Skip to content

Former Raiders center Barret Robbins sentenced to five years in prison

B. Robbins

Former Raiders center Barret Robbins accepted a five-year prison term on Friday for repeatedly violating his probation.

The latest violation was an arrest for cocaine possession.   Robbins was on probation for a March 2005 incident in which he injured three police officers while resisting arrest.  He battles bipolar disorder and drug addiction.

“You are a man who had been blessed with extraordinary athletic talent. But instead of using that athletic ability on the football field, you used it against a police officer,” Judge Daryl Trawick told Robbins via the Miami Herald. “It’s time we deal with this once and for all.”

Robbins said it was a “relief” to be sentenced and he was “happy” to have a resolution.  He’s planning to write an autobiography in prison, although he jokingly said he’s not much of a writer.  (That hasn’t stopped us.)

Our previous post this afternoon referred to Raiders coach Hue Jackson’s attempt to bring the “Old Raiders” back.  Robbins’  disappearance before the Super Bowl against the Bucs in 2003 was in many ways the beginning of the end for that team.

Permalink 46 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
46 Responses to “Former Raiders center Barret Robbins sentenced to five years in prison”
  1. BleedingSilverAndBlack says: Mar 25, 2011 3:45 PM

    Closure indeed. The Bucs still beat us fair and square.

  2. nothimagain says: Mar 25, 2011 3:49 PM

    What a perfect story to follow the last one.

  3. jlb10 says: Mar 25, 2011 3:52 PM

    such a sad and tragic story. he was definitely greatly gifted and talented. I saw a story with his wife and daughters a few years back. how sad for them.
    good luck barret and god bless you and your family

  4. raider316 says: Mar 25, 2011 3:56 PM

    Closure indeed. The Bucs still beat us fair and square.

    Fair indeed. Without our former coach to tell them everything we would have rolled over them.
    Robbins loss only helped them.

  5. medtxpack says: Mar 25, 2011 3:57 PM

    That was one of the greatest SBs. Gruden wouldve won regardless of which sideline he was on….

  6. thevikes85 says: Mar 25, 2011 3:58 PM

    Hue Jackson is right,the ‘old raiders’ are back!!!

  7. p4ever says: Mar 25, 2011 4:00 PM

    Here is a prime example of someone who has got a free pass from the Justice System and the Media. Can you imagine the hoopla and media lynching if Ochocinco disappeared before a game or if he injured three police officers. Go ahead, call me racist…

  8. supermariojosh says: Mar 25, 2011 4:00 PM

    “The old Raiders are back!”

  9. mizzousooner says: Mar 25, 2011 4:00 PM

    Yeah, bring back the old Raiders. 5 years baby!

  10. demolition510 says: Mar 25, 2011 4:07 PM

    Part of me is still pissed at him. Another just feels sorry for him.

  11. fishbone80 says: Mar 25, 2011 4:10 PM

    Always wishing you the best B-Rob.

  12. facebook.com/joesimmonscomic AKA Slow Joe (Bucs fan) says: Mar 25, 2011 4:11 PM

    @raider316: Right. The Bucs defense, which shut down the Rams earlier that year–who had the same offense as the Raiders except with outstanding speed–would have been rolled over by the slow Raiders with their geriatric wide receivers.

    Seriously, how does a fan of a team that got completely blown out in a Super Bowl talk any smack against the team that won?

    Back on the subject: I always felt bad for Robbins, since bipolar disorder is so difficult to treat and for others to understand. I hope this is a step in the right direction for him.

  13. thefactor51 says: Mar 25, 2011 4:11 PM

    Did this say stemming from a 2005 charge? It is 2011 isn’t it. Let’s hope it doesn’t take that long for the courts to sort this lockout thing.

  14. help me says: Mar 25, 2011 4:15 PM

    To quote a recent article from this site, “The old Raiders are back” indeed.

  15. gcsuk says: Mar 25, 2011 4:19 PM

    medtxpack says: Mar 25, 2011 3:57 PM

    That was one of the greatest SBs. Gruden wouldve won regardless of which sideline he was on….
    ———————————————————————–

    One of the greatest? 20-3 at halftime, and a final of 48-21? Man, that is a pretty lax definition of “greatest”. I’ll take Rams over Titans, Giants over Patriots, or Steelers over Cardinals any day. Those games went down to the final seconds. That TB/Oak SB was a snoozefest (unless you’re a Bucs fan).

