Staffing would necessitate very careful screening, to weed out
persons who have sadistic tendencies; but, this would not be too
difficult to do. Just as with any other law enforcement occupation,
this one would require dedicated people with very specific skills,
talents, and traits. The abilities to remain objective, to see the
long-term view of their jobs, and to recognize both the criminal in
the person and the person in the criminal would all be essential.
To remove any of these requirements would be to invite problems. In
the course of preparing this book, I have had some very interesting
discussions with a wide variety of people. To call some of them
real "flakes" would be too complementary; however, the biggest
majority (probably 99 percent) of the people who agree with me are
sincere, well-meaning people who realize that the system we have
today simply does not work for anyone involved. Of these ranks, I
have met quite a few who would have no real difficulty with working
these jobs. They, more often than not, have much the same outlook
as would a physical therapist -- that there is absolutely nothing
fun about pain, but, there are times when it certainly beats the
alternatives. Absolutely essential to the continued mental health
of individuals working in these centers, is a thorough grasp of the
concept that the offender, through their own choices and actions,
volunteered to be there, even in a post-legislative context where
the person has not signed a waiver. The fact that they did not
intend to get caught is irrelevant. They were aware of the
consequences when they chose to commit their crime and, therefore,
made the choice to accept those consequences. Perhaps, a general
overview of the job prerequisites, descriptions, and duties would
take some of the mystery out of the staffing problems.
Since the next section deals with hypothetical cases, to do so
would, also, assist the reader in understanding some of the terms
that I have used as if they were common place:
JOB TITLE: TECHNICIAN (tech)
JOB DESCRIPTION: Everyone else's back-up.
JOB DUTIES: Basic care, feeding, and handling of the inmates.
Transport and move inmates as required. Maintain and time the
count for the specialist during the application of the inmates
punishment. Assist and protect other staff members, as required.
Conduct routine monitoring and maintain notes on the inmates, in
order to keep their counselors advised.
JOB PREREQUISITES: Experience in care, custody, and control of
offenders. Physical capacity to secure and maintain control of
the inmates. Should be capable of reasonable and necessary force;
but, should have no predisposition towards the use of excessive
force. Should be emotionally well-balanced and recognize the
QUESTIONS 72
long-term benefits to society (and, hopefully, to the offender as
well). Should come from the ranks of the coolest heads available
-- this is no job for someone who is hot tempered. (In a post-
legislative context, this job could easily be filled by selected
jail personnel.)
JOB TITLE: TECHNICAL SUPERVISOR
JOB DESCRIPTION: Chief technician
JOB DUTIES: Oversee day to day duties of the technician
staff and assists them with any problems which may arise.
Reports to the general supervisor/center director regarding
any needed inventories. Co-ordinates all technician scheduling
and assignments.
JOB PREREQUISITES: Same as technician, plus administrative
skills and the ability to supervise and co-ordinate personnel.
JOB TITLE: MEDICAL-TECHNICIAN (med-tech)
JOB DESCRIPTION: Basic monitoring of the inmate's physical
condition before, during, and after punishment.
JOB DUTIES: If the inmate has not been previously checked over by a
doctor, performs a basic physical on inmate, to determine the
absence of any overt physical condition which would preclude
corporal punishment at that time. (If commonly required to perform
this task, they should be either a physician or physician's
assistant.) Administration and control of any required medication,
which has been previously prescribed by a physician. Performs a
thorough alcohol or betadine scrub of the inmate's back prior to
administration of the punishment. Be on stand-by, in case of a
medical emergency, during punishment. Monitor and maintain
consciousness of inmate, as needed. Responsible for dressing
damaged skin and changing any bandages, as required.
JOB PREREQUISITES: Same mental and emotional attributes as for a
technician. Should also be a licensed and experienced E.M.T.,
nurse, or physician's assistant.
