News

Violence, Security Lapses, and Media Attention Lead to Reforms at Georgia Prison

By David Reutter

A series of investigative news reports by Chattanooga Times Free Press reporter Joy Lukachick, published from February to December 2013, revealed numerous problems in Georgia’s prison system – particularly at Hays State Prison (HSP), located around 40 miles south of Chattanooga, Tennessee – and resulted in lawsuits, security improvements and the replacement of HSP’s warden.

While violence has increased in Georgia prisons over the last several years, it was not until four HSP prisoners were murdered within a two-month period that the media began to take notice. Prison officials blamed gangs and contraband cell phones for the spike in violence, but guards faulted their bosses, saying they were more focused on their careers than security.

Since 2010, at least 26 Georgia state prisoners have been slain by other prisoners; four HSP prisoners were killed from December 19, 2012 to February 5, 2013 alone.

Non-fatal assaults on staff and prisoners have been increasing, too. The Georgia State Prison has the highest number of incidents, with 251 prisoner-on-staff assaults in 2012 – an average of 21 per month. Guards have reciprocated the violence, reporting 265 uses of force on prisoners over the same time period. The Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison (GDCP) – the state’s highest security facility – reported 86 prisoner-on-staff assaults in 2012, the second-highest in the state.

There were signs of trouble in Georgia’s prison system before the spate of murders at HSP. At Telfair State Prison, two prisoners were killed between August and October 2012, while six prisoners were murdered over two years of escalating violence at Smith State Prison. Further, two guards were stabbed by HSP prisoner Brian Dukes in February 2012, and guard Larry Stell, 46, was murdered in a dormitory area at Telfair on October 11, 2012.

Read More »

Convict Stratification: The Social Construction of Prison Society

By Christopher Zoukis / BlogCritics.org

In the world outside of prison, everyone wants to know what others do, where they work, how much they make, where and in what type of house they live, what they drive, and the answers to many other personal identity questions which help us to quantify and categorize others.  These are social signals to those around all of us.  They help us to understand how to treat others, how they compare to us, and a plethora of other interpersonal protocols.  Not very surprisingly, prison is no different.

The Prison Pecking Order

In prison, unlike life “on the street,” social status is not based upon what a fellow prisoner makes or what they do for a living, but what their crime of conviction is, if the fellow prisoner is an informant or not, the group (or “car”) they associate with, and how they carry themselves.  Also unlike the world outside of prison walls, this social status can mean the difference between a life of torment and assault, and a relatively peaceful life, where due respect is proffered by perceived social equals and lesser-thans.  As such, it is vital for new arrivals — and others who want to understand the prison experience — to understand how stratification works in a correctional context.  Doing so will ensure that they maximize their chances of surviving relatively unscathed.

Crime of Conviction: Social Stigmatization at its Best

The convict stratification equation starts, much like many other components of prison life, in a seemingly backward fashion.  When judging a fellow prisoner’s social status, one doesn’t start by thinking of who they are today, but what they did to be locked up in the first place.  This is a common starting point for any evaluation because it helps to quickly — and relatively accurately — quantify complete strangers.  After all, if a fellow prisoner is, for example, doing time for bank robbery, then it can be assumed that he is a traditional convict, schooled in the criminal lifestyle.  On the other hand, if someone is in for wire fraud or embezzlement, then they are probably not considered “good people” — according to the social construction of prison society — and will be categorized as a “citizen,” not a true convict.

The same form of judging occurs with other, less savory crimes, too.  Having an unpopular crime of conviction is a quick path to the lower realms of the prison stratification system.  Those with a criminal history of sexual assault, possession, distribution, or production of child pornography, rape, molestation, and such are deemed in prison to be the lowest of the low.  Those with these types of crimes are almost automatically shunned from Day One, though they can often find a place amongst fellow unsavory types (those many regular prisoners disparagingly call “weirdos”).

