Arizona Prisoners: "Early Release" 2010.

A lot of people have been looking for information lately about the "early release" of state prisoners - specifically hoping that some will be paroled after serving only 65%, instead of the currently mandated 85%, of their sentence. I'm sorry to say, that doesn't appear to be what the deal is. That would require major sentence reform that the state legislature hasn't been willing to undertake in recent years.

It appears as if during one of the special sessions this past year, however, the legislature passed a bill which gave the Az Department of Corrections' Director, Charles Ryan, considerable leeway to release low-risk prisoners early as a means of easing the pressure on the budget. On October 1, 2010, Ryan issued a memo in response to this which details who might be eligible under what circumstances for what the rest of us tend to call "early release".

Here's the link to that memo, (also known as a Director's Instruction): DI#288. As best I can tell, no one's sentences are getting cut short, but you need to read it for yourself to determine how it applies to the situation you're involved in. It looks to me like the ADC is just cutting a handful of people loose from their parole tail so they go straight into their receiving county's hands for a term of probation, but I could be missing something.

Try using the current ADC Constituent Services Guidebook as a supplement to figure this out - if nothing else, it will direct you to the folks at the ADC central office who can better answer your questions.

Getting sentencing reform legislation next session is going to be hard. If you're the friend of family member of a prisoner, or otherwise interested in organizing with others on the issue of sentence reform and reduction, contact me soon. We have a better shot at it if we work together and draw in other members of our communities being decimated by the practice of mass incarceration and the lack of meaningful "correctional" programming going on during or after one's term of imprisonment. My contact info is in the side column of this page.

Sorry I don't have better news and didn't get this in your hands sooner. If anyone learns different from investigating this further, please contact me. If you write it up for us I'll post it as a guest blog.

Thanks,

Peg

Mother's Day: Sentencing and the War on Drugs.

                 

Women in Prison: A Fact Sheet

The Issue: Sentencing and the War on Drugs

Amnesty International-USA (2007)

The Department of Justice found that women were over represented among low level drug offenders who were non-violent, had minimal or no prior criminal history, and were not principal figures in criminal organizations or activities, but nevertheless received sentences similar to “high level” drug offenders under the mandatory sentencing policies. From 1986 to 1996 the number of women sentenced to state prison for drug crimes increased ten-fold. Nationally one in three women in prison and one in four women in jail are incarcerated for violating a drug law. (Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics Prisoners in 1997)

·  According to The Boston Globe, "nearly 26% of the nearly 2000 men and women crowding Massachusetts prisons for  drug crimes are first-time offenders…. Worse, nearly three out of four drug traffickers who do get charged in major cases, but agree to forfeit substantial drug money to prosecutors, bargain their way out of the long sentences…. The result: those with no money or information to trade face the hard mandatory sentences."

·     From 1986 to 1996, the number of women sentenced to state prison for drug crimes increased from 2,370 to 23,700.  (Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington DC Prisoners in 1997)

·  In 1986, 12.0% of women in prison were drug offenders. In 1991, 32.8% of women in prison were incarcerated for  drug offenses.  (Women in Prison, Survey of State Prison Inmates, 1991. US Department of Justice, March 1994, NCJ 145321)

The Issue: Sexual Assault and Misconduct Against Women in Prison

The imbalance of power between inmates and guards involves the use of direct physical force and indirect force based on the prisoners’ total dependency on officers for basic necessities and the guards’ ability to withhold privileges. Some women are coerced into sex for favors such as extra

food or personal hygiene products, or to avoid punishment.   

·  Powerlessness and Humiliation

There are 148,200 women in state and federal prisons. In federal women’s correctional facilities, 70% of guards are male.  Records show correctional officials have subjected female inmates to rape, other sexual assault, sexual extortion, and groping during body searches. Male correctional officials watch women undressing, in the shower or the toilet. Male correctional officials retaliate, often brutally, against female inmates who complain about sexual assault and harassment

·  Retaliation and Fear

In many states guards have access to and are encouraged to review the inmates’ personal history files (this includes any  record of complaints against themselves or other prison authorities). Guards threaten the prisoner’s children and visitation rights as a means of silencing the women. Guards issue rule infraction tickets, which extend the woman’s  stay in prison if she speaks out. Prisoners who complain are frequently placed in administration segregation.