  16. jbaxt says: Mar 25, 2011 4:25 PM

    Could you imagine how good the Raiders could be without all this type of stuff that happens to their guys.

    Why does trouble always seem to follow the Raiders. They might have the best front 7 in football next year but something stupid will happen and they’ll choke somehow.

    If I were Hue Jackson, I’d focus on a new raider way.

  17. pizzon says: Mar 25, 2011 4:42 PM

    anyone who says prison is a step in the right direction for someone with this kind of disease is an uninformed idiot. all they will do is warehouse this man and then let him out after his sentence without ever treating the problem. Im not excusing the behavior, but some of the posts are just stupid and random thoughts of emptiness. some people need to move out of moms basement and get a life. sad waste of a talent.

  18. raider316 says: Mar 25, 2011 4:47 PM

    “@raider316: Right. The Bucs defense, which shut down the Rams earlier that year–who had the same offense as the Raiders except with outstanding speed–would have been rolled over by the slow Raiders with their geriatric wide receivers.

    Seriously, how does a fan of a team that got completely blown out in a Super Bowl talk any smack against the team that won?”
    The following season that same geriatic team absolutely rolled the Bucs just like they did the season B4 the SB.
    Learn the whole story.
    The Bucs played a great game and deserved the win. But there was a reason behind it.

  19. duanethomas says: Mar 25, 2011 4:58 PM

    I think his issue is more mental health then being a criminal. I hope he finally gets the help he needs in prison. If he does when he gets out he will be able to help others with the same issue.

  20. facebook.com/joesimmonscomic AKA Slow Joe (Bucs fan) says: Mar 25, 2011 5:37 PM

    @radier316: You’re wrong on both counts. While the Raiders did win the games preceeding and succeeding the Super Bowl, the Bucs and Raiders did not play at all in 2001 and 2003. Those games happened in 1999 and 2004. Irrelevant comparisons of far different teams. You addressed the 2002 Super Bowl Champion Bucs, which had a fantastic defense. Not the 2004 Bucs, which were on the decline and finished 5-11.

    You should get your facts straight.

  21. geniusesq says: Mar 25, 2011 5:41 PM

    The “old Raiders” were still bad.

  22. henryjones20 says: Mar 25, 2011 5:49 PM

    let a black guy do this and all the nast hatefull jokes come pourin in. white guy does it and all tour prayers come flooding in. haha u ppl r great

  23. favresdong says: Mar 25, 2011 5:53 PM

    Raiders center Barret Robbins sentenced to five years in prison…..

    …..I thought he only had a 4 year contract with the Raiders, not five

  24. facebook.com/joesimmonscomic AKA Slow Joe (Bucs fan) says: Mar 25, 2011 6:02 PM

    anyone who says prison is a step in the right direction for someone with this kind of disease is an uninformed idiot. all they will do is warehouse this man and then let him out after his sentence without ever treating the problem. Im not excusing the behavior, but some of the posts are just stupid and random thoughts of emptiness. some people need to move out of moms basement and get a life. sad waste of a talent.

    @pizzon: I will openly admit I know little about the treatment of bipolar disorder, nor do I know much about the prison system, since–perhaps unlike yourself–I have no experience with either. But to have drawn the conclusions that I’m an “idiot” and “need to move out of moms (sic) basement” because of such reflects far more on your intellectual inferiority than on mine.

    Slow Joe 1 pizzon 0

  25. radrntn says: Mar 25, 2011 6:07 PM

    wow Gregg first time ever I have agreed with you….super bowl would have been a lot different if not for Barrett’s tijuana bender.

    I remember Jimmy the Greek in the 80′s saying if you ever want to fix a game, all you have to do is fix it with the center.

  26. thefiesty1 says: Mar 25, 2011 6:21 PM

    Just WIN, baby. NOT!

  27. lunarpie says: Mar 25, 2011 6:40 PM

    He deserves everything he gets from the justice system. Problem is, when he gets out he’s most likely gonna be worse than before. All because he couldn’t go to bed on time the night before the SB.

  28. tdk24 says: Mar 25, 2011 6:58 PM

    He’s gonna write a book? If he puts a photo of his ex-wife on the cover, that thing will sell like hotcakes! Schwing!

