Inside Views

3C Report Extra Info

A few examples of that it is like in jails. 

 

1. Shediac Provincial Prison

The housing units are large, 3 levels with 10 cells each, open onto a central common area. There is an exercise room, a meeting room and an outside yard. With 2 inmates per cell the total unit population can be up to 60. There is one phone and two shower stalls per level. The guard station is next to the exit and the medic window, where methadone and daily drugs are given out. There is only one set of stairs leading from the common area to the upper levels. Each cell is 7x14 ft in size, with a bunk-bed at the far end. Near the door is the stainless steel sink-toilet unit. There is also a desk-shelf unit and two plastic stools. The big overhead light is dimmed at night but never turned off.

Getting to sleep can be a challenge. You want to do something to block the light, of course you are not allowed to. Naturally inmates get creative with this issue. There is lots of time to dwell on anything you care to focus on. The mattress is a 2inch piece of foam, encased in plastic. You are supposed to have a pillow, but sometimes you don't get one. Likewise you are supposed to have two blankets but you don't allays get both. You do have a small window next to your bed.

Your clothing is grey Walmart sweatpants and t-shirts, a sweatshirt is supposed to be issued, but that is seemingly random. If you get one never send it to the launder. Hand wash it, if you want to keep it. You also get socks and underwear, use at own risk. Shoes are floppy slippers. You are not allowed any outside clothing or jewellery or a watch.

In theory each level is allowed out for recreation 1 hour in morning, afternoon and evening. That is a total of 3 hours / day you are out of your cell. Rec-time includes showering, phone calls and yard time. If it is dark in the evening you are not allowed in the yard; which is a 20x40 foot area with solid walls and a fenced over top, so you can see the sky but nothing else. There was next to nothing in the common area, people just walked in circles there. You are never allowed to go in anyone else cell. Rec-time is also when you ask the guards if there is any mail for you or give them any out-going letters. Naturally you have to ask them for pens, paper, envelopes and toilet paper too.

You receive 3 meals per day. Each level is unlocked, comes to the common area, picks up the trays and returns to the cells to eat. After about an hour the process is repeated to drop off the trays. The food was not horrible. Many inmates would try to save something to have as an evening snack. There were vending machines, which were stocked once / week with junk-food and a few other things. If you had someone outside put money on your card you could buy stuff this way. Usually the machine was cleared out fast so it was really only once / week you could get anything.

There is no library access. A book cart comes around about once / month. You take as many as you can, only supposed to take 3, then you trade as you finish reading them. You can rent a TV, for $80/month. You are supposed to be issued with a small radio, but this is a random thing you may or may not get when you arrive.

The unit I spent time on was a mixed one. The upper level being reserved for PCs; those in “protective custody”. Because of the type of crime they committed or because of interactions with fellow inmates, any PC was labelled a sex offender or a rat. Naturally the more upstanding inmates looked down on the PCs ant took every opportunity to yell insults at them.

I did not see very much violence in my time there, just a few short fights and a few times the guards came in full riot suits to drag someone off to the hole. There were however many threats of violence, and rumours about who was going to get who. The most aggravating thing was the constant yelling and vulgar insults as the “solid” criminals tried to display their superiority over the PCs.

There was absolutely no distinction between prisoners on remand and those serving their sentences. There were no educational classes, no rehabilitation programs, no religious or spiritual activities. In the event that the jail was on lock down, rec-time was cancelled. This happened because of emergencies and short staffing due to snow storms and nice summer days. We could also lose rec-time as punishment if the level misbehaved.

When you first arrive in jail fear of the unknown is very strong. What will happen next? What is the daily schedule like? What is expected of you, by the guards, by the other prisoners? What are the people like? How should you deal with aggressive or violent inmates? Will it be safe to sleep or take a shower? A lot of questions will run through your mind. If you have been in any jail before, you will still have these questions when you arrive in a new place, they will simply be less panic inducing and more a mater of necessary survival adaptation.

Perhaps the most important question is; what is my cellmate like? As you will be spending lots of time with him, locked in a small room, its something you have to figure out fast. If you are very lucky you may end up with someone you can actually enjoy spending time with. If you are very unlucky then your time will be hellish, as you must watch everything you say and never turn your back on him. But as with most things in life, you are likely to get some cellmate who is in the middle of the spectrum.

The subject of getting along with your cellmate can not be over stressed, especially when you are locked in for 20+ hours each day. Sleeping and reading can take up a lot of those hours, but life will be much more tolerable if you can find some common ground to talk about. Humans are social animals. You see this expressed very well in prison, both in positive and negative ways. You must interact with fellow inmates to some degree. You don't need to make friends, yet at the same time that is exactly what you must do.

The next most important question is; what hobbies can you develop to kill time? Considering there is very little you are allowed to have in your cell, you must be creative. A lot of people play cards, this is ok if you and your cellmate get along and no one is upset when they lose. You can spend lots of time writing letters to friends and family. But this may turn out to be a bit disappointing because very few people reply, very often. If you like to write in general, jail is a great place for that. Keep a journal, write short stories or a book, take up poetry. But remember the guards can read you stuff at anytime and they may toss it out during a cell search. Other inmates may also get hold of your writing to pass it around or destroy it. Drawing can be a good hobby, but they do not give you pencils just pens.

By this point you may be thinking; going to jail does not sound very hard. Let me tell you it is. Anyone who has been there will usually joke about the stuff that happened. That is a way to cope with the trauma. Even if you suffer no physical abuse, the environment will make you suffer mentally. Especially Shediac Jail, in my experience. A million small things add up to make the place awful. Its hard to explain unless you live it.

