An interesting article tackling the contentious issue of prison telephone systems vendors paying per minute commissions to jails and prisons. In Louisiana, as in other states, the rate can be as high as 55% of the per minute cost of the call. According to the article, phone commissions are an important source of revenue, state corrections officials say. The challenge is to balance the need to find sources of prison revenue to fund operations in a difficult economy that has slashed state and local budgets while at the same time encouraging prisoner communication with family to reduce recidivism. As the article states, “it can be harmful to re-entry and rehabilitation goals if an inmate’s family can’t afford to stay in touch with him while he’s incarcerated.”

One strategy is to reduce the commissions, and therefore the cost of the telephone service, and offset this lost revenue by offering the new meshDETECT secure prison cell phone service. Many prisoners and their families would be willing to pay a premium to have the convenience and privacy a cell phone would provide their conversations. This will increase total revenues, reduce the contraband value of smuggled cell phones and offer more opportunities for prisoners to stay in touch with family and friends.

Every time a Louisiana prison inmate picks up a telephone and places a call, it’s money in the bank for sheriff’s offices and correctional facilities across the state.

The Louisiana Department of Corrections has received $10.2 million in commissions from vendors operating prison phones during the past three fiscal years, records show, and sheriff’s offices in Louisiana’s 64 parishes have received millions more.

For the most part, the money comes from the families of inmates — many of them poor — who pay the tab in the form of collect call charges that critics say are exorbitant, unfair and ultimately counterproductive to rehabilitation and re-entry objectives.

Now, the system is under scrutiny by the Louisiana Public Service Commission, which regulates the rates that telephone companies are allowed to charge.

The commissions that vendors are required to pay sheriff’s offices and the state — as much as 55 percent of gross revenues — are a big factor in the steep phone charges, records show.

A local collect call of zero to five minutes from East Baton Rouge Parish Prison means a charge of $1.31 under existing allowable rates, with a 50-cent charge for each five-minute period after that, meaning a 15- minute phone call costs $2.31, records show.

Pam Laborde, a spokeswoman for the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections, said the cost of 15-minute local collect calls from state prisons average $1.05, while intrastate collect calls average $5.55.

The charges can be a crushing blow for poor families trying desperately to stay in contact with loved ones behind bars, said Louisiana Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell.

“A lot of people think this is grossly unfair,” Campbell said. “This affects a lot of families in Louisiana.”

He recently prodded the PSC to hire outside legal counsel to analyze rates, examine regulations and compare them with other jurisdictions to determine if they are “just, fair and reasonable.”

Campbell said he tried to deal with the issue when he was a state senator but politically powerful Louisiana sheriffs blocked attempts to cut phone rates.

Cleo Fields, a lawyer who served in the state Senate with Campbell, said it was tough legislation to try to pass.

“Obviously, the Louisiana Sheriffs’ Association opposed the bill vigorously,” Fields said. “They felt it would be an infringement on their revenues. My argument is they shouldn’t use those types of revenues to balance their budget.”

Fields said the person being penalized is not the one who is incarcerated but rather the mother, child or other family member who is being charged the high rates.

Laborde said collect phone charges for the 19,000 inmates housed in state-run prisons in Louisiana are much lower than is the case for prison inmates in the neighboring states of Texas and Mississippi.

She said the local rate for a 15-minute inmate collect call in Mississippi is $2.85, while a 15-minute long-distance call is $14.55. In Texas, the rates are $3.90 for a local collect call and $6.45 for a long-distance collect call, she said.

Under its contract to provide inmate telephone services in state-run prisons, Global Tel Link pays 55 percent of its gross revenues to the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections.

The commissions generated $3.3 million for the fiscal year that ended June 30, according to figures provided by the department.

Although a small part of a public safety department budget that is $480.6 million this year, phone commissions are an important source of revenue, state corrections officials say.

Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections Secretary Jimmy LeBlanc said the agency has done everything it can to cut expenses short of closing or privatizing prisons.

“It would be a major impact to us if we had to cut $3.3 million from our budget,” he said.

LeBlanc said staff levels have been sharply reduced during the past three years and cutting corrections officer positions is not an option.