  29. obamaczarofussa says: Mar 25, 2011 7:08 PM

    Putting this guy in prison for 5 years is a waste of taxpayer money…The guy was mentally ill, got shot multiple times when he was unarmed and 6 years later he’s still on probation?
    Doing drugs may be stupid and a waste of money, but putting recreational drug users in prison for years, with an overcrowded prison system is stupid.
    Save the cells, for those whos negative actions affect others not themselves.
    If the guy stole, raped, killed, I’d have no sympathy for him But were not talking about a career criminal here. 5 years is ridiculous !

  30. whatswiththehate says: Mar 25, 2011 7:22 PM

    Seriously, what’s with these football players going to jail?

    I’m sure out of all the sport, this one has got to be the one where more players either commit suicide or end up in jail. Something just isn’t right.

  31. genericcommenter says: Mar 25, 2011 8:00 PM

    pizzon,
    Good points. In addition to not treating the underlying issue, I imagine the experience could make him significantly worse when he is released. How anyone considers something like that good for society I will never understand.

    henryjones20,
    I can’t speak for anyone else, but if he were a black guy with bi-polar disorder I would feel the same way. Honestly I might even be more sympathetic ( I am a white guy, BTW).

    Just as I was supportive and outspoken ( as much as I can be) in support of Ricky Williams when his troubles were caused by a known mental illness that his coaches discouraged him from treating.

  32. plundergrunge says: Mar 25, 2011 9:08 PM

    He was relieved to finally be sentenced to 5 years in the big house?

    Wow, that’s pretty hardcore.

  33. theuncletodd says: Mar 25, 2011 10:01 PM

    out in 2+

  34. RussianBreadMaker says: Mar 25, 2011 10:08 PM

    This guy has something wrong going on in his brain.

  35. shaggytoodle says: Mar 25, 2011 10:35 PM

    Is that a picture of him practicing for jail?

  36. rolltideroll81 says: Mar 25, 2011 10:46 PM

    This is said. This guy needs help more than he needs prison. I’ve never heard of prison curing a case of bipolar disorder, doesn’t that make it worst. This is a perfect example of why the NFL is in the shape it is today. How loud does this guy have to scream “Help Me” before someone hears him. All the NFL, NFLPA and NFL ALumni talk about is how they are a family; Well open the door, one of your family members need you.

  37. Thomas says: Mar 26, 2011 12:59 AM

    Seriously, how does a fan of a team that got completely blown out in a Super Bowl talk any smack against the team that won?

    Simple. Without Gruden, TB doesn’t make it to the Super Bowl. Without Gruden, any other team gets their ass handed to them by the Raiders. The evidence is overwhelming that Gruden used his inside knowledge to prep the “vaunted” Bucs to beat the Raiders including their audibles, play calls, and tendencies. Sorry, but the Bucs have one 1/2 a SB win. Until they beat a team without the other team’s head coach in their locker room, no one will take that SB will seriously. Does anyone think the Bucs would have beaten the Raiders without Gruden helping them? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

  38. backindasaddle says: Mar 26, 2011 10:17 AM

    The guy is a mental case. Lock him up so he doesn’t hurt anybody. The fact that he’s “relieved” to be sentenced to prison is indicative of his mental condition. He will feel more comfortable in the big house because there will be no expectations and it’ll be all very regimented. Guaranteed that when he gets out….he’ll go right back out and get in trouble again. Mental case. Belongs locked up.

  39. mpoles says: Mar 26, 2011 10:27 AM

    This saga is one of the saddest tales from the NFL in the last decade.

    As I understand it, the causes of bipolar disorder are still not well understood. Robbins may well have always had something like it. Maybe the regular blows to the head that a centre will get in the NFL contributed. Either way, the extreme pressure of the Super Bowl build-up seems to have pushed him over the edge.

    But as the more enlightened commenters here have pointed out, what he needs, and has needed ever since that day in 2002, is HELP.

    Prison isn’t going to help. When he gets out will he be better? Like rolltideroll81 says, “I’ve never heard of prison curing a case of bipolar disorder”.

    Where does that help come from? Well, proper professional mental healthcare is going to be expensive. However you look at it, it seems likely that Barret Robbins’s job played a part in his condition and everything that has come after it. Doesn’t that mean that the league and the owners have an obligation to help? It’s probably too late for Robbins. It’s definitely too late for Dave Duerson. But there WILL be others like them. I hope that is something that the owners, the current players, Roger Goodell and DeMaurice Smith have in the back of their minds in the next few weeks.

