Prison Rape in the US

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Have the unions signed binding contracts with the courts that grant their members such immunity from investigation? Have they signed contracts preventing courts from sentencing rapist prison guards to prison?

Come on man. Here's how it is: your DAs etc don't really give a rat's ass about the rights of criminals eg. prisoners. That is a fact that has been demonstrated time and time again eg. through stories posted right here on this forum. I won't deny that the prison workers' union in CA may have too much political power, but half of their freedom to violate the rights of prisoners comes from the fact that no-one really cares about the rights of prisoners, esp. not those who are supposed to uphold/enforce your laws. They don't even care enough to improve the situation wrt proving guilt.

It is naïve in the extreme to believe that everything would be hunky dory if only you could fire corrupt prison workers (aka. almost all of them).

---

You're not incorrect that people have less compassion for prisoners. But you're severely underestimating the managerial barriers that government unions put in place. I didn't want to go down this road, but the reality is that many state institutions are effectively run by the unions. There is an organized us vs. them mentality between the employees and their employers (IE the state) that often inhibits investigations, discipline and reform.

there is nearly always a us vs them mentality. one of the many reasons people hate middle management. you've got to be an idiot to think that's a union only thing, or caused by unions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

A prisoner pregnant by a warden warrants disciplinary action for sure; criminal prosecution? Not so certain. Also, let's not forget that the people bringing charges also happen to be people who have an interest in undermining the authority of the people they bring complaints about.

---

Over here it's certainly a criminal act - it's a variant of "sexual abuse of wards" called "sexual abuse of prisoners" and calls for a minimal sentence of 3 months up to 5 years.

Consentual sex is explicitly ranked as abuse ?

It has been consistently ruled that there can be no consensus between wards and wardens due to the inequality of power in their relationship, i.e. it's not an agreement between equals. Also it prevents the usual "but she made the first move" argument by wardens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

It has been consistently ruled that there can be no consensus between wards and wardens due to the inequality of power in their relationship, i.e. it's not an agreement between equals. Also it prevents the usual "but she made the first move" argument by wardens.

---

Statutory rape then, well it makes the rules very clear.

It certainly has that ring to it - that's why what would be called "statutory rape" is §174, whereas the "sexual abuse of wards is §174a.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

You're not incorrect that people have less compassion for prisoners. But you're severely underestimating the managerial barriers that government unions put in place. I didn't want to go down this road, but the reality is that many state institutions are effectively run by the unions. There is an organized us vs. them mentality between the employees and their employers (IE the state) that often inhibits investigations, discipline and reform.

---

Fuzzy outlined CA's barriers, including elected DAs as well as public unions. But not every state is run like CA, particularly jails and prisons, and not all public unions have the same degree of influence.

Do you have credible sources or published studies showing non-union correctional officers, or privately operated jails/prisons have lower rates of (reported or prosecuted) prisoner rapes? Or that any other type of prisoner abuse is less when public unions aren't involved?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

It has been consistently ruled that there can be no consensus between wards and wardens due to the inequality of power in their relationship, i.e. it's not an agreement between equals. Also it prevents the usual "but she made the first move" argument by wardens.

---

I never understood the idea held by teachers and civil servants that their jobs are somehow so unique that they can't have a normal employer/manager/employee relationship like the rest of the working world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

I never understood the idea held by teachers and civil servants that their jobs are somehow so unique that they can't have a normal employer/manager/employee relationship like the rest of the working world.

---

Aren't you the one who argues that their jobs are unique enough that it should be illegal for them to form unions? :confused: