#NNPA BlackPress
Black Teens Receive 11 Life Sentences in Crime Where No One Was Hurt
NNPA NEWSWIRE — A 2012 Human Rights Watch report noted that the state of California had de facto sentenced 301 people to die in its prisons for crimes they committed when they were under the age of 18.
By Stacy M. Brown, NNPA Newswire Correspondent
@StacyBrownMedia
At 17, Juan Rayford Jr. was like so many other teens with big dreams – he wanted to escape his hardscrabble neighborhood and play college football and perhaps make it into the NFL.
But a fateful 2004 night in the northern Los Angeles County city of Lancaster, quickly turned those dreams into a lifelong nightmare.
Rayford had just returned to school to complete credits toward his diploma and what he’d hoped would be a shot at playing football, or, at minimum, a shot at getting out of the city that sits north of Los Angeles and the crossroads of the steamy hot and dry Antelope and Mojave deserts.
Rayford’s mother moved him to Lancaster to keep her son away from the influence of the gangs and violence that have led to as much bloodshed as Rayford’s dad, Juan Rayford Sr., saw in all of his years in the military.
Rayford’s parents were divorced, but both pushed for their child to succeed.
However, they were both aware that the Antelope Valley wasn’t immune to gangs and the related complications that are too often visited upon young African Americans, especially where law enforcement and (ultimately) America’s system of justice are involved.
While at a house party with some friends, Juan Jr. ducked into the back of the hosts’ home to play video games. While there, he said he heard the commotion between a friend and another individual.
“The friend and the other guy had a long-standing beef and it spilled over to a fight and Juan and everybody came running,” said Juan Sr., who lived in Virginia at the time of the incident and now lives in Texas. “Shots were fired, and when the police came, they took names and wanted to know who did what.”
“My son did nothing wrong, he had no gun and there were some shots fired but nobody was hit, nobody was hurt,” he said.
After questioning everyone there, prosecutors appeared to hone in on Rayford Jr. and another teen, Dupree Glass.
Although no one was shot or injured and the home owner and other witnesses initially said the teens weren’t involved, or at least did not possess a gun, Rayford Jr. and Glass were charged with 11 counts of attempted murder.
At trial, both Rayford and Glass were forced to depend upon overworked public defenders. They were offered a deal: 15 years in prison.
“I’m not guilty,” Rayford Jr. pled to his father and all who would listen.
His plea, however, fell on deaf ears.
Zealous prosecutors, who successfully requested bail set at $11 million, piled on.
On October 25, 2004, Juan Rayford Jr. was sentenced to 220 years, plus — 11 life terms.
Glass received a similar sentence.
The sentences appear to violate the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
“My son’s sentence is manifestly excessive, which constitutes, in effect, cruel and unusual punishment,” Rayford Sr. said. “The only witnesses for the prosecution were the owner of the house and her 15-year old daughter,” Rayford Sr. said.
“The mother and the daughter gave statements to the police the night the incident occurred, which stated that Juan Jr. was there, but he was not one of the shooters.
“At the trial their statements changed, and Juan Jr. had a court appointed attorney who called no witnesses on his behalf,” he said.
Legal experts said it defies reason and proportionality as the Eighth Amendment forbids extreme sentences that are ‘grossly disproportionate’ to the crime and directs judges to exercise their wise judgment in assessing the proportionality of all forms of punishment.
Now, 32 years old, having been incarcerated for 15 years, Rayford Jr. remains in a San Diego-area prison with freedom now his primary dream.
Meanwhile, his father fights daily for him.
In 2012, Rayford Sr. wrote a letter to then-U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder seeking relief, but there was no response. Most recently, he’s written to California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, an outspoken proponent of Criminal Justice Reform.
Becerra’s spokesman told NNPA Newswire that the case is headed toward the state Supreme Court and, therefore, he couldn’t comment.
A 2012 Human Rights Watch report noted that the state of California had de facto sentenced 301 people to die in its prisons for crimes they committed when they were under the age of 18.
They could not be legally sentenced to death — in 2005, the Supreme Court found the death penalty unconstitutional for juveniles.
However, theirs is literally a “life” sentence, having been sentenced to prison for the rest of their lives with no chance of parole or opportunity for release.
Sentences like these underscore how the state of California spends $12 billion annually on its prisons.
Further, Human Rights Watch noted that the United States is now the only country in the world that imposes life sentences on youth for crimes committed when they were under the age of 18, and that the number of youth given that sentence has continued to increase. Eighty-Five percent of those sentenced to life terms are individuals of color.
In 2017, then-California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill that allows judges to decide against imposing prison-sentence enhancements of 10 or more years in cases where firearms are used to commit a felony.