·  Impunity 

Ineffective formal procedures, legislation and reporting capacity within US jails and prisons account for much of the  ongoing sexual abuse of women. In 1997, according to the US Justice Department only 10 prison employees in the  entire federal system were disciplined, and only 7 were prosecuted. If a prison official is found guilty, he is often simply transferred (“walked off the yard”) to another facility instead of being fired. The inmate may also be transferred. 

The Issue: Medical Neglect of Women in US Prisons

Women are denied essential medical resources and treatments, especially during times of pregnancy and/or chronic and degenerative diseases.

·  Failure to refer seriously ill inmates for treatment and delays in treatment

Women inmates suffering from treatable diseases such as asthma, diabetes, sickle cell anemia, cancer, late-term miscarriages, and seizures have little or no access to medical attention, sometimes resulting in permanent injury or death. Instances of failure to deliver life-saving drugs for inmates with HIV/AIDS have also been noted.  

·  Lack of qualified personnel and resources and use of non-medical staff

There is too few staff to meet physical and mental health needs. This often results in long delays in obtaining medical attention; disrupted and poor quality treatment causing physical deterioration of prisoners with chronic and degenerative diseases, like cancer; overmedication of prisoners with psychotropic drugs; and lack of mental health treatment. The use of  non-medical staff to screen requests for treatment is also common. 

·  Charges for medical attention

In violation of international standards, many prisons/jails charge inmates for medical attention, arguing that the charge deters prisoners from seeking medical attention for minor matters or because they want to avoid work. In some supermaximum prisons, where prisoners cannot work at all, the US Justice Dept. expressed concern that charging prisoners impedes their access to health care.

·  Inadequate Reproductive Health Care

In 1994, the National Institute of Corrections stated that provision of gynecological services for women in prison is inadequate.  Only half of the state prison systems surveyed offer female-specific services such as mammograms and Pap smears, and often entail a long wait to be seen.

·  Shackling During Pregnancy

Shackling of all prisoners, including pregnant prisoners, is standard policy in federal prisons and in the US Marshall Service and exists in almost all state prisons. Shackling during labor may cause complications during delivery such as hemorrhage or decreased fetal heart rate. If a caesarian section is needed, a delay of even 5 minutes may result in permanent brain damage to the baby.

  

·  Lack of treatment for substance abuse

The gap between services available and treatment needs continues to grow. The number of prisoners with histories of drug abuse is growing, but the proportion of prisoners receiving treatment declined from 40% in 1991 to 18% in 1997.  

·  Lack of Adequate or Appropriate Mental Health Services

 48-88% of women inmates suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder due to sexual or physical abuse experienced prior to coming to prison.  Very few prison systems provide counseling. Women attempting to access mental health services are routinely given medication without opportunity to undergo psychotherapeutic treatment.  

The Issue: Discrimination Based On Gender, Race and Sexual Orientation

The growth in incarceration has had its greatest impact on minorities, particularly African Americans. Women are most vulnerable to different forms of discrimination, including sexual harrasment or abuse. Women that do not fit the “norm”, such as lesbians, are more succeptable to torture and abuse.

Discrimination Based on Race:

·  Over a five-year period, the incarceration rate of African American women increased by 828%. (NAACP LDF Equal Justice Spring 1998.) An African American woman is eight times more likely than a European American woman is to be imprisoned.  African American women make up nearly half of the nation’s female prison population, with most serving sentences for nonviolent drug or property related offenses. 

·  Latina women experience nearly four times the rates of incarceration as European American women.

·  State and federal laws mandate minimum sentences for all drug offenders.  This eliminates the option for judges to refer first time non-violent offenders to drug treatment, counseling and education programs.  The racial disparity revealed by the crack v. powder cocaine sentences insures that more African American women will land in prison.

Although 2/3 of crack users are white or Hispanic, defendants convicted of crack cocaine possession in 1994 were 84.5% African American.  Crack is the only drug that carries a mandatory prison sentence for first time possession in the federal system. 

Discrimination Based On Sexual Orientation:

·   Human Rights Watch has documented categories of women who are likely targets for sexual abuse. Perceived or actual sexual orientation is one of four categories that make a female prisoner a more likely target for sexual abuse, as well as a target for retaliation when she reports that abuse.

