criminal justice system – UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog

A Look at Marking Time: Art in the Age of Mass Incarceration

The Exhibit

The Abroms-Engel Institute for the Visual Arts (AEIVA) has welcomed a new exhibit, “Marking Time: Art in the Age of Mass Incarceration”. The exhibit explores the United States’ criminal justice system, mass incarceration, discrimination and the very concept of justice with works from more than 70 different artists. Many of the pieces on display come from artists who are or were incarcerated, who used art as an essential outlet and form of expression within prison. Nonincarcerated artists are also featured, influenced by the damages of mass incarceration within their families and neighborhoods. The entire exhibit creates a critique of mass incarceration from a human right’s perspective, representing the voices of incarcerated persons that are typically silenced or ignored. “Marking Time” boasts three galleries of moving pieces that speak to the gravity and scale at which the human rights violations within our punitive justice system disenfranchise impoverished and minority communities throughout the United States, and features data and interviews that discuss ways these glaring problems should be addressed and combatted.

“Marking Time” was organized by curator Dr. Nicole R. Fleetwood, who has spent a decade researching the importance and development of visual arts and creative practices for incarcerated persons. Dr. Fleetwood deliberately removed any mention of charges or reasons for conviction for the incarcerated artists featured in the exhibit, forcing viewers to remove a layer of prejudice or thought regarding whether or not the artist is inherently a “good” or “bad” person, or deserving of their incarceration. As I progressed through the galleries of “Marking Time ”, one of the first things I noticed was exactly that; how I continuously perceived the artworks as being the creations of a fellow artist, not a criminal or prisoner. This intentional shift in perception creates an environment of thoughtfulness, analysis and depth that may not have been achieved otherwise, and makes the exhibit an excellent ignition for thought, conversation and activism.

When analyzing the works themselves, I was surprised to see how many were masterfully created from hair gel, sheets, uniforms, newspapers and contraband items when traditional art supplies were not accessible. Incarcerated artists are often limited in the tools they have to create art from, but countless works within “Marking Time” reveal the true resilience of an artist’s spirit, and how artistic expression can prevail above the smothering limitations of prison.

The Pieces

As this exhibit has been analyzed and discussed through its many travels from MoMA to AEIVA, I wanted to highlight a few of the pieces and discuss their particular significance to the conversation of human rights within the United States punitive justice system and mass incarceration.

Pyrrhic Defeat: A Visual Study of Mass Incarceration by Mark Loughney

Hundreds of sketched portraits decorating a wall. — Mark Loughney, Pyrrhic Defeat: A Visual Study of Mass Incarceration, 2014-present. Series of graphite and ink drawings on paper. 725 pieces total. Each 12 x 9 in. Courtesy of the Artist. Source: Original Photo

Loughney’s series, Pyrrhic Defeat, is named for a theory within criminal justice studies that explores how a failing criminal justice system that discriminates in its criminalization of certain groups substantially benefits certain elites. Mark Loughney has created over 750 portraits of his incarcerated peers in order to mark the passage of time within his own sentence, as well as provide fellow inmates with a positive alternative to the dehumanization caused by mugshots and prison IDs. His pieces provide the individuals with a level of personalization, dignity, and respect that is often forgotten and ignored within the prison system. Loughney spends 20 minutes on each sketch, and has to carve a creative, open atmosphere for each session out of the typical chaos and disruptions within a prison environment.

Untitled by Gilberto Rivera

Three mixed media paintings depicting the chaos of the Covid-19 pandemic. — Gilberto Rivera, Untitled, 2020. Newspaper, caulk, silicone, spray paint, acrylic, and markers on canvas and recycled canvas. L: 48 ½ x 60 in C: 59 ¾ x 51 ⅜ in R: 48 ¼ x 60 in, Overall: 60 x 156 ½ in. Courtesy of the Artist. Source: Original Photo

