Man Gets 15 Years For Trying to Break Back Into Jail

25-year-old Floridian Sylvester Jiles needed a safe place to hide after being released from prison so he chose the safest place he could think of, jail. Jiles accepted a plea deal on a manslaughter charge after the 2007 shooting death of a 19-year-old, and was sentenced to eight years of probation. Three days before his release Jiles begged officers to take him back in custody, because he feared retaliation from the victim's family. When they denied his request, he tried to scale a 12-foot fence at the detention center. He was arrested and convicted of trespassing on jail property and resisting an officer. A judge sentenced him to 15 years in prison for violating his probation on Monday.

Comments

Jail is great

[Anonymous Coward]

It's because jail has free food, free healthcare, stuff to do, TV, internet, etc.

All paid for by the taxpayers.

Re:Jail is great

[TheLostSamurai]

Yep, the residents of the state of Florida are now going to have to pay over $300,000 for this guy to not get killed on the street by the family of a person he murdered. I say let him out and let the situation take care of itself.

Re:Jail is great

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus there's the free beatings and anal rape - those are included at no cost to taxpayers.

Re:Jail is great

[srodden]

OK then... let's say YOU accidentally kill (that is after all, the definition of *manslaughter*) someone's kid. In a moment of distraction, your kid hurls something at the back of your head when you're driving at the same time a kid runs onto the road. The kid dies. The kid belongs to a family of very vengeful people. They don't see it as an accident. They're all upset despite whatever facts are presented because their precious child has died. You go to jail, you get released a few years later. The vengeful family haven't calmed down and now they're all agitated again because you're on the street again. Shall we just let you out and let the situation take care of itself? How about a little less knee jerking and a little more thinking?

Re:Jail is great

[Hognoxious]

OK then... let's say YOU accidentally kill (that is after all, the definition of *manslaughter*)

No it isn't. If you killed someone in a genuine accident you wouldn't be guilty of anything, especially if the accident was partly the fault of the victim.

By genuine accident I mean you aren't driving recklessly in a known unsafe car, etc etc.

Re:Jail is great

[decoy256]

Yeah, and American prosecutors NEVER go after people who are innocent.

Re:Jail is great

[gurps_npc]

Really? You sound like a moron to me. Blaiming the wrong people. This guy didn't simply try to break in, he first asked to be put in jail. Then, instead of raping, stealing, or doing many other criminals things that would have got him safely in jail, he tried to break in. I say arrest the MORON COPS that refused to put this guy in jail for a week and as a result of the MORON COPS actions, the state of Florida has to pay over $300,000. I hate criminals and want to convict them. But stop blaming the criminals for the COPS' stupidity.

Re:Jail is great

[Anonymous Coward]

How about a little less knee jerking and a little more thinking?

Maybe familiarize yourself with the facts surrounding the "little accident" before you accuse others of knee jerk reactions?

Summary of the case (prior to his release):

http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/brevard_news/082709_Accused_killer_could_be_freed

The actual death itself might have been accidental, but Jiles brought a gun to confront someone about something (case does not say) and ends up shooting someone who was hanging out there when a fight broke out. He was originally convicted of second degree murder, but pleabargained it when the credibility of a witness was questioned. Regardless, the gun does not appear to have gone off on its own.

Prouse (the victim) was 19 when he was shot, and was several days away from being married. It's been just over three years since he was killed, do you think his fiance' and his mother are simply going to say "well, you know, people make mistakes, ha ha, life goes on, I wonder what's on Oprah after the news?" when they learn that Jiles is going to be let out of prison after three years?

Re:Jail is great

[natehoy]

Accident != "Genuine" accident.

Manslaughter does mean "accidental" death. Death with intent is called "murder".

A genuine accident (I tripped on a crack in the sidewalk and fell over, bumping into you and knocking your head into a building and killing you) is still technically manslaughter (killing a person), but there would be no conviction because it was truly an accident. I had no intention of killing you or even harming you. I could still be held civilly liable for your death in a lawsuit, but I could not be convicted of a crime.

If I walked up behind you and simply pushed you into the wall, not meaning to kill you but just meaning to hurt you, and you died - that would be considered an accident but I'd probably still face some punishment. That's not a "genuine" accident. But it is an accident. I had no intent to kill you, but I did intend to do something to you, and it got out of hand.

If we were fighting and I pushed you into the wall, the punishment would be lesser, probably none if I could prove that you picked the fight with me and not the other way 'round. If you came up to me and shoved, and I shoved back, and you fell into a wall and died, I have only attempted to defend myself. If we were both upset about something and were both active participants, then I'd probably be facing some punishment, but not as much as if I walked up behind you and shoved you into a wall.

So, yes, manslaughter is all accidental death. But some deaths are more accidental than others.

All examples above assume "perfect justice" (I am convicted based on my actions and intent, no more and no less). Getting at the truth in the real world is a lot trickier.

