Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx1

CONTRABAND DETECTION:

EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES TO STOP THE INFLUX

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 2

EDITOR’S NOTEThe influx of contraband into correctional facilities – especially cellphones – is a critical threat to the safety of correctional officers, inmates and even others outside of prison.

Tens of thousands of cellphones are seized from correctional facilities every year. The phones are used by inmates to coordinate gang activity, drug trafficking, witness intimidation and killings both inside and outside of correctional facilities. In February 2018, federal prosecutors took down a violent street gang with ties to state prisons; two of those netted were already in prison at California’s super-maximum-security Pelican Bay, charged with directing their criminal operatives through the use of contraband cell phones. A prison riot in South Carolina that killed seven inmates in April 2018 was the result of a turf war between gangs over contraband such as drugs and cellphones, say officials.

While prison leaders, law enforcement, government officials and even cellular carriers are diligently searching for effective solutions to prevent inmate access to and use of contraband cellphones, detection is still the first line of defense. This eBook reviews some of

the complex issues behind the contraband crisis in correctional facilities and details strategies for prison officials and correctional officers to better identify risks and prevent contraband from entering their facilities.

Find out how to read the clues inmates unknowingly give off as to where and why correctional officers should search for contraband; learn how correctional leaders and administrators can identify employees who might be susceptible to becoming corrupted by an inmate; and review the options that currently exist in the prison setting for cellphone detection to combat this critical issue.

Through education, training and the use of technology, correctional facilities can make dramatic inroads toward stopping the influx of cellphones and other contraband into the hands of inmates. The safety of correctional staff, inmates and the public requires the dedication of financial resources and manpower to accomplish this mission.

Nancy PerryEditor-in-Chief, CorrectionsOne

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

How to develop your contraband detection skills

How do corrections leaders spot employees susceptible to corruption?

5 options for contraband cell phone detection

How to Cure Prisons’ Contraband Mobile Phone Epidemic

4

8

12

16

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 4

Inmates unknowingly give off many clues as to where and why correctional officers should search for contraband

HOW TO DEVELOP YOUR CONTRABAND DETECTION SKILLS

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 4

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx5

By Russ Hamilton

When I first started working at San Quentin in 1989, I was in awe of the correctional officers who seemed to have a magic gift for finding things, especially contraband. Over the years through trial, error and effort, I established myself as one of those officers who has the gift of being able to find items carefully hidden by inmates.

For me, this was an acquired ability rather than a natural skill, which means it is a talent that can be learned and developed by any officer with enough desire to do so. To that end, I will discuss how correctional officers can develop their contraband detection skills. Developing these skills takes merely effort, imagination and curiosity.

WHERE AND WHY TO LOOKWhenever an officer approaches me to glean a few tips on contraband detection, they invariably begin with the exact wrong question: “Where should I look?” While I could go on and on about places to search, their question misses the more important question which is: “Why do you look where you look?”

Let me break down the difference between the two. On average, I would say 70 percent of the serious contraband I have discovered is through interpreting signals provided by the inmates. The other 30 percent I discovered through luck. Here are some thoughts on how to read inmates in groups or individually and techniques and drills for developing your detection skills. Let’s start with the basics. I begin each shift by doing the following:

1. Review of files and disciplinary reports of inmates that have come to my attention;

2. Direct observation of the unit/yard I am working;

3. Review of intel from prior shifts.

Once I have completed these steps I decide on the basic areas I will search during my shift. During each shift I take into account the following considerations to help focus my efforts:

• Space: The minimum amount of area in which any given bit of contraband can be placed. My focus may vary depending on if I have a specific type of contraband in mind. My mindfulness of space will change if I am looking cell phones as opposed to drugs.

• Accessibility: How often any specific contraband needs to be accessed in order to be useful. For instance, a standby weapon can be placed somewhere more inaccessible than drugs, which must be consumed or sold, or a cell phone, which must be accessed to send or receive messages or calls.