This Triptych by Gilberto Rivera places a spotlight on how mismanagement of the Covid-19 pandemic negatively impacted vulnerable communities throughout the artists’ hometown of New York. Rivera was a graffiti artist prior to his incarceration, and this piece truly reveals the artist’s emotions and style in a brilliant display of keywords, colors and figures. Rivera’s triptych incorporates newspaper clippings that highlight his disgust for how minority and immigrant essential workers were neglected as well as the fear incarcerated people experienced throughout the public health crisis. Prisoners across the globe were put into lockdowns to prevent the spread of Covid-19, and the result of this is an experience extremely similar to that of solitary confinement; a punitive mechanism proven to have extreme mental and physical health consequences. Despite these sweeping lockdowns, extreme overcrowding lead prisons to host the majority of the largest single-site outbreaks since the start of the pandemic. Despite these major outbreaks and casualties, prisoners fell to the bottom of priority lists for treatment and aid when medical equipment and essential items faced shortages. Rivera’s piece displays frustration and criticism of these issues that have hardly received the mainstream coverage they deserve.

Ellapsium: master & Helm by Jared Owens

Three painted panels with painted blueprints of a slave ship and federal prison overlapping. — Jared Owens, Ellapsium: master & Helm, 2016. Mixed media on birch panels. Each: 48 x 31 in. Courtesy of the Artist and Dr. Nicole R. Fleetwood. Source: Original Photo

With Ellapsium, Jared Owens addresses the racism of the criminal justice system as well as hierarchies and power struggles within Fairton, the correctional institution where Owens was imprisoned. This complex work features symbolism as a form of rebellion and disapproval, and bears an immediately recognizable resemblance to the infamous map of the Brookes Slave Ship from 1788 that displays how slaves were forced to live through their passage to America. This intentionally chosen symbol represents the violence, dehumanization, and other atrocities that slaves faced in early American history. The second and less known image present in this work is a blueprint of the Fairton prison; Owens’ combining of the two blatantly compares the horrors of the historical institution of slavery to the atrocities and discrimination committed by the United States’ current carceral state. Owens also utilizes color symbolically throughout his piece, and all of the colors used correlate to the artist’s daily life within a federal institution. The green of the institutional walls represents restriction and being subdued, blue represents the uniforms worn by prison guards, and brown represents the uniforms of those imprisoned. Orange, the most used color within the piece, was used within Fairfield to indicate areas that were off limits and unavailable to incarcerated persons, so Owens deliberately used that color for the boundary between the blueprint of the slave ship, of Fairfield, and the world outside of the two.

Owens is open about how his pursuit of art posed a legitimate threat to him within the Fairfield facility. Being caught with planks of wood to paint on or stretch canvas could have resulted in solitary confinement, extension of his sentence, or complete confiscation of personal possessions and art supplies. While these overwhelming restrictions greatly limited Owens while he was in prison, he has chosen to use his experience to create, raise awareness, and call for change- like so many artists featured alongside him in “Marking Time”.

Peace, Love, Harmony by Susan Lee-Chun

A rack of uniform orange detention hoodies, with patterns on the interior lining. — Susan Lee-Chun, Peace, Love, Harmony, 2007. Cotton fabric and dye. 36 x 60 x 18 in. Courtesy of artist. Source: Original Photo

Women on the Rise! (WOTR) was a feminist art project founded by Dr. Jillian Hernandez to provide girls in juvenile detention facilities with a platform for self-expression and dialogue. Inspired by her participation in this project, Susan Lee-Chun worked with a group of girls in juvenile detention to explore the politics of fashion, and asked her participants to “Think about who you are, what words, images or symbols define you or your beliefs. Use them to create a fabric design”. The resulting hoodies on display conform to detention center uniforms on their exterior, and on the inside feature patterns with rainbows, checkers, and the word “Love”. Upon completion of this project, Lee-Chun attempted to give the girls she worked with the resulting hoodies of their creation; and was denied that request. None of the girls involved were allowed to wear the hoodies. In public defiance, Lee-Chun’s hoodies now hang among the many artworks of “Marking Time”, criticizing a system that would prioritize conformity and uniform over the individuality, creativity and expression of a child.

How To See “Marking Time”

If you would like to see “Marking Time” and any of the artworks or artists featured above first hand, the exhibit is free and available to the public until December 11. Reserve your free ticket to view the exhibition here. Spaces per time slot are limited to 10 for a one-hour long visit. If you cannot make your time slot for any reason, please cancel the booking or call 205-975-6436. If you have any issues with booking your ticket or would like to reserve a group tour, contact AEIVA at aeiva@uab.edu.