Re:Jail is great

[Hognoxious]

Accident != "Genuine" accident.

Really? I'd have thought a genuine accident would be the most accidental kind of accident there could be.

A genuine accident (I tripped on a crack in the sidewalk and fell over, bumping into you and knocking your head into a building and killing you) is still technically manslaughter (killing a person), but there would be no conviction because it was truly an accident.

Technically schmechnically. If it was manslaughter then there would be a conviction, subject to the usual gubbins like a convincing a jury.

You probably aren't aware that there are two forms of manslaughter - involuntary and voluntary. Taking the phrase at face value, what you describe would appear to fall under the involuntary type. However legal terms often don't mean what they appear to do. As the link says:

In order for a person to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter the government must prove that someone was killed as a result of an act by the person;

OK, you got that. If tripping constitutes an act, which it may or may not. According to the third subprinciple, it isn't.

Second, in the circumstances existing at the time, the person's act either was by its nature dangerous to human life or was done with reckless disregard for human life; and

Walking along the street is not what I would call reckless or dangerous to human life.

Third, the person either knew that such conduct was a threat to the lives of others or knew of circumstances that would reasonably cause the person to foresee that such conduct might be a threat to the lives of others. "

Which clearly is not the case.

The example I gave of driving an unroadworthy car however satisfies all three.

If I walked up behind you and simply pushed you into the wall, not meaning to kill you but just meaning to hurt you, and you died - that would be considered an accident but I'd probably still face some punishment. That's not a "genuine" accident. But it is an accident.

And that would be voluntary manslaughter - intending to injure but going too far. Google it, you clearly need the practice.

Re:Jail is great

[Hognoxious]

Last time I looked, it was a thing called a jury that decides if you go to jail or not.

Re:Jail is great

[Anonymous Coward]

And what about the trial for the people who murder the man in vengeance? Is that somehow going to be free?

Re:Jail is great

[j00r0m4nc3r]

the residents of the state of Florida are now going to have to pay over $300,000 for this guy

Well, then the residents of FL have either chosen this, or elected people who have chosen it, and have not un-elected them and elected new people who will un-choose it. Therefore, FL is getting exactly what they wanted, by majority rule. Sometimes it's easy to forget that the people actually do have power and do run this country, but unfortunately most of the people are dumb and lazy, and place far too much power in the hands of their representatives...

Re:Jail is great

[Anonymous Coward]

Sometimes it's easy to forget that the people actually do have power and do run this country, but unfortunately most of the people are dumb and lazy, and place far too much power in the hands of their representatives...

Yeah, and that's why I voted for public healthcare and got forced buy-in with the very companies I never wanted to do business with again. 'Cause if you just try hard enough you can change anything...

Re:Jail is great

[Anonymous Coward]

"you aren't going to be guilty of anything"

rotflmao, wtmkfmf, foadypofg!!!!!

don't know what planet you're from, but, you'll be potentially guilty of all sorts of stuff

depends on your color,
how much money you have,
your religion
and a host of other things...

Re:Jail is great

[Anonymous Coward]

except the prosecutor decides to charge you. and we all know the prosecutors in america don't prosecute the poor to get high rankings that allow them to get better jobs when the leave the public sector. and we all know that prosecutors won't prosecute someone for the sole reason that he family/community/some other interested group demands someone's head.

Re:Jail is great

[Hognoxious]

except the prosecutor decides to charge you.

So what? A jury decides the verdict and a judge decides the sentence. And even before the trail there's a grand jury - if they decide there's no case to answer there won't even be a trial.

Re:Jail is great

[decoy256]

First, there is only a Grand Jury in certain states. Washington State, for instance, does not have a Grand Jury... the judge merely decides if there is probable cause.

Second, the judge also decides what evidence the jury can listen to. I am a defense attorney and my client just went to jail because the judge wouldn't let us present evidence that would have proven his innocence... why? Because the judge wants to get re-elected and wants to look "tough on crime". What the easiest way to do that? Ignore truth, justice, and right/wrong and just convict at all costs.

Our judicial system is far more broken than most Americans believe.

Re:Jail is great

[somersault]

So when someone simply asks to be put in jail, they should be allowed even if they have done nothing wrong?

Having said that - when so-called punishment becomes more attractive than normal life, there must be something seriously wrong going on. Surely this guy could have found somewhere else to stay for a while, and would be perfectly within his rights to protect himself against vengeful morons (though perhaps now that he's actually killed someone he never wants to have to do anything like it again)

Re:Jail is great

[somersault]

Somehow I don't think voting for one of two or three parties really gets down to the nitty gritty of your exact views on stupid laws and stupid systems. No matter who you vote for there are always going to be things you disagree with that are not changed, and even things that you agree with that will be changed.

