Osler's Razor

According to the Houston Chronicle, Harris (Houston), Dallas, and Travis counties are no longer prosecuting cases involving less than a tenth of a gram of narcotics. Also according to that article, those cases make up between 1/4 and 1/3 of all drug cases. That keeps a lot of people out of jail.
 

Side note: I voted for Berman's blog to be one of the best "blawg" (that is a terrible term) sites in this month's ABA magazine. I wrote them a sharply worded e-mail for not including yours, but seeing as how they don't care about me or my relentless e-mail campaign to include better articles, I wouldn't hold my breath.

As for your question, I think the early-morning Anon may be more correct than s/he knows. Not prosecuting drug cases doesn't keep people out of jail, really, because most drug cases don't wind up in jail time unless it is a large amount, a habitual offender, or you catch the judge on a grumpy day.

I think incarceration rates are the wrong metric for measuring crime, at least not without better data for whether prosecutions were dismissed through PTD-like programs, probation, community supervision, deferrals, etc.

The lower number of executions I would attribute toward society gradually moving away from the view of the death penalty as something commonly used in capital cases.

The decrease in some types of crime is more difficult to explain. I am skeptical of the claim in the article that greater access to technology has allowed police to respond faster. That implies that crime is ongoing, our response is simply better. An actual decrease in crime means less people are committing major crimes, even during a period when traditional criminology (and even critical criminology!) tell us it should go up.

I think the real answer is more sociological than I am qualified to analyze, really. 2009 has been a strange year in many respects, and from a sociological standpoint, we'll need more time to really analyze the ways in which our society has changed this year.

Also, for anyone looking for an example of what a real crazy commentor looks like, check out Supremacy Claus at the Sentencing Law blog. Then read his. You'll all appreciate my particular brand of verbiose ranting even more. Yowza.
 

One Word Professor can explain all this: Batman
 

quick notes from the trenches:

Since Texas has a life without parole option, juries have been heavily trending towards that option. here in Dallas however, we've had some really bad guys get sentenced to death the last couple of year, and deservedly so based on the crimes they committed.

After the crime lab scandal in Houston, it will take a while for Harris County to get back up to speed with their death penalties. I think they aren't even back to half of their pre-scandal days.

Ironically, (in my opinion) death sentences in California keep going up each year. Though, effectively their death row is shut down due to legal challenges and is currently twice the size of Texas'. Prosecutors there say it's possibly due to jurors being "fed up" and some say it's just based on sheer numbers and the heinous nature of recent crimes.

Reporting and pre-trial diversion programs from the police and DA's offices around the country have contributed to the crime rates.
For instance, if you use case filings as a measure you will have less crime in Dallas County the last couple of years because we now do not accept many misdemeanor filings when arising out of felony charges. (For instance: We won't accept a marijuana charge for the joint found on an arrested burglary suspect)

Also, Dallas Police have been in hot water for their reporting practices and the classification of crimes.

As for incarceration, in Texas we can point to an increase in funding for drug rehab facilities, meaning more beds. Which means the guy on felony probation will more likely be sent there rather than be revoked and sent to prison for his 6th positive UA.

All adds up to "less crime!"
 

That was me by the way.
 

One explanation for the FBI statistics may be a long-time problem that is accentuated the weak economy. THe FBI stats in the Uniform Crime Report have always been open to criticism because the results rely upon the local and state law enforcement agencies for reporting. This has always proved difficult for mid-sized and smaller cities that lack the budget to employ someone to manage the stats in a reportable format. With the current crunch of the weakened economy, the reporting may be at an all-time low.

I HOPE that there is a trend towards less crime, but it is hard to draw a conclusion from a one year trend found in a system that was already easily criticized for lack of reporting. Hopefully, the large cities have demonstrated such a trend and have also maintained their previous levels of reporting.
 

At least in our county, the law enforcement agencies are shorter staffed, including police departments and the county attorney's office. As a result, primarily of a short staff of prosecutors, we see more cases being declined for prosecution, more cases being resolved as misdemeanors at the preliminary hearing level, and more offers for probation in felony courts to move cases quickly.

I'm not so sure that people are committing less crime here, but the amount of prosecution has decreased.