JOB TITLE: SPECIALIST
JOB DESCRIPTION: Punishment applicator
JOB DUTIES: To carry out the sentence of the court upon the person
of the offender. Care and maintenance of all the necessary
equipment. Should have as little, as possible, other contact with
the offender.
73 QUESTIONS
JOB PREREQUISITES: Reasonable physical conditioning should be
required; but, this person does not have to be extremely large or
well built. More importantly, must have extremely good emotional
health and to recognize the long-term benefits to both society and
the offender. Must be able to recognize and deal with his or her
own feelings and emotions in an objective and mature manner. Much
more than physical ability, this job demands an extraordinary
degree of objectivity and pragmatism.
In a post-legislative context, technology could be developed to
automate this job. A person would still be needed to set up,
adjust, and to monitor such equipment but, if this job could be
automated, it would both reduce the job stress involved and
minimize any differences in the force of application.
JOB TITLE: COUNSELOR
JOB DESCRIPTION: Monitors and maintains direct contact with the
inmate.
JOB DUTIES: To the highest degree possible, seeks to undermine the
inmates denial, justification, rationalization, and/or avoidance
processes, in order to better promote an understanding within the
inmate of the correlation between their choices and their
punishment before, during, and after that punishment. Presents
videotapes such as victim impact statements, DUI/DWI tapes,
commercially available deterrence tapes, etc. Seeks to achieve a
state of mental control conducive to obtaining compliance by the
inmate with necessary procedures. Securing of the inmate for
punishment, if possible to do so without assistance, since this is
the person which the inmate will be the least likely to fight (if
they have done their job properly up to this point.) Encouragement
of proper breathing and causative focusing during the punishment.
Assist med-tech as required.
JOB PREREQUISITES: Same as specialist; but also, highly skilled at
dealing with people in stressful situations. They must be capable
of being extremely confrontational, without allowing themselves to
be reduced to the level of argumentativeness, adept at the use of
leading questions, and at maintaining control of any discussions
with the inmate.
Although it has been suggested to me that these persons should
be trained psychologists or social workers, I must strongly
disagree. While some formal training in interventional skills would
be useful; I would lean more in the direction of hiring people with
practical skills, strong creativity, and the ability to "think on
their feet" over persons with a primarily academic background.
While I have no real objections to having a psychologist
(preferably with a cognitive therapy background) on call, for
consultation, I feel that center staff should have final authority
for a number of reasons, such as: Such persons would tend to have
difficulty confining themselves to the limited scope and duration
QUESTIONS 74
of contact which they would have to work within. This is neither
the time nor place for analysis or protracted psychotherapy and I
would prefer to utilize people who would not feel the need to try
to engage in it. If the inmate is truly in need of psychological
services, these services can (and should) be provided in a more
appropriate environment than the punishment oriented environment
of these centers. Most of the current social science curriculums
have "politically correct" overtones which are in direct
contradiction to the concepts of personal responsibility for one's
own choices and actions, which are fundamental to the success of
the type of counselling which I advocate. Too often, it is assumed
that an individual who is well versed in abstract theory is more
competent than one who has a lot of practical experience. While I
would not discard the application of someone, solely on the basis
of their having degrees in psychology, or a similar field, I would
be inclined to have some reservations about hiring them, in this
capacity. I would have to sit down and talk with them extensively
to insure they have not been "brainwashed" and that they have the
needed practical experience and abilities. A good practical
understanding of people, gained through life experience, will go
much further in this job than will a wall full of degrees and a
head filled with theoretical rhetoric. While I know many of my
readers will probably object, I would have no objections to
hiring recovering drug and/or alcohol addicts (with at least
several years of recovery time and thorough attitudinal changes),
even if such a person has a prior, criminal record. These people
would have an advantage in dealing with the inmate, due to their
thorough knowledge of the warped mental processes which the inmate
is engaging in and their ability to see through the mental games
which the inmate will attempt to engage in with the counselor. I
have known many such persons, over the years; and, if they were
screened, they could be very effective at recognizing, and
disrupting, the inmates' rationalizations, justifications, and
denial.