Voting is next to worthless as far as getting your opinion across is concerned - there are hundreds of reasons to vote for one guy over another, and it's not very likely that you'd be able to tell everyone's reasons for voting one way or another. I would have voted for Obama simply because Palin was obviously a moron, and there was a risk of her becoming President for a time. I live in the UK though so that's a moot point, but I've never voted here either because it seems so pointless. I've never actually seen any real change in the way this country works in my lifetime so far, and politics is just lie upon lie, mud slinging and generally just something I don't want to have to deal with. I would vote if we could vote on actual issues rather than just for individuals - people who may agree with me on some things, but who likely disagree with me on others. Now that the internet is almost ubiquitous, and if the government ever get their fucking act together, then maybe we will actually be able to vote on individual issues and have a real form of democracy.. but governments and technology just don't seem to go together without an awwwwful lot of money and time wasted in between, so I doubt that's going to happen within the next 10 or 20 years, unless we do something like force everyone in the country to join Facebook and do polls that way.

Re:Jail is great

[h00manist]

Our judicial system is far more broken than most Americans believe.

Yep. Education and health and elections and bunch of other basic-social-structure things too, all work terribly. Everyone loves to complain about everything, nobody wants to get their hands dirty and go work in it and fix it, study how it works, spend time. People want to make money. What makes money isn't fixing society, it's things that take money from people, whether it's useful or not, good or not.. it takes money, it makes money.

Re:Jail is great

[h00manist]

It's because jail has free food, free healthcare, stuff to do, TV, internet, etc.

All paid for by the taxpayers.

I haven't been to a jail, but somehow I don't think most people think it's that great, haven't seen many cases of people trying to get in. Perhaps you liked it, though, I guess it's understandable.

Logic FTW!

[qsliver]

So to punish him for climbing the fence they opened the gate?

Re:Logic FTW!

[SleazyRidr]

I like the fact that the sentence for climbing a fence is close to double the sentence for manslaughter. Broken society FTW!

Re:Logic FTW!

[DarkKnightRadick]

Actually, if you read the submission closely, he was convicted for breaking his probation (which states you have to keep a clean nose for the entire time, even a trespassing charge is a no-no). Though doubling the original sentence is retarded.

Re:Logic FTW!

[SQLGuru]

It's almost like they are rewarding his stupidity by giving him exactly what he wanted even though originally they didn't want to give it to him.......

Re:Logic FTW!

[bsDaemon]

attempted suicide is probably a death penalty rap there,too...

Re:Logic FTW!

[clone53421]

Almost?

Re:Logic FTW!

[tacarat]

I'm glad they're teaching how to set and achieve goals in the correctional system. Maybe they'll let him out early for being such a good example.

I'd say:

[Anonymous Coward]

Mission Accomplished! :-D

So I guess he got what he wanted, right?

[Lord Lode]

See subject line...

Blocka

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to live in the county that man was in. The jail system is so messed up down there. First off the prisons are all private which means they get their paycheck from the state for every inmate they hold for over 24 hours. This might be OK for the state for economical reasons but its the judges that are the owners of the jails. I did some research after sitting in jail for 57 hours for a speeding ticket also my mother practices law down there and tells me this is true. They find lots of ways to keep people around for as long as possible. Its in the best interest of the whole judicial system down there to have as many inmates as possible.

Re:Blocka

[OrwellianLurker]

I used to live in the county that man was in. The jail system is so messed up down there. First off the prisons are all private which means they get their paycheck from the state for every inmate they hold for over 24 hours. This might be OK for the state for economical reasons but its the judges that are the owners of the jails. I did some research after sitting in jail for 57 hours for a speeding ticket also my mother practices law down there and tells me this is true. They find lots of ways to keep people around for as long as possible. Its in the best interest of the whole judicial system down there to have as many inmates as possible.

Oh god. I had always thought that privatized prisons were certainly going to lead to increased incarcerations, but now we can see the proof. These "Wars on X" are really just wars on the people.

the definition of manslaughter

[drkim]

Actually, there are a few flavors of manslaughter, voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter, and other elements which may be present or absent.

In this case he shot and killed someone. But there may have been the elements for a murder conviction that would have been hard to prove.

Trial by jury

[Anonymous Coward]

... it was a thing called a jury that decides if you go to jail or not

Leaving your fate in a group of twelve people that are SO DUMB they cannot find/makeup some kind of excuse to be left out of the jury pool would not qualify as a smart thing to do for your sake...

Re:Trial by jury

[Hognoxious]

One, your assumption that people automatically want to get out of jury duty is unfounded. Some people have nothing better to do. Some are curious. Some might even have a sense of civic duty. I haven't done it myself but I've been told it's interesting.

Two, I'd rather have 12 dumb ones than one biased one - which is the system countries like France do.

Three, it still isn't the prosecutor who decides, which is what you asserted before.

Finally, anyone who writes crap like "leave your fate in a group" is in no position to call anyone dumb. Good day!