  40. facebook.com/joesimmonscomic AKA Slow Joe (Bucs fan) says: Mar 26, 2011 2:15 PM

    Simple. Without Gruden, TB doesn’t make it to the Super Bowl. Without Gruden, any other team gets their ass handed to them by the Raiders. The evidence is overwhelming that Gruden used his inside knowledge to prep the “vaunted” Bucs to beat the Raiders including their audibles, play calls, and tendencies. Sorry, but the Bucs have one 1/2 a SB win. Until they beat a team without the other team’s head coach in their locker room, no one will take that SB will seriously. Does anyone think the Bucs would have beaten the Raiders without Gruden helping them? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

    Wait, are you asking if any team has ever won a Super Bowl without their head coach? Of course they wouldn’t have won without Gruden, dumb@ss. That’s why they hired him. Does anyone think that Al Davis wasn’t a moron for firing the best coach they’d had since John Madden, then hiring a replacement that doesn’t even change their line calls, tendencies or gameplan?

    No one in the world other than delusional sub-100 I.Q. Raider fans think any less of the Bucs’ Super Bowl win than any other Super Bowl win. Besides, Gruden had little to do with the Bucs holding the Raiders to nineteen rushing yards, forcing Rich Gannon into throwing into the teeth of a defense that had given up a collective QB rating of less than 50 all year. There was no way the Raiders were winning that game, no matter what. You scored two offensive TDs the entire game.

    Wake up.

  41. Thomas says: Mar 26, 2011 4:35 PM

    Wait, are you asking if any team has ever won a Super Bowl without their head coach?

    Thick aren’t you? No, I’m not asking whether any team has won the SB without their head coach. I’m asking whether any team has one the Super Bowl against their head coach from the previous five years? Specifically, TB doesn’t win the Super Bowl without THAT SPECIFIC head coach. If it’s any other head coach, they lose. If it’s any team other than the Raiders, they probably lose.

    That’s why they hired him.

    Really. And how did TB do after that year? How many SB did Gruden win after that?

    Besides, Gruden had little to do with the Bucs holding the Raiders to nineteen rushing yards, forcing Rich Gannon into throwing into the teeth of a defense that had given up a collective QB rating of less than 50 all year

    Actually, moron, it had EVERYTHING to do with the Bucs winning. They knew what plays were going to be scripted, where every play was going, the tendencies of every blocker, the weaknesses in every play, the blocking audibles, Gannon’s audibles, the way the Gannon was reading the defenses, where the receivers were going to be on every play, where they would be on hot reads, what they would do on down and distance, and so on. They even knew Gannon’s tendencies with respect to the snap count and hard counts. Gruden could have coached any team in the playoffs that year and beat the Raiders just as soundly.

    Like I said, the Bucs won 1/2 a SB. Until they beat someone without the advantage of the person that assembled and built their opponent into a winner, no one will take the Bucs win seriously. Lest we not forget Mr. Lynch’s sideline mike comment of “we knew exactly where every play was going.”

    Had the Bucs beat the Raiders with any other coach, no would argue the quality of the win. Had they won with Gruden but he was three or four years removed from the Oakland job, no would argue the win. However, neither of those happened. In short, the win is tainted. It is 1/2 a win.

  42. facebook.com/joesimmonscomic AKA Slow Joe (Bucs fan) says: Mar 26, 2011 5:13 PM

    HAHAHA! Thomas, you are a moron. All those things you said prove my point! The Bucs organization defeated the Raiders organization because they were smart enough to steal your coach and your organization was too dumb not to change their playcalling, audibles and tendencies.

    Sure, if they didn’t hire Gruden, they may not have even made it to the Super Bowl. You know what else? If your aunt had a penis, she’d be your uncle. But that isn’t the case. In the EIGHT years since that Super Bowl victory, you’re the only jack@ss I’ve ever heard say it’s “tainted”. A tainted victory would be one involving cheating. No one cheated, dipsh-t. The Raiders screwed the pooched at the same time they met one of the most dominant defenses in recent history.

    How are you not getting this? Breathing in too much petroleum from your Darth Vader costume?