He said that means the ax likely would have to fall on services such as rehabilitation and re-entry programs designed to help inmates transition successfully back into the community. He said that’s not a direction he wants to see the department take.

“Our staff, from the bottom up, are committed to re-entry,” LeBlanc said.

He also noted that family ties are not always healthy and conducive to an inmate’s successful re-entry into the community.

“Family culture sometimes is not the best thing because they may have come up in a culture of crime,” LeBlanc said.

He also said money generated from phone commissions helps cover the costs of investigators who review recorded calls for security purposes, often generating useful information for the FBI, State Police or other law enforcement agencies.

Like the state corrections department, sheriff’s offices in Louisiana have also come to rely on income from phone commissions to help run their operations.

For example, the East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff’s Office includes $620,000 from phone commissions payments in its $79 million budget for this fiscal year.

Casey Rayborn-Hicks, a spokeswoman for the Sheriff’s Office, said in an email that the money goes into the sheriff’s general fund to help meet operating expenses, including such things as a crime victim’s assistance program.

The Sheriff’s Office’s agreement with American Phone Systems of Lafayette requires the company to pay 48 percent of its gross revenue to the Sheriff’s Office.

The contract is similar to that for other parish sheriff’s offices The Advocate examined. The same contract also sets the commission rate at 48 percent.

Michael Ranatza, executive director of the Louisiana Sheriffs’ Association, said the LSA doesn’t compile information on how much money sheriff’s offices statewide receive from phone commissions.

“I don’t know from parish-to- parish what it generates,” Ranatza said.

He said he wouldn’t speculate on what position the LSA might take on any attempt to eliminate commissions as a way of reducing phone charges that relatives of inmates have to pay.

“That’s something that’s not on the table right now,” Ranatza said. “We would look at the merits of any proposal based on what is presented and make a determination at that time.”

Curt Selman, chief executive officer of Payphones of Arkansas LLC and past president of a trade association for specialized communications providers, said phone systems installed in prisons have to be able to screen, record and block calls and must have other security features that make such systems more expensive than others.

He acknowledged that the commissions paid to state or local correctional facilities — sometimes amounting to more than half of gross revenues — drive up the costs for inmates and their families. But, he said, it’s a tradeoff because the money goes back into operating the prisons, reducing costs for taxpayers.

“There is some pressure from individual counties, states and parishes to get the commissions as high as possible and who can blame them? They are trying to run a jail and revenues are down,” Selman said.

He said companies bidding to provide phone services try to set rates at levels people can afford but also have to accommodate the requirements of prison systems that are trying to maximize the revenues they receive.

“Most of the providers of the service are not making outlandish profits,” Selman said. “Their margins are actually pretty slim.”

The PSC’s Campbell said his objection is to the tacked-on commissions that drive up phone rates and have nothing to do with the cost of providing the service.

Moreover, Campbell said, it can be harmful to re-entry and rehabilitation goals if an inmate’s family can’t afford to stay in touch with him while he’s incarcerated.

“You should do the human thing and let the man talk to his wife and children,” Campbell said. “It shouldn’t cost an arm and a leg.”

He said it is wrong to fund sheriff’s offices and prisons by “taking it out of the hides of the poorest of the poor.”

Fields said the current practices are predatory.

“We’ve got to take the profit out of prisons, period,” Fields said. “At this point, it’s profitable to incarcerate people. It should not be a way to make money.”

The phone commission system used in Louisiana is similar to that used in many other states.

A publication called Prison Legal News earlier this year found that phone service vendors, on average, paid state corrections departments 42 percent of their gross revenues from phone calls made by prisoners.

The report found that “pure, unabated greed by both the phone companies” and state prison systems controls the rates set for inmate phone services.

The report said that eight states have banned prison phone commissions — Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Michigan, South Carolina, California and Missouri.

Author: Greg Garland
Source

The post Addressing The High Cost Of Prison Phone Calls appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

The problem of contraband cell phones in prison is not limited to unmonitored phone calls. Internet access via smuggled smartphones allows prisoners to harass victims and witnesses via social networks like Facebook. The meshDETECT secure prison cell phone solution has no internet access or camera capabilities.

