Candidate name: Peter Bevere
County: Addison
Campaign mailing address, email, and phone:
PO Box 939, Middlebury, VT 05753
(802) 989-8839
CRIMINAL JUSTICE PERSPECTIVE AND PRIORITIES
1. Do you believe that Vermont should reduce its current incarceration rate? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and describe what role, if any, State’s Attorneys play in determining how many people are incarcerated or under some form of criminal justice supervision in this state?
I believe that Vermont’s incarceration rate should only be as high as necessary to ensure the safety of victims of crime and of the community from those individuals who pose the greatest risk of harm to the physical safety of our residents and their property. To call for a blanket reduction in the prison population is an oversimplification of the issue.
2. If elected, would you commit to implementing policies and practices that will reduce your county’s incarcerated population by a specific percentage by the end of your term? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation. If “Yes,” please identify your goal and what specific combination of reforms you anticipate will achieve this goal.
No. If elected, I will continue to utilize the resources already in place, such as diversion, community service and treatment programs, to reduce the incarceration rate when it is appropriate. I will also work with our community partners, our legislators and the Department of Corrections to develop programs to address drug addiction and mental health issues. It would, however, be irresponsible for a prosecutor to agree to reduce a prison population by a specific percentage. As prosecutors, we must continue to evaluate each case based on the nature and circumstances of the case, the safety of victims and the community, the defendant’s past history and the rehabilitative needs of the defendant.
3. In past legislative sessions, Vermont’s Department of State’s Attorneys and Sheriffs has opposed criminal justice reform measures in the legislature while supporting tougher criminal penalties. Will you commit to speaking out in support of legislation to reduce incarceration, even if it means taking positions that are counter to the Department’s? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
As State’s Attorney I will evaluate any legislation based upon what I believe is best for the residents of Addison County, and I intend to speak out either for or against an issue.
FAIRNESS IN CHARGING, BAIL, PLEAS, AND SENTENCING
4. Do you support a policy to reduce the use of money bail as a condition of pretrial release to ensure that no one is incarcerated solely on the basis of their inability to pay? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
There is already a system in place to ensure that no one is incarcerated solely on the basis of his/her inability to post bail. Additionally, a defendant who cannot post bail may appeal any bail decision. As State’s Attorney, I will continue to evaluate each case and request bail when I believe it is appropriate to ensure a defendant’s appearance in court.
5. Would you commit to developing and implementing written guidelines for charging and plea bargain practices to ensure prosecutors do not overcharge or unfairly pressure defendants into pleas? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
No. This question unfairly assumes that prosecutors overcharge their cases and pressure defendants into pleas. The question also ignores the role of the defense attorney and the judge in the criminal justice process. As State’s Attorney, I will continue to make charging decisions and plea decisions based upon the circumstances of each individual case and the principals of fairness and justice.
6. Do you support increasing reliance on Vermont’s restorative justice system? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation and if you answer yes, please say what would you do to increase participation in that system for the benefit of victims and survivors as well as offenders.
Yes, I believe restorative justice programs serve a vital role in our criminal justice system. I will utilize them when the facts and circumstances of a case are appropriate for referral. This must include an expectation that the offender will participate and comply with the program and its use will not jeopardize the safety of victims and our community.
7. In assessing sentencing options, would you consider alternatives to the Field Supervision Unit (F.S.U.) form of post-release supervision that do more to reduce re-incarceration rates for technical violations? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
The Field Supervision Unit is a program that allows an offender to serve his/her sentence in the community. The program allows for a heightened level of supervision of an offender to ensure the safety of victims and the protection of our communities. The Program is designed to help an offender successfully reintegrate into the community. I believe it is an important program for the Department of Corrections, and I am not aware of any inappropriate re-incarcerations for technical violations.
ADDRESSING RACISM IN VERMONT’S CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
8. Do you believe prosecutorial practices contribute to racial disparities in Vermont’s criminal justice system, including disparities in charging decisions, bail recommendations, diversionary program placements, and plea bargains? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation, and if you answer yes, what if anything would you do to address those disparities?
No. I believe that as prosecutors we are guided by the principals of fairness and equal justice for all. As such, our decision making must be free of bias and discriminatory motivation. If elected, I will continue to maintain these principals.
9. Will you commit to collecting and making publicly available relevant data and statistical information on bail and charging decisions, pleas, convictions, and placements in diversion programs, while accounting for race, gender, disability, and other characteristics? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation or other measures you would implement to promote transparency in your office.
