A second Juneau man involved in a theft of a safe from El Sombrero restaurant the morning of July 9, 2010 was sentenced in a change of plea hearing in Juneau Superior Court on Wednesday.
Samuel Clark, 21, was given a composite sentence of 28 months with 22 suspended and six to serve by Superior Court Judge Philip Pallenberg.
Clark will have to pay more than $47,000 in restitution, though he is jointly responsible for some of that amount with others. Clark will also face three years of probation.
Clark pleaded guilty through attorney Julie Willoughby to first-degree criminal trespass and third-degree theft for the burglary at El Sombrero and two counts of second-degree attempted theft involving the Aug. 16, 2010, effort to steal guns belonging to a Juneau man. A burglary charge at The Observatory bookstore on Aug. 7, 2010, was dismissed but Clark admitted to his involvement and will pay restitution. The four charges are Class ‘A’ misdemeanors and each carried a potential of up to one year in jail and a $10,000 fine.
District Attorney Dave Brower said the crimes, committed to get money for drugs, shocked the town.
“Juneau has 30,000 people,” he said. “When something like that happens it goes through the town. It is something that does not happen every day.”
He said Cary testified Clark and Lietz used the proceeds from the El Sombrero theft to buy $1,800 of oxycontin.
Willoughby said Clark had just turned 21 and his prior record included just two charges of being a minor consuming alcohol. She said Clark got into trouble while living out on his own for the first time with Lietz.
“He did have an oxy problem,” Willoughby said. “He realized that prior to ever being charged with a crime and he moved back in with his parents.
“The events do not define his character and I am going to ask the court not to let these events define his character.”
Willoughby said Clark’s goal is to become a miner. Willoughby noted the amount of restitution to be paid and asked for a suspended imposition of sentence and 1,000 hours of community work service.
“It is enough that his life will be impacted each and every day,” Willoughby said.
Patty Moser, wife of El Sombrero owner Fritz Moser, spoke as a victim. She said she blamed Clark more than the other two defendants, because of the close connection between her family and Clark’s.
“I cannot help but hold you more responsible,” she said. “You took the very security and safety that you got to grow up with and you took it away from us.”
Alexander Hoke, who owns the building that houses The Observatory bookstore, said there are human beings behind these actions. Hoke said his tenant is 80 years old and trying to make a living selling used books. She has been robbed six times in the past three months and the damage to his building escalated each time.
Clark said he sincerely apologized to all those affected by his actions and for the embarrassment and pain he caused his family.
“Again I want to say how deeply sorry I am for the pain I have caused to all,” Clark said. “I want to do whatever I can to possibly make this right. I hope the court will see that I am not a bad person, I just made bad decisions.”
Clark reports to Lemon Creek Correctional Center today. Lietz, also charged in the same indictment, is scheduled for a change of plea hearing today.
Cary was sentenced Feb. 23 to 56 months, 36 suspended and 20 to serve for his involvement in a series of forgeries, thefts and burglaries from family, friends, and local businesses, some of which are associated with Clark and Lietz.
• Contact reporter Klas Stolpe at 523-2263 or at klas.stolpe@juneauempire.com.
Comments (28)
Add commentnot just the $$$
There are other things that come into play here. I know that the loss of the $$ was bad but how about the loss of the job a person suffered as he was discharged from his job and accused of one of the thefts just as he was trying hard to get his life back on track with a disabled child an apology cannot make up for his loss of a job and the self confidence that it was bringing him. These men made their choice to use drugs and only get 6 months. This other person got off the drugs and was trying to get his life back and they took that from him and his family. How do they make restitution to this family? They are now back to square one after working hard to get back on track? Clark and Lietz want us to feel sorry as they have a drug problem. I say BS they did more then take $$ they destroyed lives
@yes but ...
Where do you get "Clark and Lietz want us to feel sorry as they have a drug problem"? I don't see anything in the story about that. When a person is trying to explain how he could go from a relatively good kid to a thief, it seems reasonable to let the court know drugs were involved. It helps the court craft a sentence and probation conditions to address the problem.
It's easy for anonymous people to say that explaining choices that lead to the crime is the same as saying "feel sorry for us". If you're mad about the crime, express that, but don't put words in their mouths.
yes but, You are absolutely
yes but,
You are absolutely correct.
