It was less than a month ago that we noted the inherent racism of The Philadelphia Inquirer and it’s oh so #woke^[1]From Wikipedia: Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from … Continue reading publisher Elizabeth Hughes. Miss Hughes’ call was for the Inquirer to become “an anti-racist news organization,” but in the process of doing so, she and her editorial team have instead converted a once-great newspaper into one in which virtually every story is run through the lens of racial consideration. There’s a reason I sometimes refer to it as The Philadelphia Enquirer!^[2]RedState writer Mike Miller called it the Enquirer, probably by mistake, so I didn’t originate it, but I thought it very apt.

There were two more homicides in the City of Brotherly Love yesterday, bringing the total to 247, in 165 days. That works out to 1.497 per day, putting Philly on pace for 546 murders in 2021, a number which would shatter, destroy, stomp into the mud the record of 500 set in 1990, and last year’s second place 499.

While the Inquirer continues to pay scant attention to homicides in Philadelphia, unless the victim is an innocent, a ‘somebody,’ or a cute little white girl, it did pay attention to the senseless murder of Christine Lugo. I noted my guess that, when Miss Lugo’s killer was finally identified, we’d find out that he has a long rap sheet, and that, had he been treated seriously by the law enforcement in the past, could and should have been behind bars at 5:51 AM last Saturday morning. Well, we did find out, and, if the suspect in the case, Keith Gibbson, actually is Miss Lugo’s killer, he was allowed to plead down from a murder charge, one which, if convicted of it, would have had him behind bars in Delaware on the morning he (allegedly) shot Miss Lugo in the head. Several other people would be alive today had he not been treated so leniently.

And so we come to this, the lead editorial in the Inquirer on Flag day, and Donald Trump’s 75^th birthday:

Is probation the key to gun violence prevention? Not the way Philly is trying.

For many, probation is a trap — not a path out of violence.

By The Editorial Board | June 14, 2021

In April, Philadelphia’s Office of Violence Prevention (OVP) released an update to the “Roadmap to Safer Communities,” the city’s anti-violence framework. One word was missing from the update: probation. The omission is peculiar because, in the mayor’s proposed budget, nearly a quarter of the OVP’s $12.5 million is earmarked for probation.

For decades, studies have shown that many of the people who are most likely to kill or be killed are already involved in the criminal justice system. If some of the people most at risk already check in with a probation officer, why not leverage that opportunity to also offer services in the hope of reducing gun violence?

You can see where this is going, right? The Editorial Board want to make probation easier, to make it softer, to replace law enforcement with social workers!

That was the logic behind the Youth Violence Reduction Partnership (YVRP).

Philadelphia launched YVRP in 1999. Almost exclusively Black teens and young men, who have been identified by either juvenile or adult probation officers or algorithms, would receive both closer supervision (such as home visits) and first dibs on services (such as help finding a job) with the goal of keeping them alive. A key element of the program was the utilization of street workers — not probation officers — to engage youth.

Between 1999 to 2020, YVRP served more than 9,000 individuals ages 14 to 26. Fewer than 2% were involved in gun violence. If those are the individuals most at risk, that seems like a success.

Somehow, the Editorial Board never gives consideration to the opposite solution: instead of letting the bad guys stay out on the streets, how about locking them up, where they can’t hurt the public? Had Miss Lugo’s (alleged) killer been locked up for the fifteen year minimum a murder charge in Delaware would have gotten him, he was instead allowed to plead down, spent just eight years in the slammer, and had continual probation violations after he was released. The Editorial Board know that, or at least they should if they read their own newspaper, but they are suggesting easier, not harsher treatment of criminals.

For many people, probation becomes a trap. What was supposed to be a lenient alternative to incarceration can become a life sentence due to technical violations and unreasonable expectations.

Unreasonable expectations, such as obeying the law? The linked story complains that people on probation are remaining “under court control for years after being convicted of low-level crimes, resentenced two, three, four, or five times over for infractions including missing appointments, falling behind on payments, or testing positive for marijuana.” Uhhh, missing appointments with a probation officer? Keeping those appointments is far less onerous than being in jail, but is a condition for not being locked up. Making payments? These things are required, as part of the probationary sentence? And testing positive for marijuana? That means those people have broken the law in buying and possessing and using pot. Should we somehow excuse people already being treated leniently for past violations of the law for breaking the law again?

As we noted in the beginning, the Inquirer under Miss Hughes now views everything through the prism of race. “Almost exclusively Black teens and young men, who have been identified by either juvenile or adult probation officers or algorithms,” the Editorial Board noted, as though the vast majority of the 247 dead bodies on the city’s streets this year were not black, and their killers, when known, were also black, is somehow a meaningless statistic.

This is what real journalists, rather than the journolists^[3]The spelling ‘journolist’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term … Continue reading on the Inquirer’s staff, ought to investigate: just how many murders in foul, fetid, fuming, foggy, filthy Philadelphia^[4]The formulation “foul, fetid, fuming, foggy, filthy Philadelphia” comes from the song Piddle, Twiddle and Resolve from the musical 1776. would have been prevented had the killers been sentenced harshly for previous crimes and still been in jail when they committed the murder?

That would be reporting, that would be investigative journalism, but that would also be far, far, far outside of the mission Miss Hughes has set for The Philadelphia Inquirer.