The main form of punishment for breaking the law in the United States is incarceration. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) reports that at the end of 2010, there were 2,266,800 adults incarcerated in the U.S. federal and state prisons, and county jails (Prisoner Statistics, 2012). When one adds the reported 493,100 corrections staff working inside the prison or jail, the total number of people interacting on a daily basis in this closed society creates conditions where corruption at some level is likely to occur (Bureau, 2012). Research suggests corruption of correction officers, also known as detention officers, or guards is a serious issue that should be continually addressed by facility management because it occurs for many reasons and takes on many forms that can pervert the justice system. This paper will explain some main forms of corruption, give outrageous examples of documented corruption, and spell out why, given the ethics expected of the profession, corruption must be continually addressed and prevented.
The first step for criminals is finding the officer with a mindset that can be corrupted. Low to median pay scales for these officers and an increase in offenders affiliated with the gang element of society has increased the potential for corruption related manipulation of prison staff (Diaz, 2009). “Corrections and law enforcement work by its very nature involves the...potential for gradual deterioration of social-moral inhibitions and perceived sense of permissibility for deviant conduct” (Barnhart, 2010a). There are those individuals who are corrupt that are weak individuals who passed through the screening process for employment undetected, and who will give in to the temptations that will always exist in correctional work. There are also those who are simply deviant individuals who have found a work environment that offers them many opportunities to gain from corruption (Barnhart, 2010b).
The manner in which correction work must be carried out exposes corrections officers to the criminal element on a daily basis. If the officer is already predisposed to corruption, there is a high probability that the officer will forget what he or she learned in training, become overzealous in his or her work, or become misguided in how he or she approaches inmate care, custody, and control (Barnhart, 2010b).
Some of the types of corruption that can exist in a correctional facility include; gratuities, perjury, brutality, profanity, sex on duty or duty related, sleeping on duty, drinking or abusing drugs on or off duty, and misuse of confidential information (Barnhart, 2010a). Each of these create more problems than are typically dealt with by an officer or shift, and even one officer involved in one form of corruption can cause major problems for the administration of a correctional facility. Gratuities are one form of corruption in a facility. When an officer accepts anything for free as a fringe benefit of his or her job, it violates the Code of Ethics because the officer receives financial reward or gain simply because of the officer's job. Gratuities can lead to further financial gain if the officer is lead to accept kickbacks and bribes from inmates, and may lead to the officer developing a belief that facility equipment and supplies are for personal use. An even greater problem for the facility is when an officer decides to start “shopping” thru inmate property, keeping items from room searches, or stealing from facility warehouses. Theft from the inmates or the facility often evolves from gratuities (Barnhart, 2010a). Brutality is another form of corruption that is seen in the correctional setting. Excessive force, defined as “excessive violence, to an extreme degree, which does not support a legitimate police function,” can be used by corrections officers to keep the inmates “down” and some officers believe this helps to control the inmate population. However, excessive force can cause legal problems for the facility, can lead to even further violations of the inmates rights, and can cause the inmates to wait for an opportunity to retaliate against an officer who uses brutal tactics (Barnhart, 2010a).
Many times once excessive force is used, officers will resort to perjury in an attempt to cover up their corrupt, and illegal, actions. When involved in perjury an officer will leave out key information, that exposes violations by the officer, regarding an incident (Barnhart, 2010a). Although not permissible in a corrections setting, some officers will use profane language when communicating with inmates. Even when this language is used to gain attention of uncooperative inmates or to establish a dominant-submissive relationship, obscene language actually lessens the authority an officer has due to the language being an indicator of loss of control or command. Certain racially-toned language can lead to charges of prejudice, which then can lead to the officer and the facility facing discrimination proceedings (Barnhart, 2010a).