Visitors must wear a mask at all times inside the AEIVA building and keep socially distanced. Free and metered parking is available along the streets surrounding AEIVA. Safety is UAB’s priority. The pandemic is a fluid situation that UAB is monitoring, in consultation with infectious disease and public health experts; events will be subject to change based on the latest COVID-19 safety guidelines.

All upcoming “Marking Time” programs are designed as hybrid events, with both in-person and virtual components. AEIVA is prepared to move any of the events entirely virtual at a moment’s notice. Visit AEIVA on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook for the latest updated information.

Injustice in the Justice System: Issues of Access for People with Disabilities

The image shows the sculpture of a women holding scales, which is supposed to represent justice. In the background are the pillars of the Supreme Court of the United States. — Lady Justice before the Supreme Court of the United States, symbolizing impartiality and fairness. “Lady Justice” by justindc is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

As Brady Mistic got out of his car, he was immediately met with the blinding glare of police lights. Being a person with deafness, Brady relied mostly on his sight to interact with the world around him, so the bright light was confusing to say the least. He moved towards the light to inquire about the disturbance. Within the next seven seconds, Brady would find himself shoved to ground and tased by the police as they barked commands that were completely inaccessible to him, even as he tried to communicate that he was deaf. Within seven seconds, Brady acquired three charges, including resisting arrest, and was sentenced to four months in prison. Within seven seconds, the police officers’ inability to identify the need for, and establish, alternate forms of communication lead to a physical altercation and incarceration. Although these charges were waived after almost two years, Brady’s story is indicative of a widespread, disproportionate impact of the justice system on people with disabilities.

In fact, while only 20% of Americans have disabilities, 32% of federal inmates and 40% of jail inmates report at least one disability. The difference in these numbers is no coincidence. In this and a subsequent article, we will see that people with disability are not only overrepresented in prison and jail systems, but also treated unfairly at every step in the process of incarceration and reintegration into society. This article connects Mistic’s inaccessible encounter with the police with a broader, systemic lack of accommodations in the criminal justice system; the second will focus on the school-to-prison pipeline for kids with disabilities and the experiences of people with intellectual and development disabilities.

Mistic and Accessibility in the Criminal Justice System

Mistic’s encounter with the police was not the only incident of law enforcement getting into a violent altercation due to their inability to communicate with a disabled individual. In 2017, Oklahoma City police fatally shot Magdiel Sanchez, an individual with deafness, after he failed to respond to verbal commands to drop the stick in his hand and get on the ground. He was later found to have not been involved in the hit-and-run case for which the police were called. Witnesses who were present at the time of the event were even yelling to the police officers, saying that Sanchez was deaf and could not understand their spoken words. The lack of appropriate communication and the haste in action which is evident in both of these cases points to an underlying deficit in police training. Despite the fact that individuals with any type of disability are legally entitled to receive the same access to legal enforcement services as people without disabilities, most of the training around disability and crisis intervention training programs are not mandatory and are focused on psychological disabilities. Law enforcement training is not comprehensive with regards to disability and fails to equip officers with the necessary skills to interact with people who have intellectual, developmental, or other types of disabilities, which can potentially lead to fatal consequences.

Sadly, the lack of access in Mistic’s interaction with the criminal justice system did not end at his encounter with the police. Mistic was denied an interpreter when interacting with his lawyer while in jail. Like other aspects of Mistic’s case, this too points to an institutionalized barrier that prevents people with disabilities from being treated justly. Inaccessibility in the court and prison system is rampant. This was evident in the case of Abreham Zemedagegehu, an Ethiopian man with deafness whose first language was Ethiopian Sign Language. He was not allowed an interpreter during his six weeks in jail, making it very difficult for him to hear announcements for meals, contact his friends and family, and receive medication for his back pain.