2. Dalhousie Provincial Prison

The housing units are small, 2 levels with 5 cells each, for a total population of 20 inmates. There is a common room with a big tv, bench seats, a few tables, and 3 phones. There is a guard post next to the exit. There is no yard or weight room for the individual unit. These facilities are shared among all units. There is a complicated scheduled giving you 1 hour of time / day to use them.

There seems to be a higher standard of behaviour expected from inmates here. On the bright side the treatment is much better. You stand outside your cell door at 7am each morning for the count, then there is cleaning duty, then breakfast. You are allowed in the common area all morning. After lunch is lock up until diner time, then you are allowed out for the evening. At 10pm there is another standing count and its into your cell for the night. So you could be out of your cell for about 11 hours of the day.

The smaller unit size and the pattern of daily activity go a long way to making the place more tolerable. Assuming you do not have any serious problems with another inmate. You can pass your time in more social and civilized ways. In Shediac the environment conditions you to be a caged animal, at Dalhousie the environment is more human. The lack of screaming crazy people goes a long way to improve mental health. Guys play a lot of cards and the game are usually quite friendly.

There is a rec-room with some old Nintendo games, a ping pong table and a guitar, the vending machines are located there. A complicated scheduled is used because the room is shared with all the units. As I recall you got 2 visits / week of 1 hour each. If your unit was misbehaving or if there was a lack of staff, the rec-room visit was cancelled. But punishment was not the only idea at work here. If your unit did very well, with cleaning and behaviour, you would be given a new-release movie to watch on Saturday, with free chips and pop. The book cart came around every other week, however the selection on it rarely changed. There was a library room but we were not allowed there.

More importantly there was a GED education program being run and there was church service on Sunday. Unfortunately there was no real rehabilitation programs or job skill training.

The clothing was grey, the mattress was thin, just like in Shediac. However here there seemed to be no shortage of pillows, sweatshirts and radios. You got these things when you arrived. The cells themselves were very much like those in Shediac, with a small but important change; the light fixture was oriented differently so that you did not get it shining in your eyes as much at night.

My time at Dalhousie jail was relatively good, in part because of the environment, but mostly because I met some people who were easy to get along with. The quality of people you associate with has a lot to do with how you cope in any situation. In my time there, only once did a fight brake out and only once did anyone get dragged off the unit by the guards. Prison sucks at its best, but it is a huge improvement to pass your days not being fearful of getting ambushed and assaulted.

Looking at the two prisons  I do think Dalhousie is a much better place in terms of how it functions. A multitude of small units is much better than a few big blocks. Because the environments can be tailored to the type of inmates being held in them. Also the philosophy at work expresses some understanding of the normalization principle; reward and penalization for behaviour, not just punishment, socialization of people, not just caging of the animals.

3. Springhill Federal Prison

The time I spent there was in “reception” and is not an accurate reflection of what regular life at the institute may be like. When you are sent to a federal jail, you undergo a period of close confinement and evaluation. A weak or two in solitary, then 3 to 6 weeks on the range. The building used for this was one of the oldest. The cells were about 5x12ft in size, with a single bed, a sink-toilet unit and a desk-shelf unit, most amazingly to me at that point, there was a light switch, so you could actually sleep in the dark. The building was divided into several ranges; a hallway with cells, showers, a phone and a mini kitchen/laundry room. There were 14 cells on a range. At the centre of the building was the guard post “the bubble”. Next to it was a common room, but this was closed during my time there.

There was a service counter next to the bubble, that is were we went to get out meal trays. We ate in out cells. We did not return the trays directly, but dropped them off at the next meal time. The food was horrible.

While in solitary, we were allowed out for 30 minutes in the yard, but only ever 2 inmates at a time. Also we were allowed on the range for 1 hour in the evening to shower, use the phone etc. There were a few books. There were no radios issued.

We got blue jeans and blue t-shirts for clothing, black sneakers and green jackets too. The mattress was even thinner than those in provincial, perhaps because they were 20 years old.

The building housed several types of criminals including a PC range. However because of how it was set up, there was little yelling of insults. Those did sometimes come from the outside, as other inmates had their free time.

While on the range, we got 1 hour / day of yard time. Also we were allowed out of our cells for most of the evening 5-10pm and most of the week end. We joked that it was our job to be a prisoner. We were allowed over to the gym, which was in its own building, once / week, but this often got cancelled. There was not much to do on the range, it was basically just a hallway. There were a few books to read. You could have a small tv sent in and pass the time that way. Fortunately for those with out a tv, we were allowed hang out in other people’s cells, so if you made friends with a guy who had one, you could pass a few hours each evening watching tv.

There is some good and bad to be said for having a cell all to yourself. You did not have to worry about a crazy cellmate. But also you did not have anyone to talk with. The isolation sure did give you time to think.

There were only a few fights on my range when I was there. One because of laundry the other because of the phone. Both were short and did no serious damage. There was some tension because of some guys, but overall it was not dangerous.

There was testing and evaluation interviews. A long talk with a parole officer, who would make recommendations about your placement; minimum or medium. Also questions to determine if you needed a program or not. According to the formula I did not need one, but I put in a request to have one anyhow, because I wanted the help to understand it all.

