Languish.org

General Category => Off the Record => Topic started by: Sheilbh on February 19, 2010, 11:43:16 PM

Title: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Sheilbh on February 19, 2010, 11:43:16 PM
QuoteThe Rape of American Prisoners
By David Kaiser, Lovisa Stannow
Summary Report for Administrative Review
by Tish Elliott-Wilkins

Texas Youth Commission, Office of the General Counsel, 14 pp. (2005)
Report of Investigation
by Brian Burzynski

Texas Department of Public Safety, Texas Ranger Division, redacted version, 229 pp. (2005)
Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities Reported by Youth, 2008–09
by Allen J. Beck, Paige M. Harrison, and Paul Guerino

Bureau of Justice Statistics, 49 pp. (2010)
Sexual Victimization in State and Federal Prisons Reported by Inmates, 2007
by Allen J. Beck and Paige M. Harrison

Bureau of Justice Statistics, 48 pp. (2007)
Sexual Victimization in Local Jails Reported by Inmates, 2007
by Allen J. Beck and Paige M. Harrison

Bureau of Justice Statistics, 43 pp. (2008)
National Prison Rape Elimination Commission Report

National Prison Rape Elimination Commission, 259 pp. (2009)

Adults who want to have sex with children sometimes look for jobs that will make it easy. They want authority over kids, but no very onerous supervision; they also want positions that will make them seem more trustworthy than their potential accusers. Such considerations have infamously led quite a few pedophiles to sully the priesthood over the years, but the priesthood isn't for everyone. For some people, moral authority comes less naturally than blunter, more violent kinds.

Ray Brookins worked for the Texas Youth Commission (TYC), the state's juvenile detention agency. In October 2003, he was hired as head of security at the West Texas State School in Pyote. Like most TYC facilities, it's a remote place. The land is flat to the horizon, scattered with slowly bobbing oil derricks, and always windy. It's a long way from the families of most kids confined there, who tend to be urban and poor; a long way from any social services, or even the police. It must have seemed perfect to Brookins—and also to John Paul Hernandez, who was hired as the school's principal around the same time. Almost immediately, Brookins started pulling students out of their dorms at night, long after curfew, and bringing them to the administration building. When asked why, he said it was for cleaning.[1]

In fact, according to official charges, for sixteen months Brookins and Hernandez molested the children in their care: in offices and conference rooms, in dorms and darkened broom closets and, at night, out in the desert. The boys tried to tell members of the staff they trusted; they also tried, both by letter and through the school's grievance system, to tell TYC officials in Austin. They did so knowing that they might be retaliated against physically, and worse, knowing that if Brookins caught them complaining he could and would extend their confinement,[2] and keep on abusing them.[3] They did so because they were desperate. But they were ignored by the authorities who should have intervened: both those running the school and those running the Texas Youth Commission.[4] Nor did other officials of the TYC who were informed by school staff about molestation take action.
NYR Subscriptions

Finally, in late February 2005, a few of the boys approached a volunteer math tutor named Marc Slattery. Something "icky" was going on, they said. Slattery knew it would be futile to go to school authorities—his parents, also volunteers, had previously told the superintendent of their own suspicions, and were "brow beat" for making allegations without proof[5]—so the next morning he called the Texas Rangers.[6] A sergeant named Brian Burzynski made the ninety-minute drive from his office in Fort Stockton that afternoon. "I saw kids with fear in their eyes," he testified later, "kids who knew they were trapped in an institution where the system would not respond to their cries for help."[7]

Slattery had only reported complaints against Brookins, not against Hernandez, but talking to the boys, Burzynski quickly realized that the principal was also a suspect. (Hernandez, it seems, was less of a bully than Brookins. When a boy resisted Brookins's advances in 2004, he was shackled in an isolation cell for thirteen hours.[8] Hernandez preferred to cajole students into sex with offers of chocolate cake, or help getting into college, or a place to stay after they were released.[9]) The two men were suspended and their homes searched—at which point it was discovered that Brookins was living on school grounds with a sixteen-year-old, who was keeping some of Brookins's "vast quantity of pornographic materials" under his bed.[10] Suspected semen samples were taken from the carpet, furniture, and walls of Brookins's office. He quickly resigned. In April, Hernandez was told he would be fired, whereupon he too resigned.

When the TYC received Burzynski's findings, it launched its own investigation. The internal report this produced was deeply flawed. Investigators didn't interview or blame senior administrators in Austin, though many of them had seen the warning signs and explicit claims of abuse at Pyote. But agency officials saw how damning the story was. Neither their report nor Burzynski's was made public.[11]

The Rangers forwarded Burzynski's report to Randall Reynolds, the local district attorney, but he did nothing. Even though it's a crime in all fifty states for corrections staff to have sex with inmates of any age, prosecutors rarely bring charges in such cases. For a time, from the TYC's perspective, the problem seemed to go away. The agency suspended Lemuel "Chip" Harrison, the superintendent of the school, for ninety days after concluding its investigation—he had ignored complaints about Brookins and Hernandez from many members of the staff—but then it promoted him, making him director of juvenile corrections. Brookins found a job at a hotel in Austin, and Hernandez, astonishingly, became principal of a charter school in Midland.

Rumors have a way of spreading, though, however slowly. Eventually some reporters started digging, and on February 16, 2007, Nate Blakeslee broke the story in The Texas Observer. Doug Swanson followed three days later in The Dallas Morning News, starting an extraordinary run of investigative reporting in that paper: forty articles on abuse and mismanagement in the TYC by the end of March 2007, and to date more than seventy.[12] Pyote was only the beginning. The TYC's culture was thoroughly corrupt: rot had spread to all thirteen of its facilities.

Since January 2000, it turned out, juvenile inmates had filed more than 750 complaints of sexual misconduct by staff. Even that number was generally thought to underrepresent the true extent of such abuse, because most children were too afraid to report it: TYC staff commonly had their favorite inmates beat up those who complained. And even when they did file grievances, the kids knew it was unlikely to do them much good. Reports were frequently sabotaged, evidence routinely destroyed.[13]

In the same six-year period, ninety-two TYC staff had been disciplined or fired for sexual contact with inmates, which can be a felony. (One wonders just how blatant they must have been.) But again, as children's advocate Isela Gutierrez put it, "local prosecutors don't consider these kids to be their constituents."[14] Although five of the ninety-two were "convicted of lesser charges related to sexual misconduct," all received probation or had their cases deferred. Not one agency employee in those six years was sent to prison for sexually abusing a confined child.[15] And despite fierce public outrage at the scandal, neither Brookins nor Hernandez has yet faced trial. In the face of overwhelming evidence, but with recent history making their convictions unlikely, both claim innocence.

I strongly recommend this article, it's truly shocking.  It continues here:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23690
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Jaron on February 19, 2010, 11:50:41 PM
This IS shocking, disgustingly so. I can't believe the authorities don't act on this type of thing.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: jimmy olsen on February 19, 2010, 11:53:09 PM
WTF, that's crazy. How can those prosecutors live with themselves?
Quote
In the same six-year period, ninety-two TYC staff had been disciplined or fired for sexual contact with inmates, which can be a felony. (One wonders just how blatant they must have been.) But again, as children's advocate Isela Gutierrez put it, "local prosecutors don't consider these kids to be their constituents."[14] Although five of the ninety-two were "convicted of lesser charges related to sexual misconduct," all received probation or had their cases deferred. Not one agency employee in those six years was sent to prison for sexually abusing a confined child.[15]
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: The Brain on February 20, 2010, 02:17:01 AM
I blame Kevin Bacon.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Jaron on February 20, 2010, 02:21:07 AM
I blame Chicken Fried Bacon

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_9gn6KLa5xtY%2FSMP-Re-g2NI%2FAAAAAAAACFM%2F0bT3fW4xFQs%2Fs400%2FChickenFriedBacon.jpg&hash=fa93278e82df2a2c98387ade8c2ac06efcad34ee)
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Syt on February 20, 2010, 02:24:57 AM
:mmm:
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: The Brain on February 20, 2010, 02:25:32 AM
:mmm:
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: garbon on February 20, 2010, 02:26:47 AM
Rape :(
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 04:31:45 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 19, 2010, 11:53:09 PM
WTF, that's crazy. How can those prosecutors live with themselves?

:lmfao:

Sorry, couldn't help myself. Your naivete is astounding.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: CountDeMoney on February 20, 2010, 04:54:10 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 19, 2010, 11:53:09 PM
a confined child.

Somewhere, Siegy's penis just blew up like an IED of Love.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: garbon on February 20, 2010, 05:06:56 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 20, 2010, 04:54:10 AM
Somewhere, Siegy's penis just blew up like an IED of Love.

Well he did say his penis was hurting from all the urine inside it...
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Razgovory on February 20, 2010, 12:40:34 PM
That's not shocking.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Neil on February 20, 2010, 12:42:55 PM
Faggotry has caused moral decay.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 20, 2010, 01:13:36 PM
It's prison. What do you expect? All the innocent people who have just "caught" a charge to play Spades?
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Jaron on February 20, 2010, 01:19:42 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 20, 2010, 01:13:36 PM
It's prison. What do you expect? All the innocent people who have just "caught" a charge to play Spades?

We expect them not to get raped.  :huh:
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 20, 2010, 01:25:52 PM
Quote from: Jaron on February 20, 2010, 01:19:42 PM
We expect them not to get raped.  :huh:

No, you expect them to get raped. Don't lie to yourself. What you expect is that you won't see it or have to read about it. Just like everyone else.

If you cared or if society cared than they would fund prisons better. Instead they provide minimum funding to prisons which makes prisons run with minimal staff.

The result is that inmates run the prison and will do so for the foreseeable future.  And, news flash, most inmates are not nice people.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: ulmont on February 20, 2010, 01:29:30 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 20, 2010, 01:25:52 PM
The result is that inmates run the prison and will do so for the foreseeable future.

"Inmates run[ning] the prison" doesn't explain why they're getting raped by the guards.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Jaron on February 20, 2010, 01:32:11 PM
Realistically, yes. I am not shocked there is rape in prisons. However, as a citizen of these United States and a proud member of her tax base, I have the moral expectation that when our legal system sends someone off to jail, they will serve their time, but that they will be safe from harm. That is what gives us the high ground..the moral authority to impose such judgements, if you will.

This is not about making sure bad things don't happen to bad people. It is about ensuring full government control of these institutions and making sure they are being used in the manner they are being funded for. I'm not paying a god damn dime to give a rapist fresh and unlimited access to all the ass he can stomach.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 20, 2010, 01:40:18 PM
The problem is that the article is highlighting one incident of a homosexual sex offender run amok who happens to be in a position of power.

99% of the "rapes" that occur by the guards or other members of staff are consensual sex acts usually between adults. They are "rape" because of statutory law. If you look at the numbers I am sure you will find that the percentage of people who receive a reduced charge or plea for statutory rape is in line with what occurs at prison (plus the added fact that the person being charged just lost a good paying job with good benefits).