JOB TITLE: SUPERVISOR or CENTER DIRECTOR
JOB DESCRIPTION: Program administrator.
JOB DUTIES: If conducted in connection with a jail or correctional
facility, acts as a liaison between the facility's staff and
administrator. If not, delegates required operational duties to
insure the smooth daily running of the center. Screens, hires,
arranges training for, and supervises center staff and monitors
both their performance and emotional health. Makes schedules and
assignments of counsellors and specialists. Matches case
assignments to counsellors. Co-ordinates with the technical
supervisor to insure the day-to-day needs of the center are met.
Should never become too distanced from staff; but rather, should
function as a team leader with an open-door policy.
75 QUESTIONS
JOB PREREQUISITES: Ability to co-ordinate well with persons both
above and below them on the chain-of-command. Should have all the
emotional attributes required of a counsellor and be a very easy
and open person to talk to -- must be exceedingly approachable,
while still maintaining control. Should be well versed in all
aspects of subordinate's duties and understand the stressors which
come as a part of their jobs. Whenever possible, a supervisor
should have "risen through the ranks" and be capable of covering
any position as needed (with the exception of med-tech).
JOB TITLE: CLERICAL and SUPPORT STAFF
Although these persons will not have the same degree of
exposure to stress levels as those persons having direct contact
with the inmates, their emotional health should not be overlooked.
Even persons such as secretaries and file clerks (if a free-
standing facility) should be cognizant of the rationales for this
type of justice and able to deal with the environment. If someone
calls in sick, I would definitely advise against just calling down
to the local temporary agency for a replacement.
DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS
These will differ, to some extent, dependent upon whether the
facility is freestanding or is a part of a jail or other
(non-corporal) type of correctional facility; but, the basic
operations will remain pretty much the same in either instance.
Flexibility is essential, since it will be impossible to
completely schedule the day. There are just too many variables
that occur when dealing with persons under stress.
I would advise that new prisoners be brought over directly from
sentencing, rather than being taken back to the jail for out-
processing. If there are multiple prisoners brought in, they
should be immediately separated or, at the very least, not be
allowed to communicate with one another. This isolation process
should begin immediately after sentencing. They should be
registered, searched again, showered, dressed out in facility
clothing and immediately placed into an isolation cell.
The supervisor, to the greatest degree possible, should match
the inmate with the counsellor who can best deal with that
particular inmate. If a staff member finds they have been assigned
someone whom they know, assignments should be changed by the
supervisor, if staffing permits. Where an individual is trained as
both a counsellor and a specialist, they should never have to act
in both capacities on the same case.
To prevent problems, whenever it is possible, female
counsellors should be assigned to female inmates and vice-versa.
When this is not possible, a technician of the same gender as the
inmate should be within calling distance at all times that the
counsellor and inmate are together. They should periodically and
QUESTIONS 76
randomly check on their well-being. Any claims of sexual
misconduct, made by either the inmate or staff, should be
immediately followed up by a thorough administrative review, the
notification of the local Sheriff's department, and by an
independently conducted medical exam. This is not only to minimize
the possibility of sexual abuse to either the inmate or a
counsellor but, also to minimize any opportunity for false claims
of such.
Scheduling should be loose, rather than strictly on an eight
hours per day, five days per week basis. Because of the very
intensive nature of the contact with inmates, it is entirely
possible that a counsellor, for example, might find him (or her)
self working 10 to 14 hours a day, over a three to four day period,
and then, being off for three to four days. Actually, a "total
immersion then total withdrawal" form of scheduling for counsellors
would be more conducive to both their ability to work their cases
properly and their mental health.
Counsellors should be proscribed by law from divulging, outside
of the center, any information which was obtained from the inmate
through writing or discussion, in any manner which could identify
that inmate. Their testimony in court regarding any such
information should be ruled inadmissible, except in instances of
the admission of murder, the sexual abuse of a child, or in
instances of threats.