Sex on duty or duty-related sex can be caused by promiscuous inmates manipulating guards or deviant guards trading favors for privileges. This situation usually starts with conversation and a divide and conquer tactic that causes the guard to identify more with the inmate than with the prison staff. Relationships with inmates must be kept on a professional level and information kept on a “need to know” basis in order to maintain the division that must be in place in a facility between guards and prisoners. The most concerning part of this type of corruption is that it usually involves more than one guard due to what is required to keep this type of activity secret (Barnhart, 2010a). The “leaning bedroom” on a night shift is where correctional officers “coop.” “Cooping” occurs when an officer sleeps on shift in a back room or a unit desk chair away from camera view. This type of activity can happen at any time, but is more prevalent on night shifts. The officer who will coop is also considered a “goldbricker,” which is one who will only perform duties that are mandatory and meet the minimal guidelines for completing their duties. These officers tend toward short-cutting and will usually have other questionable activities occurring on their shift, as well as usually having a partner who will cover for the officer during the sleeping officer's absence. Sleeping on duty by officers creates a dangerous situation in a facility for everyone involved. Inmates are not properly supervised and other officers do not have immediate assistance when needed (Barnhart, 2010a).
Stress, burn-out, and addiction can lead to drug and alcohol abuse by corrections officers. Whether on or off the job, drug and alcohol use can affect an officer's ability to perform their duties in an acceptable manner. Drug and alcohol abuse can also lead to a greater instance of deadly force or traffic accidents involving officers, and will greatly increase the probability of cover-ups and blackmail in the facility because of the numerous individuals that must be involved in such a situation (Barnhart, 2010a). During the course of completing their duties, correctional officers are exposed to confidential information in the form of medical details, past offenses by an inmate and investigative information regarding pending cases. Misuse of this information is another form of corruption that will cause problems in and for a facility. Not only will disclosure risk the ability of the courts to prosecute an individual if the information is from an investigation, it can also place certain individuals at risk of harm or death if the individuals are cooperating with law enforcement in an investigation. Medical information is strictly held in the highest confidence, but a corrupt officer can use the information to extort money or favors from inmates (Barnhart, 2010a). Correction officers must maintain a separation between the “good guys” and the “bad guys.” This separation is necessary so that improprieties do not occur. Officers can be empathetic to the prisoners, but cannot be sympathetic to them. Being empathetic means that the officer understands the prisoner's situation. However, feelings of sympathy mean the officer “feels sorry for [the prisoner] and wants to do something for them to calm their fears or concerns. [Correction officers] cannot get caught up in sympathy for inmates.” Sympathy leads to corruption and shows the inmates that the officer is weak and an easy target for favors. By showing sympathy the officer gives control of his or her emotions to the inmate, who will use this control to manipulate the officer (Barnhart, 2010b).
The majority of individuals employed as correction officers in jails and prisons across the country are personally dedicated to law enforcement and are upstanding, honest, and have no affiliation with gangs, inmate family members, or the inmates themselves outside of the jail or prison setting. However, in addition to the officers dedicated to law enforcement, there is a small percentage of individuals who are employed as correction officers whose only dedication is to their gang family. Gangs are working diligently across the United States and abroad to introduce their members as applicants for correction officer employment. When these individuals are employed, and many are, they are a direct line into and out of the facility where they work. These individuals carry money, contraband and information into the facilities for the inmates and facilitate illegal activity that occurs within the facility (Diaz, 2009).
The working conditions for correction officers are not ideal. Stress and danger are part of everyday when working as a correction officer. Although some facilities are modern, temperature controlled, and well-lighted, some are old, hot, overcrowded, and noisy. Seemingly a more dangerous workplace, a prison is more stable than a jail because the guards know the custodial requirements of those they house (Diaz, 2009).
When officers are not honest and forthright, problems occur within the facility. When officers are corrupt, the subculture that operates among the “family” of officers may act to protect those who are corrupt. This subculture, called the “Thin Blue Line”, produces and environment where some officers may choose to ignore corruption over whistle blowing on a co-worker due to the loyalty they feel for their “brother” or “sister” officer (Johnson, 2010).
Changes in the legal system mean that there is a higher incarceration rate due to a reduction in parole and longer sentences for crimes. Since the prison system seems to focus more on ‘warehousing’ the criminals, rather than any kind of ‘correction’ to the criminal, the criminal activities continue inside the prison. Prison is seen by some criminals as a ‘prestigious life passage’ and whether other prisoners or correctional officers, drawing more individuals into their fold only increases opportunities for corruption available to the prisoner while serving time in prison (Diaz, 2009).