Inmates run the prison. No way a guard or staff member would rape a prisoner unless it was some bizarre circumstance (as the article portrays at the youth facility). Inmates hold the power. They can have a guard fired or killed without much effort if they really want to do so.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Jaron on February 20, 2010, 01:43:13 PM
You need to take your pick. They are either consensual acts between adults or violations of statutory law. Which is it Strix?

By definition isn't it impossible for them to be both?

Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 20, 2010, 01:57:42 PM
Quote from: Jaron on February 20, 2010, 01:43:13 PM
You need to take your pick. They are either consensual acts between adults or violations of statutory law. Which is it Strix?

By definition isn't it impossible for them to be both?

No. Which is why it's called statutory rape. It doesn't fit under the definition of rape, so they needed to add a new statute. Which is what they do when it's between consenting parties.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Jaron on February 20, 2010, 02:07:55 PM
Then it is rape.

We aren't talking about teenage sweethearts breaking the law because one of them turns 18.

We are talking about prison guards molesting child inmates.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Barrister on February 20, 2010, 02:15:35 PM
I don't know about NY State, but in Canada adults who are in positions of authority over youths, who then have sex with those youths, aren't committing 'statutory rape' - they're abusing their position of authority, an entirely separate offence called "sexual exploitation" with a higher sentence.

Also I don't know about NY State prisons, but in provincial and territorial prisons in Canada inmates certainly have influence, but by no stretch can they "have a guard fired or killed without much effort".

And I can tell you that such an allegation would lead to very swift charges from my office.  We're much less likely to see it in Canada though because we jail very, very few young people (too few IMHO).
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Sheilbh on February 20, 2010, 02:19:17 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 20, 2010, 01:40:18 PM
The problem is that the article is highlighting one incident of a homosexual sex offender run amok who happens to be in a position of power.
Read the rest of the article before you comment.

Also the idea of a consensual relationship between a prison guard and an inmate is laughable.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Sheilbh on February 20, 2010, 02:28:07 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 20, 2010, 01:25:52 PM
No, you expect them to get raped. Don't lie to yourself. What you expect is that you won't see it or have to read about it. Just like everyone else.
This is despicable.  We expect some violence and institutional violence within prisons and we tolerate that.  We don't expect and we shouldn't tolerate, or ignore what verges on institutionalised rape.

QuoteIf you cared or if society cared than they would fund prisons better. Instead they provide minimum funding to prisons which makes prisons run with minimal staff.
Agreed.

QuoteThe result is that inmates run the prison and will do so for the foreseeable future.  And, news flash, most inmates are not nice people.
From the article:
QuoteAcross the country, 12.1 percent of kids questioned in the BJS survey said that they'd been sexually abused at their current facility during the preceding year. That's nearly one in eight, or approximately 3,220, out of the 26,550 who were eligible to participate. The survey, however, was only given at large facilities that held young people who had been "adjudicated"—i.e., found by a court to have committed an offense—for at least ninety days, which is more restrictive than it may sound. In total, according to the most recent data, there are nearly 93,000 kids in juvenile detention on any given day.[19] Although we can't assume that 12.1 percent of the larger number were sexually abused—many kids not covered by the survey are held for short periods of time, or in small facilities where rates of abuse are somewhat lower—we can say confidently that the BJS's 3,220 figure represents only a small fraction of the children sexually abused in detention every year.

What sort of kids get locked up in the first place? Only 34 percent of those in juvenile detention are there for violent crimes. (More than 200,000 youth are also tried as adults in the US every year, and on any given day approximately 8,500 kids under eighteen are confined in adult prisons and jails. Although probably at greater risk of sexual abuse than any other detained population, they haven't yet been surveyed by the BJS.) According to the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission, which was itself created by PREA, more than 20 percent of those in juvenile detention were confined for technical offenses such as violating probation, or for "status offenses" like missing curfews, truancy, or running away—often from violence and abuse at home. ("These kids have been raped their whole lives," said a former officer from the TYC's Brownwood unit.[20]) Many suffer from mental illness, substance abuse, and learning disabilities.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: viper37 on February 20, 2010, 02:37:40 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 20, 2010, 02:15:35 PM
Also I don't know about NY State prisons, but in provincial and territorial prisons in Canada inmates certainly have influence, but by no stretch can they "have a guard fired or killed without much effort".
Ask Mom Boucher.  It didn't appear to be very hard to have 2 guards killed, outside the prison.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Jaron on February 20, 2010, 02:46:42 PM
I just read up on that and I don't see the connection.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 20, 2010, 03:42:15 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 20, 2010, 02:15:35 PM
I don't know about NY State, but in Canada adults who are in positions of authority over youths, who then have sex with those youths, aren't committing 'statutory rape' - they're abusing their position of authority, an entirely separate offence called "sexual exploitation" with a higher sentence.

Also I don't know about NY State prisons, but in provincial and territorial prisons in Canada inmates certainly have influence, but by no stretch can they "have a guard fired or killed without much effort".

And I can tell you that such an allegation would lead to very swift charges from my office.  We're much less likely to see it in Canada though because we jail very, very few young people (too few IMHO).

It is the same in NY. It's not statutory rape but a charge of abusing one's authority. Basically NY believes that anyone in a position of authority having control of another cannot engage in sexual conduct with that person because they are unable to give consent.

I am quite sure you are wrong concerning Canadian prisons. I am quite sure that inmates get officers fired all the time without much effort. All they do is turn the officer in and testify to what that officer is doing wrong. We aren't talking about inmates getting innocent employees fired. We are talking about officers engaging in activity they shouldn't be doing. A prison guard is the easiest person to injure and kill if an inmate wants to do so. There is literally nothing that can be done to prevent it if the inmate has the connections or will. It doesn't happen that often that they are killed because there is little incentive to do so.

The issue with the article is that they are using an example of a child molester as proof of something bigger and more insidious going on. The only link between the child molester and institutional "rape" is the knee jerk reactions of people reading the article.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 20, 2010, 03:50:20 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 20, 2010, 02:19:17 PM
Read the rest of the article before you comment.

Also the idea of a consensual relationship between a prison guard and an inmate is laughable.

I suggest you do the same. If you do with an objective viewpoint and not a knee jerk reaction than you will notice how the article starts with a story designed to bring a strong emotional reaction than continues with stats and figures that are muddled. Sometimes the facts are about inmate to inmate relations than they are followed by a comment concerning guard to inmate relations. It is clear the article has an agenda and doesn't care how misleading the information is that supports that agenda.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2010, 06:31:26 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 20, 2010, 02:19:17 PM
Also the idea of a consensual relationship between a prison guard and an inmate is laughable.
I don't see why.  Inmates get horny too.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Razgovory on February 20, 2010, 06:57:12 PM
Huh, I wonder if this means when Strix said that Mexicans were serial rapists he meant it as a compliment.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Ed Anger on February 20, 2010, 06:58:58 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 20, 2010, 06:57:12 PM
Huh, I wonder if this means when Strix said that Mexicans were serial rapists he meant it as a compliment.

They do like the Fruit Loops.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:26:20 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 20, 2010, 01:57:42 PM
Quote from: Jaron on February 20, 2010, 01:43:13 PM
You need to take your pick. They are either consensual acts between adults or violations of statutory law. Which is it Strix?

By definition isn't it impossible for them to be both?

No. Which is why it's called statutory rape. It doesn't fit under the definition of rape, so they needed to add a new statute. Which is what they do when it's between consenting parties.

So it's rape, but not rape-rape, Whoopi?

Seriously though, you do realize that a minor is unable to give consent (not to mention a minor in a position of subordination)? I didn't think I'd live to a day when someone on Languish actually makes an argument that the child in a statutory rape situation is "consenting". This is a pedophile's equivalent of a racist's "some of my friends are black" - just something you don't do, since it's so cliche.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2010, 07:28:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:26:20 PM
So it's rape, but not rape-rape, Whoopi?
It's a legally prohibited act that is consensual and not coerced.  It's not that difficult a concept.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:30:44 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2010, 07:28:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:26:20 PM
So it's rape, but not rape-rape, Whoopi?
It's a legally prohibited act that is consensual and not coerced.  It's not that difficult a concept.

Statutory rape is NOT consensual, because a minor can't give consent. Necrophilia is not consensual either. Neither is sex with someone who is in a coma.

I just can't believe someone can be arguing a statutory rape is "consensual". It's simply mindboggling.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2010, 07:34:21 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:30:44 PM
Statutory rape is NOT consensual, because a minor can't give consent. Necrophilia is not consensual either. Neither is sex with someone who is in a coma.

I just can't believe someone can be arguing a statutory rape is "consensual". It's simply mindboggling.
I can't believe someone is arguing that all statutory rape is with minors after Strix just explained that sex between prison guards and inmates is statutory rape.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:37:35 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2010, 07:34:21 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:30:44 PM
Statutory rape is NOT consensual, because a minor can't give consent. Necrophilia is not consensual either. Neither is sex with someone who is in a coma.

I just can't believe someone can be arguing a statutory rape is "consensual". It's simply mindboggling.
I can't believe someone is arguing that all statutory rape is with minors after Strix just explained that sex between prison guards and inmates is statutory rape.

What the fuck are you talking about? The article is about minors. Jaron's post, to which Strix was responding, to which I responded, was about sex with minors.

And, besides, sex where there is a coercion involved, even between adults, and even if there is no physical force used, is also rape.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2010, 07:41:46 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:37:35 PM
What the fuck are you talking about? The article is about minors. Jaron's post, to which Strix was responding, to which I responded, was about sex with minors.

And, besides, sex where there is a coercion involved, even between adults, and even if there is no physical force used, is also rape.

Uh, no.  From Strix:

Quote99% of the "rapes" that occur by the guards or other members of staff are consensual sex acts usually between adults. They are "rape" because of statutory law. If you look at the numbers I am sure you will find that the percentage of people who receive a reduced charge or plea for statutory rape is in line with what occurs at prison (plus the added fact that the person being charged just lost a good paying job with good benefits).
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Barrister on February 20, 2010, 08:05:14 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:30:44 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2010, 07:28:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:26:20 PM
So it's rape, but not rape-rape, Whoopi?
It's a legally prohibited act that is consensual and not coerced.  It's not that difficult a concept.

Statutory rape is NOT consensual, because a minor can't give consent. Necrophilia is not consensual either. Neither is sex with someone who is in a coma.

I just can't believe someone can be arguing a statutory rape is "consensual". It's simply mindboggling.

SOmething can be consentual in fact, but not in law.  :mellow:
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 08:19:11 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2010, 06:31:26 PM
I don't see why.  Inmates get horny too.
Because of the difference in power I think any consensual sexual relationship is more or less impossible.

QuoteIf you do with an objective viewpoint and not a knee jerk reaction than you will notice how the article starts with a story designed to bring a strong emotional reaction than continues with stats and figures that are muddled. Sometimes the facts are about inmate to inmate relations than they are followed by a comment concerning guard to inmate relations. It is clear the article has an agenda and doesn't care how misleading the information is that supports that agenda.
This article has an agenda, most essays of this type do, in this case prison reform.  I can't think of any long-form essay that lacks an agenda.  I think the story that the article opens with is shocking, but that the statistics that follow are what's worse.

