ARD, the county's Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition program, is a desirable alternative to conviction for driving drunk.
It's also a potential option for people arrested for shoplifting, welfare fraud and other first-time, nonviolent crimes.
Last Monday, a four-member ARD panel headed by District Attorney Craig Stedman reviewed the cases of four DUI defendants (please see related story, Page One).
But the panel, which meets in the county courthouse, also heard from six offenders in a wide variety of cases.
A seventh defendant, in a dispute over payment for a puppy, did not show.
Monday's non-DUI applicants included:
•A local college student who found a credit card and charged multiple purchases worth hundreds of dollars.
•A meek, 60-something man accused of soliciting sex in a park.
•A nurse who took drugs from the family that employed her to care for two special-needs children.
•A well-dressed young professional man who punched a bouncer at a bar.
•Two 20-something students.
One told police she was kidnapped instead of admitting she borrowed her parents' car without permission.
The other stole clothing from the store where she worked.
Both women wept over their crimes.
The panelists, who also invite the friends and family of the applicants to attend the monthly sessions, ask provocative questions and search the eyes of the defendants for honest answers.
"You look for the reactions," Stedman said. "Is this the kind of person that is going to successfully complete the program and not re-offend?"
Panelists must decide whether the person should be given a get-out-of-jail card in exchange for community service, counseling and a chance for some serious soul searching.
On Monday, of the non-DUI cases, there were four affirmatives and two deferred decisions.
Many factors played a role in the outcomes, Stedman said.
The credit-card thief appeared contrite, and he also walked into the commissioners' meeting room with his very concerned dad. Too, Stedman pointed out, his academic and future employment career hung in the balance. Request granted.
The older man from the park was also accepted into ARD. That he had no prior record, and that he appeared with several character witnesses and a folder full of references helped, Stedman said.
The bar fighter and the clothing thief also got a thumbs up.
Working against the fighter?
The fact that the offense was violent and, thus, an ARD rarity.
Too, Stedman said, the bouncer was seriously injured. In the young man's favor was his spotless record of community involvement and the fact that the punch appeared to be a single, reflexive blow delivered out of fear.
Desperate circumstances, including a requirement by her employer to wear the latest, expensive fashions, appeared to have motivated the clothing stealer, Stedman said.
While that didn't excuse the thefts perpetrated over several months, the district attorney said, the woman seemed pretty unlikely to steal again.
The status of the nurse and the woman who made up the kidnapping story were less clear.
Stedman, who wanted to be sure that the nurse would never again be in a position to steal and abuse narcotics, pressed her to give up nursing.
She resisted, arguing that she could work in an office that does not handle the drugs.
The district attorney said he would hold off making a decision until he could talk to a nursing case manager.
He also promised to get back to the woman who made up the hoax, saying he could not be sure that she would not do such a thing again.
"You obviously lie pretty well because the police believed you," Stedman said.
ARD panel outcomes often differ from those in which prosecutors simply read about the case, Stedman said.
Panelists take into account victims' wishes, he added.
"We want to do the right thing. If there's a way to give someone an opportunity to change their behavior ... I think everybody wins."
Jon Rutter is a staff writer for the Sunday News. His e-mail address is jrutter@lnpnews.com.
