The document discusses how hate groups form and spread hateful ideologies in prison systems. It outlines that prisons are no longer isolated from communities, as 95% of prisoners will return to society. Within prisons, gangs originally formed around identities like race and nationality have transformed into hate groups that seek to intimidate and attack others. These groups spread hateful beliefs as an "infectious disease" among inmates. The growth of hate groups in prisons threatens both the prison system and communities, as these groups develop criminal networks and political influence upon returning to society.

1. Hate Crime In Prison
The role of prison life in the growth
of hate crime and hate groups

2. Prison Community Connection
♦ Prisoners are no longer isolated from the
community.
♦ Prisons and communities impact each other
♦ 95% of prisoners will return to the
community
♦ The State controls the perimeter but not
behavior

3. History of Prison Gangs
♦ Naples Prison
– Mafia
♦ Russian Prison Gangs
– Russian Mafia
♦ American Prison Gangs
– Mexican Mafia
– Gangster Disciples
Arian Brotherhood
– Others

4. Gangs to Hate
♦ Hate motivated Behavior
– Hate crimes
– Hate Incidents (1st
Amendment)
– Often violent
– Behavior that jeopardizes a person because of
their group affiliation

5. Group Affiliations
♦ Race
♦ Religion
♦ Creed
♦ National Origin
♦ Sex
♦ Sexual orientation
♦ Disability

6. Prison Hate Motivated Behavior
♦ Identifies other groups as hostile enemies
♦ Organizes inmates in functional racial
groups
♦ Establishes a code of conduct that requires
hate group support in the community.
♦ Uses the crimes of murder, assault and rape
are primary instruments of intimidation and
enforcement.

7. Hate Based Gangs
♦ Aryan Brotherhood
♦ Nazi Low Riders
♦ Nuestra Familia
♦ Black Guerilla Family

8. Hate Group Victims
♦ Racial identity
♦ Gays, Lesbians, trans sexual.
♦ Ethnic Groups based on location
♦ Disabled

9. Epidemiology of Hate
♦ Hate as an infectious disease
♦ Inmates are infected with Hate as they enter
the prison
♦ Their infection grows and matures
throughout their term of incarceration
♦ The disease matures and mutates as the
number of infected subjects grows

10. Public Health Model
♦ Research
♦ Documentation
♦ Development theoretical models
♦ Systematic implementation of interventions
♦ Feedback and Evaluation

11. Prison Power Model

12. Phase I - State Dominate
♦ New Institution
♦ Lock Down Status
♦ Maximum Security
♦ 23/1 or 24 Hr
♦ Inmates Idle
♦ Staff does all the
work

13. Phase II - State over Inmates
♦ State Dominate
♦ Inmates are allowed to
move
♦ Work Assignments
♦ Program participation
♦ Inmates do the work
♦ Staff supervises
inmates

14. Phase III - Inmates over State
♦ Inmates Dominate
♦ Inmate numbers
♦ Compromise Staff
♦ Contraband
♦ Territory
♦ Sex
♦ Violence
♦ Organize

15. Hate Groups Impact on the
Community
♦ Develop into criminal enterprises
♦ Terrorize neighborhoods and communities
♦ Create wealth
♦ Develop Political Power
♦ Threaten the social and political order

16. Optimum Balance
♦ Staff retains control
♦ Inmates contribute to
the institution
♦ Free to conduct
positive activities
♦ Cost effective
♦ Safe and secure

17. Phase IV – Inmate Dominate
♦ Inmates take control
♦ Violent incidents
♦ Assaults on rivals
♦ Take hostages
♦ Kill the snitches
♦ Secure the crazies
♦ Develop demands
♦ Negotiate w / authorities
♦ State Assault restores
State power

18. Hate Groups Influence
♦ Fill the power vacuum
♦ Connections to the outside increase their
power base
♦ Do things the State can not or will not do
♦ Use terrorism tactics to intimidate the
prison and the community

19. The End
♦ References
♦ Office of Justice Programs, 2001, BJS Special Report,
Hate Crimes Reported in NIBRIS, 1977-99, U.S.
Department of Justice, Washington D.C.
♦ Harlow, C.W., 2005, BJS Special Report, Hate Crimes
Reported by Victims and Police, Office of Justice
Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington D.C.
♦ Hamm, M.S., 2008, Prisoner Radicalization Assessing the
Threat in U.S. Correctional Institutions, NIJ Journal No
261, National Institute of Justice, U.S. Dept. of Justice,
Washington D.C
♦ Office of Justice Programs, 2001, BJS Special Report,
Hate Crimes Reported in NIBRIS, 1977-99, U.S.
Department of Justice, Washington D.C.
♦ Rosenthal, M., 2004, Recommendations for Reform The
California Youth and Adult Correctional Agency:
Racism, Violence, Bigotry, and Gang / Intergroup
Conflict,
California Performance Review Board, CA
♦ Lofgreen. V. 1994 "A Model of the Dynamic Power
Relationship Between Staff and Inmates in a Secure
Correctional Facility", in: Peak, Kenneth J., Justice
Administration: Managing Police, Courts, and
Corrections Organizations, Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.
♦ Victor Lofgreen Ph D
Walden University
Presented to:
Community College Criminal Justice Educators of Texas
Howard College
Big Spring, TX
May 20 2009