Where do you think the article's misleading, though?

I don't know where we're going on the consensual issue - the article mentions and discusses that aspect - in terms of the prisons for minors especially there can't be consent because they're minors, in prison there's no such thing as consent (which is why it's treated as statutory rape) and while in adult prison it's often those who are weaker or unable to defend themselves who get raped I imagine that in prisons for minor it's the younger inmates. 

I think the consent argument is a blind alley that ignores serious concerns from this survey about paedophilia, abuse of power and a systemic, institutionalised tolerance of rape and sexual abuse on the part of both guards and inmates.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Admiral Yi on February 21, 2010, 08:50:03 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 08:19:11 AM
Because of the difference in power I think any consensual sexual relationship is more or less impossible.
You're confusing me Shelf.  Do you mean to say that whenever the power imbalance is too great it is metaphysically impossible for the person with less power to freely desire sex with the other person?
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 09:08:39 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 21, 2010, 08:50:03 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 08:19:11 AM
Because of the difference in power I think any consensual sexual relationship is more or less impossible.
You're confusing me Shelf.  Do you mean to say that whenever the power imbalance is too great it is metaphysically impossible for the person with less power to freely desire sex with the other person?
I don't think desire has anything to do with it. 

I think within certain power relationships it is almost impossible to have a concept like 'consent'.  Prison guard-inmate is one, I think minor-priest in a Catholic orphanage (as happened in Ireland) is another, I think until recently it's possible that there was a similar dynamic in the military.  I think consent requires a choice and I don't think that when there's a significant difference in power that that there can be a choice.  Which is why statutory rape exists and why it covers the prisoner-guard relationship.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Neil on February 21, 2010, 09:10:51 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:26:20 PM
Seriously though, you do realize that a minor is unable to give consent (not to mention a minor in a position of subordination)? I didn't think I'd live to a day when someone on Languish actually makes an argument that the child in a statutory rape situation is "consenting". This is a pedophile's equivalent of a racist's "some of my friends are black" - just something you don't do, since it's so cliche.
You make that argument all the time, as do other Languish homos.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Admiral Yi on February 21, 2010, 09:24:26 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 09:08:39 AM
I don't think desire has anything to do with it. 

I think within certain power relationships it is almost impossible to have a concept like 'consent'.  Prison guard-inmate is one, I think minor-priest in a Catholic orphanage (as happened in Ireland) is another, I think until recently it's possible that there was a similar dynamic in the military.  I think consent requires a choice and I don't think that when there's a significant difference in power that that there can be a choice.  Which is why statutory rape exists and why it covers the prisoner-guard relationship.
You seem to be arguing with a strawman.  Strix never said we should lift the penalties on guard-inmate sex.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 09:29:35 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 21, 2010, 09:24:26 AM
You seem to be arguing with a strawman.  Strix never said we should lift the penalties on guard-inmate sex.
But I'm arguing with you not Strix about this, about whether or not it's possible for there to be consent in this circumstance.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Admiral Yi on February 21, 2010, 09:39:58 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 09:29:35 AM
But I'm arguing with you not Strix about this, about whether or not it's possible for there to be consent in this circumstance.
You can't argue about the the possibility of consent while saying desire has nothing to do with it.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 21, 2010, 02:37:55 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 21, 2010, 09:39:58 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 09:29:35 AM
But I'm arguing with you not Strix about this, about whether or not it's possible for there to be consent in this circumstance.
You can't argue about the the possibility of consent while saying desire has nothing to do with it.

Desire is not the same as consent. I think we all agree that minors or sufficiently mentally disabled people cannot give consent even if they may have a "desire" to engage in a sexual activity.

I believe Sheilbh's point is that a similar situation exist when there is a sufficiently deep power difference - so arguing with it from a position of "desire" is really a strawman.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: The Brain on February 21, 2010, 02:39:49 PM
This discussion. :bleeding:
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 21, 2010, 02:40:05 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 20, 2010, 08:05:14 PM
SOmething can be consentual in fact, but not in law.  :mellow:

Perhaps, but how's that relevant to the discussion at hand? You don't argue whether sex with a 6 y.o. was "consentual in fact".
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Barrister on February 21, 2010, 03:11:47 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 21, 2010, 02:40:05 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 20, 2010, 08:05:14 PM
SOmething can be consentual in fact, but not in law.  :mellow:

Perhaps, but how's that relevant to the discussion at hand? You don't argue whether sex with a 6 y.o. was "consentual in fact".

It can be a factor to consider.  I've prosecuted a few 'stat rape' cases, and yes while a 6 year old victim is totally incapable of giving any level of consent, someone who is 13 can.  And so while it is still a crime, situations where it is 'consentual in fact, but not in law' will be treated somewhat differently when it comes to sentence.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 21, 2010, 03:13:36 PM
Part 1 of 2

QuoteThe Rape of American Prisoners
By David Kaiser, Lovisa Stannow
Summary Report for Administrative Review
by Tish Elliott-Wilkins

Texas Youth Commission, Office of the General Counsel, 14 pp. (2005)
Report of Investigation
by Brian Burzynski

Texas Department of Public Safety, Texas Ranger Division, redacted version, 229 pp. (2005)
Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities Reported by Youth, 2008–09
by Allen J. Beck, Paige M. Harrison, and Paul Guerino

Bureau of Justice Statistics, 49 pp. (2010)
Sexual Victimization in State and Federal Prisons Reported by Inmates, 2007
by Allen J. Beck and Paige M. Harrison

Bureau of Justice Statistics, 48 pp. (2007)
Sexual Victimization in Local Jails Reported by Inmates, 2007
by Allen J. Beck and Paige M. Harrison

Bureau of Justice Statistics, 43 pp. (2008)
National Prison Rape Elimination Commission Report

National Prison Rape Elimination Commission, 259 pp. (2009)

Adults who want to have sex with children sometimes look for jobs that will make it easy. They want authority over kids, but no very onerous supervision; they also want positions that will make them seem more trustworthy than their potential accusers. Such considerations have infamously led quite a few pedophiles to sully the priesthood over the years, but the priesthood isn't for everyone. For some people, moral authority comes less naturally than blunter, more violent kinds.

Ray Brookins worked for the Texas Youth Commission (TYC), the state's juvenile detention agency. In October 2003, he was hired as head of security at the West Texas State School in Pyote. Like most TYC facilities, it's a remote place. The land is flat to the horizon, scattered with slowly bobbing oil derricks, and always windy. It's a long way from the families of most kids confined there, who tend to be urban and poor; a long way from any social services, or even the police. It must have seemed perfect to Brookins—and also to John Paul Hernandez, who was hired as the school's principal around the same time. Almost immediately, Brookins started pulling students out of their dorms at night, long after curfew, and bringing them to the administration building. When asked why, he said it was for cleaning.[1]

In fact, according to official charges, for sixteen months Brookins and Hernandez molested the children in their care: in offices and conference rooms, in dorms and darkened broom closets and, at night, out in the desert. The boys tried to tell members of the staff they trusted; they also tried, both by letter and through the school's grievance system, to tell TYC officials in Austin. They did so knowing that they might be retaliated against physically, and worse, knowing that if Brookins caught them complaining he could and would extend their confinement,[2] and keep on abusing them.[3] They did so because they were desperate. But they were ignored by the authorities who should have intervened: both those running the school and those running the Texas Youth Commission.[4] Nor did other officials of the TYC who were informed by school staff about molestation take action.

Finally, in late February 2005, a few of the boys approached a volunteer math tutor named Marc Slattery. Something "icky" was going on, they said. Slattery knew it would be futile to go to school authorities—his parents, also volunteers, had previously told the superintendent of their own suspicions, and were "brow beat" for making allegations without proof[5]—so the next morning he called the Texas Rangers.[6] A sergeant named Brian Burzynski made the ninety-minute drive from his office in Fort Stockton that afternoon. "I saw kids with fear in their eyes," he testified later, "kids who knew they were trapped in an institution where the system would not respond to their cries for help."[7]

Slattery had only reported complaints against Brookins, not against Hernandez, but talking to the boys, Burzynski quickly realized that the principal was also a suspect. (Hernandez, it seems, was less of a bully than Brookins. When a boy resisted Brookins's advances in 2004, he was shackled in an isolation cell for thirteen hours.[8] Hernandez preferred to cajole students into sex with offers of chocolate cake, or help getting into college, or a place to stay after they were released.[9]) The two men were suspended and their homes searched—at which point it was discovered that Brookins was living on school grounds with a sixteen-year-old, who was keeping some of Brookins's "vast quantity of pornographic materials" under his bed.[10] Suspected semen samples were taken from the carpet, furniture, and walls of Brookins's office. He quickly resigned. In April, Hernandez was told he would be fired, whereupon he too resigned.

When the TYC received Burzynski's findings, it launched its own investigation. The internal report this produced was deeply flawed. Investigators didn't interview or blame senior administrators in Austin, though many of them had seen the warning signs and explicit claims of abuse at Pyote. But agency officials saw how damning the story was. Neither their report nor Burzynski's was made public.[11]

The Rangers forwarded Burzynski's report to Randall Reynolds, the local district attorney, but he did nothing. Even though it's a crime in all fifty states for corrections staff to have sex with inmates of any age, prosecutors rarely bring charges in such cases. For a time, from the TYC's perspective, the problem seemed to go away. The agency suspended Lemuel "Chip" Harrison, the superintendent of the school, for ninety days after concluding its investigation—he had ignored complaints about Brookins and Hernandez from many members of the staff—but then it promoted him, making him director of juvenile corrections. Brookins found a job at a hotel in Austin, and Hernandez, astonishingly, became principal of a charter school in Midland.

Rumors have a way of spreading, though, however slowly. Eventually some reporters started digging, and on February 16, 2007, Nate Blakeslee broke the story in The Texas Observer. Doug Swanson followed three days later in The Dallas Morning News, starting an extraordinary run of investigative reporting in that paper: forty articles on abuse and mismanagement in the TYC by the end of March 2007, and to date more than seventy.[12] Pyote was only the beginning. The TYC's culture was thoroughly corrupt: rot had spread to all thirteen of its facilities.

Since January 2000, it turned out, juvenile inmates had filed more than 750 complaints of sexual misconduct by staff. Even that number was generally thought to underrepresent the true extent of such abuse, because most children were too afraid to report it: TYC staff commonly had their favorite inmates beat up those who complained. And even when they did file grievances, the kids knew it was unlikely to do them much good. Reports were frequently sabotaged, evidence routinely destroyed.[13]

In the same six-year period, ninety-two TYC staff had been disciplined or fired for sexual contact with inmates, which can be a felony. (One wonders just how blatant they must have been.) But again, as children's advocate Isela Gutierrez put it, "local prosecutors don't consider these kids to be their constituents."[14] Although five of the ninety-two were "convicted of lesser charges related to sexual misconduct," all received probation or had their cases deferred. Not one agency employee in those six years was sent to prison for sexually abusing a confined child.[15] And despite fierce public outrage at the scandal, neither Brookins nor Hernandez has yet faced trial. In the face of overwhelming evidence, but with recent history making their convictions unlikely, both claim innocence.

