Federal Judge: Jail Conditions Appalling — Too Few Television Sets
The L.A. Times reports:
Declaring that Los Angeles County officials have been housing inmates in ways “not consistent with basic human values,” a federal judge Thursday called for speedy reforms at the cramped and crowded Men’s Central Jail.
What are the problems at Men’s Central? Well, it’s overcrowded, to be sure — and that’s a valid concern, I suppose. But among the concerns that the judge found serious enough to mention to the Sheriff’s Department was the lack of access to television sets:
Pregerson spent three hours touring the jail Wednesday and said he came away concerned about the amount of time inmates spend locked in their cells without daylight or recreation. Unlike many other jail facilities, Men’s Central Jail has no day rooms where inmates can gather to watch television or socialize.
. . . .
“One of the comments Judge Pregerson made during his tour was about the absence of televisions or the opportunity for inmates to get out of cells. We took that to heart and want to do something about it,” [Sheriff’s Cmdr. Dennis] Conte said.
I hope you do, Cmdr. Conte!
I for one am outraged. These inmates have a constitutional right to 500 channels, including Playboy. As the U.S. Supreme Court has said: “There are few activities in our society more personal or private than the passing of urine.” Wait . . . they did say that, but that’s not the quote I was looking for. I’m pretty sure that they have also said TV for criminals is in the Fourteenth Amendment somewhere. Everything else is.
I sure hope Judge Pregerson gets to the bottom of this. No televisions, no peace!
I bet they don’t have cell phones either.
On the other hand, I wonder what would happen if they had TV’s, dayrooms, and time to “socialize.”
Maybe the TVs should be there, but only get KLCS. After all, and I’m sure the judge would agree, most of TV is a vast wasteland…
Or maybe just Fox News.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 5/13/2006 @ 12:37 amHow about Tivo for the programs they miss while they are out earning their next sentence?
Walter E. Wallis (7ea451) — 5/13/2006 @ 7:01 amHow about hookers?
CraigC (4d10e2) — 5/13/2006 @ 9:13 amWhat is the percentage of convicted to awaiting trial in the system? That would seem to me to be a big question.
What if we have a big bunch of unguilty folks involved?
[A “big bunch”? No. — P]
RJN (c3a4a3) — 5/13/2006 @ 11:02 amHow long does Men’s Central keep inmates?
Jails shouldn’t be a place where people want to be.
But prison weight rooms, basketball hoops, televisions and radios are a powerful management tool. Inmates who can buy TV’s at commissaries will go to great lengths not to have them confiscated.
steve (a4c0cc) — 5/13/2006 @ 11:42 amI would think that rape is a far more serious problem in men’s prisons than lack of televisions. It reflects a serious lack of moral foundation when televisions are more important than inter-inmate violence (not to mention hardcore sexism, since the violence in men’s prisons that’s tolerated by or in some cases abetted by prison officials is never tolerated in women’s prisons).
Bob Smith (d57802) — 5/13/2006 @ 12:12 pmI think this Judge is well-qualified for the Judge William Wayne Justice Memorial Award for Excessive Compassion While Meddling With Prison Conditions.
DRJ (3c8cd6) — 5/13/2006 @ 12:38 pmBut prison weight rooms, basketball hoops, televisions and radios are a powerful management tool. Inmates who can buy TV’s at commissaries will go to great lengths not to have them confiscated.
Quite true. These sound like appropriate considerations for the people running the jails, and the taxpayers who employ them.
But they don’t sound like constitutional questions approprate for resolution by an unelected federal judge.
Patterico (50c3cd) — 5/13/2006 @ 12:41 pmDon’t forget computers in every cell, with broadband. Anything less is cruel and unusual punishment.
Xrlq (576284) — 5/13/2006 @ 12:54 pmI’m not outraged, but I don’t see it as an issue about TV sets either. What the article points out is this: “the amount of time inmates spend locked in their cells without daylight or recreation.”
As Steve writes in #5, it’s pretty much management tools that prison guards need to keep the monsters in place. They’re human and that’s our burden. Definitely no deluxe accommodations — but get them exercise time or 15 minutes in the TV room or whatever is the norm in lockup. It’s actually more for the staff and the system, and to limit the potential for violence.
Vermont Neighbor (a9ae2c) — 5/13/2006 @ 2:59 pmReminds me of NYC in the 70s and early 80s.
Cable was only available in Manhattan, where the elitist governing class lived, and Riker’s Island, where we put our skels awaitng trial or serving a sentence of less than one year. The rest of us had to wait until the late 80s before we were wired.
If only we had known that it was in the penumbras, emenations and shadows of the Constitution, we could have gotten cable sooner.
