Slashdot Mirror
Judges Junk Jailcam
theodp writes "With one dissenting opinion, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that an AZ sheriff's use of Webcams to broadcast prisoners being booked and held in cells constituted a profoundly undesirable level of humiliation, rejecting the sheriff's argument that the Webcasts deterred crime and showed the public how jails work." The Village Voice has a good article from a few years ago detailing how the jailcams work.
jailBAITcam is still operational...
My friend got arrested for [something :P] and I had a field day watching him sit in his cell downtown.
I asked him later "hey what did that bum want who talked to you?" he was so pissed.
Latewire
How is this going to effect my "lifetime" subscription to www.hornywomenbehindbars.com?!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
I ever ended up in jail and I knew there was a jail cam. It's like putting a mirror next to an item that's commonly stolen in a store. If a person feels like they're being watched, they're a lot less likely to try anything 'funny'.
Since we have this notion of someone being "innocent until proven guilty," I can see why having a webcam on while someone is being *booked* can be a problem. If (theoretically) everyone in the world can see John Doe getting booked for a crime which he may or may not have committed, how can he ever get a fair jury?
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
I can see the point that this is no different than celebrities or politicians being booked and the media showing up. How about if it were done after one is proven guilty - sort of as an extra punishment.
Visit Tim's Journal, yes?
I don't think Joe Arpaio (the sheriff's name here for those of you who don't live in Maricopa county, Phoenix or points south) has really done much to lower crime with his "tough ways". Sometimes I think he's more of a joke than anything else.
But he's quite powerful in the political sense. And taking down the cams ain't gonna make much difference. The guy needs to go. Well, hopefully this coming election.
The jail cams in question were for the holding cells of suspects, not of convicted criminals. Thus, the ruling that cameras were not allowed -- it amounts to conviction without a trial.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
Arpaio never met a reporter he didn't like, nor a PR stunt he wouldn't pull. Local opinion is that he's not a sheriff, he just plays one on TV.
His jailhouse tactics have cost the county millions in legal fees and settlements, and he is accused at the moment of having set up a squad of detectives to harass political opposition (in AZ, a county sheriff is an elected official).
from the been-there-done-that department
Humilation is one thing. Great, show it to grade school kids and they might think twice in the future. But I for one, do not want my "adventures in the drunk tank" broadcast for all to see. Barfing on the cop at the scene of my accident was enough.
So when is the Hawkeye movie coming out?
It seems to me that individuals in jail still have rights, no matter how detestable they are, and I'm pretty sure that having a camera trained on you 24x7 against your will violates those rights.
If I was in prison I would WANT jailcam all over the prison and in my cell.
Ordinary security cameras protect you from your fellow prisoners by alerting guards to misconduct. broadcasting this on the web and archiving images on the same site protects you from misconduct by guards. Trust me... No guard wants his mother to see him beating a prisoner to a bloody pulp and then sodomizing him.
of course to work right you need lots of cameras protected from abuse and positioned so you can see who tampers with them. My only loss as a prisoner in such a facility is that I have to be more cautious in my masturbation.
Prison is about taking away some freedoms of a person convicted of a crime. I prefer to louse my privacy than my religious or sexual preference. Never mind life and limb.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
I think it was a perfectly ACCEPTABLE level of humiliation for prisoners.
It would probably be a perfectly acceptable level of humiliation for convicts. The problem was that the cams were broadcasting from the holding cells for suspects.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
So let's see here. It's ok for national television to display home video footage of police beating the snot out of these people on the street, but as soon as the perp is dragged in to prison, now we must spare them the "humiliation" of broadcasting their incarceration on the Internet?
But God demonstrates his love for us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us - (Romans 5:8)
We're supposed to be punishing people for being convicted not for being arrested.
The cake is a pie
There is a camera in the cop car that pulls you over.
The camera in the cop car isn't being broadcast to the whole world. These jailcams were.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
I'm all for freedom of privacy and not humiliating people... but c'mon, what about COPS? They feature criminals kicking, screaming, and drunkenly making themselves look like idiots on national television! Even if they give their consent to have it played on TV, it seems like most of them are too out of it to know what's going on...
"In a Democracy, people get the kind of government they deserve." -Winston Churchill
Next, a realization that prison rape is not "funny", is a violation of basic human rights, and that /. comments about "bubba the love bunny" deserve a -1, flamebait mod, not a +1 funny.
In a civilized society, prisoners are sentenced to time in jail.
