Top Banner
23. DISRUPTIVE GROUPS
121
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Disruptive Groups

23. DISRUPTIVE GROUPS

Page 2: Disruptive Groups

Unit Goal 23.1: The student will be able to summarize

some issues involving disruptive groups.

Page 3: Disruptive Groups

23.1.1 The student will be able to define disruptive groups

Page 4: Disruptive Groups

A. Disruptive group –

• any group of inmates that pose a threat to the physical safety of other inmates or staff by virtue of the group’s nature and activities

Page 5: Disruptive Groups

1. Unorganized disruptive group:

• e.g., two cellmates and a third inmate in the cellblock get together to create a disturbance to steal another inmate’s property

Page 6: Disruptive Groups

2. Prison gangs:

• e.g., the Aryan Brotherhood (one of the more organized disruptive groups that originated in the Texas prison and jail system). As you will see later, these groups are very structured in leadership, and have been brought together for reasons of security within the prison and to help prison members and their families in issues the inmates’ face.

Page 7: Disruptive Groups

3. Street gangs:

• a gang composed of three or more persons having a common identifying sign or symbol or an identifiable leadership who continuously or regularly associate in the commission of criminal activities. In general, street gangs are not as well organized as the prison gangs, and may provide a greater threat to the jail system than to the state correctional system.

Page 8: Disruptive Groups

23.1.2 The student will be able to define criminal street

gang.

Page 9: Disruptive Groups

A. Criminal street gang –

• three or more persons having a common identifying sign or symbol or an identifiable leadership who continuously or regularly associate in the commission of criminal activities (PC 71.01)

Page 10: Disruptive Groups

B. PC 71.02 –

Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity:

Page 11: Disruptive Groups

A person commits an offense if, with the intent to establish, maintain, or participate in a

combination or in the profits of a combination or as a member of a criminal street gang, he commits

or conspires to commit one or more of the following:

Page 12: Disruptive Groups

• murder,

• capital murder,

• arson,

• aggravated robbery,

• robbery,

• burglary,

• theft,

• aggravated kidnapping,

Page 13: Disruptive Groups

• kidnapping,• aggravated assault, • aggravated sexual assault,• sexual assault, • forgery, deadly conduct,• assault punishable as a Class A

misdemeanor, • burglary of a motor vehicle, or• unauthorized use of a motor vehicle;

Page 14: Disruptive Groups

2) any gambling offense punishable as a Class A

misdemeanor;

Page 15: Disruptive Groups

3) promotion of prostitution, aggravated promotion of

prostitution, or compelling prostitution;

Page 16: Disruptive Groups

4) unlawful manufacture, transportation, repair, or sale of firearms or prohibited weapons;

Page 17: Disruptive Groups

5) unlawful manufacture, delivery, dispensation, or distribution of a

controlled substance or dangerous drug, or unlawful possession of a controlled

substance or dangerous drug through forgery, fraud,

misrepresentation, or deception;

Page 18: Disruptive Groups

6) any unlawful wholesale promotion or possession of any obscene material or obscene

device with the intent to wholesale promote the same;

Page 19: Disruptive Groups

7) any offense under Subchapter B, Chapter 43, depicting or

involving conduct by or directed toward a child younger than 18

years of age;

Page 20: Disruptive Groups

8) any felony offense under PC 32;

Page 21: Disruptive Groups

9) any offense under PC 36;

Page 22: Disruptive Groups

10) any offense under PC 34, or

Page 23: Disruptive Groups

11) any offense under PC 37.11(a).

Page 24: Disruptive Groups

23.1.3 The student will be able to identify similarities and differences between disruptive

groups (prison gangs) and street gangs.

Page 25: Disruptive Groups

A. Similarities:

• 1. Both are engaged in illegal activities, with emphasis on narcotics. Both demonstrate a high preference for violence (e.g., drive-by shootings by "Crips" and "Bloods," Texas Syndicate homicides).

• 2. Both are becoming more mobile and sophisticated

Page 26: Disruptive Groups

B. Differences:

• 1. Street gangs tend to keep a high profile (i.e., wear colors, have graffiti).

