Portrait of the author.
(Courtesy Mary Ann)
6
As previously mentioned, one of the best program activities that we have to offer inmates are visits. Unfortunately, many inmates are admitted to the prison from across Canada and other countries around the world. In order to improve inmate contact with family, I started a new program that gained international attention.
In 1982, approximately fifty percent of the population was from other provinces and countries, including the USA. One day, I got an idea for a positive new program. If an inmate serving a long sentence from a distant province made a videotape, we could arrange to send it to her loved one or family member and have the tape viewed.
I needed a community group to help me. I approached a local service club (Knights of Columbus) that had councils in other provinces and states. I spoke to the local club executive one night. I told them that if an inmate completed a tape, we would like to send it to another city where another council of their organization would be present. The council in the other city would receive the tape and take it to the family to view. In addition, they would tape the family’s own love letter and presentation and send a completed videotape back to the prison for the inmate’s viewing. I was encouraged when a local council of the Knights of Columbus agreed to participate in the project. I ran the program proposal by the program committee. Chaplain Bill, an energetic Baptist minister who was willing to help out wherever he could, agreed to be the contact person for the program.
I approved the expenditure for thirty videotapes and a new VCR television system to record and review finished tapes. Reverend Bill was very eager to get this program off the ground. The first inmate that participated was a lifer in her late twenties. She had a young daughter who resided out West. Jennifer prepared a beautiful tape of her reading children’s books and playing the guitar and singing her favourite songs. It was so exciting to see Jennifer reach out to her young daughter, who was being cared for by her grandmother.
The first completed tape and a blank tape were sent out in early June. The Knights of Columbus in Vancouver received the tapes within seven days. Jennifer’s daughter and her mother viewed the tape and prepared their own taped message. The first tape received was from Jennifer’s mother and daughter and it arrived two weeks later. I remember the day the first tape arrived. After receiving Jennifer’s first tape, Reverend Bill called me and set up a meeting with Jennifer to review the tape at three p.m. Jennifer invited me to review the tape after she first watched it. Jennifer was excited, anxious, and thrilled to see the tape of her daughter and mother. She reminded me of a small child opening her first Christmas gift. It was a beautiful sight to see Jennifer reviewing intensely the video images of her young daughter. Several other inmates participated in the program.
In early December, Jennifer agreed to have a national newspaper reporter from Toronto come to the prison and interview her, Reverend Bill, and myself. The reporter was very sensitive to Jennifer’s concerns. The reporter told Jennifer that she would not mention her daughter’s name in the newspaper. It was a well-written newspaper article that included a picture of Jennifer preparing a Christmas message for her daughter. The newspaper article was well received in the population.
I received a telephone call from a television executive from NBC’s Good Morning America program wanting to do an interview. I was flattered by the attention, but I declined the interview. Four weeks later, Jennifer received a disturbing telephone call from her mother. The Toronto newspaper article had been copied and used by an unscrupulous editor in a sister newspaper in Vancouver as part of the national chain. This time the newspaper ran Jennifer’s story showing her preparing a Christmas message for her daughter. Adjacent to this article was an article and picture of the male victim that Jennifer was convicted of murdering. This article showed a picture of the victim’s widow putting flowers on her husband’s grave at Christmastime. Although the Toronto newspaper writer had agreed to respect Jennifer’s confidential concerns, the newspaper editor in Vancouver decided to ignore this concern and champion the male victim’s story.
This was probably the most horrendous dishonest media portrayal against an unsuspecting inmate that I have ever encountered. I clearly remember Jennifer asking me if it would be okay to be interviewed by the Toronto newspaper. I told her that the reporter advised me that she would honour and respect Jennifer’s privacy. I was so angry, I refused newspaper interviews for three years. The video program continued for several more years. Later, Jennifer worked as a program coordinator under Reverend Bill’s supervision and helped other inmates prepare videotapes for their families.