"I am not a bad person, I just made bad decisions.” What a cop out. I am amused at the number of times I see this quote when people are standing in front of the judge. It would be nice if people would just man up and say, "I have been a bad person." I wonder if this fellow was having remorseful feelings before he got caught. Somehow I rather doubt it.
However, I can well imagine that some of the local bliss-ninnies will feel sorry for these poor fine young men who have been victimized by a society that unfairly prohibits drug use, making it more expensive and therefore forcing these boys to commit these crimes.
I do see one redeeming point in Mr. Clark's favor. He has a goal of becoming a miner. Being in such a profession might assist him in staying drug-free since he will be subject to urinalysis on a regular basis.
I'm a Progressive...
Who believes everyone should get a second chance. However, while these guys getting busted and sentenced and put in prison for their crime is the beginning of their so-called second chance (if they'll take it), I have come to the end of my rope with this Oxy B S, and the dealers and fools that become addicted to the garbage. What, we've got 3 or 4 separate burglaries, and the devastation caused to their victims, and these idiots are only getting 6 months? That isn't enough incentive to get someone who gone to these criminal lengths to get their Precious. I've experienced someone close to me, a decent person, descend into Oxy addiction, and become a human piece of waste - a liar and a thief, and I mean always a liar and always a thief. These idiots should have gotten at least two years for this. Maybe then they'd think twice about going back to their plate of slop, ruining their own lives, and making the lives of their victims much the worse for wear. I don't want to hear the punk addict thief telling the Court he's a good guy who made bad decisions. What he is, is a P O S until he puts his time and effort where his big mouth is and shows what a decent guy he is by turning his life around. That takes sustained action, not a bunch talk. Juneau Courts: Crack down hard on these Oxy criminal addicts, and crack down ten times harder on the dealers. - And do a lot better than what happened with the sc*mbag Oxy dealer who got a slap on the wrist - I'm sure most know who I'm referring to. Nuff sdaid. Sorry for the long post, but this Oxy problem is a scourge to our community, and we as a community, and the courts need to smack these people around good with long sentences, so that we can get a few thieving addicts attention.
Making an example of someone
Making an example of someone is not justice.
Addicts need one thing, and it's not prison: it's rehab. In prison, an addict learns how to be a REAL criminal when he/she gets out, and that is often what happens.
Persnickety Persimmon, I feel
Persnickety Persimmon,
I feel that people like you are part of the problem and not the solution.
Making an example of someone does help the problem. It deters other young people from making the same foolish errors. I know, you have your studies made by some social scientist who interviewed a bunch of criminals who said that the thought of punishment was not on their minds when they were in the process of committing their crimes. What you hero fails to do in his study is to interview all of the people who just "thought" about committing similar crimes but changed their minds when they considered the consequences.
wolfmagic2012,
You nailed it right on target. We'll both get more flack on this one as assorted bleeding-hearts log on. They'll continue to drone on until some druggie invades their world and shakes it up. Then, they'll whine and moan.
Thieves belong in prison...
The fact that they're addicts is secondary, and not an excuse for their crimes. They are being thrown in jail for burglary. When they get out, they can go to rehab. If these were just guys who got busted using, but hadn't victimized anyone, well then I'd be singing your rosy little tune Persnickety.
George Ellers, We incarcerate
George Ellers, We incarcerate a boatload of people every year in this country for drug-related charges. Has drug use declined? It has not.
We have high rates of recidivism in this country. If prison is such a deterrent, then people who have experienced it should be the least likely to commit a crime.
You can't rule people by fear. It just doesn't work. You may reject history, science, and reality all you want, but it just makes you ignorant.
@wolfmagic2012: the addiction
@wolfmagic2012: the addiction resulted in the robbery. When you put someone in prison, you're essentially just getting revenge. It doesn't teach them a lesson, it doesn't prevent them from committing future crimes, and it doesn't right the wrong that was committed. For addicts, rehab and restitution would be a more ideal form of punishment.
@George Ellers: you about nailed it, except that everyone knows prison is a possibility when one commits a crime. Making an example of a single criminal really does go against what our legal system stands for--it's not fair, and it's not justice.