• Security: The measures inmates must take to keep contraband safe. While inmates might risk losing a weapon in a common area, high-dollar items like drugs or cellphones require better hiding places, as well as active measures, such as inmate look outs and diversions. Being mindful of where look outs are positioned is an excellent way to locate all sorts of contraband.

• Consequence: The penalty for being caught with or losing the contraband. Think felonies versus misdemeanors here and you will get the idea. Inmates are much more careful about catching a new case than an administrative slap on the wrist.

Keeping these concepts in mind will allow you to better focus your efforts and help you succeed in your mission.

Part of doing your prep work is reading and understanding the inmates to give you an insight of where and when to search. I use the following indicators to help determine where to begin my searches:

Over communication: Anytime an inmate is attempting to convince you of something versus simply relaying information, or that information is superfluous or unnecessary or diversionary, you are probably in very close proximity to contraband.

A few weeks ago I was passing through a bathroom in a dorm setting. I paused to make a quick visual inspection of the lights and vents. From the corner

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 6

of my eye I saw an inmate get up from his bunk and approach me. He asked if I was looking for asbestos.

To me this was the equivalent of, “You’re getting warmer!”

Less than five feet away, behind the shower valve finish ring, I discovered three bundles of marijuana. The look on his face the rest of the day every time he saw me was priceless. Rarely should any interaction you have with an inmate be taken at face value. Be curious, be imaginative, question and investigate everything.

Moving away from an area when you are present: Sudden or furtive movements are always a dead giveaway. Be aware that this is almost always an attempt to put distance between the inmate and the contraband.

The following example includes both over-communication and movement away from an area as well as what I call “making the play” – an attempt to help prove guilt when you are attempting to charge the inmate.

Entering a dormitory setting one day I called out for an inmate who was not present. An inmate in the rear of the dorm suddenly got up (movement from area) and approached me volunteering to go find the inmate on the yard (over communication). I checked his bunk area with negative results but found a cellphone under a pillow on the bunk next to his. Based on his movements, I immediately accused

him of ownership of the phone (making the play). I knew – based on the circumstances – that charging him would be difficult, but another inmate suddenly claimed ownership (over communication).

I radioed for backup because I knew at that moment there was more contraband. As staff arrived, I found two Blackberries under the same mattress. Using photos on the first phone I was able to charge four separate inmates for possession of a single phone and able to charge the inmate who was assigned to the bunk for possession of the Blackberries.

Lack of eye contact or sudden change in activity: When inmates deliberately avoid eye contact or suddenly change their activity or activity level, contraband is nearby. Recently while entering a building an inmate momentarily looked up at me but then cast his glance toward the ground (lack of eye contact). I stared at him for perhaps 30 seconds but he only continued staring at the ground. I walked away from the area to see what he would do, and as soon as I was 20 feet or so away he got up and started to leave (leaving the area). I called him back and searched him with negative results, then searched the area discovering a cellphone hidden in a hole in the wall where he was sitting. On another occasion I entered a dorm at count time. The inmates were expecting it, but they also know I search a lot. There were being quite boisterous when we entered, but then went dead quiet (sudden

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx7

change in activity). I thought that they were worried about me searching so I immediately began a search. In less than two minutes I had a weapon and three new, uncharged cellphones with the fake screen stickers still in place on each of the screens. It pays to pay attention.

LEARNING THE SIGNSThere is a lot to be said for learning body language and behavior – it can mean the difference between a successful search and an unsuccessful one.

Experience will sensitize you to what inmates are telling you through their behavior and body language, but you can also improve that learning curve by actively observing and using critical-thinking skills to understand the signals that inmates unknowingly send us all the time.

If you really want to improve your contraband detection skills, think of your institution as a living laboratory. Use every opportunity you have to get inmates to lie to you. When they do, study their actions, observe and file the behavior away. One thing I used to do was to deliberately let inmates think I was not watching at chow and they would double back in line. Then, starting with the inmates in front, begin checking their identification cards all over again, making careful observation of their fidgets, their demeanor and any guilty signs they made in front of me.