4. Dorchester Minimum Federal Prison

It is not like what people imagine a prison to be, unlike the old Dorchester Medium Pen which is exactly the stereotype of a prison. The minimum sector is a lot of open land surrounded by a single fence. Being there is something of a privilege and there are a dozen ways you can be sent “over the wall” into the medium sector to serve your time. For example there is no tolerance for violence and fighting.

It is rather like a village, that you can not leave. Most of the housing units are small houses, with 4 double occupancy rooms or 6 single rooms upstairs and a kitchen living area downstairs. There is also a building that has apartment style dorms, each with 8 single rooms. The aim here is to provide a level of normality that will help re-integrate inmates with regular life. The rooms do not feel at all like cells. There is also a housing unit for the elderly.

The main building holds; a medical block, staff offices, the guards’ main desk, a visitor centre, the library, the gym and a few specialized recreation rooms. It is where you drop off and pick up the mail. Nearby is the school and programs building. There is a specialized building for psychology. More important than that, for most people, is the chapel. Then, perhaps most important of all is the sports field, with the track. Many many inmates pass lots of hours walking the track, alone lost in thought or in pairs talking about whatever they really need to talk about.

This is a point I really want to stress. The ability to walk out of your housing unit, down to the track, and around in circles is a huge sort of freedom over the tightly confined environments of other prisons. It makes you feel more human. If you want a private chat or if you want some alone time, you go walk the track.

Of course the place is a prison. There are rules. You are locked in your housing units over night, from 10pm to 7am. There is a standing count when everyone must be in their rooms at noon and 5pm. But compared to being locked in a 7x14 box for over 20 hours each day, it is paradise.

Unlike most prisons, meals are not made in a central kitchen. Each person makes a grocery list every week, having a set budget to work with. Once per week the groceries are picked up from the distribution centre. You can do your own cooking as each kitchen is equipped with all the normal things you would expect to find in a house. This is an other important normalizing factor, as some guys may have forgotten how to cook while in traditional confinement, if they ever knew how in the first place.

Some houses elect a cook and pool their grocery funds, while in others its every man for himself. Some houses have a set scheduled of cleaning chores, others are more free-for-all; everyone just helps clean on Saturday morning. The guards insist that things be kept neat, but they do not hover around to say how and when cleaning must be done.

On the subject of money, there is no cash. Grocery funds are purely fictional numbers on paper. What is real is your account that can be used to buy stuff at the canteen and to put money on your phone card. You can have money sent into your account from the outside. You can also work to earn it. Unfortunately the rate of pay is a bad joke; $5 / day. If you do not have a job you get welfare pay $2 / day. On the bright side taking a program or other educational class does count as a job.

It is a serious issue in terms of planning for your eventual release. Saving up for an apartment rental, damage deposit and utilities, is next to impossible under the current system.

You are allowed some personal items to be sent in a “pen box” when you first arrive. You are allowed a small TV. If you have one or not, a monthly deduction is taken from your account to pay for the cable service. Of course you are allowed to buy items from the canteen. There is/was also a purchasing office that allowed you to buy certain items from outside. So if you hear about prisoners enjoying any luxury items, it is their own money they used not tax payer funds.

There are a wide range of jobs, some you can learn useful skills at, others not at all. Some jobs even allow inmates to work off site, if they qualify for it. There is basic GED education to gain a high school equivalency. There are various job skills courses run on a complicated scheduling system, so its kind of random if you get into one of these.

There are rehabilitation programs. As that is one of the aims of the institute. However not all inmates are required to take a program. You can drop out, but this looks very bad on you when it comes to parole time. Most inmates stick with the program even if they do not take it seriously as useful life changing knowledge.

3C Part 3.

The 3C Report ( Conviction Confinement Correction )

Part 3. Correction; The post punishment system.

There is a lot of psychology involved in this subject. Before we get into ways to improve the system, I want to point out a few essential facts. The threat of punishment has almost zero effect on people committing crime. They do not make a rational choice after considering the positive and negative results of their actions. The often uttered “We need to make an example out of you.” when handing down a harsh sentence is a hollow idea, in terms of crime prevention or correction.

There are basically three types of people we must consider in terms of rehabilitation. Some recognize that their is a problem with their behaviour and they want to change it, other people see the problem but they think change is impossible, and then there are those who do not want any change.

The first type are easy to help, because they will actively take part in a program. If they genuinely want self improvement, they will try to learn from the education they are given. The second type are a harder to deal with, because they have for various reasons convinced themselves that change is not possible for them. Social and mental problems seem inescapable. These will often include repeat offenders who say with various degrees of honesty “Iv tried to change but nothing works.” They require more than a simple “how to” program, they need guidance and help to build them up to the point of being stale and self confident enough to seriously face the issues that caused their criminal behaviour. The third type are almost a lost cause. If they do not want to change, then forcing them to take a re-education program, will usually achieve nothing. A few may benefit, but most will endure the classes without any of the lessons really sinking in. Some may even seem to do well, but they are not taking the program seriously, its just a necessary hoop to jump through.

“If you have an addict, you can send him to jail a thousand times, you can put him in a thousand programs, but the only way he will really change is if he wants to.”

With those basic point in mind, let us continue.

At any level of incarceration, parole or probation, there should be programs and support offered. If you think you need help, it should not be a long complicated struggle to get it. There are many stories about offenders on parole who, don't want to talk about problems for fear of being sent back to prison, or those who do bring up issues, only to be put on a waiting list. If you are struggling with an issue, asking for help can be very difficult. You may not expect to have it fixed right away, but you do need to have it addressed right away. Unfortunately, unless the issue is on the verge of suicide, you may be told to wait.

