First Night on the Rock

Rikers Island holds a number of detention facilities, affectionately aggregated under the name of “The Rock.”  When someone is arrested in Manhattan, they will spend about 24 hours awaiting an opportunity to go before a judge for arraignment.  They will start out in a precinct holding cell, be transferred to Central Booking and ultimately find themselves in a large holding cell in the bowels of 100 Centre Street, until brought to one of the two arraignment courtrooms.

Most defendants walk out of the courtrooms through the back doors.  Some do not, whether because they are deemed to require custody or simply can’t make the “nominal” bail that a criminal court judge decides they should pay.  As if $500 means the difference between fleeing to one’s Bahamas manorhouse or returning to court.  From the courthouse, many will be taken to Rikers Island to await their next court appearance.

Via Turley and the Daily News, another dirty little secret from Rikers slips out.


Correctional Officers Michael McKie, Khalid Nelson and Denise Albright have been arrested on charges that they organized a fight club of inmates called “The Program.” Using teen enforcers called “The Team,” they allegedly oversaw a system of beatings, extortion, and terror at Rikers prison in New York. They even allegedly held classes on how to beat prisoners to leave as few marks as possible.

Ah, Rikers.  Ah, corrections officers.  Ah, jailhouse beatings.  Rarely are they so well organized, but they have always been with us.

The career path to criminal court judge usually goes like this:  Law student  –>  assistant district attorney –> criminal court judge.  Chances are that they’ve never sat with the wife or mother of a defendant who was beaten at Rikers.  Chances are that they’ve never talked to some nice suburban kid who got popped for selling pot in Washington Square Park and was confronted by a crew from 169th and St. Nicholas at Rikers who decided that they liked his sneakers. 

When they make the decision to impose bail, do they think about how the person will fare in a jail like Rikers?  Whether he’s done something wrong or not, whether he will ultimately be convicted and go to prison or not, they have condemned the defendant to experience the world of Rikers.  Some don’t get it.  Some don’t care.  Some rationalize their decisions by saying, “that’s just they way it goes.”

It’s bad enough when a street kid from uptown is thrown into this world.  Many feel no sympathy toward them, calling them “thugs” or “gangbangers”, and thus dismissing the wrong because these human beings are unworthy of their concern.  But these kids at least know how to handle themselves in a fight.  Softer people are helpless.  Nothing in their lives prepares them for a night on the Rock.

I’ve long believed that every young man and woman who becomes an assistant district attorney should be required to take off their fancy lawyer clothes and put on a saggy jeans or a jumpsuit and spend a few days in Rikers.  They should experience the world to which they glibly condemn others.  They should possess the knowledge they attribute to themselves, but for real rather than through the stories of cops and prosecutor lore. 

How many of them would survive a night on the Rock?  How many of them would survive “The Program?”  Let them bring this experience with them as they sit at arraignments, doling out $500 bail to people too poor to eat.  Before they condemn these “innocent” defendants to Rikers, they should appreciate the consequence of their flippant decisions.

14 thoughts on “First Night on the Rock

  1. Ryan McKeen

    You lost me at requiring prosecutors spend a few days in jail.

    Why not require oncologists to undergo chemo before prescribing it?

    You make valid points about abuse in prison and the illusion that is nominal bail but having prosecutors spend time in jail is a remedy for neither of those ills.

    I’d suggest requiring politicians to spend a night on the rock.

  2. SHG

                Why not require oncologists to undergo chemo before prescribing it?

    Because I’m a criminal defense lawyer and this is a criminal law blog.  But I’m glad I otherwise met with your approval as it matters deeply to me.

  3. Shaula

    Ryan McKeen wrote:

    Why not require oncologists to undergo chemo before prescribing it?

    Someone I care deeply about is undergoing chemo right now.

    The clinic this person is attending is staffed almost exclusively by cancer survivors–not, unfortunately, the doctors, but the nurses and the support staff.

    They have all, in fact, undergone chemo.

    As a result, the quality of care, the degree of empathy, and the level of support from the staff has been far, far beyond our expectations.

    Scott, I think your suggestion is marvelous and I would love to see it in practice.

  4. Mitch

    Have we forgotten that the point of bail is to ensure the defendant’s return to court? Yes even a “mere” $500 can ensure that a parent or spouse makes sure the defendant gets there because that can be half a months rent to some poor families.
    You want your clients to stay out of rikers, get them to stop committing crimes. But then again, that might put us out of business.

  5. Windypundit

    Chemo drugs are dangerous, so it would be unwise to try them and unethical to give them to someone else, but medical students routinely practice minor procedures on each other, physical therapists learn all the exercises, and psychologists undergo therapy.

    On the other hand, doctors follow a “do no harm” principle, and they never do anything to someone without getting consent, so they’re not exactly a good behavioral model for prosecutors.