  43. Thomas says: Mar 26, 2011 7:47 PM

    So you admit that the only reason the Bucs won that SB is because they were playing the Raiders. Was it smart of the Bucs organization? Sure. That isn’t in question. The issue is whether the Bucs won solely because they had the bettter team or because they had their opponent’s head coach. Since the Bucs haven’t sniffed even the championship game before or after 2002 it seems clear that it wasn’t Gruden that won the SB; it was Gruden+playing his former team. Therefore, I accept your defeat.

    A win does not have to be tainted solely because of cheating. Is that what the big kids told you on your third trip through first grade? A win can be tainted for a host of reasons including an unfair advantage that would not have existed under normal circumstances. The Bucs do not win that SB if they are playing anyone other than the Raiders. The Raiders win that SB if the opposing head coach is anyone other than Gruden. Simple as that and you have agreed.

    At the end of the day, the Bucs did not win because they had the better team. They won because they had the other team’s head coach. Forever will people say about the Bucs win “yeah but…they had Gruden”. We’ll never know whether they could have won without that advantage however given what happened before and after, it seems clear that only by playing the head coach’s team of the previous year could they win a SB.

  44. facebook.com/joesimmonscomic AKA Slow Joe (Bucs fan) says: Mar 27, 2011 3:08 PM

    Your logic is flawed. In order to come to any conclusion on cause and effect relationship, you have to have one control variable. But in any new season there are a whole new set of variables, any one, group, or totality could have been the cause for the change.

    Was playing against Gruden’s former team an advantage for the Bucs? Sure, probably. But remember, the Raiders were also playing against their former coach. If the Raiders had won big, then whiny Bucs fans could have claimed the same damn thing: “Unfair advantage! The Raiders knew how Gruden coached!”

    The truth is, both teams knew each other extremely well. But the Bucs took advantage of the situation way better than the Raiders did.

    And teams change so much from season to season. Bill Parcells once said “You never are this year what you were last year”. The Bucs offense was barely above mediocre in 2002, though it did receive a boost from Gruden’s coaching. But the defense was amazing; it had been getting better and better and that’s the year it peaked.

    Your determination that they “did not win because they had the better team” is non-provable, illogical, and just plain stupid. Christ, dude, just after the half the score was 34-3. How many times pregame was it that both teams said the unusual coaching situation would have little effect on the actual game? So even if it DID have an effect, can you honestly, with a straight face, tell me it’s responsible for a 31-point spread (27 at the final gun)? How on Earth could you not see that the Bucs were a much better team that day?

    And, don’t forget, coaching is part of the team. Knowing what Gruden may have known, why on Earth didn’t Callahan change the playcalling, audibles, and such? That was a moronic non-move. Gruden clearly outcoached him, and having the better coach is part of having a better team.

    At the end of the day (haha!) the Bucs were red hot going into the playoffs, peaking at just the right time, and were simply the best team that season. It wouldn’t have matter if the Raiders lost the AFC Championship to the Titans; the Bucs would have beat Tennessee as well. Okay, that’s not provable, it’s only opinion, but one that has a lot of basis in fact.

    And, if you were to ask any football fan (Buc or otherwise) that knew about the Bucs that year, you would hear that the only team us fans feared was the Philadelphia Eagles, since they very physical and matched up so well with us. Once the Bucs got past them, we knew no gimmicky pass-happy offense was going to beat the Bucs DT. If you bother to look up stats: No QB passed for a QB rating of over 60 against the Bucs all year. Gannon sure the heck wasn’t going to be the first.

    The Bucs do not win that SB if they are playing anyone other than the Raiders.

    Dude, as discussed, that is an idiotic statement. So you’re saying the best team in the NFL in 2002, with one of the best defenses in recent history, who was red hot going into the playoffs, could not have beaten the league’s other 31 teams? Why am I having a conversation with someone who would make such a moronic statement?

    The Raiders win that SB if the opposing head coach is anyone other than Gruden. Simple as that and you have agreed.

    1. I said the Bucs may or may not have, because who the hell knows what happens if a team has a whole different coach? The Bucs may not have even been in the Super Bowl! They may have won FIVE straight Super Bowls! We’ll never know! But Gruden leading them to the 2002 Super Bowl had everything to do with his gameplanning and the spark he brought to the Bucs that Tony Dungy no longer could. But if you’ve come to the conclusion that Gruden’s Bucs destroyed the Raiders only because Gruden knew the Raiders so well, and not because he did a great job coaching that team that year, then you obviously base your, uh, “logic” on flawed information and your Raiders-colored glasses.