• 2. Street gangs are more loosely knit as a whole, but have been noted to develop written rules or constitutions and more formalized structures. Prison gangs are highly structured with by-laws and/or a constitution that is strictly enforced.

Page 27: Disruptive Groups

B. Differences:

• 3. The average age is approximately eighteen, but active gang members are being seen into their early thirties. Gang members generally have not served time in prison.

• 4. Prison gangs are structured with a steering commission or committee, are paramilitary, and have one person in high authority.

Page 28: Disruptive Groups

23.1.4 The student will be able to identify gang

affiliations.

Page 29: Disruptive Groups

A. Body tattoos

Page 30: Disruptive Groups

B. Gang-related apparel

Page 31: Disruptive Groups

C. Inmate groupings at meals, recreation, and

housing

Page 32: Disruptive Groups

D. Information from informants

Page 33: Disruptive Groups

E. Information from other law enforcement agencies

Page 34: Disruptive Groups

F. Deterioration of inmate morale

Page 35: Disruptive Groups

23.1.5 The student will be able to list some early warning

signs of prison/jail gang activity.

Page 36: Disruptive Groups

A. Some early warning signs of prison/jail gang activity are:

Page 37: Disruptive Groups

1. Inmate on inmate assaults

Page 38: Disruptive Groups

2. Inmates assaulting staff members

Page 39: Disruptive Groups

3. Request for housing assignment changes

Page 40: Disruptive Groups

4. Self-mutilations

Page 41: Disruptive Groups

5. Body tattoos

Page 42: Disruptive Groups

6. Gang-related apparel

Page 43: Disruptive Groups

7. Inmate graffiti

Page 44: Disruptive Groups

8. Inmate groupings at feeding, at recreation, and in

housing

Page 45: Disruptive Groups

9. Information from informants

Page 46: Disruptive Groups

10. Information from law enforcement agencies

Page 47: Disruptive Groups

B. Prison/jail gangs were first formed for protection. Weaker

inmates were being preyed upon by stronger inmates or other groups because of the

prison’s/jail’s inability to protect the inmate population.

Page 48: Disruptive Groups

23.1.6 The student will be able to identify three court

cases that greatly influenced gang growth in TDCJ-ID.

Page 49: Disruptive Groups

A. Lamar v. Coffifield, C.A. No. 72-H-1393 (1977) - increased racial tension

among inmates and forced inmates to group together

along racial lines

Page 50: Disruptive Groups

B. Guajuardo v. Estelle, 580 F. 2d. 748 (5th Cir. 1978) -

allowed inmates to correspond with one another

Page 51: Disruptive Groups

1. Due to increased communication among

inmates from various units, TDCJ-ID was no longer able to “hide” cooperative inmates

Page 52: Disruptive Groups

2. It also gave gangs an established line of communication,

which significantly affected recruiting, and violence. Gangs were also able to increase their power over other

inmates with threats through correspondence.

Page 53: Disruptive Groups

C. Ruiz v. Estelle, 503 F. Supp. 1265,

1276, 1391 (S.D. Tex. 1980) - • eliminated the building tender system,

creating a vacuum of power. Gangs were able to step in and take control over other inmates.

Page 54: Disruptive Groups

23.1.7 The student will be able to explain the history of gangs in TDCJ-ID and jails.

Page 55: Disruptive Groups

A. Gangs emerged within TDCJ-ID in the mid 1970s.

The first two recognized gangs were the Aryan

Brotherhood and the Texas Syndicate.

Page 56: Disruptive Groups

1. Texas Syndicate - Formed in 1974 by Texans

incarcerated in the California prison system. Some

members filtered back to Texas, were arrested and

confined to TDCJ-ID.

Page 57: Disruptive Groups

a. Predominantly Mexican male; some white

Page 58: Disruptive Groups

b. Para-military in structure

Page 59: Disruptive Groups

c. Primary goal of controlling narcotics trade, extort other inmates, control prostitution,

undermine prison/jail authorities, conduct contract

killings as needed.

Page 60: Disruptive Groups

2. Aryan Brotherhood - Formed in Texas in the early

1980s. A group of several white inmates in TDCJ-ID decided to start their own

chapter.