·  If a woman is a lesbian, her criminal defense becomes more challenging.  Jurors in the US were polled as to what factors would make them most biased against a defendant, and perceived sexual orientation was chosen as the most likely personal characteristic to bias a juror against a defendant, three times greater than race. (National Law Journal November 2, 1998.)

·  The case of Robin Lucas depicts how sexual identity may subject a woman to further abuse or torture by a guard. She was placed in a men’s prison where male guards allowed male inmates to rape her.  The male guards taunted her about her same sex relationship, saying to her “maybe we can change your mind”.  

For more information on issues affecting women in prison and other women’s human rights issues, please visit the Women’s Human Rights Program website at www.amnestyusa.org/women or contact us at AIUSA 5 Penn Plaza-16th floor, New York, NY 10001 or at (212) 633-4292.

National CJ Commission Act of 2009

Senate Committee Passes National Criminal Justice Commission Act of 2009

January 21, 2010

 The bi-partisan National Criminal Justice Commission Act of 2009 (S. 714) was passed out of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary today by voice vote. The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) would create a commission to conduct a thorough evaluation of the nation's justice system and offer recommendations for reform at every stage of the criminal justice system.

The establishment of such a commission could not come at a more critical time. With 2.3 million people in prisons and jails, the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world. Federal and state governments spend more than $50 billion each year on corrections, and the population behind bars continues to grow.

A new approach to crime prevention is necessary and the time for reform is upon us. The commission created by this legislation would establish an organized and proactive approach to studying and advancing programs and policies that promote public safety, while overhauling those practices that are found to be fundamentally flawed.

read the sentencing project's letter of endorsement
read about the NCJCA

URGENT: Mississippi DOC and Jamie Scott

Hey All: This just came in. I just left a message on the medical director's line from AZ Prison Watch/myself asserting Jamie's right to medical care and insisting that she be transferred to a hospital immediately. We will be following up. Please call in, as indicated below. Will work on the media, too. Can use help today.



-------------

David Hope Rosser sent a message to the members of Free The Scott Sisters.

--------------------

Subject: BRAND NEW INFO - 1/20 JAMIE SCOTT UPDATE!


The prison chaplain arranged for Jamie to call Mrs. Rasco today and in that phone call Jamie confirmed that both of her kidneys have shut down and that she is in the prison ICU. She told her mother that she will be taken to the hospital sometime next week to have a procedure performed so that she can begin dialysis. She did not know why this is being delayed and neither does the family!

Jamie is grateful for all of the supporters who have called into the prison but wants us to ask folks to discontinue the phone calls. It's being stressed to Jamie that callers who yell and cuss are upsetting the officials there.

Jamie Scott, at age 38, has aged tremendously since her 15+ years of unjust incarceration and now suffers from severe medical problems which have led to her kidneys shutting down. She needs immediate hospitalization for treatment, proper diagnoses and pain relief. Jamie also  has mental health needs which need to be evaluated and  treated, as well! WE FEEL STRONGLY THAT TIME IS  OF THE ESSENCE. Jamie Scott is inmate #19197 at the  Central Mississippi Correctional Facility and she is  being treated by Dr. Gloria Perry at (601) 359-5515.

We've just been advised by our legal support to keep the pressure on the prison and not to let up one bit! Despite the prison's manipulation of Jamie, we must continue to act and not stop. So keep those calls coming in, we must get Jamie out of there ASAP. We are making moveson many other fronts to make that happen an...d this is a very integral part.

DON'T CURSE OR YELL INTO THE PHONE. STATE PLAINLY AND CLEARLY THAT WE WANT JAMIE MOVED OUT OF THE PRISON AND INTO A HOSPITAL WITHOUT FURTHER DELAY, THIS IS CRUCIAL! JAMIE SCOTT, #19197, MUST BE TAKEN TO THE HOSPITAL IMMEDIATELY!

Her physical and mental state require the highest levels of professional care.

Dr. Gloria Perry, Medical Department
(601) 359-5515

Margaret Bingham,
Superintendent of Central Mississippi Corrections Facility
(601) 932-2880
mbingham@mdoc.state.ms.us


FAX: (601) 664-0782
P.O. Box 88550
Pearl, Mississippi 39208

Christopher Epps, Commissioner of Prisons for the State of Mississippi
601-359-5600
CEPPS@mdoc.state.ms.us

North President Street
Jackson, MS 39202

Emmitt Sparkman, Deputy Commissioner

(601) 359-5610

esparkman@mdoc.state.ms.us 

http://state.ms.us

 

Please reply back to us and let us know of every response you get so that we can keep track of what people are being told.