In 2008 there were two hundred thirty eight open cases pending against prison employees for alleged misconduct that included introduction of contraband, bribery, and sexual abuse. The criminal element continues to run its business inside prison using the gang mentality that makes criminals millions of dollars outside the prison settings. These criminals entice guards with money, that will supplement the middling income the guards are paid, to assist or turn a blind eye to the illegal activities occurring in the prison (Diaz, 2009). In Chelan County, Washington, a thirty year old corrections officer was arrested after the Regional Justice Center requested an investigation into activities occurring at the facility. The officer was jailed for bribery, forgery, complicity to escape, introduction of contraband and official misconduct. This employee had worked for the facility for a long period of time and was working the night shift at a jail annex. His activities occurred over several months and included; accepting money in exchange for favors granted to inmates in his custody, allowing prohibited food and tobacco to come into the annex while he was working, and his dereliction of duty in deciding to release an inmate early without any authority from superiors (Correction Officer Arrested, 2010).
In another example of corruption, which involves gang members, The Baltimore Sun reported in 2009, “from their prison cells and with the help of corrections staff, authorities say, members of a violent gang were feasting on salmon and shrimp, sipping Grey Goose vodka, and puffing fine cigars, all while directing drug deals, extorting protection money from other inmates and arranging attacks on witnesses and rival gang members” (Diaz, 2009). In a “shocking” 2006 incident, a shootout occurred at a federal women’s prison in Florida. Over a long period of time six federal corrections officers exploited female offenders by trading privileges and contraband for sex and cash and threatening the female offenders in order to cover up the guards’ corruption. In exchange for sex and cash, correctional officers provided prohibited items such as alcohol, cosmetics, clothing, jewelry, and cigars to the female inmates. The shootout occurred due to public exposure of the long-running activities of the corrupt guards. In the shootout, a federal agent and the indicted federal prison guard were killed (Diaz, 2009).
In another instance of corruption, a correction officer used a hidden compartment in shoes to smuggle heroin, ecstasy, tobacco, cell phones and other prohibited items into a prison. The gang member inmates then sold the smuggled drugs to other inmates. The smuggled cell phones were used to talk with associates outside the prison in order to approve targets for robberies and to make arrangements for attacks on witnesses cooperating with law enforcement. This example illustrates how just one corrupt officer can have far-reaching, and sometimes dire effects on individuals both inside and outside the prison. (Diaz, 2009). Outlandish and isolated examples of corruption? One would hope so, however this situation easily occurs once the inmates in a facility know how to manipulate the guards. Once manipulated to corruption on even the smallest scale, the officer is hooked into continuing the activity in order that their malfeasance is not discovered. Most corrupt officers will find ways to circumvent security measures and work to maintain an unblemished reputation. Often the contraband is already inside the facility, or action plans are well underway, by the time an officer comes under suspicion (Evert, 2010). Once discovered, a corrupt guard will never overcome his or her tarnished reputation of dishonesty (Barnhart, 2010a).
Any level of corruption undermines the authority presence of the correctional staff in a jail or prison. In a statement issued by the FBI in January 2012, U.S. Attorney Stephen R. Wigginton stated, “Corruption by law enforcement agents in any facet of their work will not be tolerated. Those few corrupt officers undermine public confidence in the overwhelming majority of law enforcement officers who are honest and trustworthy public servants” (U.S. Attorney, 2012).
Corruption upsets the balance of power and greatly hampers the effectiveness of the administration of the facility. Within the prison setting the prisoners must know that staff and officers will not break or bend the rules. Knowing this creates a stable setting for the inmates and encourages them to abide by the rules and not challenge the authority charged with their care. The inmates must know that the individuals overseeing their custody, care and control are honest and forthright individuals (Johnson, 2010).
“There are few professions that demand so much moral fiber as policing. Corrections officers stand in 'harm's way' not so much against enemies with bullets, but against enemies skilled in every form of trickery, deceit, feigned ignorance, and deception” (Barnhart, 2010a). The International Association of Chiefs of Police publish a Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, edited for correctional employees that “stands as a spirited reminder to the higher order of this calling: As a Correctional Officer, my fundamental duty is to serve mankind; to safeguard lives and property; to protect the innocent against deception, the weak against oppression or intimidation, and the peaceful against violence or disorder, and to respect Constitutional rights of all men to liberty, equality and justice.