This first part of the article is great for bringing emotion and the sense of injustice to the article. There is nothing wrong so far. Although the article does not give us the gender or ages of these kids. These kids could be from 12-20? I am not sure where the age of majority begins in Texas but in New York it's 21. So, is this teenage girls (17-20) getting horny middle-aged men fired? Or is this pedophiles run amok praying on young boys (12-16)?

QuoteTexas is hardly the only state with a troubled juvenile justice system. In 2004, the Department of Justice investigated a facility in Plainfield, Indiana, where kids sexually abused each other so often and in such numbers that staff created flow charts to track the incidents. The victims were frequently as young as twelve or thirteen; investigators found "youths weighing under seventy pounds who engaged in sexual acts with youths who weighed as much as 100 pounds more than them."[16] A youth probation officer in Oregon was arrested the same year on more than seventy counts of sex crimes against children, and one of his victims hanged himself.[17] In Florida in 2005, corrections officers housed a severely disabled fifteen-year-old boy whose IQ was 32 with a seventeen-year-old sex offender, giving the seventeen-year-old the job of bathing him and changing his diaper. Instead, the seventeen-year-old raped him repeatedly.[18]

Our first burst of misinformation from the author. The first part of the article discussed pedophiles out of control in Texas. However, now he attempts to back up that theory with facts and information concerning inmate on inmate sexual acts. The author than throws in another horror story about an Oregon probation officer who was arrested but doesn't provide the penalty that resulted. The author quickly follows up with a story about more inmate on inmate sexual violence insinuating that the Florida Corrections Officers (not even the Department) purposely allowed a 17-year old sex offenders to have his way with a 15-year old disabled child. He provides no information as to why the 15-year old was in prison or if they both were housed in a sex offender unit.

QuoteThe list of such stories goes on and on. After each of them was made public, it was possible for officials to contend that they reflected anomalous failings of a particular facility or system. But a report just issued on January 7 by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) should change that. Mandated by the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA), and easily the largest and most authoritative study of the issue ever conducted, it makes clear that the crisis of sexual abuse in juvenile detention is nationwide.

Across the country, 12.1 percent of kids questioned in the BJS survey said that they'd been sexually abused at their current facility during the preceding year. That's nearly one in eight, or approximately 3,220, out of the 26,550 who were eligible to participate. The survey, however, was only given at large facilities that held young people who had been "adjudicated"—i.e., found by a court to have committed an offense—for at least ninety days, which is more restrictive than it may sound. In total, according to the most recent data, there are nearly 93,000 kids in juvenile detention on any given day.[19] Although we can't assume that 12.1 percent of the larger number were sexually abused—many kids not covered by the survey are held for short periods of time, or in small facilities where rates of abuse are somewhat lower—we can say confidently that the BJS's 3,220 figure represents only a small fraction of the children sexually abused in detention every year.

More information given in a grandiose fashion. The author claims that the list of stories go on and on but has only given is the example of two pedophiles in Texas and one in Oregon. I can speak for New York state, and know that between DOCS (prison system), Parole, and Probation there are roughly 36,000+ employees. Multiply that by 50 states and a few stories about pedophiles doesn't seem like an epidemic.

The author than goes on to discuss how many kids reported sexual abuse and misconduct in a BJS survey. Than confidently states that the number is probably higher (which I don't dispute). However, at no point does the author explain if this is guard on inmate or inmate on inmate sexual misconduct. That makes any of this information totally useless. It is damning in the eyes of those suffering a knee jerk reaction from the first part of the article who are no longer objective in their reading.

QuoteWhat sort of kids get locked up in the first place? Only 34 percent of those in juvenile detention are there for violent crimes. (More than 200,000 youth are also tried as adults in the US every year, and on any given day approximately 8,500 kids under eighteen are confined in adult prisons and jails. Although probably at greater risk of sexual abuse than any other detained population, they haven't yet been surveyed by the BJS.) According to the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission, which was itself created by PREA, more than 20 percent of those in juvenile detention were confined for technical offenses such as violating probation, or for "status offenses" like missing curfews, truancy, or running away—often from violence and abuse at home. ("These kids have been raped their whole lives," said a former officer from the TYC's Brownwood unit.[20]) Many suffer from mental illness, substance abuse, and learning disabilities.

The first part of this is more fluff. Of course most aren't violent. As the author points out, violent kids tend to get tried as adults. Violating probation and "status offenses" are serious because a majority of the kids were given 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and so on, chances with the promise that they would successfully complete probation. Is the author trying to say that we should tell these kids to behave or else than do nothing when they don't follow their conditions? I like where the author quotes a former officer from TYC Brownwood Unit after so thoroughly ripping the integrity of that whole organization in the beginning of the article.

QuoteFully 80 percent of the sexual abuse reported in the study was committed not by other inmates but by staff. And surprisingly, 95 percent of the youth making such allegations said that they were victimized by female staff. Sixty-four percent of them reported at least one incident of sexual contact with staff in which no force or explicit coercion was used. Staff caught having sex with inmates often claim it's consensual. But staff have enormous control over inmates' lives. They can give inmates privileges, such as extra food or clothing or the opportunity to wash, and they can punish them: everything from beatings to solitary confinement to extended detention. The notion of a truly consensual relationship in such circumstances is grotesque even when the inmate is not a child.

Ok, some meat and bones. The author begins with some minor misinformation because it isn't clear any longer what study is being discussed. I'll assume it's the one concerning the Texas Youth place. So, now the author states that 80% of the abuse is by staff but that 95% of the incidents were involving female staff with male inmates. So, forcible rape is now out the window despite the beginning of the article making it sound like male pedophiles run amok raping young children (inferring males). The author further admits that 64% of the encounters involved no force or coercion. Since it's almost impossible for a woman to forcible rape a man (without using an object anally) I am guessing that the other 31% involving coercion was something along the lines of if inmate does X for staff than he won't get in trouble or get a benefit. It is doubtful that a woman staff member is strong enough to be forcing a male teenager to do anything without help. So, once again, the author doesn't release ages of the inmates involved. The author is more honest with the facts but buries them at the end of the article when people are already sold on the pedophile run amok theory and their eyes glaze over looking at numbers at this point.

QuoteNationally, however, fewer than half of the corrections officials whose sexual abuse of juveniles is confirmed are referred for prosecution, and almost none are seriously punished. A quarter of all known staff predators in state youth facilities are allowed to keep their positions.[21]

The reasons are many. First, and foremost, most of the sex is consensual but illegal by statute. It is easier for the facility to fire the employee and keep from being investigated by a higher authority (and keep it out of the news) than it is to prosecute. Second, it comes down to usually he said, she said, so it's easier to terminate or separate the employee from employment than a costly legal battle. The author makes it sound like little or no punishment occurs but 75% of employees lose their jobs. I am sure the other 25% lose chance of promotion or are reassigned to less favorable positions. As the author noted in the Oregon probation situation, a small percentage are prosecuted but the author never gives us that percentage which implies shoddy research or intentional misinformation.

QuoteThe biggest risk factor found in the study was prior abuse. Some 65 percent of kids who had been sexually assaulted at another corrections facility were also assaulted at their current one. In prison culture, even in juvenile detention, after an inmate is raped for the first time he is considered "turned out," and fair game for further abuse.[22] Eighty-one percent of juveniles sexually abused by other inmates were victimized more than once, and 32 percent more than ten times. Forty-two percent were assaulted by more than one person. Of those victimized by staff, 88 percent had been abused repeatedly, 27 percent more than ten times, and 33 percent by more than one facility employee. Those who responded to the survey had been in their facilities for an average of 6.3 months.

Once again the misinformation train is flowing. This section starts out discussing rape by other inmates but than suddenly changes into information about staff again. If a reader isn't paying close attention than they associate the rapes repeatedly occurring in the first part with repeated sexual encounters in the second part by staff. It's clear from the TYC study that the female staff is having sex often with male inmates. It's not usual for these things to be one time encounters so of course the abuse is repeated. It is very dishonest on the authors part to attempt to link these two things together.

QuoteJust as the BJS report on sexual abuse in juvenile detention facilities shows that problems like the ones at Pyote aren't limited to Texas, two previous BJS reports, on the incidence of sexual abuse in adult prisons and jails, show that abuses in juvenile detention are only a small part of a much larger human rights problem in this country. Published in December 2007 and June 2008, these were extensive studies: they surveyed a combined total of 63,817 inmates in 392 different facilities.

Sexual abuse in detention is difficult to measure. Prisoners sometimes make false allegations, but sometimes, knowing that true confidentiality is almost nonexistent behind bars and fearing retaliation, they decide not to disclose abuse. Although those who responded to the BJS surveys remained anonymous, it seems likely, on balance, that the studies underestimate the incidence of prisoner rape.[23] But even taken at face value, they reveal much more systemic abuse than has been generally recognized or admitted.[/quote]

Once again, the author attempts to link the more serious rape among inmates that occurs in adult facilities with that of consensual sex occurring in between staff and inmates at the TYC.

End of Part 1
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 21, 2010, 03:14:04 PM
Part 2 of 2

QuoteUsing a snapshot technique—surveying a random sample[24] of those incarcerated on a given day and then extrapolating only from those numbers—the BJS found that 4.5 percent of the nation's prisoners, i.e., inmates who have been convicted of felonies and sentenced to more than a year, had been sexually abused in the facilities at which they answered the questionnaire during the preceding year: approximately 60,500 people. Moreover, 3.2 percent of jail inmates—i.e., people who were awaiting trial or serving short sentences—had been sexually abused in their facilities over the preceding six months, meaning an estimated total, out of those jailed on the day of the survey, of 24,700 nationwide.[25]

Both studies divide these reports of abuse in two different ways. They ask whether the perpetrator was another inmate or one of the facility's staff. And they differentiate between willing and unwilling sexual contact with staff, although recognizing that it is always illegal for staff to have sex with inmates. Similarly, they distinguish between "abusive sexual contact" from other inmates, or unwanted sexual touching, and what most people would call rape. The results are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. Overall, the more severe forms of abuse outnumber the lesser ones in both surveys. And the reported perpetrators in both jails and prisons, as in juvenile detention, are more often staff than inmates.

The prison survey estimates not only the number of people abused, but the instances of abuse. In our opinion, the BJS's methodology here undercounts the true number. Inmates who said they had been sexually abused were asked how many times. Their options were 1, 2, 3–10, and 11 times or more; that answers of "3–10" were assigned a value of 5, and "11 or more" a value of 12. We know of no reason to think that answers of "3–10" should be skewed so far toward the low end of the range, however—and inmates are sometimes raped many more than twelve times. Bryson Martel, for example:

    When I went to prison, I was twenty-eight years old, I weighed 123 pounds, and I was scared to death.... [Later] I had to list all the inmates who sexually assaulted me, and I came up with 27 names. Sometimes just one inmate assaulted me, and sometimes they attacked me in groups. It went on almost every day for the nine months I spent in that facility.