Congressman Bennie Thompsom

Washington, D.C. Office

2432 Rayburn HOB

Washington, D.C. 20515

(202) 225-5876(202) 225-5898 (Fax)

 

Jackson, Mississippi Office

3607 Medgar Evers Blvd

Jackson, MS 39213

(601) 946-9003(601)-982-5337 (Fax)

 

Congressman Alcee L. Hastings

 Washington Office

2353 Rayburn Office Building

Washington D.C. 20515

Tel: (202) 225-1313

Fax: (202) 225-1171

 

Congressman Jeff Miller

Washington D.C.

2439 Rayburn House Office Building

Washington DC 20515

Phone: (202) 225-4136

Fax: (202) 225-3414

Toll Free Phone Number to District Office

Pensacola, Florida Phone: 866-367-1614 

 

NBC TODAY SHOW: Today@NBCUNI.com

 

NBC NIGHTLY NEWS: Nightly@NBC.com

 

Listing of NBC/MSNBC Show e-mails at http://www.facebook.com/l/f98b2;www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10285339/

NBC News

30 Rockefeller Plaza

New York, N.Y. 10112

Phone: (212) 664-4444 Fax: 

(212) 664-4426 

 

CBS FEEDBACK FORM: http://www.facebook.com/l/f98b2;www.cbs.com/info/user_services/fb_global_form.php

CBS NEWS

524 W. 57 St., 

New York, NY 10019 

Phone: 212-975-4321 

Fax: 212-975-1893

 

ABC NEWS CONTACT FORM: http://www.facebook.com/l/f98b2;abcnews.go.com/Site/page?id=3271346&cat=Good%20Morning%20America

ABC NEWS

77 W. 66 St., 

New York, NY 10023 

Phone: 212-456-7777 

 

CNN NEWS TIP FORM: http://www.facebook.com/l/f98b2;www.cnn.com/feedback/tips/newstips.html

CNN

One CNN Center, 

Box 105366, Atlanta, GA 30303-5366 Phone: 404-827-1500 Fax: 404-827-1784 

 

USA Today

7950 Jones Branch Dr.,

McLean, VA 22108 

Phone: 703-854-3400

Fax: 703-854-2078

 

Associated Press

450 West 33rd St., 

New York, NY 10001 

Phone: 212-621-1500 

Fax: 212-621-7523

General Questions and Comments: info@ap.org 

http://www.facebook.com/l/

 

http://www.

freethescottsisters.blogspot.com

California Dreaming. Time to wake up.

This via Ken at Private Corrections Working Group. Arizona failed to study and learn from California's experiences before Marcia Powell died, or the ADC may have saved her life. For what, though - the state to chew her up cycling her in and out of prison until she was dead? They need to do a lot more than just abstain from outright killing people they're responsible for imprisoning. 

The governor and state legislature here have no excuse - they and the public are well-enough informed about conditions in the prisons to either make prisoner rights and safety - and real sentence reform - priorities, or shut up already about how much they care about vulnerable Arizonans. That's who's ending up in prison, by and large - other people's victims. Watch how many more end up there now that we're slashing public mental health care again (want to bet that Magellan still makes a profit, no matter how many homes are foreclosed on this year? Off of who's  backs? Who's invested in them, anyway?)


Talk about a colossal waste of public money - all that "profit" that could be used directly to serve people just goes into the pockets of millionaires preying on the good people of this state. That's why they want to privatize prisons, too - not to save the rest of us money, but to make some for themselves. They're invested in a future of crime-ridden communities, and they're pushing Arizona's small town economies into becoming dependent on mass incarceration. That should tell people something about their real priorities. It's got nothing to do with what's good for any of us. We're just consumers and fodder.


We see through it - some of us do, anyway. All the right wing has been doing for years is sticking it to us: cutting education, health care access, basic community services - some "crisis". They aren't ever restoring that funding - this is how they work. Empty the schools and fill up the prisons. Privatize everything (fascists). They have more reason than ever to try to keep people down - those guys are losing control quick (including over their own people - don't think Pearce isn't due for a grand jury if we're looking at abuse of power). 

