Aaron Hernandez |
Upon entering Bristol County House of Correction (BCHC), Hernandez was immediately placed in a 7-foot by 10-foot cell with no air-conditioning or television. Hernandez remains in this cell for 21 hours a day. Three times a day, Hernandez gets an hour reprieve from his “parking spot” sized cell to make collect calls, shower, and exercise—essentially he is permitted to walk around in a small cage. Only seven other inmates can see Hernandez, and he otherwise remains isolated from the other 13,000 inmates at BCHC. Though the head of BCHC, Sheriff Tom Hodgson, has described Hernandez as “a model prisoner,” Hernandez remains in a solitary confinement-like situation usually reserved for “troublemakers.” The circumstances of Hernandez’s celebrity-status have forced Hodgson to place Hernandez in protective custody for Hernandez’s own safety. Hodgson fears that other inmates may try and attack Hernandez to “raise their own stature.” Simply put, Hernandez’s strict confinement is a direct result of his fame.
Protective custody is a
form of administrative segregation or non-punitive segregation.[1] Essentially, an inmate, for their own protection, is moved into a solitary
confinement-like situation to avoid interaction with other inmates. While there
is no constitutional right to protective custody, it is frequently requested by
inmates out of fear of retaliation for their crimes outside or within the
prison.[2] Protective custody is also used to protect high-profile inmates who are at risk
due to their celebrity-status. For example, rapper Ja Rule remained in
protective custody for over two years of his prison sentence as a result of his
celebrity-status. Presumably, George
Zimmerman would have spent a large amount of time in protective custody due to
the racial undertones of his highly publicized case.
While protective custody
is not solitary confinement, it certainly has a number of similarities. A small
cell, limited interaction with other prisoners, and minimal time spent outside
the cell are qualities that both protective custody and solitary confinement
share. For supporters of Hernandez, this is particularly concerning considering
Massachusetts is constantly scrutinized for their solitary confinement
practices. Namely, Massachusetts and Arkansas are the only two states which
allow state prisoners to live in solitary confinement for up to ten years for
disciplinary infractions. Granted the differences between solitary confinement and protective custody are
important, it is their similarities that have garnered the concern of the American
Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU complaint reads:
Prison officials
sometimes justify solitary confinement as necessary to separate vulnerable
prisoners, such as juveniles and the elderly, or high-profile prisoners, like
Hernandez, from the general population. But this "protection" comes
at an unnecessarily high cost. Isolation is particularly devastating for
vulnerable populations . . . . The harms
of protective custody are so well known that the Prison Rape Elimination Act
regulations that the Department of Justice requires mandate that adult
facilities make their "best efforts" to avoid placing youthful
detainees in isolation. And, for the
cognitively disabled or those with severe mental illness — who frequently make
up the majority of those living in solitary confinement — extreme isolation can
exacerbate their condition and can result in significant deterioration.
Studies on extreme
isolation have found that prisoners can suffer irreversible effects, including
depression and extreme hallucinations. If these studies prove to be true, can
three hours a day of limited interaction really be expected to counteract the
harmful effects of extreme isolation?
As concerned as the ACLU
may be for the well-being of Aaron Hernandez, prison officials have a duty to
provide safety for their prisoners.[3]
Prisons have been held liable for the injury or death of prisoners when the
prison failed to properly segregate prisoners for safety purposes (i.e.
isolating sick and violent offenders from lower-level offenders). For example,
in Matsker v. Herr, a Seventh Circuit
case, the court held that prison officials have an Eighth Amendment duty to
protect prisoners upon learning about the likelihood of an attack.[4] To complement this notion of protection, 127 M.G.L.A. § 32 states that the
superintendents of prisons shall treat prisoners with “the kindness which their
obedience, industry, and good conduct merit.” For Aaron Hernandez, a “model
prisoner,” this would suggest that he is not only entitled to the protection he
needs, but also to a healthy living situation.[5]
Protective custody is a
unique situation for prisons. Aaron Hernandez is by all means a high-profile
prisoner. In a summer rife with newsworthy criminal cases (see George
Zimmerman, James "Whitey" Bulger, Jodi Arias, and Dzhokar Tsarnaev), Hernandez’s name
dominated news and sports outlets for well over a month. How is a prison
supposed to balance the scrutiny of solitary confinement with the danger posed
to a recognizable face? Sheriff Hodgson stands by his principles, even as two
legislators in Massachusetts have proposed a bill to severely limit the current
solitary confinement policies in their state. As Aaron Hernandez ponders his
future from within protective custody, criminal law scholars must consider the
safety risks posed to those prisoners we are trying to protect.
Calen Weiss
Articles Editor, Criminal Law Brief
[1] James E. Robertson, The Constitution in Protective Custody: An
Analysis of the Rights of Protective Custody Inmates, 56 U. Cin. L. Rev. 91, 91 (1987).
[2] See Robertson, infra note
5 at 96.
[3]See Robertson, infra note
5, at 103.
[4] 748 F.2d 1142 (7th Cir.
1984).
[5] This kindness standard
was extended to protective custody prisoners in Blaney v. Commissioner of Correction, 372 N.E.2d 770 (1978).
I have read about this celebrity and his case was fought by the very known criminal attorney.
ReplyDeletemiami dui lawyers
I never knew that being a celebrity would involve such risk too. Thanks for this impressive post on interesting topic.Walker Law Group is a boutique law firm offering a range of legal services including compensation, workers compensation, motor vehicle accident compensation, personal injury compensation, slip & fall compensation and public transport injury compensation. Personal Injury Compensation Lawyers Sydney
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing such kind of very nice and wonderful post ..
ReplyDeleteThis came up after watching an episode of Hawaii 5-0. If a person involved in a case is a person of interest or possible victim can he or she but put into protective custody against their wishes. My wife says no , I say yes who is right ? .
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf you try to take down a lawfully elected President by an Unlawfull Impeachment are you not gulty of a Coup de tat.if it fails, and shouldn't You be charged with Treason?
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing such kind a info its been really helpful.
ReplyDelete