Through multiple lawsuits over the years, prisoners with deafness reported not being able to understand the prison-wide safety instructions, to take part in classes in prison, and to defend themselves in disciplinary proceedings because a sign language interpreter was not present. In 2010, a prison in Virginia became the first in the country to have a videophone after it settled a lawsuit by a group of deaf inmates. It is difficult to imagine that this basic mode of accessible communication for people with deafness was unavailable at one point in any prison in the US and is still not available in many prisons. The lack of accessible communication methods impacts the success of people with disability as they reintegrate into society as well. One individual with blindness had the opportunity to enroll in community college courses but did not receive appropriate accommodations during classes. Another individual with a disability sought to find out how to apply for social security benefits but was denied information by their counselor, who believed they should apply for a job instead.

The image shows a corridor lines on either side by prison cells. There are two levels of prison cells. The prison cells have metal bars from the floor to the ceiling, and also some metal bars running along the length of the cells. Some of the entrances to the cells are open. There are no people in the image. The image has a very grim and foreboding atmosphere. — Prison cells in Alcatraz, San Francisco. Source: Unsplash

Access to Health Services

Decreased access to medication and health services in prisons, as Zemedagegehu experienced, disproportionally impacts people with disabilities, risking the deterioration of health problems. When 91% of jailers report they have in their facilities individuals with serious psychological disabilities who are at risk of committing suicide, it becomes imperative – a matter of life or death – to ensure adequate health services are delivered in time. The status of accommodations is no better, as many prisons deemed essential accommodations (including wheelchair, prosthetics, exercise equipment, other assistive technology) as no longer “medically necessary” in order to cut costs. Health services are placed further out of the reach of inmates due to exorbitant co-pay rates, which can be as high as a month’s labor, and additional fees incurred by prosthetics and other accommodation. The results of these factors is best portrayed in a Bureau of Justice System study which looked into health issues of prisoners and jail inmates. Only two-thirds of participants reported receiving necessary medical treatment, whereas 11% reported that their illness was not being treated because they were not being given medication. While the overrepresentation of people with disabilities in jails and prisons may largely be attributed to unjust treatment of people with disabilities, it is possible that the conditions within the jails and prisons, including the lack of access to health resources, are contributing to the development of disabilities in inmates.

Perhaps the most shocking experience of Zemedagegehu during his time in jail is that he was forced to receive an injection, which he later found out was a tuberculosis test, after refusing to sign a medical consent form because it was not presented in a way that he could comprehend. This blatant human rights violation, of forced medical procedures and ignorance of patient autonomy, underscores the necessity of sweeping changes in the jail and prison system’s treatment of individuals with disabilities.

Inaccessibility in the justice system, however, is an issue not only for arrested and incarcerated individuals with disabilities, but also to citizens seeking justice. According to a Bureau of Justice study, people with disabilities are victims of violence at twice the rate as people without disabilities. Clearly, individuals with disabilities stand to benefit from the services offered by the court system, services which they are entitled to but cannot always access due to the failure of the criminal justice system in being inclusive to all members of the community.

The issues of inaccessibility discussed in this article violate the rights afforded to all individuals, including article seven of the Human Rights Declaration which promises that everyone is “entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law”. Reforms to the criminal justice system need to take into account the needs of people with disabilities at every level, from law enforcement to court systems to jails and prisons. Individual citizens can contribute to pushing for such reforms as well. Find your local legislators and advocate for issues of access in the criminal justice system by writing to or phoning their office. Recent prison reforms in Alabama, including a bill allocating approximately $800 billion to the construction of two new facilities that will reduce overcrowding in prisons, offer hope for progress. Whether or not accessibility becomes a priority in the future depends on you and I to organize, stand as allies, and demand change.

Policing-For-Profit

Police Officer Writes Ticket — Source: the conversation.com

There are three main components of the United States criminal justice system: law enforcement, courts, and corrections. The ways in which the justice system disadvantages poor people is evident in both the courts component, with our cash bail system, and the corrections component, with private prisons and free inmate labor. However, the law enforcement component plays a part in the economics of the justice system. The Institute for Justice in Arlington, Virginia describes policing for profit as the ways in which “state laws are written to encourage police agents to pursue profit instead of seeking the neutral administration of justice.” Police officers are allowed to commit asset forfeiture abuse, seizing (and ultimately keeping or selling) and property they allege is involved in a crime. Officers are also incentivized to increase fine revenue through traffic stops and other traffic ticket opportunities. The relationship between law enforcement, the courts, and municipalities is a codependent one. Often times, cities and towns rely on fines and fees to address shortfalls in their budgets. And much like many other processes in the criminal justice system, this one disproportionately affects people of color and punishes low-income people.