Given the long period of time that some PC inmates had to endure, I was always looking for program opportunities to occupy the small group in a relatively limited space. Inmates could take correspondence courses or tutor other students. One day in 1979, I was fortunate to meet the executive director of the local Canadian National Institute of the Blind (CNIB), which was located at the end of our parking lot. After a lengthy conversation during the lunch hour, the executive director invited me to his office. He mentioned that he was looking for volunteers to transcribe books into Braille. I told Mr. Brown that I had a small group of women that might be interested in the project. Mr. Brown, who was non-sighted, said that he would like to talk to the inmates.
Later that day, I went to the PC unit and asked the inmates how many of them would be interested in the Braille program. To my surprise, five out of the seven inmates agreed to meet with Mr. Brown. I telephoned Mr. Brown and made an appointment for the next day at 1:30 p.m. Mr. Brown entered the prison with one Braille transcriber machine and some Braille paper. I escorted him to the PC area of the prison. He was an engaging individual who had the gift of talking to people. He made the inmates feel comfortable. He explained that there were seventy-five people in the Kingston community who required Braille books.
The inmates listened with interest. He told the group that it would take about two to three weeks to complete a book, depending on the size of the book and how many hours a person worked on the assignment. After hearing Mr. Brown’s presentation, three inmates signed up for the program to transcribe English books onto Braille paper. The following week, Mr. Brown brought over three transcriber machines and three boxes of Braille paper. I arranged for the three inmates who participated in the Braille program to be compensated as if they were in the school program.
At the end of the first month, three books were completely transcribed into Braille. The task of transcribing books into Braille is a time-demanding activity. The inmates worked on the book for two hours in the morning and two hours in the afternoon. If an inmate wanted to work more hours, she could work in her cell at night. It was necessary that they pace themselves and not become bored with this repetitious task.
After three months, only two inmates had the staying power and desire to continue with the program. The inmates received a beautiful thank-you letter from a sightless recipient.
I remembered one day when Mr. Brown telephoned and said he had a request from a non-sighted seventeen-year-old girl who needed her Grade 12 high school books transcribed into Braille. The two inmates agreed to work on this project. The Braille program lasted for approximately three years. At the end of the third year, four inmates were transcribing books into Braille. The CNIB found a new electronic method to transcribe books into Braille.
The inmates who participated in this program gained a lot of personal satisfaction when the jobs were completed. The letter of appreciation from the seventeen-year-old non-sighted girl brought tears to the participants’ eyes. They all realized that the program had merit. Each Christmas, Mr. Brown arranged for a large basket of fruit and chocolate to be delivered to the prison for the benefit of the inmates who had participated in the Braille program.
Mary Ann’s National Parole Board Experience
One day in early June, I was making my rounds of the institution. That day I started by visiting the Health Care Centre. I entered the nursing station and talked briefly with the duty nurse and Mrs. Thomas, the Chief of Health Care. The institution was fortunate to have registered nurses working around the clock at the prison. The nurses have to have various skills to work in a prison environment. A good, effective nurse has emergency room skills, knowledge of pediatrics, geriatrics, psychology, and medications, and post-operative know-how. A successful nurse will also have good listening skills, common sense, and a good sense of humour. Mrs. Thomas had attracted an excellent team of dedicated and hard-working nurses.
Mrs. Thomas told me that she had three overnight patients in the hospital rooms. Two inmates were recovering from surgery that had been performed at the community hospital. When I entered the quiet room, I was surprise to see Mary Ann as a patient. I said, “How are you today?”
She looked up with sad eyes and uttered a few words. “Mr. Caron, I am so stressed that I cannot sleep. I haven’t eaten in two days.”
I looked at her and responded, “What’s happening?”