  6. Leh Tizdayen

    Yep, just like every defense attorney should put on a uniform and do a vertical inside a housing tenement, or try to explain to a victim’s mother why the guy who slashed her 13 year old for a sidekeick is getting ROR’ed because the defense attorney makes a “compelling argument” that defendant didn’t have a single!! arrest within the past year.

    Oh, and by the way, the corrections officers are still “innocent” right? After all it’s just prosecutor’s allegations that they’ve instituted this “program” – and you’re taking those “allegations” at face value? How convenient.

  7. SHG

    Ah, the dumb-ass cop mentality rears its ugly head.  Here, we’re comparing defense lawyers to prosecutors, so naturally this converts in your twisted logic to why we should all feel sorry for poor cops.  What?  No black man’s anus to shove a broom handle up?  You left that one out.  Should we be expected to do that too, so that we can truly enjoy the police experience?

    And maybe the defense attorney should ask your opinion on whether or not to do his job, because of the poor 13 year old.  That would the same 13 year old who a week earlier was beaten by some angry beat cop who didn’t get to steal his morning donut in the bodega?  Yes, what a great humanitarian.

    And this post had nothing to do with whether the corrections officers are guilty or innocent, but you clearly couldn’t grasp the point. Were the words too big for you?  I’ll type slower next time, just so you can try to follow.

  8. SHG

    Yes, $500 can be a half months rent.  And it can more than they have for some trivial offense.  And if they have it for bail, maybe they won’t pay the rent and will end up on the street.  And if they use it for rent, maybe the person will spend his time on the Rock.  And society is saved, because all those $500 bail folks are terribly dangerous criminals.  Right.  But whenever someone writes something as monumentally stupid as “get them to stop committing crimes” (because we all know that everyone arrested is guilty, and guilty of the crime charged, because cops would never lie), everything becomes clear.

  9. SHG

    It’s not always necessary to take an off-topic and ill-conceived attempt at an analogy and respond to it.

  10. brian tannebaum

    I’ve said for years that prosecutors throw out numbers – 10 years, 20 years, 3 years, 30 days, without a clue. No, they don’t have to care. They “didn’t commit the crime.” But I always hear about the county court judge who tells all the new judges that “30 days in jail can ruin someone’s life.”

    I too believe that every new prosecutor should extend their one hour “stay in the middle of the hallway so you don’t get spit on” tour of the jail” to at least one night.

    I spent a night in jail 20 years ago, well actually 8 and 1/2 hours, and I will never forget it. It is always in front of my mind when I am discussing a plea or trial with a client, and especially at the initial meeting when the client says “I just don’t want to go to jail. My answer: “I understand.”

  11. a

    Beautifully written.

    Also, oncologists may not usually experience chemotherapy physically, but they witness the effects on their patients and are very aware of the consequences. I worked in a cancer research center and never saw oncologists taking treatment side effects lightly.

  12. SHG

    Thanks, a.  Ironically, while the oncologist analogy failed miserably for its intended purpose, it actually shows quite well the distinction between those whose exercise of professional skills are premises on an empathetic attachment to others and those who can close their eyes to the suffering they cause.

  13. Shawn McManus

    Generally speaking, prosecutors make it their job to do everything they can to get the defendant the harshest punishment and defenders do everything they can to get the defendant “off”.

    I wouldn’t require defense attornies to lose a loved one or even get mugged a central park. However, I’d require all defenders to spend a few weeks with first responders: two with police and one with fire and paramedics.

    Given what are my impressions of the New York criminal justice system, I’d have prosecutors go through the system secretly as criminals just so that they could round up those police / guards / prison administrators that are no good themselves.

  14. SHG

    In some respects, I agree with you, but the basic analogy you’re drawing mixes apples, oranges and bunch of other unrelated fruits.  Prosecutors exercise discretionary authority with respect to who gets prosecuted, for what, and to what degree.  Defense lawyers don’t exercise discretion; we defend who the police chose to arrest and prosecutors chose to prosecute.  Our clients don’t chose to be defendants.  They are and have no choice in the matter.

    We are also a part of the same society that suffers from crime. We already know it exists and suffer the consequences.  We don’t facilitate crime. We don’t entice or encourage clients to commit crimes; we get them afterward.  If they should go out and commit a crime again after we’ve represented them, it is no more our doing than the person at the supermarket who sells them food needed to survive. 

    And finally, our jobs are different than prosecutors.  Our duty is to defend. A prosecutors is a government official, whose duty is to do justice, even if that means not prosecuting.  They are expected to exercise discretion fairly and appropriately, and that’s why they get to decide who to prosecute while we have no choice as to who needs a defense.

Comments are closed.