Lisa Gesik hesitates to log into her Facebook account nowadays because of unwanted “friend” requests, not from long-ago classmates but from the ex-husband now in prison for kidnapping her and her daughter.

Neither Gesik nor prison officials can prove her ex-husband is sending her the messages, which feature photos of him wearing his prison blues and dark sunglasses, arms crossed as he poses in front of a prison gate. It doesn’t matter if he’s sending them or someone else is – the Newport, Ore., woman is afraid and, as the days tick down to his January release, is considering going into hiding with her 12-year-old daughter.

“It’s just being victimized all over again,” she said.

Across the U.S. and beyond, inmates are using social networks and the growing numbers of smartphones smuggled into prisons and jails to harass their victims or accusers and intimidate witnesses. California corrections officials who monitor social networking sites said they have found many instances in which inmates taunted victims or made unwanted sexual advances.

Like Gesik’s case, it’s often difficult for authorities to determine for sure who’s sending the threatening material and the few people caught rarely face serious consequences.

“The ability to have these kinds of contacts is increasing exponentially. In many ways, the law has not caught up with these changing technologies,” said Rob Bovett, an Oregon district attorney whose office prosecuted Gesik’s ex-husband, Michael Gladney.

Timothy Heaphy, U.S. attorney for the Western District of Virginia, said criminals’ use of social networks to reach witnesses has made his job harder.

“We deal every day with witnesses who are afraid of being identified,” he said. “If there are increased instances where folks who are incarcerated can reach outside the walls of the jail, that’s going to make it more difficult for us to get cooperation.”

In a rare victory, Heaphy’s office successfully prosecuted John Conner and Whitney Roberts after they set up a Facebook account that Conner used to intimidate witnesses preparing to testify against him on charges of burning two houses to punish a girlfriend and collect the insurance.

“How the hell can u b a gangsta when u snitchin and lien…,” said a post from the pair that publicly exposed one witness who cooperated with law enforcement, according to federal court records.

The issue has emerged as cell phones have proliferated behind bars. In California, home to the nation’s largest inmate population, the corrections department confiscated 12,625 phones in just 10 months this year. Six years ago, they found just 261. The number of phones confiscated by the federal Bureau of Prisons has doubled since 2008, to 3,684 last year.

Noting the increase, California legislators approved a law bringing up to six months in jail for corrections employees or visitors who smuggle mobile devices into state prisons, while inmates caught with the phones can now lose up to 180 days of early-release credit. But no additional time is added to their sentence, minimizing the deterrence factor.

In the old days, those behind bars would have to enlist a relative or friend to harass or intimidate to get around no-contact orders. Social networks now cut out the middle man.

In Gesik’s case, Gladney used to harass her the old-fashioned way, sending letters and making phone calls through third parties. The Facebook harassment began in June.

Gesik, 44, got prison officials to contact Facebook to remove that account, only to have another message appearing to be from him in September. This time, there was a different spelling of his last name.

“I figure, if he’s done all this from in prison, what’s he’s going to do when he gets out?” Gesik said.

A gap in state law meant that “no contact” orders like the one Gesik obtained against Gladney were deemed not to apply to anyone in custody, said Bovett, the prosecutor. “So they could do these very creative ways of reaching victims through third parties,” he said.

Last June, Oregon legislators approved a law prohibiting inmates from contacting their domestic violence victims from behind bars.

In California, prison officials are working with Facebook to identify inmate accounts and take them down. But that only generally happens only after the damage is done.

Karen Carrisosa, who lives in a Sacramento suburb, was aghast when officials found Facebook postings from Corcoran State Prison inmate Fredrick Garner. Garner is serving a 22-year, involuntary manslaughter sentence for killing her husband, 50-year-old Larry Carrisosa, outside a church 11 years ago.

“My kids, they go on Facebook, I go on Facebook, and what if they decide to look us up?” Carrisosa said.

She was alerted by a Sacramento television station that Garner was posting messages to his mother and others. Garner was punished with a 30-day reduction in his early release credits for possessing a forbidden cell phone and has since been transferred to Salinas Valley State Prison.