She answered, “My Parole Board hearing is on Friday and I am concerned about leaving Jamie behind. I am so nervous about my hearing. I looked at Willy’s case. Last month, Willy walked into the Parole Board hearing and after thirty minutes was denied. Furthermore, they told her that she should not apply again for two years.” Mary Ann started to cry like a baby. “I can’t do any more time. I worry about Jamie and what will happen to our relationship.”
I stood up from the chair and firmly directed my comments at Mary Ann’s inner self. “Listen, Mouse, you have a life to live. First of all, Jamie helped you to get this far. You have made tremendous progress. Jamie cares for you and wants you to move ahead. By the way, Jamie has had three girlfriends over the years at the prison and you will not be the last. Jamie has acted as your jumper cables. She has started your motor. The rest is up to you. In terms of your parole application, you have excellent reports with positive support from a variety of staff. As for myself, I have recommended that you receive escorted TA’s to prepare for your college entrance. I feel confident that the Parole Board members will look favourably at your application. I suggest you start eating and go back to the wing and spend some time with Jamie. She needs you to be strong.”
Mary Ann sat up in her bed and said, “Thank you, Mr. Caron. I needed that. Your words have helped me.” Mary Ann shook my hand as I started to leave the room. Mary Ann checked out of hospital two hours later, after eating some soup and crackers.
On Friday, Mary Ann put on her best clothes and proceeded to the chapel to meet the Parole Board members. With Jamie, she had rehearsed her responses to a variety of possible questions. Mary Ann told me later that she first went into a side office and kneeled down and prayed to God to give her a positive outcome.
Mary Ann was the first inmate to appear before the Parole Board that day. Outside the hearing room, Jamie waited like an expectant parent with six other inmate friends who had their fingers and toes crossed. There were three board members, two middle-aged women and one older man. Mary Ann recalled that they had asked her many questions, some of which she had rehearsed. She openly admitted her guilt and reported that she had written the baby’s parents five years ago asking them for their forgiveness. She told the board members that her action was wrong and ill-conceived. Mary Ann spoke positively about her school studies and her desire to attend St Lawrence College and to enroll in the architecture technologist two-year program. Mary Ann told the Board that she had been accepted into the program.
Two other inmates appeared before the National Parole Board that day. Mary Ann walked out with a large smile across her face. She had tears in her eyes, but they were tears of joy. She looked at Jamie and said, “I got it.” They embraced. Mary Ann explained that she would receive escorted TA’s until her day parole started in early September. She would return nightly for one month, and then she would be released to the Elizabeth Fry Society’s halfway house. All three board members voted in favour of Mary Ann’s parole application. The other two inmates that saw the Parole Board that day were not successful; their parole applications were denied.
Before the day was over, Mary Ann asked to see me. She walked into my office and noticed the painting on the wall that she had given me several years before. She said, “Thank you, Mr. Caron, for your ongoing support.” Mary Ann told me that my words early this week had given her confidence and had helped to put her priorities in order. She left my office a new woman. She was full of confidence and willing to tackle life’s experiences head-on. Her journey continued.
Portrait of the author.
(Courtesy Mary Ann)
Transsexual Inmates (Gender Dysphoria)
During my tenure as warden, I encountered many different situations, and people of every background. There was one area that I knew nothing about. I had to do some homework to understand the dynamic of these inmates. One day, during mid-morning when I was making my institutional tour, I entered “A” range, the largest range in the prison, where the most difficult inmates resided along with other inmates that were “different.”
When I passed Cell 11, a voice from inside called out. It was Shirley, a thirty-three-year-old white inmate who was serving life for murder. Shirley was a transsexual. Transsexuals are persons born as one sex, but physically trapped in a body of the opposite sex. After a sex-change operation and continuous hormone therapy, they are changed into the form of the opposite sex. As I got close to Shirley’s cell, she said quietly, “Warden, any news on my request for special procedure?”
I answered in the negative. “Shirley, as I mentioned before, I do not believe the service will pay for the special procedures that you have requested. To be honest with you, I am not aware of our service approving additional medical procedures. Your request has been sent to Regional Headquarters and after their review and comments, your request will be sent to National Headquarters. I don’t believe you will get a decision for two months.”
Shirley looked up and said two words: “Thanks, Warden.” “By the way, Shirley, that is a lovely picture of a horse that you are drawing.”
“Thank you.” Shirley was from out West and loved horses.
There were three transsexual inmates in the prison when I was warden. Shirley was originally serving a life sentence as a man in a maximum security prison in British Columbia. She had requested and received authorization from our service to pay for the specialized surgery at the university hospital. In Shirley’s case, the male sex organs were surgically removed and hormone therapy was started. No person with male genitals would be admitted to the Prison for Women.
Shirley had requested that two additional medical procedures be approved by the service. She wanted to have a breast augmentation procedure as well as have her vagina enlarged. The other two transsexual inmates had had their medical procedures completed before they came to prison. They did not request additional medical procedures. I was not aware that our service would pay for any more transsexual surgery.
I found that generally the transsexual inmates were different in that they had larger and more muscular bodies, larger hands, larger noses, and deeper and stronger voices. The transsexual inmates did not pose serious management problems. They all had their own personalities and blended well into the population. On family days, the transsexual inmates loved to dress up as women and were not out of place in the population. I personally accepted each transsexual inmate as a woman who had unique personal needs. I never encountered a female inmate who wanted to be a male. There were a dozen or more aggressive homosexual women who had a very muscular presentation but did not apply for a procedure to change their sex.
Near the end of the “A” range, I encountered four misplaced inmates who really stood out from the others. They were all from New Brunswick and Newfoundland. They were definitely slower than other members in the population.
I remember one of them, named Mabel. She was a thirty-three-year-old Native woman who was always friendly and loved to talk to the staff. Mabel grew up on a reserve and was proud of her Native background. She had a harelip and slurred her words. Sometimes when she was anxious it was difficult to understand what she was saying. She walked with a sight limp. Mabel occupied the fourth-last cell on Lower “A” range. When I approached Mabel’s cell, I always received the same question: “Hello, Warden. Do you have a cigarette?” Every time I saw Mabel, she would ask me for a smoke. Then, “Will you give me a pass so I can go downtown and buy some candy?”
I responded, “Mabel, you know that you are not eligible for eight months. Please ask me in April.”
Mabel was serving her second federal sentence of three years and ten months for breaking into a church to keep warm during a cold winter night. I reviewed Mabel’s lengthy criminal record and observed that with the exception of one break and enter conviction, Mabel’s record had a history of nuisance offences. Mabel loved to press fire alarms and watch the fire trucks speed off to a location. Mabel and the other three inmates at the end of the range had similar offences. The provincial correctional authority’s hands were tied. They were closing mental hospital beds, and jail cells were full. It was a real shame, but in my opinion all four inmates at the end of Lower “A” range did not belong in prison. All four women were friendly and always talked to the staff. Hardened inmates ignored them. Sometimes they made fools of them. Probably the main reason why tough criminally minded inmates did not like them was because they talked to the guards and periodically revealed more sensitive, revealing information than certain inmates would like.
The inmate that I really was fond of was Betty, a thirty-eightyear-old grossly heavy-set woman serving four years for breaking into and entering a liquor store. Betty had low intelligence and was easily taken advantage of. She loved to play poker, but never won a single game. She always lost her weekly small wage to other inmates. Every time I saw Betty, she would ask me for a smoke.
It was so sad to see these four inmates in the prison. In reality, these four inmates probably received better care in terms of food, medical attention, and clothing than they would on the streets of their hometowns. Betty was a three-time loser. I asked her what brought her back this time.
“Warden, I needed my teeth fixed and I did not have any money, so I threw a large stone through the Hudson’s Bay store window and stole a teddy bear off Santa’s sleigh.”
I vividly remember Betty’s last release from the prison. Betty was released on Mandatory Supervision and was to live at the Elizabeth Fry halfway house for six weeks. One night I received a telephone call from the Duty Correctional Supervisor at three a.m. She said that Betty had pounded on the front door with her fists wanting back into the prison. She was crying and upset because she missed her friends at the end of the range. The Duty Correctional Supervisor did not have the authority to admit any inmate at night. It was very unusual and not an accepted practice to receive inmates directly from the street. In this case, I approved Betty’s request and told the supervisor to place her in the hospital until we could sort out her problems in the morning. I suggested the supervisor telephone the night supervisor at the Elizabeth Fry Society’s halfway house and advise them that we had Betty in custody.
I was very appreciative of my staff’s attention to these four inmates. The matrons treated the four inmates like children and helped them cope with the reality of prison life. There was one slower inmate named Maggie who entered the prison several years later. Maggie was a thirty-three-year-old white woman who was noticeably overweight. Maggie, who was from New Brunswick, had been admitted to the prison for three assault convictions. Maggie’s problem was that she couldn’t express herself properly; therefore, she got upset very easily and would strike out by punching her adversaries. Maggie wasn’t really dangerous, but she was stubborn like an ox and numerous times refused to listen to directions from the staff. Frequently we had to place her in segregation because she would kick or punch a staff member when she was asked to do something. My guess is that Maggie spent half her time in segregation. The Salvation Army in her hometown completed arrangements for Maggie to be placed on a farm with loving and supportive guardians. Maggie never returned to prison again after her release and placement on the farm.
Several months passed without any major problems. I would see Mary Ann in the wing area or sometimes in the dining room. I always tried to talk to her away from other inmates in order to protect her from drawing unnecessary heat and questions from negative inmates trying to determine what I had to say. There was a lot of paranoia in the prison. Unfortunately, inmates in prison didn’t trust easily, so the facts got distorted and twisted and sometimes the result was serious harm.
I recall a middle-aged woman named Summer who entered the prison on a serious drug conviction. This inmate enjoyed putting out the balls and throwing them any which way. One day, a new inmate named Necole arrived at the prison and was placed on “A” range. This new inmate didn’t know what had hit her. Summer spread rumours that Necole was an informer for the horsemen (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) and that she had given evidence that resulted in several women’s getting long sentences for drug importation. Summer happened to tell this story to the wrong inmates. Several of these difficult inmates were known enforcers and had no respect for the police and their “rats.”
One night, Necole was cornered by three inmates in the backroom of the gymnasium and confronted. Necole told the group she had not been the informer, since at the time she was in provincial lock-up for six months for being intoxicated behind the wheel of a stolen truck. Ignoring this, they pressed on. Finally one inmate pulled out a homemade shiv and stabbed Necole in the chest and neck. She yelled at Necole, “Here is what we do to fucking rats.” The other two inmates kicked Necole in the stomach and legs before the three left the gymnasium laughing and acting tough.
The staff found Necole lying in a pool of blood. She was taken by ambulance to the Kingston General Hospital and received emergency surgery. Necole refused to co-operate with the police and identify her assailants. Several months later, a black inmate named Mandy entered the prison. Somehow she heard what had happened to Necole. She backed up Necole’s story. She stated that Necole was in the provincial jail during the time she was alleged to have ratted on the drug addicts. Necole found out that it was Summer who had passed on the rumour that she was a rat. One night, Necole caught Summer in the tunnel on the way to the gym. She punched Summer into unconsciousness. She yelled at Summer as she fell to the floor, “I will kill you, bitch, if you ever again lie and tell stories about another person.” Necole kicked Summer in the mouth and knocked out three teeth.
Summer awoke within a few seconds and walked up the stairs to the Health Care Centre. She reported to the nurse that she had fallen down the back stairs of the range. Summer suffered no lasting injuries. Her face and arms were stiff from the beating, and she had a black eye. She had to be fitted with a dental prosthesis. I never heard of Summer’s ever again speaking negatively about another inmate. She was released on parole the following year and never returned to the prison.
Mary Ann’s First Temporary Absence
In early July, I saw Mary Ann one day in the Health Care Centre. She was seeing the institutional physician for her annual medical. Mary Ann was in a good mood. She told me that she was a little nervous, because on Monday she was going on her first escorted temporary absence since she was first arrested in late 1979. We were alone in the waiting room. I asked what she would do for her first pass. She looked up and commented, “Well, first I want to go to the college and see my advisor and pick up some information on my course of study. I then want to have lunch and order something off the menu that I don’t get in here.” She giggled for a few seconds and said, “I miss having a T-bone steak with jumbo shrimps and baked potato. I love dark chocolate ice cream.” I could see Mary Ann was gearing up for her day out. “In addition, I want to get some pictures of unique buildings in the city. Finally, I want to buy something small for Jamie at the S & R department store in downtown Kingston that I see advertised in the local newspaper. The last item I will buy will be a tape of Joan Sutherland’s favourite opera arias.”
“Who is going to escort you for seven hours?”
“Reverend Bill. He knows the city well and has taken many girls out of the prison on their pass.”
“Good luck on your pass. By the way, I have meetings away from the prison on Monday, so I won’t be here to see you walk to the parking lot. Enjoy your day out.”
On Sunday night, Mary Ann could not get any sleep. She finally awoke at seven a.m., took a shower, and got dressed. She went to breakfast with Jamie. At eight-thirty a.m., Mary Ann went to the classification department and signed some papers for her release. Mary Ann hugged Jamie and gave her a big kiss. Jamie had a small tear in her eye and said, “Go for it, girl. Have a great day.” Mary Ann left the institution with Reverend Bill at 9:01 a.m.
Mary Ann arrived back at the institution at four p.m. Jamie was up in the chapel and could see Mary Ann walking up the front sidewalk, returning to the prison. Jamie returned to the wing to wait for Mary Ann’s arrival. Jamie cleaned up Mouse’s room. She couldn’t wait to hear all the news that Mary Ann had to tell. Mary Ann had agreed to pick up two packs of Dentyne gum for her. At four-thirty p.m., Mary Ann made it to her room. She hugged Jamie and went into her room for some privacy and to give her friend a little gift. According to Reverend Bill, Mary Ann had accomplished everything that she wanted on her first pass.
One of the changes that occurred at the prison happened in 1978. At that time, a number of male guards were not performing effectively in male prisons, for a number of reasons. Either they were too passive, indifferent, and/or lacked motivation, or were too aggressive; or were just not effective working with male inmates. The Regional Director of Ontario Region made an offer to my predecessor that he was unable to refuse.
My predecessor fought the transfer of twelve male correctional officers to the Prison for Women. He knew some of the men and had heard about others from other wardens. The introduction of male corrections officers was not necessarily a bad decision, but male correctional officers with no previous training and knowledge of the female offender was problematic. Many of the hardened female offenders had been abused and taken advantage of by males. Some female inmates hated all men.
The male correctional officers were predominantly assigned tasks in the front control centre, sally port area, and escort duties. The male officers also served to inspect the inside yard complex at night and assisted female correctional officers in inmate transfers to other locations. Later, some of the male correctional officers transferred to the outside hospital escort duties.
This move involving male correctional officers caused many problems. First of all, less aggressive female guards would call their male counterparts when physical confrontation and force were necessary. Some of male guards took active roles in subduing aggressive females. Sometimes the mere presence of male correctional officers on the range brought out the worst in some inmates. They taunted some of the male officers and were ready to rumble.
In time, some of the male correctional officers adjusted and were effective working with female offenders. In other cases, some male correctional officers could not manage their new roles and asked for a transfer.
Looking back, I believe I fired only two employees for not performing their required duties. I recall one officer that would vacate his one-person evening post at the sally port and go downtown and pick up a pizza. This action was totally unacceptable. This male officer was disciplined on several occasions. If a fire had occurred during the guard’s absence, or an ambulance had been required because of staff illness or inmate injury, the vehicle could not have entered the compound while the guard was out buying his supper. After the third incident, the male guard was fired as part of progressive discipline. The guard was off many months (eleven months) as he and his union defended his rights at a federal adjudication hearing. In this case, the federal adjudicator ruled that the employee had an alcohol problem and needed treatment. We had to take the employee back but he lost eleven months of his salary. We had to pay for his twelve-week addiction treatment course.
The male employee returned to work, and after four weeks, I had to fire him again. In this instance, the employee opened the main control door to talk to three inmates serving life sentences instead of talking to the inmates through the small hole in the control office Plexiglas window. If the three inmates had rushed the officer and gained control of the front control post, the entire institution would have been at risk. Mass escapes would have been possible. A senior female security officer noticed the male officer’s poor judgment. The male officer appealed his termination and used his union’s assistance for support. His case was reviewed by a federal court adjudicator within nine weeks. The adjudicator denied the appeal and upheld his termination.
In 1984, I was asked by my boss to provide a tour of the prison for a senior prison administrator responsible for correctional institutions in one of the large states in Australia. During the tour, the official noticed that I had about a dozen males working in the prison. The official from Australia asked if I had any problems with the male guards. I remember telling him that I had some problems with certain male guards because they did not have the right temperament and background to work with female prisoners. The official from Australia laughed and said that was not what he meant. “We have male guards working in some female prisons. In one prison, out of fifteen male guards on staff, eleven were involved in relationships with female correctional officers. It was so bad that some female officers could not work certain shifts in order to avoid a conflict between two female guards fighting over a male guard.”
I looked at him and said that we had the same problem here. I stated that I thought nine out of our twelve male guards were involved in relationships with female guards. We had the same problem of trying to find different shifts for certain male and female guards. A number of marital relationships were ended because of a relationship between a male and female guard. It was difficult enough to manage a female prison, but sorting out problems relating to relationships between the staff only made the situation more complex.
Mary Ann’s morale improved during July and August. She had four escorted temporary absences and was becoming knowledgeable of the city and its bus routes. She told me that Reverend Bill was very helpful. She took several buses and found her way to the college. One day, Mary Ann visited the Elizabeth Fry Society halfway house and introduced herself to the woman in charge of the house. When she entered the halfway house, she noticed that one of the French inmates who had given her a bad time in the wing area was now residing in the house. Mary Ann didn’t speak to her and knew that she might have a problem with this inmate. In two weeks, Mary Ann would be starting her college course. She got to know her advisor and they developed a positive relationship. Mary Ann told me that no one at the college was aware of her background. During her last two outings, Mary Ann picked up several of her textbooks and was reading them at night. She went out one day with her classification officer and bought some new clothes; when she dressed up, she looked like a college student. Each night, Mary Ann dreamed about leaving the prison and starting a new life. She mentioned that leaving Jamie still bothered her. Jamie accepted the reality of their relationship and tried not to say anything that would lead Mouse down a road of depression.
During the last week of August, the Inmate Sentence Administrator asked to see me. She told me that we were getting three new inmates the next day from the Toronto West Detention Centre and that there must have been a mistake with the names. Two of the inmates had the same first and last names. I commented that it could be a mistake, but checked their admission documents extra closely and made sure they had signed a waiver on infectious diseases.
The next morning at around eleven a.m., a bus arrived at the front of the prison and three handcuffed inmates walked up the front sidewalk towards the front door. I watched the small caravan proceeding around the outside worker and his wheelbarrow. I observed two middle-aged inmates and a young woman in her mid-twenties. The Inmate Sentence Administrator checked the new inmates’ documents and when everything was in order, she called for security staff to escort the inmates inside the belly of the prison. It was always a difficult moment for a new inmate to enter the prison, with all its electronic metal gates and loud noises. The Inmate Sentence Administrator approached my secretary and asked to see me.
The Inmate Sentence Administrator told me that we had a mother and daughter entering the prison. I was advised that the two family members were charged with drug trafficking (mules) and sentenced to seven years. Mrs. Marilyn Smith and her daughter Miss Marilyn Jackie Smith were part of a large group of mules who had been arrested and convicted of smuggling narcotics into Canada from South America.
I interviewed both women and found them to be very pleasant. This was the first criminal conviction for both women. The two newcomers, who were Americans, were utterly shocked to have received a seven-year sentence. Both women were assigned to “B” range. The mother told me that they had met a handsome man in South America who had promised them ten thousand dollars each if they would carry the false-bottom suitcases into Canada.
Mrs. Smith and her daughter were the second daughter and mother combination that entered the prison while I was warden. I remember another mother and daughter combination that had been admitted after being found guilty of manslaughter in the death of the mother’s common-law husband.
Mrs. Smith and her daughter were not criminally minded. They were short on cash in South America and thought that it would be easy to smuggle cocaine into Canada. They didn’t know about Spot, the small terrier that was on police duty at the airport customs office. Little Spot had caught five people in three days carrying drugs into Canada. He had a perfect nose for cocaine.
Mrs. Smith and her daughter fit in well with the thirteen other mules, eight of whom were foreign born, that we had in the institution. They both worked in the sewing room. They presented absolutely no problems to staff. Mrs. Smith told me that there had been nineteen men and women mules arrested, including the alleged kingpin, a businessman from New York. The drug leader was in the Toronto West Detention Centre. He had lots of money and appealed his conviction of drug trafficking and his eighteen-year sentence.
Mrs. Smith and her daughter had spent almost two and a half years of their sentence and were paroled for deportation on their eligibility date to the USA. The male ringleader had spent almost the same amount of time in provincial jail appealing his conviction before being transferred to a male prison in the Kingston area. He was arriving at the male prison to continue his sentence as the two Smith ladies were returning to the USA.
Over the years, the Prison for Women was criticized by various reports as Canada’s only female maximum security prison because it was too old, did not have enough programs, and was in great need of modernization. The PFW was also criticized in that it contained maximum-, medium-, and minimum-security inmates under one roof. Given some of the limitations due to the physical plant, I was extremely proud when the institution received a highly desired Accreditation Certificate in 1982 for a three-year term from the American Accreditation Association Standards. The administration was greatly appreciative of the work that all departments completed to receive this designation. I was especially grateful to Ann, the hard-working classification officer who acted as our taskmaster and coordinator of the program. Ann worked long hours and used her organizational skills to achieve the highest results and the prestigious Accreditation Standard designation. In order to obtain the Accreditation Standard, the institution had to change and rewrite a lot of standing orders, policy documents, emergency crisis management documents, medical policies, and personnel and human resource policies; make security upgrades; and develop and implement new programs and activities to reach the high goals set for the Accreditation Standards. I was very proud of our team. Many male institutions as well as the Prison for Women applied for the Accreditation Standard. Not all the male institutions were successful in obtaining the American Accreditation Standard. The final results were a testimony to the co-operative spirit and dedication of all managers and staff that had worked on this daunting task.
One of the things the institution had to do was upgrade the security of our inmate files and security documents. This was especially evident one month when classification staff complained that their files were being moved around their office and desk area. We installed some privacy cameras, and to our surprise found that some inmates who used one of the two television rooms that were located down the hall from the case management offices were seen at night lifting the ceiling panels and climbing up and moving and shimmying their bodies along the ceiling over the case management offices. I gave the inmates credit for using their ingenuity. This breach of security resulted in our cancelling television viewing in the two rooms and changing the ceiling’s building materials in the television rooms and in the classification officers’ offices.