class still largely observes but now hesitates to preach — cannot be widely reinstated, things are likely to get worse for us all.
Ms Wax is, of course, under attack as a hater of the first water. Or, should that be last water?
The scientific addressment of human conduct is inhumane to the max.
Thanks for the excerpt from Amy Wax. The upper-middle class most likely to observe “the bourgeois cultural script” is also those who are most inclined to publicly criticize it — or at least, as Wax says, refuse to preach it.
That will change only when the upper-middle class finds itself no longer in secure neighborhoods. You see it happening in some of Portland’s nicer neighborhoods, places like Sellwood and Laurelhurst where “Love Wins” signs are so popular. Yet these good people do not want homeless camps (or renters!) anywhere near them.
“The anti-assimilation ideas gaining ground among some Hispanic immigrants” is too bad. When I worked in Southern California, I found the family unit to be traditionally important among Hispanics. That is something that could bolster American culture — but not if we’re going to be divided into groups.
The Democratic party, in particular, still insists on pushing identity politics. I slogged through Hillary Clinton’s “What Happened,” and at one point, while sucking up to Black Lives Matter activists, she calls herself a “sinner” for having supported the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. This was her husband’s crime bill. Her husband was probably the best Democratic president in my lifetime, but Hillary disowns his legacy.
Two-hundred pages later, she complains about voters who “were worried about people of color — especially blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims — threatening their way of life.”
In her world, only white right-wingers care about crime and social disintegration.
You don’t have an editing function so I can’t fix my badly worded previous comment! I meant to say that I also posted a comment on your earlier essay about the Florida shooting. Too bad Nikolas Cruz didn’t receive a serious timeout when he was younger.
I found the piece Larry’s talking about. Excellent!
http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/commentary/paying-the-price-for-breakdown-of-the-countrys-bourgeois-culture-20170809.html
Your meaning came through fine. And thank you for the link to Ms. Wax’s op-ed. It’s a nice antidote to a ridiculous story I read yesterday in The Oregonian about a “Latina elected official” (that’s from the headline) who was arrested for allegedly twice boarding a MAX train without paying.
Apparently some Latinas need special care and consideration because of how they use their name, and officers need sensitivity training in how to handle these special Latinas.
I looked into the article about the “Latina elected official.”
In former times her parents would blush at having raised such a mendacious and incompetent child.
True in former times in America. In Latin America, though, even today many parents would likely be embarrassed at that behavior. But in America, especially in Portland which grovels for being the “whitest city in the U.S.,” expecting non-whites to respect the law is racist.
Whether she likes it or not, this Latina is a white chick.
I provide this link so that the we might know the evil from which our minority citizens are protected.
Prager U and other conservative/libertarian hate sites have seen some of their contents demonetized, flagged so that they could only be viewed in restricted mode, and otherwise had their content distribution impeded.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wfN_DtNtyo
Makes you glad big tech is protecting us by limiting the platforming of these fascists doesn’t it.
I wonder if Noah Schultz realizes the benefit of his incarceration. Without it the man would probably be dead or at least a regular inmate.
How could he not understand that he is where is because of his time in prison. But he seems not.
That was a nice touch about Judge Walker.
Not only does Noah Schultz not realize how lucky he is that he landed in prison, he doesn’t realize how many people on this planet would be happy to trade places with him.
So many Americans are so naive about what’s happening in this world.
Thank you for your http://www.oldtownperspective.blogspot.com, Larry.
The media could use more Old Town Perspective.
If, as the one-party invites claim, brains are not REALLY develope until 25, 26, even 40, what on earth are we doing letting these unformed lambs fly airplanes, command armed companies, or lecture America with that haughty certitude of youth about why we need to abolish the 2nd Amendment?
They want it both ways – all privileges and access for younger people, but none of the accountability.
Juveniles haven’t been going to adult prison for over 20 years..yes even at age 25, they stay in the Oregon Youth Authority.
The OREGONIAN ran a click bait story about burglary rates in Portland neighborhoods….the worst by far?
Laurelhurst.
“(T)hat haughty certitude of youth” is being encouraged by the media’s coverage. I’m not sure the protesters — certainly not all teenagers — want to abolish the 2nd Amendment. Many of these kids understand the difference between a law-abiding citizen wanting to own a hunting rifle or a handgun and a violent guy like Nikolas Cruz having access to military-grade weapons.
A 17-year-old girl who had tried to befriend Cruz wrote about her experience in a terrific op-ed for The New York Times. I think she — and many of the kids who have been protesting — would be alarmed at the testimony by the adults who appeared before Oregon’s Senate Judiciary Committee. These adults want to give the Nikolas Cruzes sympathy and multiple chances until they are 25; the kids want the adults to step in early and forcibly stop guys like Cruz.
Is this for real? Are you serious Oregon wants to treat adults like juveniles? I know they’re thinking about changing the verdict system. That’s good. This idea’s crazy, if it’s for real. Schultz’s got nothing to complain about.
It’s for real. The testimony from the Senate Judiciary Committee quoted in my essay was from what is called an “informational hearing” held at the end of the 2018 Oregon legislative session. Those who testified were all invited. Consequently, the hearing had a deliberate slant.
It’s a slant that is favored by legislators like Senate Judiciary Chair Sen. Floyd Prozanski (D-Eugene) and House Majority Leader Jennifer Williamson (D-Portland). They are among legislators who have been trying to weaken Measure 11 for years (see, for example, “Deep in the Heart of Oregon” from 2011).
This hearing could help lay the groundwork for possible future legislation. Because Measure 11 was passed by voters, though, it will take a two-thirds majority vote of legislators to overturn it. While it’s within reason that the legislature could end up with a Democratic two-thirds majority after the next election, it’s not reasonable to assume they will all line up against Measure 11.
[…] Nurturing Our Freddy Kruegers […]
[…] Nurturing Our ‘Freddy Kruegers’ […]