Around here what you are talking about would not be the case. The car thieves and pot dealers would not be in the same prison as the hardcore criminals like child rapists. For the most part.
I’ve never been in prison, but I know a few people who have, and they’ve all mentioned that child molesters and, to a lesser extent, rapists are definitely looked down on. One of them had even had additional time added to his sentence for taking one of those types to task.
If I were to take a guess as to why, it seems to me that, even among criminals there’s a certain sort of code where, even if society sees all of their acts as criminal, there’s some acts that are justifiable and others that are not. You’ll even hear them talk about code and respect and all that. Beyond that, society as a whole tends to put child molesters pretty damn close to the worst of the worst of human filth, and that other criminals may not be as bad, it’s not necessarily the case that they don’t also still hold that same sort of contempt for them but, operating under another set of rules than most of society, they’re allowed, or even compelled, to do something to people they see as bad even compared to themselves.
Little Nemo has said something similar in a different thread, and he worked in a prison in some capacity (but I don’t know what capacity exactly). Stats on child abuse among inmates I’ve seen are all over the map. I’ve seen 14%, 36%, 84%. I have no idea.
What happens to people in prison for non-sexual child abuse? You’d assume a lot of people in prison are violent towards kids despite not being sexually attracted to them. So I have no idea if people in prison for child abuse are treated as bad as those in for child rape. I’d assume not though.
Celebrities, sex offenders, ex-law enforcement personnel (and the occasional ex-prosecutor), people who turn states evidence or debrief, etc tend to go into protective custody.
I thought Indiana had a prison devoted just to sex offenders, probably for safety and treatment reasons, but I can’t find anything on google about it.
First, where did I say “everyone”? I said “A great many” which means “many but not all”. Starting off by misrepresenting what someone says is not a good way to make an argument.
Second, I’m basing my comments partially on the opinions of a relative who spent time in several prisons. Yes, I’m sure there are some prisoners with a genuine hatred of child molesters. But many of them are just looking for an excuse to pick on someone else. People do end up in jail for all sorts of reasons, but being a violent thug - a bully - is a common one.
Oh god, so I said “everyone.” Argument: invalid.
Jesus…
I had kinda wondered that myself. I was forced to view kiddy porn, video and Polaroid, at the behest of the state. I finally concluded that it was along the same lines of an officer breaking the speed limit to catch a speeder.
Still, a few short clips or stills would have been much less disturbing. But then, the entire video ensures maximum outrage during deliberations and sentencing.
What I don’t get is presumably he accepted that the video was of him and his stepdaughter? If not then I suppose it had to be shown so you could say that it was him. If he did accept it, however, then imo there was no good reason to force you to watch that.
So what would have been your legal recourse had you reacted badly to the experience? I recently watched Appropriate Adult, the story of serial killer Fred West told from the point of view of the woman, a social worker, who assisted in his interrogation. She later sued, unsuccessfully, for the trauma caused by hearing his confessions.
If the jury were just told what someone else had seen in the video would that be hearsay? (WAG)
If you want to live in a society in which someone who does something like that gets punished then you must be willing to be exposed to evidence that proves that he actually did it. I don’t see why you should expect compensation.
Of course it would be.
There is a hierarchy in prison, but one of the main determining factors is the perception of weakness.
Those who are in debt, informers, pensioner street robbers, former law enforcers, however you can see exceptions to the general rule. I have seen former law enforcers within the general population and have no problems - it can depend upon the exact circumstances of the crime as well as the personality of the individual.
Sex offenders are generally at, or near the bottom of the pile and there is usually someone around who has a personal reason to inflict harm or someone wanting to win some jail credibility.
Staff are also generally not all that keen on sex offenders to talk with, however sex offenders are usually very little trouble in terms of keeping good order in prison - they keep their heads down.
Offenders may also divide themselves on other types of offences, so that dwelling burglars are regarded rather lower than commercial/industrial burglars, street dealers lower then distributors etc.
A lot depends upon the personalities of the prisoners themselves.
In the UK system in the category C estate (the most common) you tend to find that if you don’t get involved in anything on the wings then you will be pretty much left alone, perhaps with the occasional bully trying his luck, even then bullies are not generally liked and are often subject to ‘corrective’ measures by bully haters.
I would imagine that criminals with offenses against children are even more stigmatized in women’s prisons - they are surrounded by mothers.
From an article about Susan Smith, “…she is confined in what is called the Administrative Segregation Unit, meaning she has little contact with guards and none at all with other prisoners.”