When searching cells or dorms and I found something like a tattoo gun, I would overlook it for a moment to gauge their reactions. It is all part and parcel of the bigger game for bigger stakes and more serious contraband. Remember that imagination is essential to the game. If you watch for and gauge inmate reactions, then take your own cues from their behavior to determine when and where to search, you will put yourself far ahead of the game.

About the Author Russ Hamilton is a retired sergeant for the California Department of Corrections.

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 8

HOW DO CORRECTIONS LEADERS SPOT EMPLOYEES SUSCEPTIBLE TO CORRUPTION?

Corruption in prisons, jails and other facilities where people are incarcerated is not new, and yet leaders still struggle to ensure that staff retains high ethical standards

By Doug Wyllie

Let’s look closely at the elephant in the room – corruption among correctional employees. It has been a problem for all of human history that some incarcerated people work diligently to manipulate their captors into giving them everything from contraband to sex to freedom.

How do correctional leaders and administrators identify an employee who might be susceptible to becoming corrupted by an inmate? What are some of the tells? What are some of the indicators that you have staff – whether they are corrections officers or commissary workers or maintenance personnel – that are prone to being corrupted?

To glean some answers, I connected with Michael Pittaro, assistant professor of criminal justice at American Military University and CorrectionsOne contributor. Pittaro is also an expert on ethics in corrections.

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx9

IT USUALLY BEGINS WITH THE LITTLE THINGSPittaro suggests that administrators watch for employees who seem to be a little too close with the inmates – those who tend to fraternize a little too much either with the prison population at large or with an individual inmate. At some point, they may cross a boundary from being respectful to being a little too friendly, he said.

Corrections leaders should keep an eye out for employees who tend to socialize with the prison population or give the inmates breaks, excuses, or let them slide on things.

“I think it’s learning that telltale sign where they kind of cross some boundaries early on by not knowing where they stand as officers or staff members and where the inmates stand,” Pittaro said.

In Pittaro’s 16 years of experience in corrections – most of it in prison administration – the process of becoming corrupt starts off very lightly, with things that aren’t necessarily defined as corrupt.

“It seems to start off very slowly and somewhat innocently. But once you kind of open the door, it invites in further opportunities. That slippery slope then definitely comes true,” Pittaro said.

WATCH FOR THE SIGNS, AND SPEAK UPPittaro said that administrators – and peers, for that matter – should watch for employees who give an inmate a little leeway on things like an extra phone call or extra time doing something. And he said that early intervention is the key. This is ideally done peer to peer in the proverbial “courageous conversation” but an administrator who notices this behavior and fails to act is inviting problems. This is because at the very earliest stages of corruption, the employee may not know they’re being manipulated and might even welcome the outside observation.

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 10

“I don’t think the employee recognizes the early signs that they’re being manipulated or groomed in a way, you know, for further incidences,” Pittaro said. “I’ve dealt with situations where officers were bringing in drugs, cigarettes, cell phones and of course, one of the worst ones is sexual contact with the inmates, which was pretty pronounced in my years.”

Pittaro emphasized that perhaps the most egregious examples of employee corruption is sexual contact.

“I just think that’s the huge one,” Pittaro said. “That’s always been an issue, and we read about it constantly. I experienced it where I used to work and it’s just baffling why that in fact goes on. But in my experience – and this is not to stereotype – there seems to be more female staff members engaging in sexual acts with male inmates than male staff members with female inmates. And I found that to be quite intriguing and a little surprising too.”

According to a 2011 Department of Justice report, female corrections staff “perpetrated the majority of incidents of staff sexual misconduct, while males perpetrated the majority of incidents of staff sexual harassment.”

Pittaro said that one of the biggest reasons that peers fail to challenge a colleague who they perceive to be at risk of being corrupted by an inmate is retaliation. They fear being ostracized by colleagues if they do bring something forward. Pittaro added that this fear is especially pronounced if the employee is a newer or rookie officer, or rookie employee who wants to be accepted and liked. So, colleagues often just turn a blind eye to it.

“I don’t think that necessarily people are naïve to it occurring, I just don’t think people are taking that necessary step to try to curtail it early on,” Pittaro said. “So I think it has more to do with the culture – the prison culture. They go to ethics training. They know about manipulation, other officers noticing these behaviors. But the blockade, or the obstacle,

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx11

is that no one is taking that next step then to address it. I think there are a lot of roadblocks that are preventing staff members from coming forward and addressing it either directly with that particular employee or bringing it to the administration.”

MAKE YOUR FACILITY AN ETHICAL ONEOnce an employee has been fully turned – hasbecome truly corrupted – they have a very difficult time going back to their ethical origin. He says this is in part because a person who knowingly does something they previously thought was wrong is very likely using some sort of rationalization to justify their actions.

“Once you rationalize it in your mind, you make it acceptable and then it’s easier to go forward and do it again. You’re also kind of justifying your actions. So it’s kind of like creating your own rules,” Pittaro said.

If you are an employee, watch your own behaviors and those of your colleagues. If you are an administrator, make every effort to be frequently

present in the facility – be proactive about talking with your employees and reminding them that this is an ethical facility and that no form of corruption will be tolerated.

Remind employees that they’re dealing every day with masters in manipulation – this is what they do. Inmates have 24 hours a day, seven days a week to study the behaviors of correctional facility employees. They can tell if you’ve had a bad day. They pick up on all sorts of things and they’ll use that information to try and get inside an employee’s head.

About the authorDoug Wyllie is senior contributor for CorrectionsOne, providing police training content on a wide range of topics and trends affecting the law enforcement community. Doug hosts the PoliceOne’s Policing Matters podcast, and is the host for PoliceOne Video interviews.

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 12

Cellphones are a continuous threat inside correctional facilities; here’s how you can find and stop this type of contraband before it becomes a problem in your prison or jail

By Melissa Mann and Laura Neitzel

As the prevalence of contraband cellphones in prisons continues to grow, many corrections officers consider it to be the biggest threat to prison security. Cellphones can record conversations, video images, provide internet access and ultimately be used to commit crimes and plot violence against prison officials, prisoners and others, inside and outside prison. The problem has grown so dire that South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster signed an order allowing South Carolina State Guardsmen to help patrol the perimeters of the state’s prisons in search of contraband.

The Federal Communications Commission has held meetings to facilitate conversations among prison officials, law enforcement and wireless providers who are looking at ways to stem the flood of illegal cellphones in prisons. While various solutions, including signal-jamming technologies and disabling inmate cellphones, are in limited use, detection is still the first line of defense against the rampant use of contraband cellphones in prisons.

5options for contraband

cellphone detection

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 12

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx13

How you can detect contraband cellphonesSeveral options exist in the prison setting for cellphone detection to combat this problem. Those include K9 detection; handheld detection devices; fixed and portable detection systems; perimeter security, including in-custody or re-entry screening; cell jamming/managed access technologies; and ferromagnetic detection.

K9 detection: The annual cost of employing a cellphone detection K9 includes

the salary of the officer and the purchase of the animal. The K9 alerts its handler to a cellphone battery, which means the phone does not need to be activated in order to be detected; an advantage over other detection devices. Three dogs working part time successfully detected 100 phones over the course of a year in a Maryland prison.

Hand-held detection units: Hand-held detection units are convenient as they are mobile

and able to be used in units throughout the prison. Smaller units include a start-up cost ranging from approximately $5,000 for a handheld device up to $50,000 for a mobile detection chair. In order for the cellphone to be detected by these devices, the phone must be powered on or in use. Hand-held devices have been known to provide false positive results.