Because of these attacks, Martel contracted HIV. "You never heal emotionally," he said.[26]

Methodology aside, though, this question about frequency was an important one to ask, precisely because rape in prison is so often serial, and so often gang rape.[27] The BJS estimates that there were 165,400 instances of sexual abuse in state and federal prisons over the period of its study, an average of about two and a half for every victim. Had it made a similar estimate on the basis of data from its youth study using the same method, it would have found that juvenile victims were abused an average of six times each. Especially when thinking about the effects on a child, it's awful to realize that these numbers are probably too low.

What little attention the BJS reports on adult victims have received in the press has so far mostly been devoted to the prison study, not the one on jails. On June 23, 2009, the day the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission released its report, both The New York Times and The Washington Post ran editorials praising it, and both referred to the 60,500 number as if that represented the yearly national total for all inmates.[28] However, we believe that these papers missed the true implication of the BJS reports, and that the jail study is the more important of the two.

This is partly because the study of jails answers more questions, and does more to help us understand the dynamics of sexual abuse in detention—beginning with the racial dynamics.[29] Of white jail inmates, 1.8 percent reported sexual abuse by another inmate, whereas 1.3 percent of black inmates did. But when considering staff-on-inmate abuse, the situation is reversed. 1.5 percent of white inmates reported such incidents, but 2.1 percent of black inmates did. Overall, a black inmate is more likely to suffer sexual abuse in detention than a white one, 3.2 percent to 2.9 percent. The study did not report the race of perpetrators.[30]

More eye glazing information without providing any real stats or facts. And, once again, the author mixes and merges the info about inmate on inmate and staff on inmate encounters.

QuoteAdvocates have long known that victims of sexual abuse in detention tend to be those perceived as unable to defend themselves, and the jail study confirms this. Women were more likely to report abuse than men.[31] Younger inmates are more likely to be abused than older ones, gay inmates much more than straight ones, and people who had been abused at a previous facility most of all. (See Table 3 for more detail.) Those targeted for abuse are also likely to be vulnerable in ways the BJS did not address in this report. Often they have mental disabilities or mental illness,[32] they are disproportionately likely to be first-time and nonviolent offenders,[33] and most simply, they are likely to be small.[34]

Nearly 62 percent of all reported incidents of staff sexual misconduct involved female staff and male inmates. Female staff were involved in 48 percent of staff-on-inmate abuse in which the inmates were unwilling participants. The rates at which female staff seem to abuse male inmates, in jails and in juvenile detention, clearly warrant further study. Of the women in jail, 3.7 percent reported inmate-on-inmate sexual abuse; 1.3 percent of men did. Does this mean that women are more likely to abuse each other behind bars than men, or that they're more willing to admit abuse? We don't know—but if they're simply more willing to admit abuse, then the BJS findings on men may have to be multiplied dramatically.

Here is some interesting information. It shows that the author should have created an article discussing that WOMEN are a more major concern than pedophile run amok.

QuoteThere is another, starker reason why the jail study is the most important. Jail is where most inmates get raped. On first glance at the reports it doesn't look this way. But—and this is what the press seems to have missed—because the BJS numbers come from snapshot surveys, they represent only a fraction of those incarcerated every year. People move in and out of jail very quickly. The number of annual jail admissions is approximately seventeen times higher than the jail population on any given day.[35]

To get the real number of those sexually abused in jails over the course of a year, however, we can't simply multiply 24,700 by seventeen. Many people go to jail repeatedly over the course of a year; the number of people who go to jail every year is quite different from the number of admissions. Surprisingly, no official statistics are kept on the number of people jailed annually.[36] We've heard a very well-informed but off-the-record estimate that it is approximately nine times as large as the daily jail population, but we can't yet be confident about that.

Even if we could, though, we still couldn't just multiply 24,700 by nine. Further complicating the matter, snapshot techniques like the BJS's will disproportionately count those with longer sentences. If Joe is jailed for one week and Bill for two, Bill is twice as likely to be in jail on the day of the survey. Presumably, the longer you spend in jail, the more chance you have of being raped there. But even that is not as simple as it seems. Because those raped behind bars tend to fit such an identifiable profile—to be young, small, mentally ill, etc.—they are quickly recognized as potential victims. Very likely, they will be raped soon after the gate closes behind them, and repeatedly after that. The chance of being raped after a week in jail is likely not so different from the chance of being raped after a month. Probably more significant (at least, statistically) is the difference in the number of times an inmate is likely to be raped.

What is the right multiple—are five, six, seven times 24,700 people molested and raped in jail every year? We don't know yet, but we hope to soon. PREA requires the BJS to conduct its surveys annually. The BJS has revised its questionnaire to ask those who report abuse how long after they were jailed the first incident took place; it is also collecting data on the number of people jailed every year and the lengths of time they serve. Together, this new information should lead to much better estimates.

We do know already that all the BJS numbers published so far, which add up to almost 90,000, represent only a small portion of those sexually abused in detention every year. And that is without even considering immigration detention, or our vast system of halfway houses, rehab centers, and other community corrections facilities. Nor does it include Native American tribal detention facilities operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs or corrections facilities in the territories.

Now the author begins to confuse everyone. Is the issue now jails and not pedophiles? Does the author consider youth facilities to be jails and not prisons? And if the author is discussing rape in jails are we no longer talking about staff? Is it just inmate to inmate? The author is trying to make a statement here that has nothing to do with the article.

QuoteIn 1994, in Farmer v. Brennan, the Supreme Court angrily declared that "having stripped [inmates] of virtually every means of self-protection and foreclosed their access to outside aid, the government and its officials are not free to let the state of nature take its course." Rape, wrote Justice David Souter, is "simply not 'part of the penalty'" we impose in our society.[37] But for many hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children, whether they were convicted of felonies or misdemeanors or simply awaiting trial, it has been. Most often, their assailants have been the very agents of the government who were charged with protecting them.

Beyond the physical injuries often sustained during an assault,[38] and beyond the devastating, lifelong psychological damage inflicted on survivors, rape in prison spreads diseases, including HIV.[39] Of all inmates, 95 percent are eventually released[40]—more than 1.5 million every year carrying infectious diseases, many of them sexually communicable[41]—and they carry their trauma and their illnesses with them, back to their families and their communities.

Prisoner rape is one of this country's most widespread human rights problems, and arguably its most neglected. Frustratingly, heartbreakingly—but also hopefully—if only we had the political will, we could almost completely eliminate it.

Ok, so it appears the author has totally gone off topic and we are now just discussing inmate on inmate rape.

Quote—February 10, 2010

It is clear the author wants to garner an emotional response of anger and a sense of injustice from the reader. It is also clear that he goes about it in a dishonest and disingenuous way. Why did I bring up inmate on inmate rape and adult rape? It's clearly a major part of the article.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: The Brain on February 21, 2010, 03:18:23 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 21, 2010, 03:14:04 PM

Quote—February 10, 2010

It is clear the author wants to garner an emotional response of anger and a sense of injustice from the reader. It is also clear that he goes about it in a dishonest and disingenuous way. Why did I bring up inmate on inmate rape and adult rape? It's clearly a major part of the article.

I think you're reading way, way too much into a simple date.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: grumbler on February 21, 2010, 03:24:38 PM
What I find ironic in all of this is that, when salaries were increased in the police and prison systems, the claim was that it would result in a better quality of prison gurads, cops, probation officers, and the like.  What we got was simply higher-paid fuckups.  I don't think you can expect better of them.

Since it is only the losers who are applying for these jobs, the question becomes how we can afford to recruit the kinds of supervisors that will keep the losers more or less in line and doing something of a job.  As Texas has shown, merely promoting these losers into supervisory positions doesn't work.   It is possible that technology will provide the answer, as it largely has for the whole "dubious traffic stop" problem, but I am not sure what form the technology would take.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 21, 2010, 03:26:40 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 21, 2010, 03:24:38 PM
What I find ironic in all of this is that, when salaries were increased in the police and prison systems, the claim was that it would result in a better quality of prison gurads, cops, probation officers, and the like.  What we got was simply higher-paid fuckups.  I don't think you can expect better of them.

Since it is only the losers who are applying for these jobs, the question becomes how we can afford to recruit the kinds of supervisors that will keep the losers more or less in line and doing something of a job.  As Texas has shown, merely promoting these losers into supervisory positions doesn't work.   It is possible that technology will provide the answer, as it largely has for the whole "dubious traffic stop" problem, but I am not sure what form the technology would take.

They clearly need to higher more losers. Quality cannot replace quantity in this equation.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: The Brain on February 21, 2010, 03:27:52 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 21, 2010, 03:24:38 PM
What I find ironic in all of this is that, when salaries were increased in the police and prison systems, the claim was that it would result in a better quality of prison gurads, cops, probation officers, and the like.  What we got was simply higher-paid fuckups.  I don't think you can expect better of them.

Since it is only the losers who are applying for these jobs, the question becomes how we can afford to recruit the kinds of supervisors that will keep the losers more or less in line and doing something of a job.  As Texas has shown, merely promoting these losers into supervisory positions doesn't work.   It is possible that technology will provide the answer, as it largely has for the whole "dubious traffic stop" problem, but I am not sure what form the technology would take.

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi13.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa299%2FSlayhem%2FFatMan.jpg&hash=71e669651b446c5c4a00a080536ed9e1097ed662)
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Barrister on February 21, 2010, 03:29:12 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 21, 2010, 03:24:38 PM
What I find ironic in all of this is that, when salaries were increased in the police and prison systems, the claim was that it would result in a better quality of prison gurads, cops, probation officers, and the like.  What we got was simply higher-paid fuckups.  I don't think you can expect better of them.

Since it is only the losers who are applying for these jobs, the question becomes how we can afford to recruit the kinds of supervisors that will keep the losers more or less in line and doing something of a job.  As Texas has shown, merely promoting these losers into supervisory positions doesn't work.   It is possible that technology will provide the answer, as it largely has for the whole "dubious traffic stop" problem, but I am not sure what form the technology would take.

I'm going to write this off as an obnoxious troll and not otherwise respond.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: HVC on February 21, 2010, 03:41:00 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 21, 2010, 03:26:40 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 21, 2010, 03:24:38 PM
What I find ironic in all of this is that, when salaries were increased in the police and prison systems, the claim was that it would result in a better quality of prison gurads, cops, probation officers, and the like.  What we got was simply higher-paid fuckups.  I don't think you can expect better of them.

Since it is only the losers who are applying for these jobs, the question becomes how we can afford to recruit the kinds of supervisors that will keep the losers more or less in line and doing something of a job.  As Texas has shown, merely promoting these losers into supervisory positions doesn't work.   It is possible that technology will provide the answer, as it largely has for the whole "dubious traffic stop" problem, but I am not sure what form the technology would take.

