Ban Deferred Adjudication

Deferred adjudication was created in the hopes that it would give first-time offenders a second chance to straighten up and fly right. The way it was supposed to work was that a first time offender would have his record wiped clean if he successfully completed a probationary sentence meted out by the judge. I can't find figures for lives that have been turned around by the program, probably because there are none. Instead, deferred adjudication is being used by serial criminals to continually wipe clean their records.

Nine years ago, Robert Grove, a tour operator, was ordered to pay $2.8 million to the people he had cheated. He would collect the money for a tour, then for some reason the tour would never happen. He was also ordered to accept no more travel business until the debt had been repaid. Neither happened. He was arrested last year and charged with stealing an additional $100,000. He was sentenced to 10 years of deferred adjudication. He has been ordered to pay another $450,000 which included $375,000 in restitution. It's doubtful that any of that money will be repaid -- he's filed for bankruptcy three times since 1990. When asked for an explanation, Grove told the judge that he didn't collect enough money for the tours, so he used the money from one group to pay for the tours taken by other groups -- a Ponzi scheme.

His lawyer says in his defense, "It's not like he was buying fancy cars and boats and houses." I suppose it makes no difference to the people who lost that money whether he bought a mansion or donated it to charity -- their bottom line remains the same. They were cheated out of thousands of dollars. And adding insult to injury, not only will they probably never see a penny of their money, but the man who cheated them will probably never spend a day in jail. And his theft may not even appear on his record. And that is why deferred adjudication needs to banned.

"A 'big theft' but no time." The Dallas Morning News; March 20, 2012, p. 1A.