Small Towns and Excessive Fines

A report shows that small cities and towns across the country use fines to finance their governments. As economic development in small towns and rural communities continues to decline, fines are accounting for a considerable percentage of revenue. Common boosts in revenue come from traffic cameras, speeding traps, and parking tickets. Fines and Fees Justice Center co-director, Lisa Foster says this use of the judicial system as a means of income stems from “the inextricable ties between the police, the town and the court.”

An analysis by Governing, the largest to date, shows that fines account for more than 10 percent, and in some jurisdictions 20 percent, of funds in small governments across the U.S. Although, these cases are found throughout the country, they are concentrated in poorer areas. Regions of the country like the South have impoverished rural areas and a large number of independent municipal local courts. So, states like Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas have a sparse tax base in certain areas, but fines account for a high percentage of their revenues. Whereas revenue from fines in wealthier Northeastern states don’t exceed 10 percent.

Police officer traffic stop — Source: Flickr

Both fines and fees have increased over the years. The rise in fees is concerning though. Some states limit the amount that local governments can profit off of traffic tickets. States like North Carolina use money from fines to support public schools. Fees, imposed to offset operational expenses, on the other hand are less restricted. Fees for monthly parole meetings and drug tests are established locally and the money obtained if often used for aspects of the government other than the judicial system. Fees in Georgia are used to for a medical trust fund and an additional retirement fund for police officers.

Nonetheless, income from fines and fees is allocated in city budgets. Although Georgetown, LA has fewer than 500 residents, this 2019 financial statement showed fines made up nearly 92 percent of the village’s revenue. Ultimately, the dependence on fines and fees has become so routine, that as the president of the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, Robert Scott says, “they [local agencies] don’t want to let it go.” There is no doubt that the dependency will continue. As the worsening global pandemic has caused a budget crisis, municipalities will look to fill budget gaps with fines and fees.

Nathaniel Woods and Alabama’s Broken Justice System

As the world is reeling from the coronavirus outbreak and the constant inundation of new cases and increasing death rates, I wanted to call your attention to an important event that has largely been overlooked in the midst of the chaos. On March 5^th, 2020, a man by the name of Nathaniel Woods was executed by the state of Alabama via lethal injection at the William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore, Alabama. The 43 year old Woods was convicted because of his role in the fatal deaths of three Birmingham, Alabama police officers in 2004. Two entities could have stepped in to stop the execution: The Supreme Court and the governor of Alabama, Kay Ivey. The Supreme Court did delay the execution for three hours, but Kay Ivey refused to step in stating that she believed justice must be served in the name of the law. The execution of Nathaniel Woods was unjust and unfair in many ways and highlights the severe problems within the Alabama Justice system.

In the case of Nathaniel Woods, it is important to note that he was convicted of being an accomplice to the deaths of the three police officers. The man who confessed to the actual act of shooting and killing the police officers is Kerry Spencer. In fact, Spencer confessed to acting alone in the crime that landed both him and Woods on the Alabama death row. He testified this in his own trial and claimed to be acting in self-defense, highlighting that the shooting was not planned. During his confession, Spencer very clearly stated that Woods ran away from the scene and could not be considered an accomplice to the act. According to his former appellate attorney, Spencer may never be executed as Woods was. When Spencer was convicted in 2005, the jury that found him guilty recommended that he receive life in prison without parole, instead of the death penalty. A 2017 Alabama law that removed the power of the judge to override non-unanimous jury verdicts in the cases of the death penalty effectively protects Spencer. So why, when Spencer confessed to the deaths of the police officers, is Woods dead? A primary factor is that Wood’s jury never heard Spencer’s claim of self-defense. An even larger factor is that the Alabama death penalty laws are inherently flawed and unjust.