The state boasts some of the most severe sentence enhancements in the country with more than 100 separate code sections that add years to a person’s prison or jail sentence, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.
One of the most commonly used sentence enhancements was the five year enhancement that comes with the use of a firearm. Using the five year enhancement, nearly 100,000 years have been added to the sentences of people currently in custody.
“I hope this bill will lead to more fair and equitable sentencing in cases involving guns where no one is hurt,” said Democratic Sen. Steven Bradford of Gardena, Calif.
“Longer sentences do not deter crime, but instead disproportionately increase racial disparities in prison populations and they greatly increase the population of incarcerated persons,” Bradford said.
For Rayford Jr. and Dupree Glass, there could finally be some hope.
In 2014, the nonprofit legal entity, the group, Innocence Rights of Orange County, filed writs of habeas corpus on their behalf.
In a statement posted on their website, Innocence Rights of Orange County noted that Rayford and Dupree were sentenced to eleven consecutive life sentences for “allegedly shooting at a house where eleven people lived.
“No one was injured, and Juan has maintained his innocence since day one.
“Nevertheless, he was prosecuted under the Kill Zone Theory which eliminates the need for the prosecutor to prove the element of specific intent when charging attempted murder as long as the individuals are standing within a ‘kill zone.’”
The kill zone is an ambiguous area defined by the prosecutor which results in excessive attempted murder charges.
The petition by Innocence Rights of Orange County was granted by the California Supreme Court in December 2016 and they’re currently waiting for the Court to hear the case.
“Juan isn’t bitter, he isn’t angry,” Rayford Sr., said. “He prays every day and he does what he’s supposed to do and we are hopeful that the Court will soon hear the case and grant his freedom.”
#NNPA BlackPress
Recently Approved Budget Plan Favors Wealthy, Slashes Aid to Low-Income Americans
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts

By Stacy M. Brown
BlackPressUSA.com Senior National Correspondent
The new budget framework approved by Congress may result in sweeping changes to the federal safety net and tax code. The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts. A new analysis from Yale University’s Budget Lab shows the proposals in the House’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Resolution would lead to a drop in after-tax-and-transfer income for the poorest households while significantly boosting revenue for the wealthiest Americans. Last month, Congress passed its Concurrent Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2025 (H. Con. Res. 14), setting revenue and spending targets for the next decade. The resolution outlines $1.5 trillion in gross spending cuts and $4.5 trillion in tax reductions between FY2025 and FY2034, along with $500 billion in unspecified deficit reduction.
Congressional Committees have now been instructed to identify policy changes that align with these goals. Three of the most impactful committees—Agriculture, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means—have been tasked with proposing major changes. The Agriculture Committee is charged with finding $230 billion in savings, likely through changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. Energy and Commerce must deliver $880 billion in savings, likely through Medicaid reductions. Meanwhile, the Ways and Means Committee must craft tax changes totaling no more than $4.5 trillion in new deficits, most likely through extending provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Although the resolution does not specify precise changes, reports suggest lawmakers are eyeing steep cuts to SNAP and Medicaid benefits while seeking to make permanent tax provisions that primarily benefit high-income individuals and corporations.
To examine the potential real-world impact, Yale’s Budget Lab modeled four policy changes that align with the resolution’s goals:
- A 30 percent across-the-board cut in SNAP funding.
- A 15 percent cut in Medicaid funding.
- Permanent extension of the individual and estate tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
- Permanent extension of business tax provisions including 100% bonus depreciation, expense of R&D, and relaxed limits on interest deductions.
Yale researchers determined that the combined effect of these policies would reduce the after-tax-and-transfer income of the bottom 20 percent of earners by 5 percent in the calendar year 2026. Households in the middle would see a modest 0.6 percent gain. However, the top five percent of earners would experience a 3 percent increase in their after-tax-and-transfer income.
Moreover, the analysis concluded that more than 100 percent of the net fiscal benefit from these changes would go to households in the top 20 percent of the income distribution. This happens because lower-income groups would lose more in government benefits than they would gain from any tax cuts. At the same time, high-income households would enjoy significant tax reductions with little or no loss in benefits.
“These results indicate a shift in resources away from low-income tax units toward those with higher incomes,” the Budget Lab report states. “In particular, making the TCJA provisions permanent for high earners while reducing spending on SNAP and Medicaid leads to a regressive overall effect.” The report notes that policymakers have floated a range of options to reduce SNAP and Medicaid outlays, such as lowering per-beneficiary benefits or tightening eligibility rules. While the Budget Lab did not assess each proposal individually, the modeling assumes legislation consistent with the resolution’s instructions. “The burden of deficit reduction would fall largely on those least able to bear it,” the report concluded.