Page 61: Disruptive Groups

a. Exclusively for white inmates

Page 62: Disruptive Groups

b. White supremacist philosophy

Page 63: Disruptive Groups

c. Has an executive committee composed of five steering committee members

Page 64: Disruptive Groups

d. Primary goal of controlling narcotics trade among white inmates, extortion and the

killing of black inmates.

Page 65: Disruptive Groups

3. Mexikanemi - Texas Mexican Mafia

Page 66: Disruptive Groups

Note: c.f. Mexicanemi = California Mexican Mafia

Page 67: Disruptive Groups

a. Exclusively for Hispanic inmates

Page 68: Disruptive Groups

b. Members are primarily from the Houston, San

Antonio, and El Paso areas

Page 69: Disruptive Groups

c. Para-military in structure

Page 70: Disruptive Groups

d. Goals include: a share of the narcotics trade in TDCJ-ID, selling of weapons and

other illegal activities as mandated in the gang

constitution

Page 71: Disruptive Groups

4. Barrio Azteca – the largest, most active gang in

the El Paso area

Page 72: Disruptive Groups

a. Started in the Coffield Unit of TDCJ by five gang

members of the “X14” group from El Paso

Page 73: Disruptive Groups

b. Paramilitary in structure

Page 74: Disruptive Groups

c. Have a signed armistice with Mexikanemi (1997)

Page 75: Disruptive Groups

d. Activities include drugs, prostitution, extortion, staff

intimidation and inmate assaults (including murder)

Page 76: Disruptive Groups

5. Border Brothers

Page 77: Disruptive Groups

a. Primarily made up of Mexican nationals

Page 78: Disruptive Groups

b. Paramilitary structure

Page 79: Disruptive Groups

c. Chief rival: Barrio Azteca

Page 80: Disruptive Groups

d. Activities: Concentrate primarily on drug trafficking and manufacture of prison-

made weapons. Also showing a propensity for committing or threatening to commit acts of

violence

Page 81: Disruptive Groups

23.1.8 The student will be able to identify various street,

prison and/or jail gangs.

Page 82: Disruptive Groups

A. Crips - Formed in California on high school

campuses when the “Crips” began to prey upon

nonmembers by extorting money and committing

robberies.

Page 83: Disruptive Groups

1. Identify with the color blue

Page 84: Disruptive Groups

2. Refer to one another as “cuz”

Page 85: Disruptive Groups

3. Uses the letter “C” to replace the letter “B” in

conversations and writings.

Page 86: Disruptive Groups

4. Gang members will write blue graffiti on walls in the neighborhood to mark their

particular territorial boundaries.

Page 87: Disruptive Groups

B. Bloods - This gang is also referred to as the “Pirus”

because they originated on Piru Street. The "Bloods" developed in an effort to

protect themselves from the “Crips” and have become the principal rival of the “Crips.”

Page 88: Disruptive Groups

1. Identify with the color red

Page 89: Disruptive Groups

2. Use the term “Blood” to identify one another

Page 90: Disruptive Groups

3. Graffiti writings are done in red

Page 91: Disruptive Groups

4. Although the “Bloods” are outnumbered by the “Crips,” what they lack in numbers

they make up for in violence. They are regarded as the more ruthless of the two

gangs.

Page 92: Disruptive Groups

C. Skinheads

Page 93: Disruptive Groups

1. Skinhead groups have formed with varying levels of cohesion in every region of

the country

Page 94: Disruptive Groups

2. Gangs are now operating in 21 states, including Texas

Page 95: Disruptive Groups

3. Consider themselves as white warriors

Page 96: Disruptive Groups

D. Asian Groups - Cambodians, Vietnamese,

Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese are the most secretive of the gangs