Patch (808b29) — 5/13/2006 @ 4:02 pmThe last I heard the common wisdom was that you can best control women prisoners by providing them with a comfortable environment (even coddling them) but that you can best control men prisoners by brutalizing them. My view is that once you deprive any person of his freedom you are responsible for providing him with the same safety and “comfort” he could obtain for himself if he were free. Not necessarily TV sets, but freedom from fear of assault, decent food, comfortable shelter, hygiene and medical care. If pushed, I would insist that it is the same as the obligation a parent has to a young child. I would disagree with the judge on his emphasis (the cramped and likely smelly quarters seem worse to me) but I know that small luxuries can alleviate much larger hardships. For example, in World War II the Army found that cigarettes helped soldiers endure hunger, thirst and fatigue. It may very well be that these prisoners are too dangerous to ever be free in society or too irredeemably evil to even be allowed to live. But we are a very rich country and we can afford a lot of justice and plain human decency. There’s a line from “The Outlaw Josey Wales”: “They were decently treated. They were decently disarmed, they were decently fed and they were decently shot.” [Parallel to the DaVinci Code post: A very fun movie that I did not believe a word of. Quantrill’s and Bloody Bill Anderson’s bushwackers were the bad guys.]
nk (06f5d0) — 5/13/2006 @ 4:03 pmWell, at least they’re not giving them a culturally biased exit exam!
Oh, the humanity!
Patricia (2cc180) — 5/13/2006 @ 5:13 pmI thought they could rehabilitate female prisoners with episodes of Oprah.
Vermont Neighbor (a9ae2c) — 5/13/2006 @ 6:13 pmYou cannot rehabilitate what was not habilitated to begin with. But that doesn’t matter. We are all in this together. When a part of your body needs to be amputated you do it to protect the other healthy parts of the body but the loss is still there.
nk (06f5d0) — 5/13/2006 @ 6:25 pmThe only solution is for the Supes to outsource detention to Maricopa County. Sheriff Joe knows how to keep them quiet and habilitated.
Another Drew (8018ee) — 5/13/2006 @ 7:10 pmL.A. County Men’s Central Jail , known here as the “Twin Towers”, is where everyone arrested in the county gets processed for Court or held if there sentence is (I beleive) less than a year.
It is a zoo, with members of every gang in So. Kalifornia housed there. It was suppose to be one tower for men and one for women when they built it about 12 years ago, but the number of people going though killed that after about 2 years and they had to reopen the Women’s jail they had just closed.
If the inmates were allowed to socialize there, with all the comings and goings, it would be a perpetual riot.
SoCalOilMan (f272cd) — 5/14/2006 @ 7:43 amFor those who think that the judge has a point, including about the amount of time spent in cells, never mind the TVs, here’s a question:
Super-max.
That is, if a Federal judge can rule this way about LA prisons, could a Federal judge reach similar conclusions about the conditions at super-max jails?
If so, what does this do to the arguments enunciated by so many that 23/7 lockup of the Moussaouis are somehow acceptable/preferable?
When Moussaoui, too, is being given 15 minutes of every hour with a TV, and plenty of opportunity to be out of his jail cell, etc., will these folks be appalled, or will they be relieved at our “greater humanity” in “properly treating” such people?
Lurking Observer (14e887) — 5/14/2006 @ 10:41 amExcellent, excellent point.
Patterico (50c3cd) — 5/14/2006 @ 10:51 amWell are these monsters waiting to be tried? Or convicted monsters? If they are waiting trial then they are assumed to be innocent and I have slightly more sympathy for them. They should be housed in civilized surroundings until convicted.
Convicted monsters can rot so far as I’m concerned.
agesilaus (42e79b) — 5/14/2006 @ 11:37 amThe whole range. Some are awaiting trail, some are convicted and awaiting transfer to state prison, some are serving short sentences. It is more of a processing facility, moving people in and out constantly.
SoCalOilMan (138f76) — 5/14/2006 @ 2:06 pmHow about video games? Shouldn’t they have PS2s or Xboxes?
Then we can start discussing which games they should be playing.
Grand Theft Auto? Or maybe Barbie Horse Adventure.
Hoystory (eb120d) — 5/14/2006 @ 4:14 pmWhat about their constitutional right to have 50,000 volts coursing through their bodies until…?
What…? You don’t think that’ll fly?
McGehee (5664e1) — 5/15/2006 @ 6:13 pm[…] In prison, you can watch the latest movies, eat fine food regularly, play video games, have access to sporting equipment, including weights and gym equipment, and televisions too. Women can keep their children in prison with them. […]
snarffalicious.com » Blog Archive » Prisoners Have Too Many Rights (2efb0e) — 5/22/2006 @ 6:08 am