A parole officer can be a useful resource for the offender. However there is the solid unshakable notion that the PO is not your friend, he is there to do his job, not to help you. If you are cooperative and make his job easy, then a reasonable working-relationship can exist. But you must watch what you say.

A system that makes rehabilitation central.

As soon as a criminal is convicted, before sentencing, an interview should be done to determine if they want or need a rehabilitation program. At the same time the question of education and job skills can be covered. The recommendation of the interviewer should be used by the judge in considering the sentence to be given.

A general self-management program can benefit anyone, and should be required for all as a short class. The skills of emotional awareness and control, those of better communication and conflict resolution, are basic psychology that we can all stand to improve on. They do not directly relate too criminal behaviour, but they do play a huge role in how a person lives their life. A more lengthy class should also be provided for those who are very deficient in these areas.

Dealing with addictions is the next biggest topic. There are many things people can be addicted to; drugs, alcohol, gambling, sex, pornography, etc. There should be a generic program dealing with addictions in the most broad way, but there also should be more deep and lengthy classes focused on specific areas.

A few words about work-rehabilitation.

The idea of normality while in prison is a valuable one. Inmates should be in situations that help them reintegrate. This includes living in apartment-like housing units, where they must do normal daily tasks like cooking and cleaning. It also means having some sort of job. However the current work programs is something of a joke. At $5 / day, there is no real incentive to work. It also makes saving any real amount next to impossible. For example; if you want to save enough for an apartment, say $300 damage deposit and $600 first month’s rent, you need to work 180 days, with out spending a cent. As part of a reintegration plan this is a poor idea. Most inmates take jobs just to relieve boredom.

In addition to education and programs.

For best effect, a support network must exist in the community, and be active with the offender during his term of parole or probation. There are 3 basic elements to any such system; regular weakly meetings, a help line one may call at any time, and a refresher class given near the end of the offender’s sentence. ( currently most refresher classes are given to those on parole early in their term ) Also of importance is idea that you have freedom to say things in the group and you need not fear punishment.

Currently if a person is on parole for say a drug offence, he is very hesitant to talk about the very real pull addiction has on him. If he admits to having taken some drug, for whatever reason, it can be an automatic trip back to jail. The fear is that instead of getting help, he gets punished.

Corrections Programs – Voluntary and Mandatory

Those in V. Programs want to be there, most if not all have some desire for self improvement. It must be admitted that some are just working the system and not taking reform seriously. Those in M. Programs are often reluctantly co-operating because it is a necessary step in their sentence. They often have low levels of motivation to change.

As a basic truth of psychology, it is far more easy to help someone change than to force them to change. Thus the effectiveness of a voluntary program should be expected to be a lot higher than that of a mandatory one. The particulars of a V. Program should assume that participants want rehabilitation and take seriously their role as students. Unfortunately the M. Programs must take a different view. To be effective they must overcome the resistance of the participants to the very idea of reform. The program must make a serious and continuous effort to push the idea “successful personal change is possible” into the minds of the students. Until this idea is embraced, very little long lasting change can be expected.

The attitudes of people participating in programs maybe summed up as follows;

I have no problems. Im fine, its society that has the problems. Nothing is my fault, I do the best I can, I just end up in bad situations. I have problems, Iv tried to fix them but nothing works. Im too set in my ways to change now. I have problems but no idea how to fix them. Im not sure what my problems are.

Some of these attitudes are easy to work with, others require work before any meaningful rehabilitation can start.

The 2 paths to self improvement.

Basically there is the external and the internal factor.

Psychology focuses on the internal. Everything is all in your head. It is all up to you to face your problems and fix them. External influences do effect you, but its mostly about how you react to them that matters. You only control what you think and do. Psychology generally dismisses any talk of spirituality and help from a higher power. The idea that God has a plan for you is considered delusional.

The external path to self improvement has a large focus on the spiritual / religious side of life, especially the idea of getting help from a higher power. When you feel that you can not solve your problems it is a great comfort to be able to turn to something greater than yourself and ask for help. The idea that your difficulties maybe part of a big picture, a divine plan, can get you through some dark times and serve as a foundation for self improvement.

Many people are resistant to the spiritual and especially the religious, because of negative past experiences and their perceptions of what these things offer. They may even see them as forms of weakness. A belief in God may be comforting but in the end He is not real and the belief is just a crutch. On the other hand science and psychology seem more solid, yet they do not offer much in the way of comfort or hope. They do offer useful skills in communicating, emotional understanding, self management, etc. But they generally fail to offer a sense of meaning about life.

The problem faced by program designers is that spirituality and psychology are often at odds with each other. If religion in any traditional form is brought into consideration it is quickly dismissed as incompatible with proper modern rehabilitation. So we are left with some loss ends. A science based program of sound techniques for self improvement will lack the motivational forces of hope- that there is purpose to life, that things will get better, and faith- that there is a higher power who can help you when you don't have the strength to go on.

3C Part 2.

The 3C Report ( Conviction Confinement Correction )

 

Part 2. Confinement; The Incarceration System.

The first issue is that of people being placed in confinement before trial. These are people not yet guilty of any crime, but who are considered unable to be left at large. There are situations when this may be necessary. Concern for victims must not be reduced. However the statistics on this are alarming; “Prisoners awaiting trial accounted for 57 percent of the total number of inmates in provincial jails.” according to Stats-Canada report in 2015. This has not gone down, “The average number of adults in remand in 2017 increased 3% when compared to the previous year” These people are living under the exact same conditions as convicted criminals who are serving their sentences. Usually they are mixed together with absolutely no distinctions made.