Page 97: Disruptive Groups

1. Not concerned about territorial boundaries

Page 98: Disruptive Groups

2. Interested only in money and will participate in drugs, extortion, and prostitution to

earn it

Page 99: Disruptive Groups

E. Jamaican Gangs - Members have a distinct

island accent, hair may be braided in “dreadlock” fashion

Page 100: Disruptive Groups

1. Clothing is usually red, yellow, and green

Page 101: Disruptive Groups

2. Very violent where gang activity is involved

Page 102: Disruptive Groups

3. Strong preference for large caliber semiautomatic

weapons

Page 103: Disruptive Groups

4. Subscribe to rituals and sacrificial ceremonies

Page 104: Disruptive Groups

F. Other prison/jail gangs identified: (Optional)

Page 105: Disruptive Groups

1. La Hermanidad De Pistoleros Latinos

Page 106: Disruptive Groups

2. Norteños

Page 107: Disruptive Groups

3. Sureños

Page 108: Disruptive Groups

4. Latin Kings (both street and jails)

Page 109: Disruptive Groups

5. Texas Mafia

Page 110: Disruptive Groups

6. Dirty White Boys

Page 111: Disruptive Groups

7. La Nuestra Familia

Page 112: Disruptive Groups

8. Raza Unida

Page 113: Disruptive Groups

9. Aryan Circle

Page 114: Disruptive Groups

10. Peckerwoods

Page 115: Disruptive Groups

11. Brothers of the Struggle

Page 116: Disruptive Groups

Additional Resources• American Justice. http://americanjustice.com/gangs.• Austin Police Department. Gang Suppression Unit.

www.ci.austin.tx.us.• Jackson, R. K. & McBride, W. D. (2000). Understanding Street

Gangs. Nevada: Copperhouse Publishing Company.• Leet, D. A., et. al. (2d. Ed). (2000). Gangs, Graffiti, and Violence:

A Realistic Guide to the Scope and Nature of Gangs in America. Nevada: Copperhouse Publishing Company.

• National Major Gang Task Force, www.nmgtf.org.• Prison Gang Update, www.convictsandcops.com/gang.htm.• Publications from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service.

(November/December 2002). No. 67. Organization website: www.ncjrs.com.

• 1. “Correctional Strategies in Gang Management,” available at: http://www.nicic.org/services//video/fy2000/00gangs.htm

Page 117: Disruptive Groups

Additional Resources• 2. “The Influence of Prison Gang Affiliation on Violence and other

Prison Misconduct,” available at: http://www.bop.gov/orepg/oreprcrim

• 3. “Institutional Treatment of Gang Members” (NCJ 187687)• 4. “A National Assessment of Gangs and Security Threat Groups

(STGs) in Adult Correctional Institutions: Results of 1999 Adult Corrections Survey,” available at: http://ngcrc.com/ngcrc/page7.htm

• 5. “Prison Interventions: Evolving Strategies to Control Security Threat Groups” (NCJ 187685)

• 6. “The Facts About Gang Life in American Today: A National Study of Over 4,000 Gang Members,” available at: http://www.ngcrc.com/ngcrc/page9.htm

• 7. “From the Street to the Prison: Understanding & Responding to Gangs” (NCJ 190755)

Page 118: Disruptive Groups

Additional Resources• 8. “Gangs in Middle America: Are They a Threat?” (NCJ 192470)• 9. “The Growth of Youth Gang Problems in the United States: 1970-

1998” (NCJ 1811868)• Roberson, C. (2000). Exploring Juvenile Justice. Nevada:

Copperhouse Publishing Company. • San Antonio Police Department. Gang Task Force.

www.ci.sat.tx.us/youthgangs.htm.• Starbuck, D., et. al. (December 2001). Hybrid and Other Modern

Gangs. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. U.S. Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs.

• Texas Department of Criminal Justice: www.tdcj.state.tx.us• Texas Department of Public Safety: www.txdps.tx.us/txgangs.• Texas Gang Investigation Association: www.tgia.net

Page 119: Disruptive Groups

Additional Resources

• Texas Office of the Attorney General - Gang Division: www.oag.state.tx.us.

• Texas Prison Gang Page: http://davadnai.users.omniglobal.net.

Page 120: Disruptive Groups

Related Case Law

Page 121: Disruptive Groups

Aguilar v. TDCJ-Institutional Division, (5th Cir. 1998)

• Inmates and several other prisoners filed a § 1983 action complaining that prison officials denied them access to the courts, placed them in punitive segregation, confiscated their personal and legal property, and falsely accused them of being prison gang leaders as an excuse for violating their civil rights. The prisoners maintained that these actions resulted from the prison officials' discrimination against Hispanics. The district court dismissed with prejudice all of inmates’ complaints, reasoning that the claims were barred by the Eleventh Amendment.