Prison report: The cell phone questionBy Just A Guy
Editors note: just A guy is an inmate in a California state prison. His reports run twice a week.
By Just A Guy
It’s been about six months since Tim Redmond asked the question, should prisoners be allowed cell phones? Back in April, there was quite a furor about inmates and cell phones, but since that time there hasn't been much mention of it, so I thought I would chime in on the subject, as it bears discussion and analysis.
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation claims that inmates having cell phones is a huge security risk -- that we can plan escapes, plan simultaneous riots, or call in hits on people. While all those things are true, they are certainly things that were done in prisons by inmates before cell phones existed! Cell phones just make those things quicker to accomplish.
Those are words meant to scare the public into believing the inmates that do have cell phones all use their phones for negative things.
Another reason that CDCR is against cell phones, just possibly, is that cell phones have things like cameras, video records, and voice recorders. God forbid an inmate take a picture of a cop “sleeping the toughest beat,” or take a video of cops beating someone's ass, or maybe recording conversations in which the officers or others were threatening or just disrespectful.
Today’s technology even allows for real-time streaming if you have the right type of phone. Can you imagine the doors of possibility that this opens up? Hello, You Tube!
And what about the amount of money that the collect-call phones generate for GTL.
Doesn’t CDCR get $30 million a year from GTL for giving them the contract?
Few folks know that even though the collect call phones we are allowed to use are monitored, there is really no way for the staff to find out who made a call. And this is especially true if you make a three-way call; they can know the number you dialed but not the third-party number. Also, you ever heard of call forwarding? Duh!
What if CDCR contracted with a company like AT&T? Here’s what I propose:
AT&T or the like should be allowed to sell phones to prisoners. There could only be one type of phone, and this found would not have a camera or Internet capability, but would have text. There could be a number of different plans for inmates to choose, from cheapo to unlimited minutes.
The provider would be responsible for the monitoring the calls and text messages. (They could even contract this out.) All cell calls go through supercomputers anyway, and those computers have very complex algorithms that can detect all kinds of stuff, from key words to language spoken. (The Department of Defense uses this technology).
Each phone would be registered to the purchaser so that if anything unlawful was done, it could automatically be attributed to the registered user. If there is someone at CDCR, or any other agency, that is suspicious of, how much easier will it be to track their calls? Using another inmate's phone would result in your phone privilege being suspended as well as that of the inmate who allowed you to use his or her phone.
Maybe there could be a limit on the number the phones could dial. There would be a limit on hours of operation, say, 6 am to 10 pm. The scenarios are endless on how CDCR could control this.
Imagine -- what cell phone company wouldn’t be interested in having its customer base increase by 160,000 users, with no competition?
Before cell phones came to prisons, the collect-call phones we are allowed to use were busy all day and there was a line to use them. Now they are empty all day.
I’ve done the math before, but here is is again: Ninety six collect call phones (in this prison) being used a minimum of 12 hours a day. With calls limited to 15 minutes at a minimum of $3 a call. One phone generates a minimum of $144 a day. Times 96 phones equals a minimum of $13,824 a day, times 365 days a year equals $5 million a year. I wonder what the net profit of that $5 million is? Remember too that there are 33 prisons in California -- and even if you cut my numbers in half, it’s still $2.5 million, at just one prison.
You know the very same people who are saying it’s a huge security issue are the ones bringing in the phones -- ‘cause I have yet to meet an inmate capable of sticking a cell phone, charger, and headset up his ass, let alone in the visiting room.
By the way, that $29.99 version mobile phone you can buy at Best Buy costs $600 in here. Who do you suppose is making that profit?
And while possession of cell phone in prison is not a crime, it would be great to get some statistics on how many raids are focused on cell phones vs. drugs - -- and possession of drugs is a felony.