I believe this question is best suited for the Department of State’s Attorney’s and Sheriffs because it is better suited to collect such data effectively and efficiently. As prosecutors, an information (with the charges we file) and affidavit of probable cause (the facts to support the charges) are part of the public record. Our requests for bail are made in open court and sentencing recommendations are placed on the record in open court. As such, there is tremendous transparency in what we do. I will continue to support this transparency.
10. Would you decline to file charges where evidence indicates that a police officer engaged in racial profiling or other racial bias? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
Yes, absent independent evidence to support the case. Racial profiling or any other form of discriminatory conduct is an abuse of power and the civil rights of an individual. This has no place in our criminal justice system.
PUBLIC HEALTH APPROACHES TO ADDICTION
11. Do you support a public health-centered approach to substance use and addiction that emphasizes decriminalization and harm reduction, increases access to treatment, and does not involve prosecution for drug possession? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation, and if you answer yes, what specific strategies would you support, both inside and outside the criminal justice system, to implement that approach?
I support finding ways to provide individuals with substance abuse issues access to treatment and, when appropriate, with an opportunity to have the charges dismissed. We already do this with diversion, Tamarack, deferred sentences and Treatment Court. I will continue to support these programs when the facts and circumstances of the case warrant it. My support is based upon the offender’s participation and compliance with the program and that the safety of victims and the community is not jeopardized.
12. Do you know how many people prosecuted in your county are currently incarcerated post-conviction for an offense in which addiction was the driving factor? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
No, nor do I believe there is an accurate means to collect such data at this time.
TREATMENT FOR PEOPLE WITH MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES
13. Would you commit to enacting policies to divert defendants with mental health issues away from the criminal justice system and into treatment and support services in the community? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
I believe that individuals with mental health issues -- both defendants and victims – are severely under-represented in our criminal justice system. I support diverting mental health cases from our criminal justice system when the facts and circumstances of the case warrant it and when we are able to assure the safety of victims and the protection of our community.
14. Do you know how many people prosecuted in your county and currently in DOC custody have a mental health issue, including but not limited to a serious mental illness or other mental health condition? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
I do not, as I do not believe there is currently a system in place to track this information.
HOLDING LAW ENFORCEMENT ACCOUNTABLE
15. Would you commit to assigning special prosecutors authorized to investigate and prosecute officer-involved shootings and other use-of-force cases, and cases of police misconduct? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
No, I believe the current system that calls for an independent review by both the State’s Attorney’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office is fair and effective.
16. Do you support a policy requiring a criminal conviction before forfeiting property, including for third parties’, and regular reporting on all civil assets seized by law enforcement, including how seized assets were spent or used? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
Vermont law already requires a criminal conviction. I have rarely, if ever, seen civil forfeiture utilized.
MINIMIZING COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES OF INCARCERATION
17. People with a criminal conviction can face long-term barriers to housing and employment among other collateral consequences as a result of having a criminal record. Would you commit to implementing policies to mitigate collateral consequences? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
Yes. I fully appreciate the collateral consequences that come with a criminal conviction, and I would support expungement in appropriate circumstances.
18. Would you commit to requiring prosecutors to consider the potential collateral consequences to children and families in making prosecutorial decisions—especially the decision to seek a prison sentence for a parent or a minor—and to use their discretion to avoid adverse consequences for children and families whenever appropriate? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
As a prosecutor, I fully appreciate the collateral consequences to children and families associated with a criminal prosecution, especially those consequences related to the health and safety of men, women and children who are the victims of crimes. I will always take these factors into consideration when determining how best to handle a case.
19. Would you commit to implementing guidelines for prosecutors to consider immigration-related consequences of prosecutorial decisions and to use their discretion to avoid adverse immigration-related consequences for noncitizens whenever appropriate? Please give a clear “Yes” or “No” and any explanation.
I would not agree to implement formal guidelines. As State’s Attorney, my staff and I will be aware of the potential impact our decisions can have on non-citizens. My staff will evaluate each case and make appropriate sentencing recommendations based upon the need to protect victims of crime and the residents of Addison County, regardless of the immigration status of an offender.
20. Vermont's Fair and Impartial Policing Policy prevents law enforcement agencies from contacting federal immigration authorities except in limited circumstances, though under statute these policies do not extend to the State’s Attorneys’ offices. Will you commit to limiting communication between your office and federal immigration authorities to instances where your office is presented with a criminal warrant or subpoena?
Immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the federal government. As State’s Attorney, I will comply with any applicable federal and state laws, including Vermont’s Fair and Impartial Policing Policy.