#NNPA BlackPress
A Threat to Pre-emptive Pardons
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process.

By April Ryan
President Trump is working to undo the traditional presidential pardon powers by questioning the Biden administration’s pre-emptive pardons issued just days before January 20, 2025. President Trump is seeking retribution against the January 6th House Select Committee. The Trump Justice Department has been tasked to find loopholes to overturn the pardons that could lead to legal battles for the Republican and Democratic nine-member committee. Legal scholars and those closely familiar with the pardon process worked with the Biden administration to ensure the preemptive pardons would stand against any retaliatory knocks from the incoming Trump administration. A source close to the Biden administration’s pardons said, in January 2025, “I think pardons are all valid. The power is unreviewable by the courts.”
However, today that same source had a different statement on the nuances of the new Trump pardon attack. That attack places questions about Biden’s use of an autopen for the pardons. The Trump argument is that Biden did not know who was pardoned as he did not sign the documents. Instead, the pardons were allegedly signed by an autopen. The same source close to the pardon issue said this week, “unless he [Trump] can prove Biden didn’t know what was being done in his name. All of this is in uncharted territory. “ Meanwhile, an autopen is used to make automatic or remote signatures. It has been used for decades by public figures and celebrities.
Months before the Biden pardon announcement, those in the Biden White House Counsel’s Office, staff, and the Justice Department were conferring tirelessly around the clock on who to pardon and how. The concern for the preemptive pardons was how to make them irrevocable in an unprecedented process. At one point in the lead-up to the preemptive pardon releases, it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process. President Trump began the threat of an investigation for the January 6th Select Committee during the Hill proceedings. Trump has threatened members with investigation or jail.
#NNPA BlackPress
Reaction to The Education EO
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking a higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college.

By April Ryan
There are plenty of negative reactions to President Donald Trump’s latest Executive Order abolishing the Department of Education. As Democrats call yesterday’s action performative, it would take an act of Congress for the Education Department to close permanently. “This blatantly unconstitutional executive order is just another piece of evidence that Trump has absolutely no respect for the Constitution,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) who is the ranking member on the House Financial Services Committee. “By dismantling ED, President Trump is implementing his own philosophy on education, which can be summed up in his own words, ‘I love the poorly educated.’ I am adamantly opposed to this reckless action, said Rep. Bobby Scott who is the most senior Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee.
Morgan State University President Dr. David Wilson chimed in saying “I’m deeply concerned about efforts to shift federal oversight in education back to the states, particularly regarding equity, justice, and fairness. History has shown us what happens when states are left unchecked—Black and poor children are too often denied access to the high-quality education they deserve. In 1979 then President Jimmy Carter signed a law creating the Department of Education. Arne Duncan, former Obama Education Secretary, reminds us that both Democratic and Republican presidents have kept education a non-political issue until now. However, Duncan stressed Republican presidents have contributed greatly to moving education forward in this country.
During a CNN interview this week Duncan said during the Civil War President Abraham “Lincoln created the land grant system” for colleges like Tennessee State University. “President Ford brought in IDEA.” And “Nixon signed Pell Grants into law.” In 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush which increased federal oversight of schools through standardized testing. Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college. Wilson details, “that 40 percent of all college students rely on Pell Grants and student loans.”
Rep. Alma Adams (D-NC) says this Trump action “impacts students pursuing higher education and threatens 26 million students across the country, taking billions away from their educational futures. Meanwhile, During the president’s speech in the East Room of the White House Thursday, Trump criticized Baltimore City, and its math test scores with critical words. Governor West Moore, who is opposed to the EO action, said about dismantling the Department of Education, “Leadership means lifting people up, not punching them down.”
-
#NNPA BlackPress3 weeks ago
Target Takes a Hit: $12.4 Billion Wiped Out as Boycotts Grow
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Undocumented Workers Are Struggling to Feed Themselves. Slashed Budgets and New Immigration Policies Bring Fresh Challenges
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
BREAKING Groundbreaking Singer Angie Stone Dies in Car Accident at 63
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of February 26 – March 4, 2025
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
NAACP Legend and Freedom Fighter Hazel Dukes Passes
-
Arts and Culture3 weeks ago
Beverly Lorraine Greene: A Pioneering Architect and Symbol of Possibility and Progress
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
Trump Kicks the Ukrainian President Out of the White House
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
Apple Shareholders Reject Effort to Dismantle DEI Initiatives, Approve $500 Billion U.S. Investment Plan