hey guys- ron and i were talking about "prison problems" and he said he thinks one of the biggest problems is all inmates being clumped together regardless of crime, violent tendencies, # of convictions, etc..

he said it starts in the county jails where some people with no criminal record that for instance are being held pending trial are in the same block with someone who murdered six people!

then even when they get to the prisons they are still not seperated, in some cases-

just curious what you guys think-am particularly interested to hear from those who were in prison or worked there-

It seems that every prison in the USA is over crowded, so that would be hard to do or maintain.

Yes, prisons are overcrowded and they tend to clump everyone together. It's a great idea to seperate the violent from the non-violent, but I don't see that happening.

A question to go along with this - does custody level have anything to do with the type of crime - violent or non-violent? How does this work?

I think it does. That is where the different levels of security come in, right? Max, med, minimum?

THERE ARE MURDERERS WITH LIFE SENTENCES IN MINIMUM SECURITY PRISONS

JUST B/C YOU ARE IN A MINIMUM SECURITY PRISON DOES NOT MEAN ALL INMATES THERE COMMITTED "LOW-LEVEL" (FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD) CRIMES

THAT IS ONE OF THE ISSUES-YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO WERE CONVICTED OF DWI/DUI IN WITH MURDERERS

Then what is the purpose of the different levels? How are people classified if not by the crime?? I don't get it. Can you explain any further?

It must have to do with how the behavior has been, release dates, etc?

custody depends on many things....in nc, it depends on how many "points" you have. you get points by going to school, working, behaving yourself, etc. you can lose points by doing anything from cursing someone out to fighting to showing dirty urine. when you acquire a certain number of points, you are eligible to be reviewed for lower custody status. whoever makes such decisions looks at the prisoners record, length of time served, etc. if you meet the criteria and pass the review, you are moved to lower custody levels. of course, if you are moved down and screw up, your butt ends up back in the higher custody level again.....

In Canada, the min, med, max, super-max designations have to do with the amount of supervision you need, not the severity of your crime.

We have provincial prisons for any sentence less than two years, and federal prisons for any sentence over two years.

The only time the severity of your crime is an issue is the first day after you are convicted, when they decide which security level they'll put you into.

Whatever level you start at, towards the end of your sentence (or upon a lengthy bit of time with good behavior) they start to "cascade" you, which is to put you at a lower level of security, with a view towards eventual parole and release to a halfway house.

So, yeah, you can have an 18 year old first time offender, in with a mass murderer, easily, especially if he ever tries to escape, and is thus a maximum security risk.

The SECURITY level they pay attention to is the INSTITUTION'S security, not the INMATES' security!

Menolly

Thank you for the clarifications!

I have always thought it wrong for all inmates to be clumped together regardless of crime. It has been suggested that due to overhead it would not be feasable, I disagree, mind you, I have nothing to base this on but it seems to me that non violent criminals, DWI's, drugs and etc. would cost less to maintain as they would not need the close supervision that violent criminals would need. I think this would also eliminate some other problems too such as the abuse of younger or weaker inmates who are subjected to the "bullying" of others.

No, custody level doesn't have anything to do with the type of crime. Atleast not in Va. My husbands crime is considered violent even though he was only convicted of ATTEMPTED car jacking. He is in a level 2 prison because of the point system and # of years he has. There are also men who have served 25 or more years for murder etc. there because they have less than 5 years left on their sentences.

This is a good one.. (question).. In the feds.. There are a lot of factors that come into play.. Total Time.. Charge.. Escape risk, etc..
Sherri, I remember the county jail from back when I was a real "new boot".. I was in for a friggen traffic warrant and I shared a cell with a guy going up for capital murder charges.. Yeah, I was young and the nature of it all scared the hell out of me.. Even the guy facing the charges was shocked they would put me in his cell (yeah.. his amazement was elevating my nerves.. ;) ) .. A lot of the time, they just don't care..
Back to the feds.. If you have a murder charge and an out date.. You can find your way to a camp in time.. I was at a medium with a number of guys that were pulling life with no parole.. Should they be there? Absolutely in my book..
It is hard to guage custody levels in the joint.. Why is that homicidal maniac in with other people at the Low security prison? Has he been cured or does he have a right after pushing a long bit of time? Only the inmate probably knows..
I know in the state they have what I have heard termed as "Agg farms".. I am pretty sure prisons like Angona in Louisiana are for lifers.. But I don't know if they have prisons that are dedicated to certain offense categories.. It would be nice to class people like that but I just don't think the "powers that be" care all that much...

that is true.. I know as far as custody level they may start in a max facuility but with good behavior they moved up the latter.. Custody levels change all the time in the blink of an eye..

David's point about only the inmate knowing rings true time and again. I'm guessing plenty of people have moved up in security levels as well as down. You just never know how anyone, including yourself, will react in any given situation. Makes it hard to gauge people anywhere, let alone someone you are locked in a cell with.

My boyfriend's original charges were carjacking, armed robbery, and fleeing and alluding. Of course they all stemmed from one incident. He went up to a woman, with a fake gun (idiot) and asked her for her car. He told her he wasn't going to hurt her, he just needed her car. Well, she gave it to him, and he took off. Of course the cops were after him in minutes, and he tried to get away, but that doesn't work. So, being back in on a parole violation (dropping dirty and leaving a rehab) he is back in level II. I don't really know the difference between level II and level I is, but I know I would rather him be in level I because it would make me feel better. But, after reading these posts, unless you are in maximum security, it doesn't REALLY matter what level you are in eh? They are pretty much all the same I guess. Does that sound about right?

No, I don't agree that they are all the same.... Different levels are acquired by a lot of hard work and time spent..... Does not have anything to do with the actual crime.... Yes, some of the inmates have killed someone, but, if they have not changed or shown improvement, they cannot move up.... Butch and been in Medium Custody for 11 of the 12 years he has been down..... He has worked very hard to try and get to minimum but they keep telling him that because he has a 50 year sentence, he cannot go to minimum..... So, I am sure, there are not too many inmates in minimum security that should not be there.....

It is a hard job to work your way up and sometime even trying hard does not acomplish the task.... Most of your very hardened criminals are in Maximum and Close custody..... Death Row is Close custody..... Life Sentences are close or maximum.....

Donna

I AGREE-DONNA-THE LEVELS ARE NOT ALL THE SAME-MEDIUM IS A LOT MORE STRINGENT THAN MINIMU.

THERE ARE SOME LIFE SENTENCES IN MINIMUM, AND SOME OF THEM HAVE A VERY EXTENSIVE AND VIOLENT CRIMINAL HISTORY-- I JUST FEEL LIKE THEY SHOULD DO A BETTER EVALUATION OF PEOPLE'S POTENTIAL FOR VIOLENCE. AND I DO NOT THINK THAT PEOPLE IN JAIL/PRISON FOR A TRAFFIC VIOLATION SHOULD BE IN THE SAME CELL BLOCK WITH MASS MURDERERS AND RAPISTS.

I realize this is old, but it deserves some attention because it is important. Many people believe that violent and non-violent inmates should be separated. In the nearly 5 years I was down, I don't think that is a big issue. Now the idea in county might be a good debate, because guys are yet to get their time, but once they get their time, there is a "calming", if you can call it that. Some call it closure. Besides, if a guy is violent, he would be in close custody or max. His nature, in how he acts, would determine whether he gets promotion or not. If a guy is very violent, rest assured he will put himself in isolation (the hole) before too long. But again, I rarely seen major confrontations with violent and non-violent. That is not to say it does not happen, but not nearly as often as you think. Inmates generally try to get along.