Fixed detection installation: A fixed detection unit installation

is estimated to cost approximately $100,000. The cellphone unit must be powered on;

but if a phone is detected, this unit can also pinpoint the location of the phone. This larger type of detection unit must be regularly maintained and updated with the most recent software, firmware or hardware. Use of this large-size unit may be considered more labor intensive as individuals must be escorted to the device for screening.

Managed access: According to the National Institute of Justice, managed access systems

can help combat the problem of contraband cellphones by disrupting unauthorized cellular transmissions from prisons. However, this technology is not permitted in all states at this time. This permissible “managed access” technology allows authorized and emergency calls to pass through a specially designed detection system and is not considered the same as cellphone jamming technology under the watchful eye of the Federal Communications Commission.

A managed access system provides a cellular umbrella over a defined area such as a prison. This umbrella intentionally interferes with transmissions of mobile wireless devices within the designated area. Through testing in two California prisons over an 11-day period in 2011, the CDCR blocked more than 25,000

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx13

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 14

unauthorized communication attempts such as calls, texts, internet access and emails. This is an average of 2,500 per day. Shortly after implementation of its managed access system in Mississippi, 26,000 text messages that were generated from within a single correctional facility were intercepted.

Ferromagnetic detection: Designed to address deficiencies in conventional screening methods,

advanced ferromagnetic detection systems (FMDS) detect the ferromagnetic components common within cellphones. Because cellphones are often disassembled and their individual components smuggled into prisons, a FMDS device provides an advantage in that the cellphone does not have to be on – or even assembled into one piece – for the handheld device to detect the presence of ferrous metal components. In fact, a FMDS can even detect ferrous metal objects inside a human body. Because the device is portable,

it can be placed at normal checkpoints or used both indoors and outdoors for surprise and covert screening of inmates and their belongings,

The correctional industry is on a quest for an efficient and cost-effective solution to the prolific infiltration of contraband cellphones into prison facilities. Examining several approaches and their effectiveness in each setting is the first step toward successful detection of this safety and security breach.

About the authorsMelissa Mann is recently retired from the field of law enforcement. Her experience spanned 18 years which included assignments in Corrections, Community Policing, Dispatch Communications and Search and Rescue. Melissa holds a BS in Criminal Justice and MA in Psychology with emphasis in studies on the psychological process of law enforcement officers. She holds a deep passion for researching and writing about the lifestyle of police and corrections work and the far reaching psychological effects on the officer and their world.

Laura Neitzel is the senior manager of sponsored content and a staff writer for CorrectionsOne.

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 14

150% Greater Detection of Contraband*

It’s often said that the finer details distinguish good from great. At Metrasens we agree. Since detecting small, often concealed contraband is one of the many distinguishing details of the Cellsense Plus® contraband detection system. In fact, in a recent study, Cellsense Plus is shown to detect up to 150% more contraband than its competitors. That’s why 40 state DOC’s, over 250 county jails, and prisons in 46 countries rely on Cellsense Plus as a primary screening technology every day.

Come see how others are confiscating more contraband by visiting metrasens.com.

www.metrasens.com | 630.541.6509 | info@metrasens.com

*based on third party study conducted by Intertek

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx15

150% Greater Detection of Contraband*

It’s often said that the finer details distinguish good from great. At Metrasens we agree. Since detecting small, often concealed contraband is one of the many distinguishing details of the Cellsense Plus® contraband detection system. In fact, in a recent study, Cellsense Plus is shown to detect up to 150% more contraband than its competitors. That’s why 40 state DOC’s, over 250 county jails, and prisons in 46 countries rely on Cellsense Plus as a primary screening technology every day.

Come see how others are confiscating more contraband by visiting metrasens.com.

www.metrasens.com | 630.541.6509 | info@metrasens.com

*based on third party study conducted by Intertek

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 16

HOW TO CURE PRISONS’ CONTRABAND MOBILE PHONE EPIDEMIC Manipulating Cellular Signals Is Not Effective – Here’s a Better Approach

By Nick Jordan and Mike Hynes

It’s not an exaggeration to say a mobile phone is a lifeline to the world. Ever since it became affordable to carry a portable phone line and mini-computer wherever we go, mobile phones have gone from nice to necessary to can’t-live-without-them. From senior citizens down to the tiniest tyke, people love their phones – most people, anyway.