They should not be subject to torture at the hands of other inmates, and it is the duty of the State to prevent such abuses.
Just in case you're interested on what the aforementioned sheriff is up to THESE days, take a look at the latest New Times.
-72
-Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music.
But some of the images are more invasive: strip searches, female prisoners in various stages of undress, and, up until late April, a constant, unobstructed view of the women's toilet and the women using it.
Seriously?!? No wonder he lost the case. Way to hand your detainees tons of county cash, bozo. This type of guy in elected office is why we need strong anti-abuse laws on the books, and stricter supervision of prison operations. More interestingly, why isn't this bigger nationwide news? It would seem to have all of the makings of a major story, and yet I've only heard of it on /.
Of course, though the article states the toilet-cam as fact, the last line in the article has some hapless spokesdrone denying that charge... anyone know if they're just lying to cover up? From the attitude of the sheriff ( and much of law enforcement ), I'm guessing there really was a clear view of the women's toilet...
Yeah, ever wondered why some faces of the suspects were blurred out, and not others?
Check out "Top Ten Reasons NOT to vote for Joe".
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
Good. Maybe they can use some of that money to go out and buy a fucking shirt.
Q: In addition to the Web cam, what are some other things that are unique about your jail?
A: When I took office, I decided to put tents up, so we have almost 1,500 [inmates housed] in tents in the desert. I've gone down from three meals a day to two meals a day -- I call it brunch. And we have the cheapest meals, probably, in the country: 20 cents a meal.
I'm cracking down on animal cruelty, and when I make an arrest [for that], I have to seize [the animal involved]. I decided to put the dogs in cell blocks [in an unused jail]. I took some heat because that's the only jail we have that's air-conditioned. Also, it costs $1.15 a day to feed the dogs and only 40 cents a day to feed the inmates, but that's the way it goes around here.
I took away [inmates'] coffee; took away their smoking; took away their movies. The only TV they get is the Weather Channel, and they have to hear me do bedtime stories. I introduce the story, and [then play an] audio book. They can go to the library and get a regular copy, but this helps them learn how to read.
I put them in pink underwear. I decided to do that six years ago. I put them in striped uniforms several years ago, and I have male and female chain gangs. We do things different here since I became the sheriff. I just got reelected to a third term, and now everybody thinks I'm running for governor. All the polls show me leading for governor, but I haven't decided whether I'm running next year.
Q: It's been reported that you've had at least 800 lawsuits filed against you.
A: It doesn't mean nothing. It's how many you lose. Everybody sues me for the cockroaches, the food.
Q: Have you had to change some of your policies as a result?
A: I haven't changed anything.
Humiliation makes others feel better, but the target tends to feel pissed off, c.f. Columbine shootings. If you assume from the start they can't be rehab'd, you might as well kill them, quickly. Putting them in jail doesn't solve anything.
Prison should not provide anything remotely beneficial beyond educational, occupational, or psychological support. There should be light at the end of the tunnel for those who want to travel that route and the rest can rot in a 4x6 cell.
"The area of penetration will no doubt be sensitive." ~ Spock
Musta hit the 'any key' earlier when I posted as AC. Sorry. I'm gonna repost and face the wrath of moderation, considering how strongly I feel about this :
My new reality TV show.
'CellBoss 2004'. Not only will we be able to vote over the internet to give rapists and child abusers more time, but we can vote naughty/ugly/unpopular cons straight into segregation! Imagine the possibilities regarding aliances!
Joking aside, as someone who has spent significant time locked up, I find the idea of a webcam monitoring convicts quite disgusting. The simple fact of the matter is (IMHO) that this will do nothing but undermine what little integrity these guys have. Whether or not it might make things 'safer' is silly to me, considering the faulty foundation the Prison Industrial Complex is based on. This alongside of the fact that people in these holding cells are NOT necessarily guilty. The more we trivialize things like prison -- this indirectly relates to the COPS television show (ever seen a white collar criminal arrested?) -- the more people will ignore that America has the highest recorded rate of incarceration in the world and that 80% of those in prison are in for non-violent crimes.
_____ "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." -- Orwell
During that same weekend in incarceration, my friend witnessed the brutal beating of a suspect by three armed guards. The suspect had not assaulted anyone, but was being verbally abusive to the guards. The suspect lost consciousness, a lot of blood from a nasty head wound, and had to be carted to the infirmary.
Where did all this happen? Good ole NYC.
All of this happened in front of multiple surveillance cameras. I would surely like to review those tapes myself, but the general public is not allowed access to them.