Harsher penalties simply do not work. Prison has been proven again and again to not be a deterrent, and if you believe all kinds of people consider committing crimes and then think better of it because they might get in trouble--well, you must live a very sad life in thinking we're all that base, but there IS salvation in education (social bonds and actually having something to lose prevent people from committing crimes, not the threat of punishment).
Advocating for punishment without actually dealing with the motivations that led to the crime in the first place is simply a childish yearning for revenge. You can dress it up however you want, but that's what it is. It's selfish and is entirely about making YOU feel good, when it really isn't about you at all.
An addict needs...
...to hit rock bottom and truly want desperately to stop their addiction, and then follow up with treatment. Your derogatory remark is noted, however it is not a childish yearning for revenge when one is sentenced for a crime they were found guilty of. It is not mitagating in any way, as to sentence, to say, "but your Honor, he would have never done this if he weren't an addict!" The crime of burglary must be sentenced, and 6 months for the crimes they committed is a slap on the wrist. I know a number of addicts that would go cold turkey before committing burglary or stealing from others. So you see, just stopping drugs doesn't make one an honest person. In my opinion, you are very naiive Persnickety, and it shows when you attempt to pontificate.
An addict does not need to
An addict does not need to hit rock bottom... Where do you get that from? TV? I'm sure hitting rock bottom helps, and if you survive it, you likely have a large incentive to turn around, but it's not necessary, and honestly, I'd rather rescue people BEFORE they go and do terrible things.
And yes, throwing someone in prison without actually attempting to fix the person is childish revenge. Prison keeps the person out of society's hair for a little while, and that's it. Once they're released, they're worse off than when they started (who wants to hire an ex-con?)--that's no incentive to turn your life around.
Again, rehab and restitution. Let's make them get clean and do some community work (especially the kind where you have to interact with other people) under close supervision rather than just sticking them in prison and forgetting about them.
Z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z
Give it a rest dear, this one's old news.
just more junkies
being junkies and ruining our community.
Putting someone is prison
Putting someone is prison isn't about getting revenge, teaching them a "lesson", or making yourself feel better, it's about removing a threat from society for a period of time that's appropriate under the circumstances.
Having been around way more than enough drug addicts in my lifetime, there is no doubt whatsoever that the penalties need to be harsher. They are liars, thieves, can be very dangerous, and in some cases, all of the above. I have seen too many lives ruined and too many rehab failures to believe that only rehab, education, or whatever, is the answer.
Besides, you can't "rescue" people before they do terrible things, and attempting to "fix" them does not work either. Crap stinks no matter what you call it or try to cover it up with.
And making the statement that prison and harsher sentences has been proven not be a deterrent is pure fantasy. Besides, compassion or leniency to criminals is cruelty to their victims and society as a whole. Period.
Here's an idea: Suck it up, accept responsibility for your actions, and suffer the consequences for those actions.
I'm sorry, but how is
I'm sorry, but how is compassion towards a criminal cruel to the victim(s)?
Here's a quick fact for you: everyone is "dangerous." We all have the capacity for violence and criminal behavior. Should we all be locked up? No. Proactive steps should be made to reduce the future likelihood of such events. And harsher punishments do not reduce crime. You speak of my living in a fantasy land, but perhaps it is you who do.
"Our findings suggest that harsher
prison conditions do not reduce post-release criminal behavior, and may even increase it."
http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/jesse.shapiro/research/prison041607_web.pdf
Here's the thing: you guys and your revenge-fantasy world have had your way for the last few thousand years and have not solved (and have sometimes exacerbated) the problem of criminal behavior. That doesn't lend your perspective much credibility anymore, even if it does appeal to simple-minded folk who don't like shades of grey.
@ George Ellers
Looks like you nailed it about the studies.
Okay, I'm not going to call the guy derogatory names, but anyone who feels like they are entitled to rob an 80 year old woman, or a longtime family friend, should not be expecting compassion. Seems like the original story about the robbery indicated that the safe at El Sombrero contained not just business receipts, but also one of the kids college funds. What are the odds that these criminals will be able to pay restitution before the kid is due to start college.
