Contraband in the Main Jail

Conclusions 1

• CL1
  In July 2009, the Sheriff, in response to a 2008-2009 Grand Jury Report, conceded that dealing with contraband in a jail environment is very challenging. As a result, the jail staff conducts hundreds of inmate searches daily and random cell searches as often as possible. Now, over nine years later, this challenging situation has remained the same. Indeed, one experienced custody officer the Jury interviewed candidly observed that in the last few years the contraband problem actually worsened. As long as many persons in our jail population continue to engage in addictive behaviors, efforts to introduce contraband to satisfy their dependence on drugs will continue to occur. Therefore, the task faced by law enforcement is to marshal all available resources to interrupt the flow of contraband into places where it should not be.

Observations 1

• OB1
  Contraband finds its way into the nation’s jails in many ways. Typically, it is secreted somewhere on the person of inmates or visitors where it cannot be detected, mailed to inmates, including in the glue on stamps, or introduced by outside vendors or their employees. So too, unauthorized items of contraband can be fashioned within the facilities themselves from wood, metal or other readily available materials which are benign as originally intended but can be weaponized as well. Contraband items also can be smuggled undetected into a correctional facility by custody staff members. However, as far as the interviewees were aware, within recent memory there have been no reported incidents which involved attempts to introduce contraband other than by arrestees themselves or their visitors, including attempted mail contacts. In that respect, as well, an Agreement for Services contract entered into between the County and an independent contractor at the Jail, reviewed by the Jury, expressly included a protocol requiring the training of contractor employees in matters of security and prescribing measures prohibiting unescorted entry. Nevertheless, by whatever means it enters, contraband continues to find its way into the Jail. In August 2018, a substantial variety of illegal drugs and other contraband items were found on an incarcerated inmate’s person in a housing unit, including heroin, methamphetamines and prescription medications. That contraband had an estimated value of $15,000 to $20,000. Also, in the previous month a female arrestee temporarily detained in a holding cell in Lompoc was found to have hidden heroin and methamphetamines in a plastic bag in a body cavity. Clearly, but not unexpectedly, these incidents demonstrate that there is a continuing contraband problem which obviously commands constant law enforcement vigilance. In a further effort to gauge the current extent of the problem, the Jury obtained statistical data from the Sheriff’s Department which logs, on a monthly basis, the total number of discovered instances in which controlled dangerous substances or alcohol were attempted to be brought into the Jail, or later found there. Examination of this data revealed that for the 12-month period from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018, the number of such drug related incidents totaled 214. Ninety- six of these incidents involved actual possession of controlled substances, alcohol, or drugs within the Jail itself, as opposed to intercepting persons attempting to bring them for use, barter or sale. Statistics as to how many items of contraband still manage to be introduced into the Jail completely undetected despite existing preventative efforts obviously are difficult to estimate. The Jury also examined randomized sample incident reports from the past few years which described a variety of circumstances in which contraband was discovered. Most involved finding the contraband through unannounced cell searches, perimeter searches, personal observation, odor detection, information provided by 2 2018-2019 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury other inmates, and by screening all mail received at the Jail intended for distribution to inmates. Examples of items found include postcards doused in methamphetamines, a syringe hidden in a pipe, and heroin found at a perimeter fence. 2 In addition, the Jury also reviewed recent minutes of the Medical Advisory (MAC) and Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) committees which are composed of senior custody, health, contracted medical provider, Wellpath, and other relevant departmental representatives. The CQI minutes revealed that, in January 2019, there were two confirmed instances of drug overdoses. Both inmates were transported to Cottage Hospital for treatment, where they remained for multiple days. In one instance, Naloxone branded as NARCAN, which is indicated for use in an opioid overdose situation was administered to the inmate. However, since it is an opioid antagonist, and the inmate had ingested LSD and Ecstasy, which are not opioids, it was ineffective. The second inmate had self-administered two prescription medications later identified as a potentially fatal mixture of phenobarbital and Klonopin. Fortunately, both hospitalized inmates survived. Prompted by the particular circumstances of the two overdose incidents, the “Critical Clinical Events” section of the CQI minutes pointedly observed that discussion needs to be had on better pat-down of new arrestees, especially since one inmate still had over 30 pills on his person. The Jury concluded that the need to offer this corrective suggestion indicates that more drug detection training, not to mention enhanced scrutiny by custody personnel generally, should be given priority attention, especially at the intake stage where pat-down of arrestees takes place. While one drug-sniffing dog, Krypto, presently is being utilized for drug detection by the Sheriff’s Department, competing demands county wide for his unique abilities has made it impossible to station the animal at the Jail’s arrestee intake area on any sort of a regular, no less permanent basis. Although some correctional facilities nation-wide employ full body x-ray scanners identical or similar to those used at airports to discover contraband, the Jail does not. The Jury was advised by a senior custody officer that this was likely due to the high cost of purchasing such items. However, the Jury believes that their possible purchase should continue to be explored by the Sheriff’s Department and could be well worth the initial investment, given the potential beneficial results. Finally, the Jury was advised that the purchase of one full-body x-ray scanner for use at the Northern Branch Jail is planned. The Jury posits that the additional purchase of one or more such scanners would be helpful in meaningfully fostering staff and inmate safety and getting ahead of the curve in contraband deterrence efforts at the new facility. 2 Main Jail Incident Report Nos. 17-9248, 16-17442, 16-2067, 15-16049, 13-2029 3 2018-2019 Santa Barbara County Grand Jury

Agency Responses 1

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.