In the case of illiterate inmates, a tape recorder could be
allowed to substitute for writing; but, future literacy training
should be, if possible, mandated as a part of the sentence.
Meals should be loosely available to both inmates and staff, to
fit the rather loose scheduling. WARNING! It is NOT advisable to
feed an inmate too near the time that their sentence will be
carried out. The combination of fear/anxiety and food will make
many people nauseous. Not only is cleaning up the mess unpleasant,
it also entails the risk of the inmate choking under circumstances
where the performance of the Heimlich maneuver would be, at best,
very unpleasant and difficult. If the inmate is allowed something
to bite down upon during punishment, it should never be of a
knappish or loose fibered consistency, as these tend to exacerbate
nausea. In any event, "sick-sacks" or a plastic-lined trash can
should be readily available and the med-tech should monitor the
inmate for any signs of nausea.
Actual conduction of punishments should be, when possible,
scheduled for afternoons and early evenings. This is to allow for
adequate preparation of the prisoner by the counsellor.
A med-tech should be available 24 hours a day, if possible. If
the center is a part of a jail, etc. the jail nurse on duty would
suffice. If not, good access to E.M.T. trained personnel could
suffice, but would be less desirable. In any event, a med-tech
should be physically present during the application of all
punishments to handle any emergencies and to avoid liability
issues. For any sentence of more than 30 lashes, this person
should be required to be a licensed physician.
77 QUESTIONS
Discharge of prisoners should be predicated on both their
medical condition and their completion of any assignments which
their counsellor may have directed them to perform. Inmates should
be allowed to take the completed assignments home with them upon
release.
! ! ! NEW ! ! !
As of 2/15/97
Due to the amount of interest which I am receiving from
legislators, and a number of queries from defrendants, I am in
the process of training people to work waiver cases. To be
considered, you must have NO connections with the BDSM
community (the discovery of any such ties will result in instant
termination of training or employment!) Preference will be
given to people who have experience in recovery programs, victim
advocacy, corrections, and law enforcementl but, other applications
will be given consideration, as well. Prior involvement in gangs or
criminal activity will NOT automaticly exclude you, IF (and ONLY
IF) you can demonstrate that you have turned your life around (and
KEPT it turned around) -- it could prove to be an asset...
You will not be charged for any training provided by the author,
nor will you be paid for such. Employment will be based upon the
need requirements in your area. You might be called upon to work
waiver cases in other areas, on an "as needed" basis. If so, your
travel expenses will be covered, in addition to the pay you receive;
so, you should incur no out-of-pocket expenses. All reasonable
attempts will be made to accommodate your existing schedule.
Since employment is, ultimately, contingent upon the need for
such services no guarantees can be made that training will ever result
in employment; but, if this sytem takes off, those who are in at the
beginning will be the ones who will be first in line for management and
training jobs at that time. All we're gambling is a little time and the
material. we'll be using will be useful in other aspects of your life...
If you think you might be interested, please use this link to jump
over to the application page of this web site.
Training Application
PROPOSALS 26
SUGGESTED PUNISHMENTS
I have serious reservations about the practice called caning,
partially because I do not believe anyone beyond the age of puberty
should be struck below the waist, and partially because it is not a
system which I know enough about to advocate. From what I have
heard, it appears to be far more damaging than anything I am
proposing; but, the information which I have heard has been
conflicting in nature; therefore, I am unsure of the degree of
credibility that I can grant it.
I find the suggestions of criminology professor Graeme Newman
(see his book "Just and Painful: A Case for the Corporal Punishment
of Criminals") regarding the use of electrical shock to be
interesting and possibly usable--IF it were thoroughly standardized
and used only in a POST-legislative context. I am more than some-
what concerned, however, with the potential for damage to a person
with a hidden heart problem or with low blood sugar (ref.: Stun
guns tend to produce a mild and nondangerous drop in blood sugar;
devices of this nature would have to be very tightly engineered, so
as to not have TOO serious an effect). This method is not one
which I would completely discard, but feel that it might be better
to place it into the "pending further investigation" file.