Alabama Governor Kay Ivey. Source: 187th Fighter Wing. Creative Commons.

The jury that convicted Woods reached a non-unanimous verdict of 10-2 recommending the death penalty. Alabama is one of two states in the United States that allows a non-unanimous verdict to result in the execution of a defendant. The death penalty laws within Alabama have been seriously criticized by civil right leaders and have been called unjust under the accusation that the criminal courts are unfairly biased against minorities. Despite Woods’ family and a few high profile figures including Martin Luther King III, the son of the late Martin Luther King Jr., and Kim Kardashian West contending that much of the evidence supported Woods’ innocence, neither Governor Kay Ivey nor the Supreme Court intervened on Woods’ behalf.

Woods’ case is unfortunately one in a long line of executions that highlights the many problems with the Alabama justice system. Before its abolishment in 2017, Alabama allowed judges to over-ride a unanimous jury in order to impose death sentences. While this is a step in the right direction, Alabama was the last state in the United States to make this change. Alabama has had 67 executions and 9 exonerations since 1976. This means that for every seven people executed, one has been exonerated. As of today, at least 107 of the death sentences in Alabama have been reversed and resulted in a reduced sentence or an exoneration. These statistics leave Alabama with a very high error rate. After 2010, Alabama has executed a series of defendants with questionable convictions: two defendants suffering from mental illness and three defendants whose judges over-rode the jury’s decision for life imprisonment in favor of the death penalty. Alabama also has no statewide public defender system and does not pay appointed attorneys enough, resulting in a lacking quality of counsel. Until 1999, capital trial attorneys were paid $40 per hour for work in-court and $20 an hour for work out-court. The out-court work compensation could only reach $1000. During this time, almost half of the current death row convictions occurred. Now, capital trial attorneys are paid $70 per hour with a cap of $2500, a rate that is noticeably below market rates. The lack of funding has resulted in a reduced quality of work and inadequate representation for defendants who are fighting for their lives.

In January of 2020, the governor of Alabama appointed a panel to issue recommendations to address the problems of the Alabama prison system reported in a 2019 report released by the Justice Department. The report identifies the major problems with Alabama’s prison system. These problems included prisoners being assaulted and tortured on a routine basis with the knowledge and participation of the prison guards. Such abuse clearly violates the Eighth Amendment that protects against cruel and unusual punishment. It also included problems within prisons such as overcrowding, understaffing, a large presence of weapons and drugs, corruption, and raw sewage. Many corrections officers have been arrested and charged with crimes such as bribery and drug trafficking. In February of 2019 a judge found that the conditions for mentally ill patients within the prison system were unconstitutional. Since the beginning of 2019, at least 29 of 28,000 people died of preventable deaths in the Alabama prison system, a big contrast to the national average of prison homicides of seven per 100,000 prisoners. The recommendations provided by the state appointed panel have been called “common-sense” and do not address the more serious problems. If these problems are not fixed, the prison system will be operated by an outside party.

There are a significant number of problems within Alabama’s death penalty policy and within the Alabama prison system in general. There is no need to prove that a defendant was at least 18 years of age at the time of the crime within the state. There is insufficient protection for mentally ill defendants. And the Supreme Court is the only thing within Alabama that is preventing the executions of defendants with an IQ of below 70. Changing and reforming the broken Alabama death penalty system will be a long process, during which there is a possibility for many more innocent people to die. The decision to end the judicial override system in 2017 was a step in the right direction but not nearly far enough. Since then, more changes have been made to protect the already broken system, such as the 2018 decision to use nitrogen hypoxia, a method of suffocation, as a backup execution method. There is hope that the execution of Nathaniel Woods would push Alabama to make serious changes. However, this hope has not yet come to fruition. Some changes that would reform the system instead of protecting it would include: requiring a unanimous agreement from the jury to sentence people to death, requiring prosecutors to prove that the defendant was at least 18 years of age at the time of the crime, and acknowledge and end the racial bias that contributes to the death penalty practices. Ultimately, even after these changes are made, the most positive change to the Alabama death penalty system is to eradicate it once and for all.