Hector Garcia Jr. used a smuggled smart phone hidden in his cell at Kern Valley State Prison to rally support on Facebook for an inmate hunger strike this summer that sought improved living conditions for gang leaders housed in special secure cellblocks.

“Starving for my better future,” he posted, according a July 1 screen grab from the corrections department. “Let’s do this … statewide…”

The discovery rattled Isabel Gutierrez. Garcia murdered one of her sons and wounded another in January 2005. Now Gutierrez fears her own social-networking left her vulnerable.

“I panicked,” she said. “My photos are up of my family and my grandkids. I felt like they can see into my world.”

Guards found Garcia’s phone, punishing him with a 30-day cut in early-release credits and 30 days’ loss of yard, TV and radio privileges.

Attorneys who represented Garcia and Gladney in their previous criminal trials did not return phone calls seeking comment on behalf of their former clients.

Source

The post Inmates Harass Victims Via Facebook appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

An article about a prison in Australia highlighting the problem of contraband technology being smuggled into prisons. It is not just contraband prison cell phones which are a problem in this particular facility.

Prisoners in one of Victoria’s most secure jails have been using webcams and wireless internet devices to enjoy freedom on the outside world.

The Herald Sun can reveal two cameras, a wireless USB internet stick and several USBs containing data were found at Barwon Prison.

Police are investigating and several inmates may be charged.

It is the latest in a series of breaches at the maximum-security prison, the most serious being the murder of gangland killer Carl Williams last year.

Correction Victoria’s Security and Emergency Services Group officers seized computers in last month’s search.

The contraband was found in the prison’s Eucalypt unit, which houses murderers such as police killer Jason Roberts.

The Herald Sun has reported Roberts had been taunting his victims online by professing his innocence, and calling on pen pals to write to him.

A Corrections Victoria spokesman said at the time it was believed the websites were being maintained by someone outside jail.

Victorian prisoners are not allowed internet access.

“Prisoners across the Victorian prison system have access to computers in specified and controlled circumstances, which never includes internet access. Computers are subject to regular searches and audits,” the spokesman said.

“Any prisoner found to have used their computer inappropriately will not get it back.

“Corrections Victoria is constantly reviewing its computer policy in light of technological developments such as internet-enabled USB devices.”

The spokesman said security officers made 90,000 searches of prisoners and visitors in the past year.

But resourceful criminals were still been able to smuggle compact computer equipment into jail.

Killer Hugo Rich was found with a stash of cyber porn when his cell was searched late last year.

Loddon Prison in central Victoria was nicknamed Crazy Johns after thee mobile phones and other accessories were seized in March last year.

Two killers were linked to that discovery.

Opposition corrections spokeswoman Jill Hennessy said the State Government had not invested enough in security or guards.

The post Inmates Surfing Web From Prison appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

Another report on the international issue of contraband prison cell phones, this time from India. This prison will up its number of cell phone jammers from 9 to 23 to combat smuggled wireless phones. However 80 cell phone jammers are really needed

Illegal use of mobile phones in Asia’s largest prison requires more than 80 jammers to combat it, yet the prison is equipped with only nine.

This was brought to the notice of Delhi high court by the amicus curiae (friend of the court) appointed by HC in a case where it is monitoring attempts by the administration to prevent use of cellphones inside the jail complex. The amicus also apprised the bench that there were certain jails inside the complex that had absolutely no jammer facilities.

On learning of severe shortage of jammers, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Sanjiv Khanna on Wednesday directed the state government to install 23 more by August 15. The government has already sanctioned the purchase and installation of these devices.

Appearing for the state government and Tihar administration, Pawan Sharma had earlier informed the high court that nine jammers were installed and 23 more to be fitted soon.

HC was hearing a matter taken up by it on its own after an unidentified prisoner wrote to a chief metropolitan magistrate (CMM) in 2009 that rampant use of mobiles by inmates was on the rise. The CMM forwarded the same information to HC after conducting initial investigations indicting the prison administration. The high court had then directed the authorities to seize all the phone instruments and install effective jammers immediately.

In the past few years, at least nine mobile phones and 11 SIM cards were found inside Tihar Jail. Mobile phones are included in the articles listed as prohibited to be taken inside prisons.