The Rat Factor

After this initial evaluation has been figured, the next question — regardless of crime of conviction — concerns if the prisoner in question has testified against anyone else.  This could be in terms of testifying in court (they would be deemed an “informant” in this case) or snitching on their fellow prisoners (they would be deemed a “rat” in this context).  Regardless of crime of conviction, if a prisoner is known to assist law enforcement or the prison authorities, they are deemed to be the lowest of the low.  Add a conviction for an unsavory crime, and any “good con” wouldn’t be seen dead speaking with them, or worse, many might make a point to openly assault such individuals based upon principle.  Whereas in regular American society, those who are a bit odd or disagreeable are avoided, those in prison face a much harder fate: ostracism, shunning, and possible assault (depending on the prison security level in question).

Read More »

What Do TV and Movies Get Right and Wrong About Prisons?

By Matt Stroud

A few months back, when I first started with In These Times, I had a talk with Logan Sachon at The Billfold about what I intended to do with The Prison Complex and why I find prisons so infuriating and fascinating. It was an enjoyable discussion. But when she asked me, “What do TV and movies get right … and what do they get wrong” about prisons, I admitted I didn’t really know; I’ve never served time in a prison, and anything I possess approaching a journalistic expertise about incarceration comes from what I’ve read, conversations I’ve had, and policy discussions I’ve followed.

So I decided to get in touch with some prisoners to see how they’d answer Logan’s question.

In a partnership with Between the Bars — a fascinating site that allows prisoners to blog about whatever they want — this is the first in a hopefully recurring series of posts by prisoners about their daily lives behind bars. Since we’re just getting started here, the prompt is simple: “What do TV and movies get right and what do they get wrong about prisons?” Our first response comes from Jennifer Gann, a prisoner at Kern Valley State Prison in the desert of Southern California about 45 minutes by car northwest of Bakersfield. Kern Valley is a maximum security facility for men with just about 4,100 prisoners.

Jennifer’s letter has been scanned and posted here. The text of her letter follows:

I’m a 44 year old transgender woman activist and prisoner in California. I have been incarcerated for the past 24 years, and I’ve witnessed every imaginable aspect of the prison system from the inside.

Initially, I was sentenced to “seven years” in state prison after being convicted of a robbery charge. I’ll admit that I’m no angel, but I served the time which fit the crime. I’m a drug addict and ex-gang member who has made a lot of mistakes which I now regret.

Read More »

Texas Prison Burials

By Prison Legal News

If a Texas state prisoner dies or is executed, relatives or friends can pick up the body. If they don’t, he or she is buried in the largest prison graveyard in the United States – the Captain Joe Byrd Cemetery in Huntsville, Texas. Such burials occur around 100 times each year.

Named after an assistant warden at the Huntsville Unit who helped clean and restore the 22-acre graveyard in the 1960s, the cemetery is still associated with the prison unit known as “The Walls” for its 19th century brick walls. The warden or assistant warden from the facility attends each funeral.

A prisoner’s body may be unclaimed for a number of reasons. There may be no surviving friends or relatives, but a more likely explanation is that the friends or relatives are too poor to afford the burial expenses.

“I think everyone assumes if you are in a prison cemetery you’re somehow the worst of the worst,” said Indiana State University assistant professor of criminology Franklin T. Wilson, who is writing a book about the Byrd cemetery. “But it’s more of a reflection of your socioeconomic status. This is more of a case of if you’re buried there, you’re poor.”

Although Texas prison officials have only been able to verify 2,100 prisoner burials at the graveyard, Wilson, who recently photographed every headstone in the cemetery, estimated the number was over 3,000.

 

Read More »

Providing Relief for the Families of Inmates From the High Cost of Staying In Touch

By Julie Veach, Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau

Today, the Commission released an Order that will provide meaningful relief to millions of Americans who have borne the financial burden of unjust and unreasonable interstate inmate calling service (ICS) rates.  These reforms are the right thing to do.  Our actions will increase inmates’ ability to stay in contact with their families and loved ones—including the 2.7 million children with an incarcerated parent.  That increased contact reduces recidivism, which benefits all of us through safer communities and by reducing the expense of incarcerating the re-offenders.  In fact, one study notes that a 1% reduction in recidivism would lead to $250 million in annual cost savings.

The ICS rates that spurred us to act are high.  In one case, the cost of a 15-minute call is $17.50—about $1.15 per minute.  The Order we released today is a major step toward fulfilling our statutory obligation to ensure that rates for all consumers are just, reasonable and fair.

