It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by NuclearPaul
What is the standard procedure for this? I mean, If someone spends time in jail and has $50 saved when they are released, are they allowed to keep it?
If so, this is just greed. The only reason they want to keep the money themselves is because they saw all those zeros. Standard procedure should apply here. Otherwise they will end up wanting your tax return too if its attractive enough.
Originally posted by StigShen
reply to post by searching4truth
Reading your OP article more closely, it does indeed state that under Illinois law private bank account funds are forfeit in order to pay for their prison stay.
I say we stop paying taxes to support prisons then. Hey, they can battle it out in civil court with the inmates to recover the costs. Not the taxpayers problem anymore.
Do the taxpayers subsidize me if I lose my leg in a drunk-driving accident? Do they "cover" the settlement/award until the defendant comes up with the cash?
Two out of three appellate judges ruled in favor of the Corrections Department in June. The dissenter, Judge Tom Lytton, said there is a conflict in state law governing collections proceedings against prisoners. If a prisoner's only asset is wages earned behind bars, then the state is limited to the 3 percent deduction, Lytton said.
Originally posted by StigShen
reply to post by searching4truth
The way I see it, if they can sue you in civil court for wage earnings, then the state is obligated to pay you the Federal minimum wage.
OR
Make it cleat that this is mandatory labor without pay, which is legal under non-ratified Constitutional amendments.