According to the Prisons Act of 1894, any person found possessing a prohibited item inside the jail is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or fine not exceeding Rs 200 or both.

Source

The post Tihar Jammers: 23 More To Fight Illegal Mobile Phones appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

The California legislation making the possession of contraband prison cell phones a crime has been approved in committee. Will this stop the flow of smuggled cell phones into jails? Has the fact that drugs are illegal stopped them from being smuggled in to jails and prisons across the country?

Senate Bill 26, authored by Senator Alex Padilla (D-Pacoima), was approved by the Assembly Public Safety Committee today on a unanimous bipartisan vote.  SB 26 would crack down on the smuggling and use of cell phones and other wireless communication devices in California prisons.  The bill includes tough penalties for both smugglers and inmates.  Current law does not provide any criminal or financial sanctions for smuggling cell phones to inmates.

“It is time for California to crack down on cell phones in prisons.  Forty-four states and the federal government have taken action to tackle this problem in their prisons. California, where the problem is most severe, should take action as well,” said Senator Padilla.  “We know that inmates with cell phones are ordering murders, organizing escapes, facilitating drug deals, controlling street gangs, and terrorizing rape victims,” he added.

Senator Padilla has had the strong support of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) in his effort to address the problem of cell phones in California’s prisons. “Contraband cell phones in prison continue to be a problem for CDCR as they allow inmates to circumvent our monitoring process and commit crimes,” said CDCR Secretary Matthew Cate. “This year we have confiscated 6,000 phones through May at our prisons. We are pleased that the Public Safety Committee has approved Senate Bill 26, as it will strengthen our efforts to curb this problem,” he added.

SB 26 would do the following:

Smuggling

• Any person, employee or nonemployee, who possesses a cell phone with the intent to deliver, or delivers, to an inmate is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by six months in jail and a fine of up to $5,000 per device.

Inmate Possession

• An inmate in possession of a cell phone shall be subject to loss of time credits. Lost time credit will not be eligible for restoration.

Visitor Protection

• The bill contains language for visitors who inadvertently bring a cell phone into a prison without intent to deliver to an inmate.

Managed Access Technology

• Prisons will use technology to identify unauthorized cell phone signals and block their ability to transmit phone calls, texts, and emails.

The number of cell phones confiscated in our prisons has grown exponentially. In 2006, prison officials confiscated 261 cell phones in California prisons. In 2009, 6,995 cell phones were confiscated.  Last year, 10,761 phones were confiscated.  Charles Manson has been caught twice in possession of a cell phone.  Smugglers are selling these phones to inmates for more than $1,000 a piece.  One person who was caught, bragged about making $100,000 in a single year smuggling cell phones to inmates.

SB 26 is Senator Padilla’s third attempt to criminalize cell phones in prison.  SB 1730 introduced in 2007, and SB 434 introduced in 2009, both died in committee.  SB 525 introduced in 2009, won legislative approval in 2010 but was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.

Cell phones in the hands of inmates are a clear and present threat to the safety of correctional officers, inmates, and the public.  Cell phones in prisons have been used by inmates to:

• Control street gangs.  On August 31^st, 2010, Attorney General Brown announced the arrest of

four Nuestra Familia gang leaders and 30 gang members.  The gang is believed to be controlled by imprisoned gang leaders that use cell phones to direct illegal activity throughout the state.  (source)

• Coordinate with drug traffickers from inside prison cells to plan murders, kidnappings, and drug deals (source)
• Order a “hit” on a murder witness in Maryland (source)
• A Texas death row inmate threatening a legislator (source)
• Coordinate simultaneous rebellions in 73 prisons in Sao Paulo, Brazil in 2006 and, more ominously, coordinate attacks on law enforcement in the streets.  These criminal acts essentially shut down Brazil’s financial capitol for days (source)
• Plan escapes, such as one in Texas in March (source)
• Threaten and intimidate witnesses and victims (source)
• Coordinate attacks on prison guards (source)

SB 26 is supported by the California Correctional Peace Officers’ Association, US Senator Diane Feinstein, California Peace Officers’ Association, California Police Chiefs Association, California State Sheriffs’ Association, Crime Victims United, California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, and the California District Attorneys’ Association, among others.