So who doesn’t love mobile phones? Anyone who works in a correctional facility – because in a prison, a mobile phone isn’t a fun, useful gadget: It’s a safety issue.

Contraband mobile phones have long been a security and public safety concern for correctional agencies across the globe, and successfully detecting them before they do damage is one of the biggest challenges facing prison staff these days.

A Major Problem for PrisonsTo the average correctional officer, a contraband weapon, or drugs, may be more dangerous inside the prison in the immediate term, but a mobile phone is more nefarious – because the damage it can cause reaches far beyond the prison walls.

Inmates can use a mobile phone to continue drug-dealing or organized crime operations; threaten

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx17

public officials and intimidate witnesses; and even coordinate murders. Just a few examples of the havoc a mobile phone can wreak from inside prison walls:

• In the United Kingdom, inmates have run a cocaine ring, arranged the murder of a teenager as part of a feud and organized the killing of a gang leader.

• In 2018, federal prosecutors said two inmates used smuggled cellphones to run a violent, drug-dealing street gang from inside California’s super-maximum-security Pelican Bay State Prison.

• South Carolina officials blamed a prison riot that killed seven inmates in April 2018 on a turf war between gangs over territory, money and contraband items such as drugs and cellphones.

• Contraband cellphones have been linked to coordinated attacks on prison officials and other illegal operations. A South Carolina Department of Corrections officer was shot six times after a hit was put out on a contraband phone.

• Fifteen prisoners housed in the North and South Carolina Departments of Corrections were charged in a “sextortion” ring, in which they used contraband cellphones to target U.S. military service members.

And it’s not just a handful of phones causing these issues; the numbers paint a grim picture of the extent of the problem. In South Carolina in 2017, prison officers found and took one phone for every three inmates, and many other agencies have similarly high phone-to-inmate ratios – for example, in Oklahoma, it’s one phone for every six prisoners. At least 15,000 mobile phones or SIM cards were confiscated in English and Welsh prisons in 2017, equivalent to one for every six inmates. It’s a widespread epidemic.

In an effort to clamp down on the mobile phone contraband problem, some correctional institutions have explored “jamming,” or blocking mobile reception by using a device to transmit a signal on the same frequency, and at a high-enough power, that the two signals collide and cancel each other out.

Others look to what’s called “managed access,” in which only communications from approved devices are passed to cellular carriers, or international mobile subscriber identity-catching (“grabbing”), in which phones are attracted to a fake network and can be monitored or blocked.

But there are several reasons that these options will not stem the tide of illegal cellphones in prisons.

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 18

Manipulating Signals Is Not Effective While attacking contraband phones through their signals seems like a good way to ensure even phones that make it into prisons can’t be used, there are some major flaws to that solution.

A cellphone can be used as a data storage device as well as for transmission. Even without signal and data access, a phone remains a useful data storage device. Inmates can record audio and video messages and arrange for the phone’s movement into and out of prison through staff, visitors and other means, using the phone itself or its SD/SIM card to carry data and continue to conduct criminal activities. The phone/data storage cards can also be used internally only, to pass information between inmates.

Staff can disable or unplug jammers, rendering them useless. It’s not a scenario prison officials like to envision, but corrupt correctional officers and other staff can be bribed by prisoners to unplug or disable jammers temporarily to allow the inmates to make calls or send data. When it’s only a sporadic occurrence, it makes it very difficult to detect without catching the CO or inmate red-handed.

Methods that target signals can create issues with internal communications. Because mobile reception is blocked entirely, jamming blocks all phones and SIM cards within the jammer’s reach, including those of prison staff. Grabbing, as well as managed access, allow staff phones to be put on unaffected “white lists,” but these methods are costly.