They clearly need to higher more losers. Quality cannot replace quantity in this equation.
Pay less and higher more :P
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 21, 2010, 04:21:28 PM
Quote from: HVC on February 21, 2010, 03:41:00 PM
Pay less and higher more :P

And that is a traditional issue they have always faced in law enforcement and corrections. If you pay less than you attract mostly ex-military who lack the education or experience required for the social work side of the equation. If you pay more than you get better educated and experienced people but cannot hire as many of them.



Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: The Brain on February 21, 2010, 04:24:50 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 21, 2010, 04:21:28 PM
Quote from: HVC on February 21, 2010, 03:41:00 PM
Pay less and higher more :P
If you pay more than you get better educated and experienced people but cannot hire as many of them.

:o
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: HVC on February 21, 2010, 04:32:32 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 21, 2010, 04:21:28 PM
Quote from: HVC on February 21, 2010, 03:41:00 PM
Pay less and higher more :P

And that is a traditional issue they have always faced in law enforcement and corrections. If you pay less than you attract mostly ex-military who lack the education or experience required for the social work side of the equation. If you pay more than you get better educated and experienced people but cannot hire as many of them.

Can't you tier it? managers (or equivalent) would make more to ge the educated, but the grunts make less to fill the quota of quantity. But i doubt the union would like that
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 05:47:04 PM
Thanks for responding.  I'll get into this.

Quote from: Strix on February 21, 2010, 03:13:36 PM
This first part of the article is great for bringing emotion and the sense of injustice to the article. There is nothing wrong so far. Although the article does not give us the gender or ages of these kids. These kids could be from 12-20? I am not sure where the age of majority begins in Texas but in New York it's 21. So, is this teenage girls (17-20) getting horny middle-aged men fired? Or is this pedophiles run amok praying on young boys (12-16)?
This is common in any article like this.  Start with an individual story that demonstrates your general theme before getting into the long grass.  Starting an essay with a statistical overview grabs the reader less.

I also entirely reject the distinction you're drawing between victims who deserve blame (teenage girls 'getting horny middle-aged men fired') and victims deserving of sympathy (young boys).  The only thing that distinction makes is one of ickiness really.  Both are victims; they would be protected in a school and they should be in a prison where the power relationship is so much more extreme and where it is exceptionally difficult for a kid to report what's happening to them.  How do you report that you're being molested when the principal likes kids too?

If you look at the tables provided in the article most of the victims seem to be between 13 and 17.  Inmates prefer them younger (or weaker compared to an older kid) and the guards are often younger than I would have guessed (25-35). 

QuoteOur first burst of misinformation from the author. The first part of the article discussed pedophiles out of control in Texas. However, now he attempts to back up that theory with facts and information concerning inmate on inmate sexual acts. The author than throws in another horror story about an Oregon probation officer who was arrested but doesn't provide the penalty that resulted. The author quickly follows up with a story about more inmate on inmate sexual violence insinuating that the Florida Corrections Officers (not even the Department) purposely allowed a 17-year old sex offenders to have his way with a 15-year old disabled child. He provides no information as to why the 15-year old was in prison or if they both were housed in a sex offender unit.
I don't think the article's about paedos running amock so much as it's about an institutional tolerance of rape.

QuoteMore information given in a grandiose fashion. The author claims that the list of stories go on and on but has only given is the example of two pedophiles in Texas and one in Oregon. I can speak for New York state, and know that between DOCS (prison system), Parole, and Probation there are roughly 36,000+ employees. Multiply that by 50 states and a few stories about pedophiles doesn't seem like an epidemic.
He doesn't say it's an epidemic, but he does say 12.1% of minors asked in this survey report sexual misconduct.

QuoteHowever, at no point does the author explain if this is guard on inmate or inmate on inmate sexual misconduct. That makes any of this information totally useless.
This is no more than ten sentences below in the argument:
QuoteFully 80 percent of the sexual abuse reported in the study was committed not by other inmates but by staff.
QuoteThe first part of this is more fluff. Of course most aren't violent. As the author points out, violent kids tend to get tried as adults. Violating probation and "status offenses" are serious because a majority of the kids were given 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and so on, chances with the promise that they would successfully complete probation. Is the author trying to say that we should tell these kids to behave or else than do nothing when they don't follow their conditions?
I think he's trying to avoid the knee-jerk reaction you suffered earlier that inmates aren't nice people and that it's okay to turn a blind eye to that.

QuoteOk, some meat and bones. The author begins with some minor misinformation because it isn't clear any longer what study is being discussed. I'll assume it's the one concerning the Texas Youth place.
I haven't read anything about a Texas study.  The only study I've read of in this article is the report issued by the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

QuoteSo, now the author states that 80% of the abuse is by staff but that 95% of the incidents were involving female staff with male inmates. So, forcible rape is now out the window despite the beginning of the article making it sound like male pedophiles run amok raping young children (inferring males). The author further admits that 64% of the encounters involved no force or coercion. Since it's almost impossible for a woman to forcible rape a man (without using an object anally) I am guessing that the other 31% involving coercion was something along the lines of if inmate does X for staff than he won't get in trouble or get a benefit. It is doubtful that a woman staff member is strong enough to be forcing a male teenager to do anything without help. So, once again, the author doesn't release ages of the inmates involved. The author is more honest with the facts but buries them at the end of the article when people are already sold on the pedophile run amok theory and their eyes glaze over looking at numbers at this point.
Forcible rape isn't the problem.  Rape is the problem.  I reject the idea that it's almost impossible for a woman to rape a man, but I'd also note that members of staff are able to trade privileges and punishments for sex.  The ages of the inmates is, again, not terribly relevant (though they're in the tables if you want them).  And as I say the idea that consent is possible in a prison or that it makes it acceptable is preposterous - these are minors in a position of absolutely no power dealing with people who have an immense amount of power over their day-to-day life.

QuoteThe reasons are many. First, and foremost, most of the sex is consensual but illegal by statute. It is easier for the facility to fire the employee and keep from being investigated by a higher authority (and keep it out of the news) than it is to prosecute. Second, it comes down to usually he said, she said, so it's easier to terminate or separate the employee from employment than a costly legal battle. The author makes it sound like little or no punishment occurs but 75% of employees lose their jobs. I am sure the other 25% lose chance of promotion or are reassigned to less favorable positions. As the author noted in the Oregon probation situation, a small percentage are prosecuted but the author never gives us that percentage which implies shoddy research or intentional misinformation.
I don't think that losing your job or being reassigned is sufficient, personally.  The authors provide a footnote which link to a BOJS report that have the statistics.  I think we'd be far less sanguine about the sex being consensual but illegal if these were good kids at school being serially abused by people in positions of power.

As to the he said-she said, that's true of all rape cases which is why it's terribly difficult to prove and has one of the lowest conviction rates.

QuoteOnce again the misinformation train is flowing. This section starts out discussing rape by other inmates but than suddenly changes into information about staff again. If a reader isn't paying close attention than they associate the rapes repeatedly occurring in the first part with repeated sexual encounters in the second part by staff.
I think by 'paying close attention' you mean 'reading'.  I don't see how ''sexually abused by other inmates...Of those victimized by staff' could be confused really.

QuoteIt's clear from the TYC study that the female staff is having sex often with male inmates. It's not usual for these things to be one time encounters so of course the abuse is repeated. It is very dishonest on the authors part to attempt to link these two things together.
This is abuse, not abuse.  The two things are thematically linked, they're to do with the frequency of the abuse.  I don't see what's dishonest about having them together, but clearly writing that one is to do with inmates and one with guards.

QuoteOnce again, the author attempts to link the more serious rape among inmates that occurs in adult facilities with that of consensual sex occurring in between staff and inmates at the TYC.
You're missing a step, he's linking the TYC to the BJS report on sexual abuse in youth facilities to the wider context - this is clear from the article:
QuoteJust as the BJS report on sexual abuse in juvenile detention facilities shows that problems like the ones at Pyote aren't limited to Texas, two previous BJS reports, on the incidence of sexual abuse in adult prisons and jails, show that abuses in juvenile detention are only a small part of a much larger human rights problem in this country.
I think a dishonest attempt at artificial linking of these things would be less step-by-step and show considerably more sleight of hand.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 05:57:18 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 21, 2010, 03:14:04 PM
More eye glazing information without providing any real stats or facts. And, once again, the author mixes and merges the info about inmate on inmate and staff on inmate encounters.
There are plenty of stats and a discussion of how reliable or not they are and the methodological difficulties - again that's rare in an intellectually dishonest hatchet job.  I don't think there's mixing and merging, except within paragraphs and even then the inmate-inmate/staff-inmate distinction is always acknowledged and the paragraphs are thematically tied.

QuoteHere is some interesting information. It shows that the author should have created an article discussing that WOMEN are a more major concern than pedophile run amok.
This was never about paedos gone wild.  It's title 'The Rape of American Prisoners' not 'PAEDOGEDDON'.  That's for a reason.  I think, though, that you're right that there's an interesting study waiting to be done on the sex aspect because it surprised me.

QuoteNow the author begins to confuse everyone. Is the issue now jails and not pedophiles? Does the author consider youth facilities to be jails and not prisons? And if the author is discussing rape in jails are we no longer talking about staff? Is it just inmate to inmate? The author is trying to make a statement here that has nothing to do with the article.
I think the issue has never been solely about paedos.  The jail study is entirely I don't think there's any confusion they're talking about a study on jails.  The writers aren't talking about the actual study but the potential size of the problem and methodological problems.
QuoteOk, so it appears the author has totally gone off topic and we are now just discussing inmate on inmate rape.
How is that off-topic in an article called 'The Rape of American Prisoners'?
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Sheilbh on February 21, 2010, 05:58:48 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 21, 2010, 02:37:55 PM
Desire is not the same as consent. I think we all agree that minors or sufficiently mentally disabled people cannot give consent even if they may have a "desire" to engage in a sexual activity.

I believe Sheilbh's point is that a similar situation exist when there is a sufficiently deep power difference - so arguing with it from a position of "desire" is really a strawman.
Exactly.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: DontSayBanana on February 21, 2010, 06:18:23 PM
Also, Yi, I hate to break it to you, but the law is on the side of Marti and Sheilbh here; the rationale of "by nature of the relationship, the lesser party could never be assumed to consent" is why pedophilia is criminalized in all 50 states.  In fact, some states have expanded on that to include family structure, so it's the basis for some anti-incest laws as well.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Admiral Yi on February 21, 2010, 06:28:30 PM
Quote from: DontSayBanana on February 21, 2010, 06:18:23 PM
Also, Yi, I hate to break it to you, but the law is on the side of Marti and Sheilbh here; the rationale of "by nature of the relationship, the lesser party could never be assumed to consent" is why pedophilia is criminalized in all 50 states.  In fact, some states have expanded on that to include family structure, so it's the basis for some anti-incest laws as well.
No need to break that to me, I already get it.  Because of the nature of the guard inmate relationship, not only can we not assume consent is given, it's virtually impossible to determine when it is.  But that is not the same thing as categorically ruling out the possibility.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 21, 2010, 06:34:58 PM
Quote from: HVC on February 21, 2010, 04:32:32 PM
Can't you tier it? managers (or equivalent) would make more to ge the educated, but the grunts make less to fill the quota of quantity. But i doubt the union would like that

They try but it doesn't work well. If the "managers" don't hold the lower positions than they can't always understand the nature of the jobs and goals. If the grunts get promoted than they get above their abilities.