Source

The post Legislation to Ban Cell Phones in Prison Approved by Key Policy Committee appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

The creativity of prisoners seeking contraband cell phones never disappoints. Perhaps if a secure prison cell phone service was available, these birds would not have been necessary!

Brazilian inmates have turned to carrier pigeons in their quest for communication with the outside world.

Guards have intercepted two carrier pigeons carrying mobile phones to detainees at a prison in Sorocaba, 62 miles from Sao Paolo, a spokesman for the state penitentiary system said.

“Penitentiary agents found the pigeons outside the Danilo Pinheiro prison but, fortunately, the birds did not have time to enter the prison building with the material,” said Rosana Alberto.

Each pigeon was carrying a small bag containing a mobile phone and charger, she said. The birds were caught on two successive days, last Wednesday and Thursday.

The use of pigeons to smuggle contraband into jail is the latest twist in a ongoing struggle by criminal networks to deliver forbidden goods into Brazil’s prisons.

Criminal organizations like “Red Commando” in Rio de Janeiro or the “First Commando of the Capital” in Sao Paulo, which are well established in the detention centres, have extensive supply networks.

In the past they have use accomplices, from lawyers to corrupt prison guards, to smuggle in drugs, weapons and mobile phones to the detainees, according to the police.

The goods are then traded or used to organise crimes from inside the jails.

Source

The post Pigeons Fly Cell Phones To Brazilian Prisoners appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

This editorial makes the case that smuggling contraband prison cell phones should be illegal in California. And of course, that is correct. But laws making cell phone smuggling illegal don’t address the demand factors that cause contraband prison cell phones to be so valuable. Providing a controlled and secure prison cell phone service for legitimate prisoner use, much like current prison payphone service works, will go along way to reducing the contraband value of smuggled wireless cell phones in jails.

It doesn’t take an advanced degree in criminal justice to understand that prison inmates never should have access to cell phones. They use them to plot violent crimes inside and outside the prison, plot escapes and conduct drug deals with other inmates or contacts on the outside.

Matthew Cate, secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, agrees. He said, “Cell phone smuggling into California’s prisons is a very serious and growing problem. Public safety officials in prisons and prosecutors on the outside need additional tools to combat cell phone smuggling to inmates.”

One such tool should be stiff felony penalties for anyone smuggling cell phones into prisons or accepting bribes for phones. Those penalties should be even tougher for prison guards.

Unfortunately, it is the guards who are suspected of providing most of the cell phones to inmates, often taking bribes. Yet California continues to be lax in passing laws to crack down on the problem.

Possessing a cell phone behind bars violates prison rules, but still is not illegal. Inmates can lose early release credits, and employees caught smuggling phones can lose their jobs.

Even when someone is caught, the penalty is extraordinarily light. Last month, Terry Lane, a former California correctional officer from San Jose, was sentenced to just 45 days in jail for smuggling several cell phones to state prison inmates.

Lane also was fined $5,700, which the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office said was the amount of bribes Lane took from inmates for delivering the phones. The bribery charge was dropped in a plea bargain.

A more appropriate sentence for Lane would have been something closer to 10 years in state prison and a fine many times higher.

The best way to discourage prison guards from taking bribes for delivering cell phones is the use of tough penalties that include long prison terms, firing and permanent disqualification for ever working in a prison.

There are a few bills floating around in the Legislature to stiffen penalties for those who bring phones to inmates and or accept bribes for doing so.

State Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Los Angeles, has introduced two bills this year that add penalties for inmates, employees or visitors smuggling cell phones.

Sen. Elaine Alquist, D-Santa Clara, is carrying another bill that would require random searches of employees and contractors.

Action is long overdue. Prison officials say that the number of cell phones confiscated in California prisons has been growing rapidly over the past few years and has become a major problem that needs to be remedied.

If prison employees or visitors faced years behind bars for cell phone smuggling, we believe the practice would decline sharply. There is no good reason to delay legislation, even if there are added costs.

Source

The post Get The Cell Phones Out of Cells appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.