Let’s take a look at the reforms:

  • The Order requires that all ICS providers’ interstate rates and charges be cost-based.  This applies not only to the rates for making a call, but to other charges like fees for establishing, maintaining, or funding an ICS account.
  • The Order also adopts interim caps for interstate inmate calling rates.  The caps are $.21 per minute for interstate debit and prepaid calls, and $.25 per minute for interstate collect calls.  No provider can charge rates above these caps without getting a waiver from us first.
  • The Order adopts interim “safe harbor” rate levels—$.12 per minute for interstate debit and prepaid calls, and $.14 per minute for interstate collect calls.  ICS providers can utilize the safe harbor and receive the benefit of a presumption that their rates are cost-based.
Read More »

Inmates Caught, Hunt Shifts To Who Faked Release Order

By Dianne Frazee-Walker

You’ve got to give them credit for trying. Florida inmates Joseph Jenkins and Charles Walker “almost got away with it.” Instead of digging the traditional tunnel under the prison or impersonating a correctional officer and walking out of prison as free men, these felons came up with a strategy more ingenious than story lines for prison outbreak movies.  

Jenkins and Walker came close to pulling off forging documents that granted them an early release. The escapees both 34 were serving life sentences for murder at the Franklin Correctional Facility in the Florida Panhandle. The duo must have decided a life sentence was too long, so they somehow produced official looking documents that go them an early release, 15 years early. The fraudulent certificates passed as plausible with an authentic looking forged judge’s signature along with case numbers. 

Mr. Jenkins was released on Sept. 27 and registered as a felon on Sept. 30. Mr. Walker was released on Oct. 8 and registered with the authorities three days later.

The ploy came to an abrupt end Saturday evening at Cocoanut Grove Motor Inn located in the touristy town of Panama City Beach, Florida just hours after family members of the men publicly pleaded for their surrender.

The capture occurred just in time because Jenkins and Walker were waiting for a ride from Atlanta to pick them up and take them across the state line. The two men were arrested peacefully and are now in custody. They were unarmed and had a small amount of cash on them.

Read More »

What Are Indigent Federal Prison Inmates Provided?

By Christopher Zoukis

The other day a Prison Law Blog reader presented a question.  “My father is preparing to serve a sentence in a federal prison camp.  He doesn’t have a lot of money or other resources.  What will the Federal Bureau of Prisons provide him for his basic needs?”  Obviously, a good question.  In fact, it’s sad that the Federal Bureau of Prisons doesn’t make this sort of information available to soon-to-be inmates and their families.  Regardless, the Prison Law Blog is here to help.

What Does the Federal Bureau of Prisons Provide to Indigent Prison Inmates?

Generally speaking, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, much like most state prisons, provides indigent inmates with the basic requirements for living in prison.  Prison administrators are responsible for clothing, feeding, and providing medical care to all prisoners, and usually provide recreational opportunities, religious services, psychological counseling, and limited educational opportunities to the prison inmate population under their care as well.  A federal prison inmate with absolutely no resources whatsoever will not starve or freeze to death, though their existence won’t be delightful either since there won’t be many luxuries.

Clothing for Federal Prison Inmates

The Federal Bureau of Prisons provides federal prisoners with several days’ worth of clothing including underwear, t-shirts, khaki pants, khaki shirts (both short-sleeved and long-sleeved), socks, and a winter coat.  Federal inmates are also provided two blankets and two sheets.  Depending on the local climate, long underwear, a knit hat, gloves, and other clothing or linen items might also be furnished.

Federal inmates with funds to spend can often purchase higher quality, or merely an additional quantity, of the existing clothing items.  For example, while the Federal Bureau of Prisons will furnish prisoners with socks, prisoners with funds can purchase higher quality socks from the prison commissary.

Read More »

FBOP Announces Annual Inmate Perception of Care Survey

By Christopher Zoukis

 While an odd thought to present, ever since the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP) implemented the TRULINCS computer system — and followed it with the MP3 player program — the FBOP has appeared to be on the right track in terms of communicating with the federal inmate population.  This idea has presented itself through more frequent announcements to the prison population (via the TRULINCS Electronic Bulletin Board), inmate institutional perception/character surveys, and now the instant Inmate Perception of Care Survey.  It’s the latter which will be presented publicly today.