It's something hard to work out which is why state government is always filled with A) people who can't do their job or B) people who don't know how to do their job. Everyone rises to their level of incompetence e.g. the Peter Principle.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Razgovory on February 21, 2010, 07:10:05 PM
Strix is at least right about one thing, most people in the US are well aware of the problem of rape in prisons.  The thing is, most don't care.  Kids in a juvenile facility, yes they'll care then.  That's probably why the author chose to start his story with that and segue into the adult facilities.  I suspect alot of people in the US feel that the rape victims deserved what they got in the adult facilities though.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Ed Anger on February 21, 2010, 07:15:54 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 21, 2010, 07:10:05 PM
Strix is at least right about one thing, most people in the US are well aware of the problem of rape in prisons.  The thing is, most don't care.  Kids in a juvenile facility, yes they'll care then.  That's probably why the author chose to start his story with that and segue into the adult facilities.  I suspect alot of people in the US feel that the rape victims deserved what they got in the adult facilities though.

I remember when CountMoveOn.org got all pissy when I made a prison rape joke a few years ago. Dude needed some surprise buttsecks to relax or something.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: HVC on February 21, 2010, 07:25:10 PM
Quote from: Strix on February 21, 2010, 06:34:58 PM
Quote from: HVC on February 21, 2010, 04:32:32 PM
Can't you tier it? managers (or equivalent) would make more to ge the educated, but the grunts make less to fill the quota of quantity. But i doubt the union would like that

They try but it doesn't work well. If the "managers" don't hold the lower positions than they can't always understand the nature of the jobs and goals. If the grunts get promoted than they get above their abilities.

It's something hard to work out which is why state government is always filled with A) people who can't do their job or B) people who don't know how to do their job. Everyone rises to their level of incompetence e.g. the Peter Principle.
Then there is only one answer. old school style. You stay in the same cell for the whole duration of your incarciration. No lunch room, you eat in your cell. no library, you read in your cell. no tv, you're in fucking jail. No excersise or sports, becasue once again you're in fucking jail.

Plus gruel. good old fashion low protein gruel to crush the spirit :D
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: dps on February 21, 2010, 08:01:00 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 20, 2010, 08:05:14 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:30:44 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2010, 07:28:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:26:20 PM
So it's rape, but not rape-rape, Whoopi?
It's a legally prohibited act that is consensual and not coerced.  It's not that difficult a concept.

Statutory rape is NOT consensual, because a minor can't give consent. Necrophilia is not consensual either. Neither is sex with someone who is in a coma.

I just can't believe someone can be arguing a statutory rape is "consensual". It's simply mindboggling.

SOmething can be consentual in fact, but not in law.  :mellow:

Yeah, which is why statutory rape is statutory rape and not just plain rape.

Or, put another way, if you're 25 and force a 14-year old girl to have sex with you at gunpoint, you're going to get charged with rape, not statutory rape. because you actually used violence or the threat of violence in order to get sex.  But shower her with presents in order to get her to have sex with you, and you're going to be charged with staturoy rape in most jurisdictions, because the law doesn't consider a 14 year-old to be legally capable of granting consent (again, in most jurisdictions---there are a few places that  set the age of consent that low or even lower).

Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 02:52:39 AM
Quote from: Barrister on February 21, 2010, 03:29:12 PM
I'm going to write this off as an obnoxious troll and not otherwise respond.

That's what I do with all grumbler's posts a priori. Saves me time I would otherwise need to read them.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 02:55:16 AM
Quote from: Strix on February 21, 2010, 03:13:36 PM
Or is this pedophiles run amok praying on young boys (12-16)?

I think it is dishonest to imply that all pedophiles are religious.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 03:01:30 AM
Quote from: dps on February 21, 2010, 08:01:00 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 20, 2010, 08:05:14 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:30:44 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2010, 07:28:51 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 20, 2010, 07:26:20 PM
So it's rape, but not rape-rape, Whoopi?
It's a legally prohibited act that is consensual and not coerced.  It's not that difficult a concept.

Statutory rape is NOT consensual, because a minor can't give consent. Necrophilia is not consensual either. Neither is sex with someone who is in a coma.

I just can't believe someone can be arguing a statutory rape is "consensual". It's simply mindboggling.

SOmething can be consentual in fact, but not in law.  :mellow:

Yeah, which is why statutory rape is statutory rape and not just plain rape.

Or, put another way, if you're 25 and force a 14-year old girl to have sex with you at gunpoint, you're going to get charged with rape, not statutory rape. because you actually used violence or the threat of violence in order to get sex.  But shower her with presents in order to get her to have sex with you, and you're going to be charged with staturoy rape in most jurisdictions, because the law doesn't consider a 14 year-old to be legally capable of granting consent (again, in most jurisdictions---there are a few places that  set the age of consent that low or even lower).

Again, I get it, but absence of direct coercion does not equal consent.

Polish law also criminalizes differently a situation when unlawful sexual conduct results from the use of force, psychological coercion, blackmail, a hierarchical dependency or inability of one party to give informed consent (and again, criminalizes more strongly a situation where a minor is coerced to sexual conduct, in a strict sense, and a "non-coercive" sex with a minor. Nb, it avoids referring to any of these situations as "rape" (and just describes them like I did, by a narrative), because it just encourages retarded distinctions between rape, rape-rape and rape-rape-rape etc. (which can be seen as a back-door - no pun intended - way of legitimizing or softening the odium surrounding child abuse, for example).
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: katmai on February 22, 2010, 03:02:38 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 02:55:16 AM
Quote from: Strix on February 21, 2010, 03:13:36 PM
Or is this pedophiles run amok praying on young boys (12-16)?

I think it is dishonest to imply that all pedophiles are religious.

:bleeding:
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 03:06:34 AM
Quote from: katmai on February 22, 2010, 03:02:38 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 02:55:16 AM
Quote from: Strix on February 21, 2010, 03:13:36 PM
Or is this pedophiles run amok praying on young boys (12-16)?

I think it is dishonest to imply that all pedophiles are religious.

:bleeding:

Who else but religious people would be praying on young boys?
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 03:08:38 AM
Anyway, I don't remember all people here jumping to Polanski's defense by claiming that the 13 y.o. "really consented".
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: grumbler on February 22, 2010, 08:18:58 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 03:08:38 AM
Anyway, I don't remember all people here jumping to Polanski's defense by claiming that the 13 y.o. "really consented".
:lol:  Like "all people here" do anything as a unit!
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: grumbler on February 22, 2010, 08:23:20 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 02:52:39 AM
Quote from: Barrister on February 21, 2010, 03:29:12 PM
I'm going to write this off as an obnoxious troll and not otherwise respond.

That's what I do with all grumbler's posts a priori. Saves me time I would otherwise need to read them.
Ah, the old "I am ignoring him" pose.  It isn't any more credible for you than for Dguller or Slargos.

My post was a dig at Strix that accidentally caught BB's wife in the blast.  I didn't expect any response, let alone two responses.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Grallon on February 22, 2010, 08:53:20 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 03:01:30 AM

Again, I get it, but absence of direct coercion does not equal consent.




Is it that time of the season again?  I should calculate the cycle lenght sometime.   And I like my 15yo crispy and fresh - like green apples. ^_^




G.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Neil on February 22, 2010, 09:02:32 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 03:08:38 AM
Anyway, I don't remember all people here jumping to Polanski's defense by claiming that the 13 y.o. "really consented".
I remember you jumping to Polanski's defence, pedophile.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 09:32:30 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 22, 2010, 08:23:20 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 02:52:39 AM
Quote from: Barrister on February 21, 2010, 03:29:12 PM
I'm going to write this off as an obnoxious troll and not otherwise respond.

That's what I do with all grumbler's posts a priori. Saves me time I would otherwise need to read them.
Ah, the old "I am ignoring him" pose.  It isn't any more credible for you than for Dguller or Slargos.

My post was a dig at Strix that accidentally caught BB's wife in the blast.  I didn't expect any response, let alone two responses.

Was the post meant seriously or was it simply dig at Strix though?
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: grumbler on February 22, 2010, 09:47:17 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 09:32:30 AM
Was the post meant seriously or was it simply dig at Strix though?
Just a dig at Strix and his "I am saving the world for only $70k per year" bit from last year.  I added enough detail to make it look a bit like a credible position, but certainly don't actually think that all cops, prison guards, and parole officers are scum-of-the-earth or loser types. 
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Berkut on February 22, 2010, 10:45:17 AM
Quote from: StrixInmates hold the power. They can have a guard fired or killed without much effort if they really want to do so.                

I happen to know several prison guards.

One who has been doing it for some 20+ years and is in a supervisory position at Attica.

Another (a relative) who is in her 3rd year as a guard, so pretty new to it.

I would bet my next paycheck neither of them would agree that inmates can get guards injured or killed if they feel like it. I think I will email Strixs post to them and see how much they laugh at him.

I suppose he could justify such a silly statement by saying that *anyone* can get someone killed without much effort if they really want to - like I could go murder someone right now without anyone really being able to stop me - but I certainly could not do so without a rather serious consequence.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Malthus on February 22, 2010, 11:15:19 AM
This sort of thing doesn't help ...

http://csc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2001/2001scc19/2001scc19.html

QuoteSecond, the prosecutor, Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Middle District of Pennsylvania and principal affiant of the Requesting State, Gordon A. D. Zubrod, stated during an interview with Linden MacIntyre for The Fifth Estate, a Canadian television program, the specific broadcast of which ("The Maple Leaf Swindle") aired on the CBC network on September 30, 1997:

MacIntyre: ... For those accused who choose to fight extradition, Gordon Zubrod warns they're only making matters worse for themselves in the long run.

Zubrod:  I have told some of these individuals, "Look, you can come down and you can put this behind you by serving your time in prison and making restitution to the victims, or you can wind up serving a great deal longer sentence under much more stringent conditions", and describe those conditions to them.

MacIntyre:  How would you describe those conditions?

Zubrod:  You're going to be the boyfriend of a very bad man if you wait out your extradition.

MacIntyre:  And does that have much of an impact on these people?

Zubrod:  Well, out of the 89 people we've indicted so far, approximately 55 of them have said, "We give up".