    2. You can’t make me agree to something just because you typed that I “agreed”. If that’s the case I could just say “Thomas needs to go back to his job at the loading dock and you agree”.

    3. The Raiders were a good team that year, with a fun offense to watch, but they weren’t even the second-best team in the league. That was the Eagles. I suppose here I could say something like “The Eagles would definitely have beaten the Raiders in that Super Bowl”, but that is non-provable and the kind of stupid thing you would say.

    Forever will people say about the Bucs win “yeah but…they had Gruden”.

    Except for the tiny fact that you’re the only person in eight years I’ve ever heard say it. Have you ever heard any non-Raider knucklehead say such nonsense?

  45. Thomas says: Mar 27, 2011 5:17 PM

    , the Raiders were also playing against their former coach. If the Raiders had won big,

    Not even remotely the same. First, there is simply no way that Gruden could have instilled everything he had built at Oakland in TB in one year. Simply not possible. Second, the personnel was different so the way Gruden used them was different. However, Oakland’s personnel was practically handpicked and groomed by Gruden and was unchanged when they played them. So your theory is empty.

    The truth is, both teams knew each other extremely well. But the Bucs took advantage of the situation way better than the Raiders did.

    And you conclude this how again? They had not played each other, the style of personnel was different and Gruden had only been there one year. The closest you could get to the two teams playing each other was in 1999. Score? Oak 9 TB 5.

    . Christ, dude, just after the half the score was 34-3. How many times pregame was it that both teams said the unusual coaching situation would have little effect on the actual game?

    “We knew every play there were going to run”. Need I say more? They knew Gannon’s audibles. If you give any NFL team that kind of advantage of any other team, they are going to win. You do that with a playoff caliber team, and they are going to win big. You do that with a team that has a good defense and they are going to shut you down completely. Let’s not forget the other side of the ball. Gruden had spent the last five years practicing against the Raiders defense. He knew every strengths and weakness inside and out.

    So even if it DID have an effect,

    I accept your admission that you were wrong.

    can you honestly, with a straight face, tell me it’s responsible for a 31-point spread (27 at the final gun)?

    Five turnovers all caused by the defense being tipped off about patterns and audibles. Combine that with an intimate knowledge of the other teams defense and its adjustments and personnel and it is not hard to see a 31 point difference.

    why on Earth didn’t Callahan change the playcalling, audibles, and such?

    An excellent question. One argument that I think Calahann stated after the game has been that at the time they only had a single week between the championship game and the Super Bowl which wasn’t enough time to change the audibles. However, by you arguing whether they should have changed their audibles, you are in fact validating that it was a significant factor in their loss.

    Forever will people say about the Bucs win “yeah but…they had Gruden”.

    Except for the tiny fact that you’re the only person in eight years I’ve ever heard say it. Have you ever heard any non-Raider knucklehead say such nonsense?

    You need to get out of your mom’s basement. EVERY fan I’ve come across, including more than a few Bucs fans, concedes that having Gruden was THE reason for the lopsided score. Like I said, “We knew every play they were going to run”. EVERYONE qualifies the win with “yeah but they had Gruden”. That the win is tainted is further supported by the fact that the Bucs did not do squat afterwards nor has Gruden. You do realize that the Bucs have only been to two playoff games since 2002 and lost them both? Until the Bucs or Gruden win without having the other team’s playbook, audibles, defense schemes, and detailed knowledge of their weaknesses, no one will take that win seriously. Get over it. Forever will there be an asterisk next to that win.

  46. kobrakai7474 says: Mar 29, 2011 11:51 PM

    p4ever, henryjones20, et al: With all due respect, this is not a race thing nor is it a case of a pampered athlete getting more chances than he deserves. It is the sad case of a very sick man. His illness is no different than cancer or heart disease and it is just as insidious. It needs agressive and ongoing treatment, and Barret Robbins needs to be a partner in the treatment. Hopefully, prison will give him the structure (and treatment) he needs to finally get control of his illness. Otherwise, in the not-too-distant future, we are going to be reading his obituary.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!