And PP, you seem to think that incarcaration leads to recidivism. I'm pretty sure that the most of the repeat offenders, are the ones who got reduced sentences. At any rate, they were back on the street. Making someone actually serve their sentence, is not cruel and unusual punishment.
Sympathy
If these guys want sympathy they can earn it, starting with publicly naming the source of drugs that they used for each purchase that they can recall. I don't remember is not going to cut it. Go ahead guys show us just how remorseful you really are.
Rats
@ah ha, I couldn't agree with you more. The best thing they could do is rat out their sources. That damn drug has destroyed too many kids in this town and it would be nice to get the scumbags who are selling it the hell out of here.
Rats
@ah ha, I couldn't agree with you more. The best thing they could do is rat out their sources. That damn drug has destroyed too many kids in this town and it would be nice to get the scumbags who are selling it the hell out of here.
@ AH HA
Right on!!! That's a good idea.
I just had an epiphany.
I just had an epiphany. Instead of incarcerating these young misunderstood fellows, we should remand them to Persnickety Persimmon's custody so that she can employ he enlightened intellect that for surpasses the crass babblings of we of unsophisticated graces to assist them in finding the blissful enlightenment that will allow them to throw off the shackles of the evil addictions imposed on them by societies unfair pressures.
We, the great unwashed will be allowed to bear witness to this enchantress who reach into the souls of these young men and bring out the good that exists in all of them.
Then, will we who were so foolish as to recommend the horrors of the penal system for these flowers of American youth be able to fully comprehend the follies of our beliefs.
Persnickety, yes, we all have
Persnickety, yes, we all have a capacity for violence and criminal behavior. Here's a quick fact though: We don't all get locked up because we don't commit crimes.
"Proactive steps should be made to reduce the future likelihood of such events. And harsher punishments do not reduce crime. You speak of my living in a fantasy land, but perhaps it is you who do."
What proactive steps do you suggest? And we were talking about harsher sentences, not the harsher prison conditions that the study you cited is more focused on.
"Our findings suggest that harsher prison conditions do not reduce post-release criminal behavior, and may even increase it."
Yes, when it comes to more violent criminals (murderers, rapists, etc.). That's why you don't release them early, or ever.
With all due respect, your approach is the one that exacerbates the problem. Why? Because it enables, rescues, or provides excuses for poor choices. Simple minded folk, indeed.
I am sorry if I offend some
I am sorry if I offend some of you, but I hope this posting will make all of us think about humanity and forgiveness.
Life is a learning process, they are young. These individuals did some really dumb things and messed up, harming victims and our community. Which is wrong and should be held responsible for it. They didn't have to admit to the crimes, (the first defendant said they had nothing to do with it) but they did, they are taking responsibility. Locking them up and throwing away the key will do nothing for them, the victims, or the community (it will only cost all of us more in the long run). Is 26 or 6 months in jail going to change a victim's anger? Probably not, their feelings will only change through their own journey of forgiveness.
I personally believe, 6 months in jail, restitution, and probation are enough. But I am sorry to the victims that our justice system does not give you a voice in the process, leaving you feeling more victimized.
There are a lot of lessons to be learned from this, I hope these individuals, the victims, and our community can grow and be part of the healing process for all those involved.
Hold these individuals accountable for their actions, but also be there to appreciate and respect their place in our community. Allow them to earn the trust they lost, it may take years but give them that chance.
Everyone should have their time to grieve and be anger, but if you sit in that grief and anger it will ruin you and ruin our community.
I will be one to support these individuals, these victims, and our community in their paths of growth and forgiveness.
@Colorado14er: you speak of
@Colorado14er: you speak of "choices," and that leads us into some turbulent philosophical ground. All but the most rabidly single-minded among us can agree that the idea that we're all isolated, decision-making machines with the same capacity for judgment is a load of BS. There are many factors that determine who you are as a person, chief among them genes and environment, and to discount this fact in any kind of debate is dishonest.
But all this is beside the point. Here's another study having to do with length of prison sentences:
http://www.ndsn.org/jan93/longer.html
Not that I expect you to care what scientists have to say. It seems every layperson thinks they know better than pointy-headed intellectuals when talking about social issues.