Look, there are fucking cell-phone sniffing dogs now. It’s safer to be a drug dealer in prison than a cell phone user. because they rarely go for the dealer. Why should they -- we’re only hurting ourselves with the drugs anyway.
digg •
del.icio.us •
sphere •
google
•
Comments (7)
Not a bad thought, guys. But is has the same fundamental problem you have now: a "negotiated" monopoly on phone service in prisons. AT&T is GTL writ large, and they'd certainly cut just as corrupt a deal with CDCR. I think change starts by doing the hard work of reforming the reformers...
Posted by Joe Morse | October 2, 2009 06:41 AM
why not just sell calling cards to inmates? Allow them to make calls at the rate people do outside of prisons-which would be a few cents per minute, take off the insane restrictions on use of phones, i.e. 'sign up lists' and restrictions on phone calls to one or two a week?
There are a ton of things CDCR 'could do' to facilitate communication between inmates and their families, they just don't want to. They seem to feel that it is to their advantage to strain relationships inmates have with their loved ones rather than to encourage them.
There is at least one prison/jail provider who provides the ability for a person to leave a voice mail message for an inmate The inmate enters a pin code to check voice mail messages & is charged a small amount from their account for it.I would think that would lessen the stress that inmates currently have when they have to wait several days or a week to find out if their loved ones are ok.
Secure email is already available to inmates in federal prisons and some state prisons, but why not CDCR? Jpay tried to provide a secure email service to inmates for around $1 an email but as far as I know the state killed the program. I doubt if it were for security reasons since monitoring email should be easier than monitoring phone calls.
There are problems with allowing inmates to have cellphones, and I am not sure cellphones are even necessary if other means of communication were provided.
What is necessary is adult leadership in Sacramento who realize that the goal should be to strengthen bonds an inmate has with his/her loved ones outside of prison, not do everything you can to destroy them
Posted by pixiedust | October 2, 2009 07:17 AM
Its a sham. Officers bring teh phones in & prisoners by them. Then they raid them & take away the phones. Then the officers sell news phones to the prisoners. Its a scam.
Posted by BillyGoatAcres | October 2, 2009 01:22 PM
One problem with selling inmates anything of value ([phones or cards)is it becomes what the prison calls contraband. It can be traded as currency.
The author is slightly incorrect about one thing. there is technology being offered by one inmate telephone company that can identify with voice analytics the called parties. Voice can be treated like a fingerprint.
Posted by SoCal | October 2, 2009 02:54 PM
Socal,
If we were sold cards or phones legally then it would not be considered contraband, contraband is something that we are NOT allowed to have.
In order for voice analytics to work as you proposed you have to know who's voice to compare it to. With a three way call they wont know what number has been dialed therefore would not know who's voice to use analytics against. Secondly, what is to say the owner of the numbered dialed is the person that they are trying to use analytics on, roughly 6 billion people could be at the other end of the line.
Posted by jag | October 2, 2009 03:38 PM
The other point to remember here, and nedra hints at it, is that the real burden of GTL and the collect call policy falls not on inmates but on their families. The families get the phone bills, and have to pay them in order to stay in touch with loved ones. Many of these are low-income families and it's a huge burden.
Posted by tim redmond | October 2, 2009 04:55 PM
OH how i enjoyed this editorial. if i could post it on every newspapers editorial section in the state I would do it. I am so sick of the melodrama associated with cell phone use in prisons. It's always mis reported what people do with them. How many escapes have been planned and accomplished with the use of cell phones versus some son keeping in touch with his mother, sister, father, wife or kids at a fraction of the cost GTL charges. Sure it costs a whole lot more to duck and dodge being caught with one but most of the people I hear with them figure the semblance of normal conversation with loved ones is well worth the cost.
My loved one is incarcerated and we have chosen NOT to use a cell phone because we want to come home one day and the threat of being caught with one is a price too high for us to pay. That is our choice. Others don't feel they have that choice. I wishi it were different and fair but it isn't because of greed and the pleasure of human suffering. I wish those that are lying about the reasons would simply quit and look for a solution that would help instead of continuing to bury heads in the sand and force penalty. Just a Guy is right on and his ideas are brilliant.
Posted by nedra stribling | October 2, 2009 04:55 PM