202 Chapters
Medium 9781574414325

Chapter 8 – Recreation

Jorge Antonio Renaud The University of North Texas Press ePub

CHAPTER EIGHT

recreation

TDCJ considers anything an inmate does out of his cell to be recreation, unless it is chow or part of his officially assigned duties. The official terms for recreation are either “programmatic activities,” which includes all officially sanctioned group meetings, and “non-programmatic activities,” which is essentially everything else.

Inmates spend most of their time at work, in their cells or socializing in the dayrooms or on the yard. Dayrooms are communal living areas. On most units, they open at 8 A.M. and close at 10:30 P.M. on weekdays and at 1 A.M. on weekends and holidays. They are open all day and are usually noisy and full of inmates. Most dayrooms have from four to ten tables, which seat four; from one bench to four, which seat from five to ten inmates; and have one or two televisions. Depending on the warden’s preferences, programs offered on television will range from the basic four networks to ESPN, USA, and various movie channels.

See All Chapters
Medium 9780253356390

3 Existential Damages

Molé, Noelle J. Indiana University Press ePub

There is nothing better for a man, than that he should eat and drink, and that he should make his soul enjoy good in his labor.

—Ecclesiastes 2:24

Putting the soul to work: this is the new form of alienation.

—Franco “Bifo” Berardi

The soul that we are constantly constructing we construct according to an explanatory model of how we came to be the way we are.

—Ian Hacking (1998)

Mr. G worked as an engineer for Telecom in Pisa, where he was responsible for the Tuscan maritime area (Tribunal of Pisa, April 10, 2002, in Meucci 2006: 490). He had been instructed to minimize the overtime of his staff and had taken measures to follow those orders. However, his actions provoked a union reaction and, in response, Mr. G filed suit to protect his job position. Following disciplinary action by Telecom, Mr. G was transferred to Florence in June 1999 and was told, informally, that this was done to appease the National Union Coordinating Group. He was moved once again to Pisa by the next month. At that time, Mr. G was denied the monthly raise in salary that his colleagues had received, and he filed suit in the Florence Tribunal (which he later won, in January 2001). In January 2000, Telecom hired a new engineer for the Tuscan maritime branch and Mr. G was stripped of his professional role. Although he presented his case to the attorney general’s office (procura della repubblica), he was still fired later that month. He was rehired in February and transferred, once again, to Florence, and Telecom took legal action to justify the legitimacy of the transfer. At this point, Mr. G sued for mobbing, professional damages, and loss of dignity, and he contested the transfer. As part of his ruling on the case, Judge Nistico, citing Article 2087 of Italy’s Civil Code, reflected on the case:

See All Chapters
Medium 9781574411676

10 For the State

Gary M. Lavergne University of North Texas Press PDF

chapter ten

For the State

“It was not accidental; it’s not self defense.

What else can he say but ‘I was crazy.’”

—Norman Kinne

Assistant District Attorney

I

T

he genius of the American Constitution is that it was written to protect unpopular people and ideas. Freedom of the press protects unpopular print; freedom of speech protects unpopular speech. Popular ideas seldom need protection. So it is with individuals. Due process, search and seizure limitations, access to legal representation, the right to remain silent, and other rights are designed to assure that even the most reprehensible of American society, even those deemed unfit to live among us, have an opportunity to, at least nominally, defend themselves against the state.

Like democracy, civil liberty, for only the few and the popular, is an oxymoron.

Defending Abdelkrim Belachheb was a defense of Constitutional rights all Americans enjoy. Forcing the state to answer an insanity plea, and thus prove guilt, assures caution and thoughtfulness by the state whenever it brings a defendant, even those clearly guilty of committing a heinous act, to trial.

See All Chapters
Medium 9780253020925

4 Economic Interventionism, Islamic Law and Provincial Government in the Ottoman Empire

Schull, Kent F. Indiana University Press ePub

M. Safa Saraçoğlu

IN THIS CHAPTER, my intention is to make some observations on the transformation of Ottoman administrative involvement in the functioning of markets from the fifteenth to the nineteenth centuries. My intent is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject, but rather, to raise questions that can help us understand shifts in how markets were conceptualized in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. I argue that mechanisms that regulated the conduct of fair and legitimate market place exchange changed significantly in the Ottoman Empire from the fifteenth to the nineteenth centuries, as the rulers gradually abandoned an interventionist policy (using regulatory mechanisms such as price ceilings) in favor of noninterventionist state policies. Administrative intervention in markets was not a process that was easily accepted by medieval fiqh scholars, who claimed that it interfered with the free will of individuals in determining and declaring the value of their property. The Ottomans ignored these objections, however, particularly between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries.

See All Chapters
Medium 9781574414325

Appendix A – Custody Levels

Jorge Antonio Renaud The University of North Texas Press ePub

APPENDIX A

Custody Levels

The following explains what custody levels exist in TDCJ-ID (Institutional Division), and gives a brief summary of the privileges allowed at each level. For a more detailed idea of the levels and privileges, see the chapters on Money, Recreation, and Segregation.

1. Minimum out, State Approved Trusty I—Eligible for four contact visits each month. Can work outside without direct supervision except for sporadic check-ups. May be assigned to trusty camp. Maximum allowed on recreation, commissary, and property privileges.

2. Minimum out, Line I—Same as above, except that may be from Line I to SAT II.

3. Minimum out, restricted—May be from Line I to SAT II. Eligible for same privileges as above. Must have direct unarmed supervision while outside the fence and cannot live in trusty camp.

4. Minimum in—May be from Line I to SAT III. Must have direct, armed supervision if outside fence. Maximum privileges on commissary, recreation, and property. Allowed from one to three contact visits monthly, depending on SAT status.

See All Chapters

See All Chapters