Being confined for more than a few days will often cause a person to lose his job. If he can not communicate effectively with friends on the outside he may well lose his apartment and all his possessions. Being placed on remand is a potential destructive form of punishment. That is in addition to its psychological impact. The isolation, depression, and dangers are compounded by the uncertainty of the situation. While some people spend less than one month on remand, others end up there for nearly a year, as technical issues move their trail dates around. (The crown prosecutor will sometimes delay if they feel the case is weak, to ensure that the accused spends more time in jail whatever the outcome of the trail may be.) Let me be very clear, remand is punishment !

We should recognize there is a fundamental difference between a none guilty individual being held and a convicted individual serving a sentence. The two should not be put in the same box – literally. There should be community options available, that may include some restrictions and monitoring, but do not destroy a person’s life. A system more like that used in half way houses, if the person can not stay where he is. If a person must be confined, then a separate institute or a clearly separate section of a provincial jail, should be used.

The main concern here, is to protect the public safety without causing undue harm to the person who is by law “innocent until proven guilty”. Some limitations to personal freedom may be required, but the conditions should not be exactly the same as those of a prisoner who is being punished for his crime.

To explain in a simple way; A remand centre should be more like a cheep hotel, possibly one you are not allowed to leave. It should not be a 6x14 concrete cell with a 2inch foam mat as your bed, and a guy serving 8 months, as your roommate.

One of the major concerns of the confined is communication with the outside world. Communication with friends, family and your lawyer should be unlimited, and you should have opportunity and even aid to get your affairs in order. This is a serious difficulty under the current remand system. Accomplishing even simple tasks once you are in jail is a lot harder and more time consuming than most people can imagine.

It is understandable that the public may not like the idea of accused criminals, especially the repeat offenders, being allowed to enjoy such soft treatment. But the principal must be recognized; those not yet found guilty are innocent and should not be tossed in with those who are serving a sentence.

The next point is about incarceration being an overused punishment.

The tough on crime mentality says; Offenders should be put away in harsh conditions for long periods, to teach them a lesson and serve as a warning to other wood-be criminals. These convicts deserve the minimal essentials of life and should not be allowed luxuries and privileges.

To a limited degree this harsh treatment approach does have some merit. For some, especially first time offenders, a short sharp sentence can act as a strong deterrent against future bad behaviour. But for many it will make no real difference because the underlying issues that drove the person to commit a crime are not addressed. The harsh sentence idea relies on the power of negative reinforcement as a behaviour control. What seems poorly understood is how time and situation play into the mix. A person when thrown in jail for the first time will be horrified, it is a horrible place. Very soon they will be saying “I will do anything to get out, I just want to go home. I will do whatever it takes to avoid coming back here.” If the sentence is short and sharp, followed by a program to address the underlying issues that caused the criminal behaviour, then a lot of good may be accomplished.

Unfortunately, any lengthy stay in prison forces a person past the adaptation point. There comes a day when the horrible situation is accepted as normal by the person trapped in it. Unpleasant, often dull, sometimes dangerous, but normal. The shock value has worn off. He may never want to go to jail again, but it will not hold the same sort of fear and dread that it did at first. Oddly enough lot of convicts will return to prison, because they they find it more familiar and comfortable than the chaotic life outside. Or maybe its more accurate to say that they return because they don't see any other path in life.

What is the main aim of confinement?

1. To keep a troublesome person out of society / to protect society from an individual. In this case clear evidence should be shown that the criminal is not manageable, that he will almost certainly do harm to people and property if not confined. Situations of long standing rivalry and violence, where threats have been made are the most obvious examples, or cases where a person has gone to extreme lengths to “get even” and it seems likely he will continue this pattern of behaviour. Also of concern is the feeling of safety that a victim of a crime may have. When a criminal is put away for a few years, he is no danger for that time and the victim can sleep better.

2. As a form of punishment / to make the criminal suffer for their misdeeds. While knowing the criminal is suffering may help make a victim feel better, it really is not very helpful at reducing crime. It is simply a traditional view we hold onto despite the mountain of evidence against it as a useful policy. The public desire to be tough on crime is something of a miss-focus of the public eye. The drive should be to reduce crime in effective ways.

3. To keep criminals in a controlled environment while they undergo rehabilitation. In this situation confinement is not primarily a punishment but rather a necessary part of the correction program. While some people can undergo a rehabilitation process out in the community (if the resources are available) it may not be the best option for maximum results. When you are incarcerated most of life’s concerns, work and other activities, are suspended. You have a lot of time on your hands, with very few things to do. Thus it is a good environment to focus on self examination and improvement, guided by rehabilitation programming. In this case the sentence length (more exactly the confinement stage of a sentence) would be linked to the length of a corrective program; evaluation + program itself + assessment.

A program that offers examination and correction of a person’s behaviour, can be good in any situation. It should be offered at both Provincial and Federal levels of incarceration and also as part of any community based sentence where the offender does not serve jail time.

When viewing confinement as part of the rehabilitation process, rather than confinement as punishing and warehousing criminals, we may better focus on the issue of mental health and alternative sentencing. 

Many people are in jail today because of addictions that got out of hand and resulted in criminal acts. What they need more than punishment is help.