9                                   The appellants argue that in light of the powerful influence on sentencing that can be exerted by an American prosecutor, they took Mr. Zubrod's comments as a very serious threat. Their committal hearing commenced on October 6, 1997, within a week of the CBC broadcast.  They resisted their extradition to Pennsylvania on the grounds that: (i) they would face sentences in the Requesting State that are very substantially higher than those they would face in Canada, and (ii) they would be subjected to homosexual rape in prison.  They allege that to extradite them in these circumstances would constitute a breach of their right to security of the person and a violation of the principles of fundamental justice, contrary to s. 7 of the Charter.

Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 11:50:55 AM
Quote from: Berkut on February 22, 2010, 10:45:17 AM
Quote from: StrixInmates hold the power. They can have a guard fired or killed without much effort if they really want to do so.                

I happen to know several prison guards.

One who has been doing it for some 20+ years and is in a supervisory position at Attica.

Another (a relative) who is in her 3rd year as a guard, so pretty new to it.

I would bet my next paycheck neither of them would agree that inmates can get guards injured or killed if they feel like it. I think I will email Strixs post to them and see how much they laugh at him.

I suppose he could justify such a silly statement by saying that *anyone* can get someone killed without much effort if they really want to - like I could go murder someone right now without anyone really being able to stop me - but I certainly could not do so without a rather serious consequence.

Strix is exaggerating a real problem though.  Inmates are constantly trying to get guards fired.  They have nothing better to do then sit around thinking of ways to harass the guards.  That's not to say they can get someone fired at will, but many make an effort to do so.  They certainly can't have some one killed at will (or usually at all).  Typically they try to bribe a guard or convince them to smuggle in contraband.  They also try to seduce a guard and then use that to blackmail them.  This is one of the big reasons why they offer privileges like Television.  Every hour they are distracted by the boob-tube, is an hour they are plotting against the guards.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Berkut on February 22, 2010, 12:00:24 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 11:50:55 AM


Strix is exaggerating a real problem though.  Inmates are constantly trying to get guards fired.  They have nothing better to do then sit around thinking of ways to harass the guards.  That's not to say they can get someone fired at will, but many make an effort to do so.  They certainly can't have some one killed at will (or usually at all).  Typically they try to bribe a guard or convince them to smuggle in contraband.  They also try to seduce a guard and then use that to blackmail them.  This is one of the big reasons why they offer privileges like Television.  Every hour they are distracted by the boob-tube, is an hour they are plotting against the guards.

I don't doubt that inmates can and will try to get guards in trouble - they are criminals after all.

I don't see that as a problem though - so what? Obviously guards need to be aware that they have to keep a rather high standard of conduct, if for no other reason than to make sure they cannot be fairly or unfairly implicated by a bunch of criminals. I don't see that as a problem, real or otherwise - just a fact of life. And it would be true no matter how much society spent on prisons.

I think the extent that Strix claims that guards in prisons, at least in new York, are under-paid losers is rather exaggerated as well. Like I said, I know a few people who are in fact guards, and they are paid rather well, have a nice pension, and it is generally considered to be a pretty decent job. Hardly anything prestigious of course, but not at all anything that "losers" do to the exclusion of non-losers. Just a decent middle class job. My niece actually has a bachelors degree, although I am not sure if that is actually a requirement or just a nice -to-have.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 12:15:38 PM
It's a problem for the guards!  They don't like being harassed!

In Missouri they are underpaid losers for the most part.  My mother worked in the Department corrections in the office of personal.  The average corrections officer is employed there for about six months before quiting or being fired.  Wages are terrible and standards are pretty low.  The most common reason for termination: compromise by an inmate.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Berkut on February 22, 2010, 12:21:39 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 12:15:38 PM
It's a problem for the guards!  They don't like being harassed!

In Missouri they are underpaid losers for the most part.  My mother worked in the Department corrections in the office of personal.  The average corrections officer is employed there for about six months before quiting or being fired.  Wages are terrible and standards are pretty low.  The most common reason for termination: compromise by an inmate.

In that case, you get what you pay for, I imagine.

New York is in the top-ten in prison guard salaries though.

I don't know that for a fact actually, but I would bet it is true even without looking it up.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Barrister on February 22, 2010, 12:30:04 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 22, 2010, 08:23:20 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 02:52:39 AM
Quote from: Barrister on February 21, 2010, 03:29:12 PM
I'm going to write this off as an obnoxious troll and not otherwise respond.

That's what I do with all grumbler's posts a priori. Saves me time I would otherwise need to read them.
Ah, the old "I am ignoring him" pose.  It isn't any more credible for you than for Dguller or Slargos.

My post was a dig at Strix that accidentally caught BB's wife in the blast.  I didn't expect any response, let alone two responses.

That's about the closest I'll get to an apology, so thanks. :hug:
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Barrister on February 22, 2010, 12:31:11 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 03:08:38 AM
Anyway, I don't remember all people here jumping to Polanski's defense by claiming that the 13 y.o. "really consented".

Because the fact that there was "consent in fact" is not a defense.   :huh:

It is only part of the circumstances that must be considered.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: grumbler on February 22, 2010, 03:39:17 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 22, 2010, 12:30:04 PM
That's about the closest I'll get to an apology, so thanks. :hug:
And I will take your statement as the closest I'll get to an apology, so we are all even. :hug:
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 04:46:38 PM
Quote from: Berkut on February 22, 2010, 12:21:39 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 12:15:38 PM
It's a problem for the guards!  They don't like being harassed!

In Missouri they are underpaid losers for the most part.  My mother worked in the Department corrections in the office of personal.  The average corrections officer is employed there for about six months before quiting or being fired.  Wages are terrible and standards are pretty low.  The most common reason for termination: compromise by an inmate.

In that case, you get what you pay for, I imagine.

New York is in the top-ten in prison guard salaries though.

I don't know that for a fact actually, but I would bet it is true even without looking it up.

I suspect this is true.  If you have low pay and low standards (which you have to with low pay), you get crappy people.  To instance my mother told me about.

First while sitting outside on a smoke break she watch as a truck drove up with two inmates in the cab.  It parked and the two inmates hopped out went around back and opened up the trailer and out popped two guards!

Second one.  We read this one in the paper.  Three guards went on a fishing trip.  One had caught a small blue gill.  He said to his friends "Hey guys, watched this" and swallowed the hapless fish whole and alive.  Naturally he choked to death on it.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 04:47:06 PM
Quote from: grumbler on February 22, 2010, 03:39:17 PM
Quote from: Barrister on February 22, 2010, 12:30:04 PM
That's about the closest I'll get to an apology, so thanks. :hug:
And I will take your statement as the closest I'll get to an apology, so we are all even. :hug:

Why should he apologize to you?
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Admiral Yi on February 22, 2010, 06:56:38 PM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2010, 03:08:38 AM
Anyway, I don't remember all people here jumping to Polanski's defense by claiming that the 13 y.o. "really consented".
Might have had something to do with the fact that the victim said "no," repeatedly.

What Strix is doing is exactly the same thing anyone else would do if people claimed Polanski beat her silly and ass fucked her while she was stunned and bleeding--point out that it is not accurate.  The article creates the impression that there are thousands and thousands of cases of prison guards forcibly raping underage inmates.  According to Strix this is an inaccurate representation.  Not a single person has said that prison guards should not be prosecuted for statutory rape of consenting adult inmates, just as not a single person ever said Polanski should be convicted of aggravated sexual assault.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: dps on February 22, 2010, 08:27:56 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 04:46:38 PM
Quote from: Berkut on February 22, 2010, 12:21:39 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 12:15:38 PM
It's a problem for the guards!  They don't like being harassed!

In Missouri they are underpaid losers for the most part.  My mother worked in the Department corrections in the office of personal.  The average corrections officer is employed there for about six months before quiting or being fired.  Wages are terrible and standards are pretty low.  The most common reason for termination: compromise by an inmate.

In that case, you get what you pay for, I imagine.

New York is in the top-ten in prison guard salaries though.

I don't know that for a fact actually, but I would bet it is true even without looking it up.

I suspect this is true.  If you have low pay and low standards (which you have to with low pay), you get crappy people.  To instance my mother told me about.

First while sitting outside on a smoke break she watch as a truck drove up with two inmates in the cab.  It parked and the two inmates hopped out went around back and opened up the trailer and out popped two guards!

Second one.  We read this one in the paper.  Three guards went on a fishing trip.  One had caught a small blue gill.  He said to his friends "Hey guys, watched this" and swallowed the hapless fish whole and alive.  Naturally he choked to death on it.

The first bit is pretty troubling, and certainly relates to this discussion.

The second bit, not so much.  I can see a well-educated person in a good paying job pulling a stupid stunt like that on a fishing trip (quite possibly while under the influence of alcohol).
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Strix on February 22, 2010, 08:47:06 PM
Quote from: Berkut on February 22, 2010, 12:00:24 PM
I don't doubt that inmates can and will try to get guards in trouble - they are criminals after all.

I don't see that as a problem though - so what? Obviously guards need to be aware that they have to keep a rather high standard of conduct, if for no other reason than to make sure they cannot be fairly or unfairly implicated by a bunch of criminals. I don't see that as a problem, real or otherwise - just a fact of life. And it would be true no matter how much society spent on prisons.

I think the extent that Strix claims that guards in prisons, at least in new York, are under-paid losers is rather exaggerated as well. Like I said, I know a few people who are in fact guards, and they are paid rather well, have a nice pension, and it is generally considered to be a pretty decent job. Hardly anything prestigious of course, but not at all anything that "losers" do to the exclusion of non-losers. Just a decent middle class job. My niece actually has a bachelors degree, although I am not sure if that is actually a requirement or just a nice -to-have.

I was actually taking a backhanded swipe at Grumbler but he didn't reply to the bait. At least in NY working for DOCS is considered an excellent career since they pay well and only require a HS degree (or NYS GED). The people who join the military, where I grew up, are those who cannot get into college, law enforcement, corrections, or a construction job. If they cannot qualify for the regular military than reserves takes them so that they can go "active" at a later point.

I did exaggerate the extent to which inmates harm guards. It does happen but not that often. I had a cousin who worked at Clinton Correctional Facility. He pissed off some inmates who put a "hit" (to injure) out on him. He was crossing the yard one day while rec was going on and got a softball upside his head at 70+ MPH from about 15 feet away. He had major damage to one of his eyes as well as suffering brain injuries (and many broken facial bones).  My cousin had made the mistake of stopping some hispanics before they could attack a new black inmate.

As for getting guards fired, I understated the issue if anything. I was involved with an investigation last summer that ended up getting three females fired from a local prison and a fourth reassigned. They had gotten mixed up with an inmate who turned them in when I went to violate his parole.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: grumbler on February 23, 2010, 08:32:06 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 04:47:06 PM
Why should he apologize to you?
The same reason I should apologize to him.
Title: Re: Rape in America's Prisons
Post by: Razgovory on February 23, 2010, 09:47:54 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 23, 2010, 08:32:06 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 22, 2010, 04:47:06 PM
Why should he apologize to you?
The same reason I should apologize to him.

He insulted your wife?  I didn't even know you had a wife.