If it wasn't for the divisive power of racism and misogyny we would have overthrown them by now. That and hunger. Hunger makes a lot of things harder. That's why they try to keep us living out of soup kitchens and food banks...there's nothing charitable about that.


Anyway, I don't agree with some of the arguments here - I think the practice of privatizing prisons should be banned altogether under human rights law, as they have done in Israel. But it does address some of the stupider things our legislature has done (and still plans to do, apparently)...

----------

A poor prison plan for California

Gov. Schwarzenegger's latest proposal combines a destructive budgeting formula with an untested theory about privatization.

LA Times Editorial

January 17, 2010

When Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed shifting female inmates out of prisons to community detention centers in 2006, the Legislature said no. When he asked lawmakers the following year to approve $10.9 billion in bonds to build new prisons while also reforming sentencing laws and parole rules, they reduced the bond package and jettisoned the reforms. Last year, when he asked them to cut the prison budget by $1.2 billion, they fell about $200 million short. We don't blame the governor for being frustrated, but we do fault him for apparently giving up.

Schwarzenegger's latest prison plan, unveiled in his State of the State address earlier this month, is less a serious policy proposal than a hunk of red meat tossed out at voters who are understandably furious about cuts in education spending. It combines a deeply destructive budgeting formula with an untested theory about prison privatization. Yet, if there ever was a time when California needed its leaders to get serious about the prisons, it's now. The skyrocketing cost of administering the corrections system is helping to drive the state to the brink of financial collapse, even as the system's overcrowded conditions and abysmal medical care are violating federal law -- and forcing the courts to demand expensive fixes that exacerbate the budget problem.

Schwarzenegger's cynical response is to pit the prisons against colleges and universities, proposing a ballot initiative mandating that the state cannot spend more than 7% of its budget on corrections or less than 10% on higher education. We've already discussed the dangers of this kind of ballot-box budgeting, which puts decision-makers in a straitjacket and is largely to blame for the state government's deficit crisis. But what has received less attention is the governor's strategy for getting the corrections budget to 7%, from its current level of about 10%: privatizing the prisons.

Many politicians, especially on the GOP side of the aisle, are attracted to private prisons, under the theory that private industry runs everything more efficiently than government. That hasn't really panned out in other states. Studies on whether rent-a-reformatories are cheaper for taxpayers than government-run prisons have had conflicting results, largely because the data are hard to compare. Opinions also differ widely on whether private prisons, which tend to have lower guard-to-inmate ratios than public lockups, experience more violence. It's safe to say that if differences exist, they aren't very big.

It's not unreasonable to think that private prisons could be more successful in California than they have been elsewhere, because prison costs here are so out of line. A series of highly generous contracts with the prison guards union, whose political contributions make it a force to be reckoned with in Sacramento, contributed to a 32% jump in the corrections budget between 2006 and 2009, until the financial crisis forced legislators to make cuts in the corrections budget last fall. California spends far more per inmate ($49,000 a year) than any other state. A shortage of guards not only leads to abuse of the overtime system -- according to a September state audit, nearly a third of base-level correctional officers make so much money working overtime that their annual salaries exceed those of managers two pay grades higher -- but the guards have negotiated such bountiful benefit packages that it's actually cheaper for the state to continue paying overtime to older officers than to hire new ones to end the staffing shortage. The audit concluded that it costs between $3,200 and $7,800 more per inmate annually to house them in a California prison than in a comparable private facility.

Yet that doesn't necessarily suggest that privatizing the prisons is a good idea -- and it doesn't come close to suggesting we could lower the prison budget to 7% of the general fund solely through privatization. California's prison population has soared in the past two decades because the voters have passed ever-tougher sentencing laws while also tying the hands of judges to give them less flexibility in setting terms. Privatization won't solve either problem.

Moreover, private prisons come with a host of complications and trade-offs. Perhaps most serious is a loss of accountability and transparency. It's already hard for the public to find out what's going on behind the barbed wire, but abusive behavior by guards, inmate violence, accounting shenanigans and other common prison woes would be even further shielded under private control. What's more, the state might only be trading one influential lobby (the prison guards) for another (private prison operators and the communities that rely on them for jobs). Creating a prison-industrial complex with a financial incentive for locking people up could distort state politics, escalate prison spending and encourage overcrowding at least as much as the current system does.