Consider a new form of confinement centre. It would be built along the lines of a minimum security prison, with its aim being rehabilitation and reintegration, rather than minimalist housing for inmates designed to make them suffer for their crimes. It would have an environment to provide as many normalizing factors as possible. It would be a controlled environment of course, but not one that makes every effort to provide an unpleasant experience. 

A common problem people have with any lengthy trip to jail is that they come out more messed up than they were when they went in. Readjustment to society, overcoming anxiety and paranoia are serious issues for many convicts coming out of jail, even for those who were relatively normal in their social functionality. The 3C confinement correction centre, would try to reduce the negative effects of captivity, while rehabilitation goes on, so the person will have the best chance of a smooth social reintegration. 

 

Also we should combine elements of basic education and job skills training into these centres. While the primary concern must be for an individual to become better able to manage himself so he will not offend again, many also need help with the more normal subjects of education and even some basic life skills.

There is a near total lack of programming, education and job training at the provincial level. 

 

The argument here is that confinement at this level is usually for short terms only, and always less than 2 years, so most inmates don't have time for any program. It is a good point, but also totally negates the institute as a corrections centre. Without any counselling, programming, education, what is it doing? It is warehousing and punishing people, in hope that their unpleasant experience will convince them never to commit another crime.

As part of the reform to provide effective reduction of recurring crime, I would suggest Provincial jails need to be run more like Federal ones, with programs, education, job training and even some sort of parole system. Or we divide Provincial jails into two separate sections; 1. Remand Centres that only hold people waiting trail, under relatively generous conditions. 2. Punishment Centres that only hold convicted criminals for very short terms under harsh conditions.

Recommendations for Reform of the incarceration system.

Point 1. Remand centres, separate from prisons. They should have various levels of security and confinement to deal with the innocent-until-proven-guilty people who can not be allowed unsupervised freedom until their trial date. These centres would facilitate the person’s interaction with the community rather than limiting them.

Point 2. Probation being turned into a more viable alternative, even in the case of some serious crimes. People should be kept in the community, unless it is clearly proven that they are unmanageable and dangerous. There should even be an option of relocation, in cases where the offender is cooperative but some people in the community really do not want him there. In many situations probation should include a general program of self management and a specific program to deal with the issue most linked to the criminal behaviour.

Point 2.5 Probationary Half-Way Houses should exist, and follow the general form and function of their name sake. Offenders maybe required to live in one for a term. This can be especially effective when combined with a rehabilitation program, because the offender does not have to worry about holding a job and paying rent, he can focus more on self improvement. Then take the necessary steps to get back on his feet.

Point 3. Short sharp sentences. The provincial level of incarceration should be revised, with its main function to punish people for 30 days or less. The conditions should be as uncomfortable as possible (without violating human rights) with the time span being kept very short. A full three weeks should be seen as a serious sentence, not to be handed out lightly. This is punishment pure and simple, not rehabilitation.

Point 4. Correction Centres (not warehouses) as a new institution of provincial or federal level incarceration. These would be in a style similar to a minimum security prison. Their main aim being rehabilitation not punishment. They would include not only behaviour modifying programs but also general education and job skill training. However, in order to make this effective a stay of one year or more would be required.

Point 5. Federal medium and maximum prisons would still need to exist. It must be admitted that some people do not want to reform themselves. The use of these institutes would be for repeat offenders and those with extreme violence, the unmanageable. (and those who try to escape from the Correction Centres)

Point 6. Parole should be required after any institutional stay. Typically a term would be spent in a Half-Way House, with close supervision and tight regulation, followed by a term of more relaxed parole conditions. There should also be resources to aid the person with re-integration to society. Basically what Parole is now, except extending it to Provincial level offenders.

For example;

A first offence may see you sentenced to Probation, including some months in a probationary half-way house, during which time you must take a program, followed by a period when you are given more freedom of movement and may reside on your own.

A second offence would send you to the Provincial Punishment Canter for a short stay between 1 to 3 weeks, followed by a Parole period including time in a half-way house, while taking a rehabilitation course, then time on parole at large. This should even be a consideration for many of crimes that are today listed as serious, so long as the offender is deemed manageable. With an appropriately longer time served on parole after the punishment phase, to allow for a full reform program.

For serious crimes or repeat offenders a trip to the Corrections Centre would be in order. Assuming the offended is found to be interested in reform. This may be in addition to a term in the Punishment Centre or not, as the judge likes it. The part of the sentence served at the CC would be linked to the rehabilitation program and other help that is pest given in a controlled environment. Minimum time would be about 1 year. After which he would serve a Parole period.

For those who are highly uncooperative, a sentence would send them to a more traditional warehouse institute. With the understanding that after some time there would be a review to determine if they qualify to enter the Corrections Canter for programming.

What must be kept in mind is the following;

“Different environments create different behaviours. This has been proven. The correctional service should take seriously the research. What patterns of behaviour are being created or reinforced by the environment of a given confinement institute? Are they actually beneficial to society, to the rehabilitation and integration process?”

3C Part 1.

The 3C Report ( Conviction Confinement Correction )

This paper will be divided into 3 parts as the title implies. The thoughts offered here are gained from direct experience and some research into the various systems used in Canada. The aim is to offer both criticism and possible avenues of improvement.

Introduction.

The idea of vengeance and punishment runs deep in society. Compassion for criminals is almost laughable. They should be locked away for a long time and made to suffer for the things they did. If you want a system that accomplishes this aim, then we are doing fine. No need to keep reading. But if your concern is reform and the actual reduction of criminal activity, then you should consider what is presented here.