In an effort to make federal incarceration more transparent, the Prison Law Blog has obtained a document entitled “Note to the Inmate Population: English and Spanish Informed Consent.”  This document explains what the Inmate Perception of Care Survey is, how it can be participated in, and other components of this study.  The English information contained therein is presented below for the Prison Law Blog readership’s perusal:

_________________

Notice to the Inmate Population

English and Spanish Informed Consent

The Annual Inmate Perception of Care Survey will be available by region and you will receive local notice when the survey will be turned on for your institution.  Please read over the following disclosure statement and consider taking the survey when it becomes available.

NCR [North Central Region] and NER [North East Region] August 19-September 1, 2013

MXR [Mid-Atlantic Region] and SCR [South Central Region] September 2-15, 2013

SER [South East Region] and WXR [Western Region] September 16-29, 2013

Read More »

My Life With Lifers: Book Review

By Dr. Elaine J. Leeder

Book review by John E. Dannenberg

Dr. Elaine Leeder, Dean of the of the School of Social Sciences at Sonoma State University, offers a concise, compassionate view of the life and psyche of California prisoners serving term-life sentences. After a long career that has included volunteering to teach prisoners in New York State, and, later, for a decade in San Quentin State Prison, Dr. Leeder has blended her deeply personal humane support of the underdog with her expertise as a sociologist to show that people “thrown away” by society upon being convicted of murder are still people, capable of rehabilitation and eager for the chance to gain the tools for reintegration into society through intensive education while incarcerated.

My Life with Lifers chronicles Dr. Leeder’s interaction with life-sentenced prisoners at San Quentin in a round table discussion group she leads at the facility, called “New Leaf on Life.” Each month, Dr. Leeder brings a guest speaker – a professor or student – to lead the group in discussion on a topic far removed from prison life. The speaker engages the lifers’ minds in thought processes that take them to new levels – daring them to learn, interact in dialogue and yearn to learn more. Many of the prisoners also participated in college-level classes offered by volunteers from a local private university.

Read More »

GAO Examines How BOP Can Reduce Prisoners’ Time in Prison

By Derek Gilna

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has released a study on the
Bureau of Prisons’ authority to shorten a federal prisoner’s sentence. The
Bureau of Prisons (BOP) was found to have three principal authorities with
respect to sentence reduction: prisoners can earn up to twelve months off for
successfully completing the Residential Drug Abuse Treatment Program (RDAP);
eligible prisoners can be transferred to community corrections for up to the
final 12 months of their sentences; and prisoners can theoretically earn up to
54 days a year for good conduct while incarcerated.

Unfortunately, according to the GAO’s review of data from 2009 to 2011, due to
budgetary constraints, mismanagement or bureaucratic indifference, the BOP does
not fully utilize all of the sentence-reduction resources at its disposal. As a
result, federal prisoners spend more time away from their families and
communities, which costs the taxpayers millions of dollars and contributes to
prison overcrowding.

RDAP consists of coursework and counseling that addresses both drug and alcohol
abuse. According to the GAO the problem of substance abuse among prisoners is
staggering, as the “BOP estimates that 40 percent [of those] entering federal
custody have a substance abuse disorder….” Despite that fact, only 19,000
prisoners were able to participate in the program during the time period
reviewed. The BOP currently houses approximately 217,000 prisoners and operates
at 38 percent over capacity.

Due to overcrowding and other program inefficiencies, such as an inability to
hire staff or fill vacancies in a timely manner, very few prisoners who
complete RDAP receive the full 12-month sentence reduction authorized by
statute and BOP program statements.

According to the GAO, “during fiscal years 2009 through 2011, of the 15,302
[prisoners] … who completed RDAP and were eligible for a sentence reduction,
2,846 (19 percent) received the maximum reduction and the average reduction was
8.0 months.” BOP officials have acknowledged that most RDAP participants do not
receive the full amount of time off because they have less than 12 months to
serve on their sentences by the time they finish the program.

Read More »
Search
Categories
Categories
Archives