The debate over prisons is in some ways similar to the debate over education, in which free-marketeers battle organized labor over charter schools. We think charters are a worthwhile experiment that can help make public schools better -- and the same could apply to private prisons, if they're given proper oversight. California already has a handful of private lockups, but they are very low-security facilities. We'd favor a change in union contracts and state laws that would allow privatization of a few higher-security prisons, so the impacts on costs and accountability could be assessed.

In other words, Schwarzenegger has a terrific idea for a pilot program. But to suggest that such an untested and possibly dangerous experiment is the solution to our prison problems, or that it could quickly produce a dramatic drop in expenditures, is disingenuous and irresponsible. What's needed is for the Legislature to do the job it failed to do last year and approve more meaningful parole reforms to get nonviolent drug addicts out of cells and into rehab, create a commission to revisit California's draconian and ineffective sentencing laws and take other steps long recommended by criminal justice experts to reduce the inmate population.

Morrison Institute: Less Prison, More Probation.

This from an unexpected place: The Morrison Institute. Thank you folks, for speaking up. Please do more work on this issue in the coming year in the community - don't just keep it to your academic newsletters and blogs.

--------------

Bill Hart: Time to open the prison gates?

Dec. 23, 2009

Bill Hart, Senior Policy Analyst

Another fine mess. That’s one way of describing Arizona’s overcrowded, billion-dollar prison system, so many of whose graduates — apparently uncorrected — go on to commit more crimes. “Train wreck” is another useful phrase. But it’s worth keeping in mind the one thing Arizona’s prison crisis is not: It’s not a mystery.

Nor is its solution.

Consider the twin basics of Arizona’s prison policy over the past 30 years: First, pass a bunch of laws requiring lots more convicted criminals to be sent to prison (e.g., mandatory minimum sentences); second, pass other laws making most prisoners stay inside longer (e.g. “truth-in-sentencing”).

What did we think would happen?

Arizona for years has ranked among the top 10 states in its incarceration rate, measured as the number of people locked up per 100,000 state residents. Meanwhile, in the past 30 years corrections has run up a larger percentage increase in operating spending than any other Arizona agency. Since just fiscal year 2004 we have added more than 11,000 inmates at a cost of more than $400 million.

Why the rush to lock everybody up? Some say Arizonans simply have a lust for punishment. Fans of incarceration, however, are quick to point out that crime in Arizona has declined since the 1990s. They are less quick to note that America’s leading criminal justice scholars do not agree that incarceration deserves all or even most of the credit for the crime drop. Or that crime has gone down in both states with harsher justice systems and those with milder ones. Or that Arizona continues to hold down first place among states in the rate of property crime as measured by the FBI.

In any case, we’re left with two unpleasant alternatives: Either let substantial numbers of prisoners out early, or continue to struggle through the budget mess hobbled by this billion-dollar ball and chain.

Like it or not, it’s time to open the gates. 

What about the nightmare of wanton violence that opponents warn of? Most inmates in Arizona prisons are locked up for non-violent crimes (though they might be repetitive offenders). Their most common offense by far is drug crimes, which accounted for 8,388 inmates in November, or about one-fifth of all prisoners. Next in frequency come the expected categories: assault (4,976), robbery (3,485), burglary (2,959), and murder (2,606). Then, however, comes aggravated DUI, which requires 2,188 prisoners to serve a total of four months behind bars.

 Which raises another question: Why are we going to all the trouble and expense of sending thousands of drunk drivers to prison (as opposed to jail or home arrest) for only four months? 

In fact, 39% of the total FY2008 inmate population was locked up for less than six months. Most of these are convicts who were granted probation or parole — that is, they were deemed low-risk enough to remain free or be released. Many of most were then locked up for “technical” violations, meaning they didn’t commit a new crime but perhaps missed a meeting with their probation officer or otherwise broke the rules.

It’s hard to see how releasing some of them early — and diverting many more incoming inmates to probation or jail — would pose a threat to the survival of civilization. It’s easier to see the upside: Keeping an inmate in an Arizona prison for a year averages out to around $22,000. Keeping someone on probation for a year runs slightly more than $1,000. 

No mystery here.