Anyways, crime isn't so much about poor choices. Every action has a motivation and a form of reasoning behind it. People commit crimes because they're desperate, because they're angry, because they're impulsive, and in rare cases, because they get off on it. You are ignoring this fact and are instead just focusing on the crime itself. This all but guarantees criminals will re-offend once released, as you can't treat the crime as if it exists in a void. Poor choices are a result of every other influence in a person's life.
Colorado14er - I'm intrigued
Colorado14er - I'm intrigued by your moniker. Have you climbed any?
pp, it's just all about collectivism, isn't it? We're all in this together and we're all to blame for the ilk of society? And that line of thinking explains why our education system is trash and now the progressives have hijacked the churches and are spewing this crap.
Let's blame it on bullying...
Calypso, I have climbed quite
Calypso, I have climbed quite a few (there's 52 total), save the ones that require very technical climbing.
PP, I never said that we're all isolated, decision-making machines with the same capacity for judgement. I said that enabling, rescuing, or making excuses for people who make poor choices makes the problem worse. Just because every action has a motivation and form of reasoning behind it, and people commit crimes because they're desperate, angry, or whatever, doesn't require you to show compassion or leniency towards them.
It sends the wrong message because it does not hold them fully accountable for their actions. Regardless of environmental or social factors, when you show leniency toward a criminal, this is exactly the message you send to them, whether you realize it or not.
I also never said that there is a one-size-fits-all punishment for every criminal or that I don't care what scientists say. On this particular issue, I'm saying the penalties need to be harsher. I am speaking from extensive personal experience and from other studies I've seen suggesting the opposite of the study you cited, among other things.
So please don't assume things about me that you don't know. Making straw-man arguments doesn't help either, nor does making arrogant statements such as "it seems every layperson thinks they know better than pointy-headed intellectuals when talking about social issues." I could turn right around and say every pointy-headed intellectual thinks they know better than laypersons with real-world experience, and that history is littered with examples (on all sides of the ideological aisle) of this line of thinking resulting in disaster.
Persnickety, argue with fact.
Put simply, you defend your position with thinly veiled personal opinions, that's to say that you have little substance to your argument. You quote a short statement of a THEORY by Dr. Darrell Steffenmeier, a sociologist who studies crime, law, and the justice system. Sociology, as I'm sure your deep intellect will tell you, is the study of a society, that is, how human beings interact within a group or as a whole. As I'm sure you're also well aware, sociology is a study based on THEORIES, which, while having significant evidence, has not been proven entirely. As I'm sure your great intellect has also told you, psychoanalyst Erik Erikson has created a series of developmental steps (http://www2.honolulu.hawaii.edu/facdev/guidebk/teachtip/erikson.htm) which describes the vast number of effects that determine a person's psychological state.
That being said, the effect of jail conditions are largely debated, the effect of arrest however, is not (http://www.terry.uga.edu/~mustard/bias.pdf). As the arrest rate increases, potential criminals become less likely to commit crime. However, as the arrest rate rises, the amount of effort put into punishment of inmates decreases, due to the requirement of "splitting [the justice system's] attention". Another important part of our justice system that you seem to completely ignore is the rehabilitation facilities that are present in prisons. While inmates are imprisoned, they are not treated like animals, they are given limited rights. They can gain an education, work, and live like human beings while imprisoned. However, letting inmates off with minimal charges is, as 14er stated, "compassion or leniency to criminals is cruelty to their victims and society as a whole."
What many people who oppose prison seem ignorant to is the fact that crime is a constant. As inmates are imprisoned, the growth rate of crime still increases. Why? Because more and more children are turning to a life of crime. Why is this? Because our population is increasing. As population increases, I'm sure you're superior mind has also been informed of, the crime rate increases. However, if crime is left unpunished, that rate increases more.
Now, to address your point of rehabilitation. Rehabilitation, in and of itself, is a social disease. As the world population further seeks to place blame on others, people turn to hiding behind their own 'weaknesses'. It is disgusting to think that one would displace blame to receive shorter or less intense sentencing.
Addicts as a whole hide behind drugs to protect their weak beings. Is it not common sense that addicts exploit, cheat and lie? It is high time that we stopped treating addicts as weak human beings who need help, and time to treat them like the criminals they are.
And don't come after my intelligence, you ignorant and argumentative child, for that is a weak debate tactic.