What do you all suggest we do? Perhaps a public oversight committee that reviews the prison/jail surveillance tapes? This committe might be comprised of responsible citizens, selected via a process similar to jury duty selection.
Idiots like Sherriff Arpaio know that deterrence does not work. They do it because they want to mete out further punishment, beyond the convict's actual sentence. They feel, quite incorrectly, that they have the right and/or duty to make prisons and jails living hells for the inmates.
We need to do something to stop this. Most people are indifferent because they have no family members or loved ones behind bars. But take it from me: it can happen to you; it can happen to anyone. When you least expect it, someone you know will screw up and get thrown in prison. You won't feel so indifferent then.
Until convicted, like when arrested, booked and held, people are innocent of the crime of which they are accused. Any treatment of them other than obtaining their presence in the justice system, which could prove their guilt, is unacceptable, and threatens us all.
--
make install -not war
...is seen as funny by society at large. Why is this? Its because a) they are criminals b) they are men If there was any place where women knowingly got raped there would be an outcry, investigation etc etc. But as it is, it is an accepted, and even condoned by society. After all, these are criminals, they should pay their debt. Rape is rape, no matter who it happens to.
-Copyright law #69:Whenever Mickey Mouse is about to enter the public domain,copyrights get extended by 25 years.
Hello,
Amnesty International takes a somewhat dim view of this Sheriff's methods, and note that there was at least one suspicious death in custody among other things.
It seems the US is about the worst place for knee-jerk publicity seeking tough on crime laws & law 'n order auctions every election campaign.
In regards knee jerkism, look at the way many state & local authorities banned GHB within days of sensationalist reports of body builders abusing this vetinary anasthetic (to aid testosterone production from deep sleep) & gays getting off on thershold dose recreational use. The end result was the new illegal status attracted publicity way out of proportion to the recreational reality of the drug itself & pharmacuetical supplies were replaced by underground chemist supplies, which of course leads to dangerous quantity/quality irregularities, which is the very thing that makes GHB dangerous.
So the chief effect of politicians taking a opportunity to knee-jerk over the American public's anger over people daring to get off on things they shouldn't get off on, are law 'n order bills which have made the drug much more attractive to use & inherently much many more dangerous to use too. The end result being a logrithmic increase in overdoses from virtually none before hand (relative to the US population)
Now in regards the law 'n oder auctions every elections, the end result has been the US having both incarceration & policing rates that are logrithmically higher than anywhere else in the world (there's that big L word again).
This has led to a significant proportion of a significant American minority being totally disenfranchised & huge costs to the American tax-payers that get sucked in by all this law 'n order fear mongering. To the point that many US states now spend more on jails than education (which definitly doesn't bode well for the future), the maning, building & servicing of jails has become the biggest growth industry in the US & if US incarceration levels continue to grow at the same rate they have over the last 15 years, then by 2037 every American will be either employed by the 'jail industry' or incarcerated themselves.
This has been devastating to America's underclass - just look at those snitch snowballs in Tulia, Texas & Union, Alabama caused by knee-jerk & law 'n order election year 'auction' bills for mandatory minimums & forfeiture legislation. In both cases we had cops arresting people based on the uncorroberated testimony of a paid snitch & then threatened with mandatory minimums if they didn't snitch on any of their mates that were poor but had property (via such things as inheritances, redundency payouts, divorce settlements or people that had done well in the past but are now down on their luck). Meaning they were good forfeiture material as they were worth persecuting but didn't have the incomes to stand up for themselves in the justice system.
This leads to a snowballing effect as people are threatened with the mandatory minimum to plead out on lesser chargse (meaning they still get convicted & all their property forfeited) on the condition they snitch on any aquaintence, relative or mate that the cops want them to snitch on. Meaning a huge snowballing tragedy of justice in which the evidence is rarely tested in court & when it is tested, it's tested in some hick court where the judge & jury automatically take the cops side, with the legal aid lawyer is hung-over & nodding off in court all day (leading to situations where jurors refuse to admit their mistake & are still convinced that certain defendents are guilty, even though they won appeals due to ironclad alibies, simply because their adament that 'cops are good & don't lie').
Or look at the many Americans that feel the need to keeped a loaded firearm within axcess of the bed to protect the family from home intruders. Nevermind the fact that if one isn't a drug dealer or a Asian business man/woman with a reputation of keeping large quantities of cash at home, the chances of one's family falling victim to a home invasion if one's a member of the suburban middle class, is probabl