Many years ago, as a member of a street patrol group, I was
exposed to a system which utilized flogging (of the back) with a
whip constructed of four lengths (approximately two and a half foot
long) of what is referred to as S P T--3, 14/2 flat utility cord,
which is most commonly used for low-voltage, landscape lighting
applications). While the circumstances made long-term tracking
impossible (due to the limited and extremely transitory nature of
the population involved) the "recidivitory rate" was virtually
nonexistent. Although this material produces a VERY painful
effect, I know of no instances in which anyone it was used upon
received any permanent, serious damage.
In the course of distributing copies of my notes for comment
and input, I have been questioned by a few people as to the reason
for this choice of material. I don't recall anyone asking our
leader (the person who most commonly applied these floggings) why
he used it; but, I suspect that his reasons were that it was very
effective, inexpensive, and easy for him to keep clean with just
paper towels and rubbing alcohol. H.I.V. wasn't around yet; but,
hepatitis was, and I can remember that he was always careful about
cleaning it before and after he used it on someone. Today, porous
materials would carry too much danger of disease transmission.
Given the lethal nature of the H.I.V. virus, I would be inclined
to recommend the above mentioned utility cord, based on the first
two reasons; and, at an approximate cost of 35 cents per foot (and
only ten foot needed per prisoner), they not be reused. This would
eliminate the possibility of any actual, or alleged, transfer of
diseases.
This system incorporated a sentencing method whereby the "jury"
determined the sentence on a case by case basis through individual
vote. The highest and lowest were discarded and the remainder were
27 PROPOSALS
averaged -- with the understanding that the jury would have to
witness the punishment they imposed. This policy was a safeguard
against excessive sentences. Although I feel that it accomplished
this goal rather well (under the circumstances) and produced fairer
sentences than would have been obtainable by set standards; I'm
very skeptical as to whether it would be workable under more
generalized, widespread, judicial utilization. In that situation,
there was a degree of consistency of persons serving as jurors and
they did so voluntarily. Given the differences in demographics,
and the compulsory and rare nature of jury duty in our present
system, I would have serious concerns about requiring jury members
to set and witness such sentences. This practice could result in
widely varying penalties and would pose serious logistical problems
for punishment center personnel (who will needed scheduling
flexibility). Also, it would present a strong possibility of long
term, negative emotional effects on the jurors, who could be
mentally unprepared for the graphically unpleasant nature of such
punishments. I feel that fairness would be better accomplished, in
general utilization, through a loose system of standardization.
The suggestion of any exact sentencing parameters/
recommendations requires more data than I currently have available
to me; but, that I am currently attempting to accumulate. Input
would be considered from any source. I do, however, strongly
recommending that standardized sentencing parameters be established
with any leeway or discretion being left to the judge (in non-
pleabargained cases, and to the prosecutors in plea bargained
cases), who could be present -- if (s)he wished, and if it could be
arranged without too much scheduling difficulty.
I would strongly recommend that any person responsible for the
setting or approving of such sentences, once such a system was
fully in place, be required to witness at least one, if not more,
of these sentences being carried out so,they will more fully
understand the sentences they impose. It is one thing to
arbitrarily decide on a number, it is quite another to grasp the
impact which it will have on the person receiving that sentence.
They also need to understand that (for example) a 15 lash sentence
comes closer to representing a doubling of a 10 lash sentence in
terms of the pain the person will experience.
The penalties for some offenses could be directly tied to the
offense, such as: blood alcohol content in DUI cases or drug weight
in drug cases. I would recommend a general guideline of not more
than 50 lashes being applied to an individual within a 30-day
period; and, in less serious crimes, any sentence of more than
about 30 to be split, with at least a two week recuperation period.
