Beginning in 2019, applicants have been granted parole at a sharply declining rate.
By Jacob Holmes Published on October 24, 2024 at 7:43 am CDT
Article can be found at: Alabama Political Reporter Lawmakers grill parole board chair over low approval rates
Leigh Gwathney, chair of the Alabama board of paroles, faced tough questions from lawmakers on the Joint Legislative Prison Oversight Committee on Tuesday over the parole board’s low rates inconsistent with its own guidelines.
Sen. Clyde Chambliss, R-Prattville, who chairs the committee, expressed frustration with Gwathney numerous times throughout the hearing Tuesday, expecting her to be able to answer questions he had presented to her in January.
“Madame chair, you said that you would answer the questions that day we sat in your office,” Chambliss asked Gwathney. “You said that, so what has been going on from the time that you said that you would answer the questions to today—disregard? How could we interpret it any other way? It has been months.”
Beginning in 2019, applicants have been granted parole at a sharply declining rate, reaching lows of just 1 to 3 percent in some months. While approval rate percentages have recently risen into the teens and low 20s, Gwathney remains one of the staunchest members of the board — lawmakers said she personally has only voted in favor of granting parole in 8 percent of cases.
The parole board’s own guidelines suggest that 70 to 80 percent of applicants that the board considers each month should be granted release. The board only conforms to its own guidelines up to about 30 percent of the time. In July of 2024, the latest available data, the board only conformed with its own guidelines in 1 out of 4 cases.
Chambliss said members met with Gwathney in January to glean information to better understand the situation and determine whether the guidelines need further revision or whether the board might require more oversight.
“The bureau is saying they meet these criteria, and almost three-quarters of the time, the board says it doesn’t matter if they meet these criteria, we are not going to parole,” Chambliss said. “It seems like one of the two needs to be adjusted to reality. And I don’t know which. I am just looking at it and trying to figure it out. You set the rules, the Board sets the rules, they are called parole guidelines. I am having a hard time understanding conformance to your own rules.”
Gwathney pleaded that she was not attempting to dodge the committee’s questions, but trying to ensure that she understood them to provide the proper answers—which only served to stoke the ire of Chambliss.
“At our meeting in January, this group asked six or seven questions,” Chambliss said. “You said you would answer those questions, your counsel wrote those questions down. I want the answer to those questions by the end of November.”
Rep. Matt Simpson, R-Daphne, argued during the hearing that the problem lies with the guidelines and not the board. He cited a number of applicants convicted of murder that came before the board that, based on the guidelines, should have been granted parole. He emphasized that one man convicted of murder in 2015 could have been let out already if the parole guidelines had been followed.
“If there is a case where someone commits a murder, and an increased risk to offend, and the guidelines still say they are supposed to get out, I want you guys to do exactly what you are doing in making sure they go through that process,” Simpson said.
He also argued that some offenders should serve out their full sentence instead of having the opportunity at parole, saying it is less about whether the individual will reoffend and more about serving time as punishment for the original crime.
Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, has introduced numerous bills to reform Alabama’s parole system including oversight of the board, and said that Gwathney inadvertently made her case for oversight during her presentation.
“What is even more ridiculous, is she said today that she would change the score sheet in favor of applicants to help them get out and it only managed to reach 8 percent,” England told media after the meeting. “So how screwed up is the process, or the guidelines, that you have to change them to get up to 8 percent, like it is something to be happy and excited about, is ridiculous.”
Jacob Holmes is a reporter at the Alabama Political Reporter. You can reach him at [email protected]