Public opinion will naturally be against most of what I shall talk about, because it may seem lenient towards the offenders and it will be expensive to implement any effective changes. As we constantly deal with deficits and cuts to all sorts of social programs, certainly we can not afford to spend any more on the corrections system. Best to just rename it the punishment system and cut all funding to anything that may actually rehabilitate people. ( sarcasm – not a real recommendation )

Part 1. Conviction; The Justice system.

We are told that you are innocent until proven guilty. In a technical way that is true, but in most functional ways it is not. As soon as you are charged with a crime there is an assumption of guilt. The police are convinced of it, the crown prosecutor is convinced of it. They will do everything possible to put you away and win the case. The word order here is very deliberate and refers to the process of remand that can have people sitting in jail, sometimes for many months, before they go to trial.

The assumption of your guilt stands against the proclaimed “innocent until found guilty” rule. Some people believe we do not do that in this country. I assure you that it happens a lot, if not all the time. The prosecution will often put as much pressure on the defendant as it can to force him into pleading guilty, if not to everything than to some things. They assert that if you defend yourself and are found guilty they will demand a harsher sentence than if you simply come forward quickly and admit your guilt. In what way is this justice in action? You have a right to defend yourself, but if you do so you will receive extra punishment.

With some cases the burden of proof does still lie with the prosecution, they must show evidence. But many cases today are simply matters of an accusation made against the defendant. The victim, often as the only witness, is given credibility, their claim has to be taken seriously. But this places the defendant in a very difficult situation as he is forced to prove his innocence. If he pleads “not guilty” and says the accusation is untrue, but offers no compelling evidence the court will almost always find in favour of the accuser, who offered no evidence other than a story about what happened.

This sort of situation is particularly troubling in historic cases, ones dealing with events that happens a number of ears ago and are only now being prosecuted.

The pressure to get a conviction starts with the police. When they arrest you, they want you to make a statement, they want you to make a confession. That simplifies things a lot. Interestingly they are required to remind you; “You have the right to remain silent, anything you say may be used against you. You have nothing to gain from any promise made and nothing to fear from any threat.” That last part is often overlooked, but it is part of the mandatory warning. Having said this, the officer will then say whatever he can to get you to make a confession. This often included the promise that cooperation and full disclosure will be good for you and get the judge to be lenient.

That is part of the regular polite interrogation technique. It may include a bit of “good cop, bad cop” and it is very effective, especially on first time defendants who are stunned and confused by their situation. Any sort of torture and physical abuse are strictly prohibited. But it is not unusual to be left in a holding cell for many hours with out food or water before the interrogation takes place. You have a concrete slab to sit on, there is a toilet, they may be toilet paper, there is no clock on the wall, there is no way of really knowing what will happen next or when it will happen. You can call a guard, but mostly they will ignore you. It is very frightening and disorienting especially for first timers.

You may call legal aid, the free advice service that you are allowed to call. They will advise you to say nothing, make no statement at all. Because your statement will be used against you, not for you.

The two points here are;

1. assumption of guilty requires one to prove innocence.

2. forceful tactics used to gain a guilty plea.

The next point is about a Judge’s ability to make rulings and sentences.

With the increasing “tough on crime” attitude and laws, the amount of flexibility that a judge can express has been seriously limited. Harsh minimum sentences are a horrible idea, because they do not allow the consideration of the many factors around a case to have any real impact on the sentence. It is a form of simplistic efficiency to say any crime of type Y must have a minimum of 2 years jail time. It is not a wise or just practice. After a guilty ruling, the judge should be able, be required, to take time and consider the factors of the case, then have a wide range of options available. Time behind bars should not be the only choice. Yet it is the almost universal sentence these days.

What alternative to incarceration already exist?

A conditional discharge or A suspended sentence.

Unless there is a minimum sentence required by law (there now often is) the court can give an offender an Absolute discharge – which almost never happens, or a Conditional discharge – which is a form of probation, or a Suspended sentence – which usually comes with a period of probation.

Probation.

This allows control over an offended with out the need for incarceration. He can live and work normally, with in a framework of restrictions. Probation is based on the belief that some offenders should have the opportunity to remain in the community under the supervision of a probation officer. If they violate the terms of probation they face jail time and or a fine. ( A major difference between Probation and Parole, is that those who commit a breach while on parole can be sent directly back to jail, while those on probation must have a day in court.) This form of punishment is imposed most frequently in the case of first offenders or in cases where the offence is relatively minor.

Some good things can be said for the idea of probation. However it usually only works for those who are not already living a “criminal life style”. Unfortunately the rate of re-offenders is quite high, causing many people to disregard probation as a serious form of punishment or correction.

The main aim here seems to be an inexpensive form of warning-discipline, with very little effort made at correcting a criminal’s behaviour. If the offender is generally able to manage himself and function in society, then probation is a fine idea. But if he is troubled, addicted, or otherwise deeply involved in an unhealthy life style, then probation needs to have more substance to it.

Fines.

A wide range of offences, federal and provincial, as well as municipal by-laws, include fines as possible punishments. Fines are used extensively by courts, both alone and in conjunction with other punishments.

However there is a problem with how the system of fines works. The imposition of a fine, without any other penalty, indicates that the judge believes the offender does not present a threat to the community and, therefore, should not be jailed. Yet if he somehow fails to pay the fine, he can be sent directly to jail. The amount of time he is required to serve depends on the size of the fine. Despite how damaging jail time is to the individual, and the cost to keep him there, the rate at which the fine is paid off is ridiculously low, about $10/day.