This, in itself, constitutes a psychological punishment and should
be given due consideration as such. However, the person should be
required to remain in secure custody during this period. To expect
these people to return voluntarily is unrealistic.
PROPOSALS 28
SOME OFFENSES WHICH SHOULD
DEFINITELY BE TRANSITIONED
TO CORPORAL PUNISHMENT
HOT CHECKS/FORGERY/FRAUD/SHOPLIFTING
THEFT (INCLUDING AUTO)
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF or VANDALISM
SALE OF ALCOHOL TO MINORS
MINOR'S POSSESSION OF ALCOHOL
RESISTING/FLEEING/EVADING ARREST
RECKLESS DRIVING or ENDANGERMENT
ASSAULT/BATTERY/DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
BURGLARY (THEFT OF A FIREARM SHOULD CARRY ADDITIONAL)
ROBBERY WITHOUT A WEAPON BEING INVOLVED
ANIMAL CRUELTY/NEGLECT/ABANDONMENT
STATUTORY RAPE OF A CONSENTING MINOR
BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR AN ACCIDENT WITHOUT INSURANCE
WEAPONS CHARGES (BUT PERMITS TO CARRY SHOULD BE
OBTAINABLE!)
PUBLIC INTOXICATION (WHEN COMBINED WITH OTHER CHARGES
SUCH AS DISORDERLY CONDUCT)**
DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED or UNDER INFLUENCE**
DRUG POSSESSION, SALES, or TRAFFICKING**
These (**) offenses should also follow the following
schedule:
First Offense: Evaluation
Second Offense: Probable requirement to attend 12-Step
meetings or outpatient substance abuse treatment.
Third Offense: Inpatient substance abuse treatment. (Clear
evidence of addiction, such as withdrawal, should be grounds
for inpatient treatment even on the first offense.)
29 PROPOSALS
NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE*
INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER*
VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER*
NOT ALL INCLUSIVE--Should probably include most all of the
class A and B misdemeanors and third degree felonies (also many
second degree felonies). For these offenses, there would be NO
long-term incarceration until, at least, the third offense (second
offense for those charges denoted by a *); but, the penalties could
double with each subsequent conviction. (ie. First Offense-10,
Second-20, Third-40, Fourth-80, etc. I don't think that many would
opt to go too far with this......)
Prior, unrelated convictions should be grounds for increasing
the sentence by up to 50 percent, at the judges discretion. I
would, however, re-emphasize my earlier advice against anyone
receiving more than 50 lashes in any single 30-day time period.
This recommendation is based upon very important physical and
psychological grounds.
In many instances sentence deferral or suspension, as a part of
a probation or deferred adjudication could be approved on the
stipulation that revocation would result in the automatic doubling
of any remaining sentence. (CLARIFICATION--When I refer to
deferral in relation to corporal sentencing I refer to deferral of
that portion of the sentence--not of the conviction. That would be
an entirely separate matter.) Total deferment should be avoided
except in very extraordinary circumstances, or in cases of very low
sentences. In these cases, I would recommend the use of an
"observational deferral" where they would be transported,
processed, and worked by a counselor in the same manner which they
would be if their sentence were to be carried out -- with the
difference being that they would, instead, be required to witness
an equal or greater sentence being carried out. Best to let them
KNOW exactly what it is that they don't want. Otherwise, there is
too great a danger these persons could suddenly find themselves
facing a really tough sentence that might not have been necessary
if even a part of the original sentence had been carried out. This
kind of sentencing could be very effective when combined with
community service, restitution, mandatory 12-Step meeting
attendance, etc.
The primary difference from today's system is that their
"ATTENTION IS GOTTEN FIRST," and they have a REAL incentive to get
their act together and not mess up.
I would also project a dramatically marked increase in the
compliance rates for alternatives such as those I previously
listed.
