In a lot of American films/tv series either set in or having an episode set in prison, they have the visiting set up so that the visitor is on one side of a glass wall whilst the inmate is on the other, and they talk via a phone. Much of the time the conversation talks about stuff that would get the visitor arrested for serious crimes and/or they plan another serious crime. but neither the visitor or the inmate seem worried that there may be someone listening in.
Is that a true representation of how it happens in some prisons? (Glass wall, phone, absolute secrecy.)
From what I’ve seen with the reality prison shows, some of the prisons have that phone and glass set- up but others allow visits in person, either in a visiting room or across a counter.
I’ve seen prison staff on the reality shows going through the phone records trying to get information on one thing or another but it was “real” phone calls, not calls through the prison visiting set up. However, I don’t know why they wouldn’t, when that’s where a lot of illegal activity occurs. It could be that they record all of the calls but don’t necessarily listen to the recordings unless they have reason to (because that would take a lot of time and it seems budget is always a big concern for the prisons). Sorry I don’t know for sure.
As for how extensive monitoring is I expect that not all conversations are recorded or monitored, but that the magnitude of monitoring is kept secret so prisoners don’t know the odds of being recorded.
I’ve had relatives in prison, IME the glass wall with phone is usually a local lockup thing, like a county jail. Low level security prisons generally have supervised visits at a table in a common room. Never been to maximum security prison (my relatives aren’t that bad), but I would imagine they would require the glass wall with phone. And talks with lawyers get special conditions since even in prison there conversations are confidential.
I have spent a lot of time on those phones. It’s a lot like the movies. A glass wall, a phone, and a small thin slot to slide papers though. I think non-attorneys don’t get the slot. Also, as an attorney, I assume I have complete privacy, as it would be a problem if anyone was listening in.
Don’t assume. There’s a scandal right now at the Leavenworth Detention Center (a privately-operated prison under contract to DOJ), where it turns out the contractor was routinely recording attorney-client visits and phone calls, at least occasionally turning over the recordings to prosecutors; the federal court here has appointed a special master to investigate, whose findings are Not Good.
Maximum security prisons, at least in Kansas, usually have the “tables in a common room” approach too, except for inmates in lockdown/segregation or with special security considerations (offenders with a child-sex case, for example, will never have contact visits with minors, assuming they have any visitation with minors in the first place).
You **“expect?” **Why don’t YOU do some basic research before answering, then? You know, in the spirit of “fighting ignorance.”
The reason I answered is because part of his question was if the glass/phone system was standard and I know that it’s used sometimes but not always. So please learn to read correctly, in the spirit of fighting ignorance.
Also, in the spirit of fighting ignorance, please learn to use basic punctuation correctly.
Also, naita, where in your link DOES it answer the question of whether or not those internal “phones” ARE actually recorded, rather than discussing what is private IF AND WHEN they are recorded? Please do some basic research before answering. In the name of fighting ignorance.
Yikes. It really is shocking when someone puts in all those years of education and has so much to lose and does something so crazy.
It does surprise me that they allow in person visits with the regular visitors (non-attorney) when it seems so much contraband is smuggled in that way.
Let’s not be snippy. Stick to the facts in GQ. If you think something has been posted that is factually incorrect, just post what you believe to be the correct facts and save the snippy comments for a more appropriate forum.
IME in dealing with a nephew who went throught the county system and into a medium security facility, the county facility (a recently built one) didn’t have the phone hookup, but instead, had a video visitation system. The prison that he spent four years had the phone system, the oppositre sides of the table visits for his parents, wife and children and even individual secured rooms for conjugal visits.
I’ve visited an inmate in a women’s prison, about 10 years ago, in Louisiana. I don’t remember the details of going through security, but visitors were lead to what looked like a small gymnasium, with several tables and chairs. We took a seat, and after a little while the inmates filed in and could sit with us. There was a photographer and we could pay to take pictures. We could talk for an hour or so, IIRC. There were guards present but it was very laid back, from my memory. I think we were allowed to touch, but nothing too intimate.
You quoted prison reality shows, I quoted a page using actual trial transcripts. There’s a difference. As to you question, it is answered here, among other places:
On the one hand, maintaining strong family/community ties is thought to reduce recidivism, which is a good thing.
On the other hand, if you block one channel of contraband, that just gives incentive to develop other channels (and inmates have plenty of time on their hands to think of ways to do so). In other words, if you eliminate in-person visits from family and friends, the contraband currently brought in by those folks will instead arrive by staff, by drone, by work release / work call, or any of the various other new or tried and true methods.