This page and its contents are not legal advice.

The information is placed in order of posting.

The links on the page are for assistance of persons interested in corrections and correctional topics. PLEASE ADVISE ME IF A LINK IS NON-FUNCTIONAL!

California POST Notice of Possible Change in Jail Course Certifications

Jail Manager E-Mail

on 4/11/07 9:33, Martindale, John at JMartindale@MontereyPark.ca.gov wrote:

> Bill,
>
> I'm looking into privacy issues regarding jail video systems. I figured you
> would be a good resource to steer me in the right direction. I would
> appreciate any assistance you can give.
>
> Thanks
>
> John Martindale
> Monterey Park Police Department
> Jail Manager

******

Hi John,

The CCSA Title 24 only requires privacy screens for toilets in new construction and remodeling. Showers often have water screens, but bear consideration.

The basic legal question concerning viewing devices is, "who sees what for what purpose?"

Most detention facilities limit camera views to hallways and special purpose cells such as safety and sobering cells. Some video holding cells, breath-o-lizer rooms, sallyports and building entrances.

The issue of opposite gender observation can also be an issue. The location of monitors can be important. The "general public" should not be able to see the monitors. In some cases viewing by non-law enforcement city employees can raise both privacy and "embarrassment" complaints. Inmates are known to flash cameras for effect and make obscene gestures that some people consider offensive.

DO NOT HAVE VIDEO EQUIPMENT IS CELLS OR ROOMS WHERE UNCLOTHED SEARCHES THAT PLACE!

The next legal question is that camera, video and audio equipment cannot replace "Direct Visual Observation" for "Safety Checks". Be sure there are policy statements and training in place to cover this issue.

Another topic is recording video and audio. More and more departments are monitoring booking areas for supervision and management of employees.

DO NOT PUT AUDIO-VIDEO EQUIPMENT IN EMPLOYEE BATHROOMS AND LOCKERROOMS.

DO NOT PUT JAIL VIEWS ON LIVE STREAMING VIDEO OVER THE INTERNET (E.G. Joe Appio of Arizona).

From a facilities management perspective, I have had more problems with buying quality equipment that is reliable and easily maintained. The way technology is changing, expect that whatever system the city chooses, it will be obsolete within 5 years. Therefore, the wiring system is more important than the end devices.

Please let me know if you need more information.

Bill @1115pdst 4/11/07

******

Re: California SB 159 and SB896 research concerning revision to how pre-arraignment prisoner medical expenses are paid.

From: Bill Naber [mailto:bnaber@nteusa.org]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 5:18 PM
To: Mercier, Michelle
Subject: SB 159 and 896 research 12/11/06


Hi Michelle,

Here's what I found so far on SB 159. There is an amended Bill SB 896 that modifies the 2005 version. I suggest printing out the text of both bills to compare by paint and paste.

SB 896
Status
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/sen/sb_0851-0900/sb_896_bill_20060918_status.html

History
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/sen/sb_0851-0900/sb_896_bill_20060918_history.html

SB 896 Text

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/sen/sb_0851-0900/sb_896_bill_20060918_chaptered.html

SB 159 Text 10/04/05
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/sen/sb_0151-0200/sb_159_bill_20051004_chaptered.html

10/11/05 Status

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/sen/sb_0151-0200/sb_159_bill_20051011_status.html

History of Bill

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/sen/sb_0151-0200/sb_159_bill_20051004_history.html

My reading of these two bills is that the Hospital lobbist want to change law concerning how "pre-booking medical costs" are paid. Currently (prior to these laws become effective, police departments were not charged by the hospital for bring in a prisoner for "clear to book" medical screening. The law until now was that all medical charges for persons arrested for state laws was a "county charge". The dollar amounts a hospital could charge for such services was governed by the "Medicaid" regulations, also known as Medically Indigent Adult (MIA) rules. These bills allow hospitals to charge their "going rate" and to force police and sheriff's into contracting for pre-arraignment medical services.

More discussion topics to come on:

• Analysis of Way V. Ventura strip search [aka Unclothed security search] decision implications for local law enforcement (adult and juvenile).

• Impact of Sexual Violent Preditors (SVP's) on jail classification systems.

• Potential impact on local police and sheriff's of California prision over-population litigation.

• Rising issues of City Jails Holding high risk inmates under contract for state and federal prosecutors.

• The nation-wide crisis of Recruitment, Hiring and Retention of qualified personnel in public safety.

• Frequency and depth of suicide and self-injury training for adult and juvenile detention.