KELOLAND.com Search   Advanced Search.RSS Story Links
Online Opinion Poll
Online Opinion is your chance to tell Keloland what you think.
Remember - our on-air polls are scientific. Online Opinion is not. It's simply an easy way to speak your mind.

As of today, 574 questions have been posted and 1,066,602 votes have been cast. Click Here to view the Online Opinion archives.


Apr 29, 2008
Hildygate returns. So does the issue of reforming SD's restitution system
Posted by: Pat Powers - 04/29/2008 3:59 PM (Personal Rights)


From KELO:


A man fired last summer from his job at a Sioux Falls company now faces felony grand theft charges involving $200,000 in losses.

It's alleged that 37-year-old Chad Schuldt overpaid himself, misused a company credit card and racked up federal tax penalties while working for Hildebrand Tewes Consulting firm.

Yes, I know Hildebrand is the victim in this, and he has my sympathy, as I’ve noted when this came up a year or so ago that my family went through this same crap. It just seems like this process has drug out for quite a while. And it seems to be finally coming to a head at an inopportune time, when the Obama Express is going to hit SD.

What can I tell Steve? Don’t look for your money back anytime soon. If Chad (AKA, the Clean Cut Kid, AKA CCK) goes to Jail in South Dakota, the Department of Corrections will be in charge of restitution. My family? We’re getting it back $250 a month at a time. At least some months.

The last I’d left it when I got on this crusade that the restitution system needed to be reformed, The Executive Branch of Government spoke with me, and seemed genuinely interested in a solution back in December. And that’s about the last I heard of it.

5 months later, I know I can’t do anything for my own family. I know I can’t do anything for the young girl here in Brookings who was left with a couple hundred thousand in counseling bills that her criminal was supposed to pay restitution for. I know I can’t do anything for the dozens of others to this point. But victims being re-victimized by the system cannot be allowed to continue.

This cannot be allowed to continue. If I have anything to say about it, it won’t. Maybe we can help out a few others from being stuck in this boat. Even Hildy.

And you never know. I just might.

Yes, yes, I know I've got the naysayers asking me about how they're revictimized. I know they're asking me how to get blood out of a turnip.

Believe me, I am painfully aware that you can’t get blood out of a turnip. But once you set an order for restitution to an agreed amount, no matter how ridiculously low it is, should that order not be enforced?

In my dad’s case, his thief is paying it back $250 a month. Fine. OK. We can live with that. But, until I really, really got on DOC’s rear, we’d go a couple of months or more, and there would be no payment - and then we’d be the ones who’d have to keep track.

ONLY after we raised holy heck, and I started a somewhat public crusade on it last year did DOC get on her tail. Why? They had no idea she wasn’t fulfilling the requirements they ordered, and THEY were responsible for her parole supervision. Should not those involved in the supervision of criminals agree on a basic principle that parole supervision also includes making sure the restitution obligation is honored?

We found out when the clerk of courts would get on their little computer (tap, tap tap), and tell us when and how much she paid. We'd call the parole officer, and (tap, tap tap), the parole officer would do the same as well. Can’t they program a flag into the same system that tells them when someone paid that someone DIDN’T pay during a 30 day period?

In the case of the little girl molested by her Martial arts instructor, it is in question whether or not DOC knew the bills out there for counseling - which under order of the judge the perpetrator of this crime was responsible for paying - were unpaid.

They let him off of parole, found out the bills weren’t paid, and then everyone discovered there was no way to hold his feet to the fire as part of his sentence, despite the order of the judge. Why? Because he had been discharged from parole. It went all the way to the supreme court, and they affirmed that they wished it wasn’t so, but under state law, their hands were tied.

Judges have and use the hammers they have available for restitution. They exercise creativity and thinking outside the box because they typically have the victim in front of them when they make the decision. The problem is DOC does not. It’s run them through, get some basic needs met, and run them out. Oh, was there a victim involved? Sorry about that. Hope they paid you something.

Paying your debt to society cannot simply involve time. There must be a good faith effort to make the victim whole, and that component is woefully ignored under the current system. And I simply think it should be fixed for the next poor souls who come along.

THAT’s what I’m talking about.

 

Comments

There are no comments at this time.

Post a Comment
Name

Email

Remember my information?
Yes No

Subscribe to this comment thread?
Yes No
Comments



Enter the word in the image for verification.

 

Web Site Design and Custom Programming By: Lawrence & Schiller© 2010 KELO-TV -- KELOLAND.COM -- ALL RIGHTS RESERVED