Family members of each deceased inmate whose custodial death has been described in this series are adamant that these jails need to be held accountable. It is believed by those involved in this pursuit of answers that these four deaths, in particular, were preventable custodial deaths.
A comparison with actions taken by another state has been made to show discipline that can be applied when jail standards are not upheld and could result in a custodial death. Specifically, in June 2020, an inmate died at one of the county jails. The follow-up inspection revealed that guards at the jail failed to conduct the required checks on the well-being of inmates. In response to that failure in the oversight of inmates, the jail was ordered to be temporarily closed.
The point being made is that the results of jail inspections should be taken very seriously. Non-compliant jails should take immediate action to correct problems they are cited for, particularly when a jail’s practices put inmates at risk for a custodial death. It should not be ignored when a jail fails to follow through with mandates reflected in jail violation reports.
See Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and Part 5 of this six-part series.
Despite being incarcerated, inmates have constitutional rights that must be upheld. Jail facilities have a duty to ensure that no one is denied their constitutional rights. A jail can be sued if a custodial death is a result of a jail custom, practice, or policy that is found to be unconstitutional.
This website provides posts for informational purposes. There is no intent to suggest or infer actions of wrong behavior on the part of any person, company, or institution.
–Guest Contributor