I will keep my private life unsullied as an example to all; maintain courageous calm in the face of danger, scorn or ridicule; develop self-restraint; and be constantly mindful of the welfare of others. Honest in thought and deed in both my personal and official life, I will be exemplary in obeying the laws of the land and the regulations of my department.

Whatever I see or hear of a confidential nature or that is confided to me in my official capacity will be kept ever secret unless revelation is necessary in the performance of my duty. I will never act officiously or permit personal feelings, prejudices, animosities or friendships to influence my decisions. With no compromise for crime and with relentless prosecution of criminals, I will enforce the institutional rules as well as the law courteously and appropriately without fear or favor, malice or ill will, never employing unnecessary force or violence and never accepting gratuities. I recognize the badge of my office as a symbol of public faith, and I accept it as a public trust to be held so long as I am true to the ethics of the police service. I will constantly strive to achieve these objectives and ideals, dedicating myself before God to my chosen profession...law enforcement” (Barnhart, 2010a). Author Jessica Mitford conducted a study of prisons in 1973. A statement made in her book, Kind and Unusual Punishment remains true thirty-eight years after its publication: “The character and mentality of the keepers may be of more importance in understanding prisons than the character and mentality of the kept” (Mitford, 1973).
Research suggests corruption of correction officers is a serious issue that should be continually addressed by facility management because it occurs for many reasons and takes on many forms that can pervert the justice system. This paper explained some main forms of corruption including gratuities, brutality, perjury, profane language, sex on duty or duty-related sex, drug and alcohol abuse, and misuse of confidential information. The paper gave some outrageous examples of documented corruption, and explained why, given the ethics expected of the profession, corruption must be continually addressed and prevented. Every individual who works in the criminal justice profession fulfills his or her duties while operating under a code of ethics which sets a standard of performance above ordinary morality. The criminal justice profession requires individuals to be committed to being more than an ordinary, decent human being. A correctional officer must be able to remain above reproach in any and all situations, and must maintain his or her personal, as well as professional life so as to not be susceptible to bribery, coercion, blackmail, ridicule or any form of corruption.

References

Barnhart, Tracy. (2010a). Deviance and Corruption. [Original published January 28, 2010]. Retrieved April 5, 2012 from www.corrections.com/tracy_barnhart/?p=578
Barnhart, Tracy. (2010b). Deviance and Corruption. [Revised and republished February 15, 2010]. Retrieved April 5, 2012 from www.corrections.com/news/article/23579
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Quick Facts: Correctional Officers (2012). Retrieved May 15, 2012 from www.bls.gov/ooh/protective-service/correctional-officers.htm
Correction Officer Arrested on Corruption Related Charges. (2010). Retrieved April 14, 2012 from www.kirotv.com/news/news/correction-officer-arrested-on-corruption- related/nDSK8
Diaz, Tom. Rot in the Big House - Prison Corruption, Part One. (2009). Retrieved April 8, 2012 from tomdiaz.wordpress.com/2009/04/19/rot-in-the-big-house-prison- corruption-part-one
Evert, Barry. Dirty Deeds - How to Catch Corrupted Staff Members. (2010). Retrieved April 15, 2012 from http://www.correctionsone.com/correctional- psychology/articles/2012845-Dirty-deeds-How-to-catch-corrupted-staff-members/
Johnson, Isaac. Corruption in Corrections. (2010). Retrieved April 12, 2012 from www.justiceguy.com/?p=28
Mitford, Jessica. Kind and Unusual Punishment: The Prison Business. (1973). Alfred A. Knopf [Distributed by Random House]. 1st ed. New York.
Prisoner Statistics: Correctional Population in the United States, 2011. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). Retrieved May 18 from bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus10.pdf U.S. Attorney's Office. Federal Correctional Officer Sentenced to Prison for Accepting Bribes and Smuggling Contraband. (2012). Retrieved April 11, 2012 from www.fbi.gov/springfield/pressreleases/2012/federal-correctional-officer- sentenced-to-prison-for-acdepting-bribes-and-smuggling-contraband