The problem here is that a sizable number of people every year end up sitting in jail for failure to pay fines. This maybe necessary to keep law and order, but a key injustice in the current system is the lack of a hearing to examine the reasons why a person did not pay.

So we see there are not many alternatives to incarceration. Certainly not if the crime is considered at all serious. A discharge or suspended sentence or a fine, implies that although the person is guilty the circumstances in his case are such that he does not deserve any harsh punishment. Probation could cover a wide range of situations with many possible sentencing details, however it is seen as lenient and ineffective, thus not fitting for any serious offence.

Of particular interest to me are the cases of people who are generally functional and law abiding citizens, who commit one crime which is by its definition considered serious and carries a minimum sentence. No matter what the circumstances of the offence, they face time in captivity, because no lesser punishment is open for consideration. This trip to prison can often ruin life for them and for their family. Even a short sentence can be damaging to their mental and physical health. In some ways a short stay in provincial jail is the most harmful possible alternative, because it provides no program of rehabilitation and no support mechanism once the offender is released.

Having taken a look at what is available, we should consider what is desirable.

Many people want to make the evil offenders pay. They often claim that conditions in prison (as they understand them) are to soft. Sentences need to be more harsh. Seeing an endless stream of criminals, some judges may support these sentiments whole heatedly. However it may be doing more harm than good. Tough laws that put more people in jail for longer do not actually reduce crime. This is a major point to think upon. The desire for retribution, for punishment is understandable but it is not the most effective principal for actually fixing the problem.

These observations are mostly my own.

To add some weight, let me point out that a few things from an official report;

“The most prominent feature of Canadian sentencing practices is the over-reliance on jail. It often appears that judges do not feel they are confronted with a continuum of sentencing options, but, rather, a dichotomy: incarceration, which is viewed as a real sentence, or some form of community sanction, which is viewed as a form of leniency."

“Countless studies have shown that jails do not rehabilitate offenders. Moreover, researchers have concluded that there is no evidence that imprisonment works as either a specific or general deterrent. While it is true that jails remove offenders from the community, this is a temporary reprieve.”

“Rather than rehabilitate, correctional institutions expose offenders to conditions in which they develop habits and attitudes that leave them less, rather than more, able to integrate into society after serving their sentences.”

“Given the ineffectiveness of the current system, we believe that the apparent public demand for longer sentences requires a thoughtful response. While we can understand the anger at crime that motivates this reaction, we know that longer sentences will not reduce crime. We are firmly of the view that it is more important to determine what has caused a person to act in an inappropriate way, and to deal with the cause of the behaviour, than it is to sentence a person for longer periods to satisfy a public demand for punishment.”

I believe minimum sentencing laws are exactly the opposite of what we should be doing to fix the system. They are a great example of a political fix to the problem. Not the problem of crime but the problem of angry voters. 

 

Reform in the area of sentencing.

There should be numerous options to chose from at sentencing time. When ever possible, one that allow for the lest damage to the individual and his family should be selected. It is not often considered that sending a person to jail can be very damaging to their family. The court frequently inflicts suffering not only on the guilty but also on those around him. Of course all blame must be put on the criminal, if he had not done anything wrong none of this would happen. The judge needs not concern himself with the side affects of his ruling. Maybe he should.

A short sharp sentence is very effective on first time offenders. After a few days in jail you are felling so low and homesick you desperately want out and you would never want to come back. However most people get over this. After some time, about 1 month inside, you learn to adjust to your situation, however horrible it is. This is why repeat offenders do not have any fear of prison. It is uncomfortable, but they know what to expect and how to make the most of it. With a long sentence a person has to adapt to his environment to survive. Then when released he must re-adapt to the outside world. The length of time and the conditions you hold a person in will have a large impact on how successful this reintegration is. As it stands, judges seem to have little, if any, knowledge of the reintegration aspect of the system.

Psychological and physical treatments should be considered more often as a primary ruling rather than a secondary corrective measure tacked onto a prison sentence.

More about the side effects of incarceration.

“Despite the attention being paid to criminal justice, one issue remains entirely absent from public policy and the government’s statements of intent: the concrete social effects of criminal policy on offenders’ families, and particularly their children. In civil law, separating a child from a parent is the exception and may be done only in the best interests of the child, but a court handing down a sentence on a defendant who has been found guilty of a crime has no obligation to inquire about his or her family circumstances. While there are legal precedents for considering the potential effects of a sentence on children, sentencing principles are silent on the matter.”

“Well you should have thought about that before you came to jail.” a guard said to a prisoner who expressed concern over the difficult time his family was having because of his captivity. On the one hand it is true that the criminal is responsible for his being in jail, and all the consequences that involves. But on the other hand, the justice system is playing a role in destroying the lives of his family. Very few want to recognize this fact. All blame must be placed on the criminal’s shoulders.

Yet the unspoken truth is that the judge and the justice system do carry some responsibility for the well being of the criminal’s family. When ever possible the punishment and rehabilitation of an offender should be done in a way that does not bring heavy suffering upon the family. As things stand, little consideration is given to this, and there are few if any measures that are in place to help keep the family together during a criminal’s confinement.

Counselling is only offered to a family if it is the victim of a crime. In this case the aim is mostly to split up the family, because they are better off away from the offender. For the families who are suffering simply because the husband is in jail, they are told to turn to the welfare system for help. At best this usually means a long waiting list before any actual counselling may occur.