Jamming, grabbing and managed access offer mixed results. Here’s the biggest reason of all: These methods simply are not the all-encompassing solution officials once hoped they were.

In 2012, California deployed managed access technologies at 18 of its 35 prisons, but halted expansion of the program in 2015 because other technologies were outpacing the managed access system, and is moving to other types of solutions.

Managed access didn’t work because cellular service providers switched to what is commonly known as 4G or LTE (Long Term Evolution) technology, which uses new frequency bands. Carriers also are transmitting voice calls over what amounts to a Wi-Fi network. The prisons’ managed access system doesn’t capture Wi-Fi, Skype or satellite transmissions, unless inmates use Skype and other social media applications through a cellular connection. A nonpartisan study from the California Council on Science and Technology detailed a lengthy list of additional potential problems with managed access before the system was even deployed.

The issue remains that technology is always changing, which means jamming, grabbing and managed access systems are only as good as the technology they were designed for. These systems would require constant upgrades to keep current – and not only are these methods expensive to deploy, but they’re even more costly to upgrade.

Additionally, where there’s a will, there’s a way – even with the most updated technology. A trial in two Scottish prisons deployed a grabber system, which cost more than 1.2 million pounds to deploy. A report on the trial shows “resilience issues” and the system’s “lack of intelligence” – and all that cost was for naught in the end: Prisoners developed what officials described as “innovative countermeasures” to circumvent the phone block.

Prison officials know better than anyone that inmates will go to any lengths to obtain contraband – invent a new

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx19

method of detecting or preventing, and inmates will find a way around it. Contraband has many portals of entry to a facility: Unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones, can fly over fencing; objects are thrown over walls; food shipments and mail deliveries hide illicit materials; and work-release inmates and staff bring contraband in a side door – or even within their own body. Even the provider of the managed access systems for the California Department of Corrections told the Associated Press regarding contraband phones, “There is no magic bullet. You can’t try to address the demand because the demand is always going to be there.”

The reality is that contraband mobile phones in prisons is a complex issue that no single technology or method can address. Instead, successfully fighting contraband phones requires multiple technologies, tactics and training.

The Solution: The Multilayered Approach to SecurityTo fight contraband, correctional facilities must use a layered security solution.

Tactics include highly qualified and trained staff; roving COs; walk-through metal detectors and X-ray equipment at main points of entry; portable detection equipment; random screens; high fencing/netting; drone detectors; shakedowns and more.

Technologies should be deployed at all entry points (front, back and side), as well as facility-wide. An example of something that can be used throughout a facility is a portable ferromagnetic detection system (FMDS), which uses passive sensors that detect a magnetic signature, down to a millionth of the earth’s magnetic field. It takes less than a minute to set up and passively detects ferrous metals as people and objects move by, allowing more detection in less time, and fewer unnecessary close encounters between staff and inmates.

Staff can use FMDS alongside X-ray equipment at entry points to screen people, then pick up the unit and use it throughout the facility to conduct full-body searches of inmates and screen mail, laundry, mattresses and other inmate property. The units run on batteries – there is no need for an electricity source, as with a walk-through detector, giving correctional officers the ability to bring a security solution all around a prison without worrying about a power source.

This technology has been deployed in 46 countries across the globe, including in all New Zealand

and United Kingdom prisons; all 54 state prisons in New York; all 24 state

prisons in Maryland; and in California and Indonesia. FMDS goes beyond detecting phones and can find any ferrous metal contraband, including weapons,

and can even detect ferrous metal objects inside a human

body – unlike hand wands or walk-through detectors.

The most important success factor for any correctional facility is its staff and the training they’ve undergone; all the innovative tactics and cutting-edge technologies in the world don’t matter if the staff is not well versed in them.

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx 20

The human factor is vital in every aspect of security, and making staff experts on tactics and technologies through hands-on training (including refresher courses for veteran COs) will help staff understand how each method contributes to the layered security approach – and how it enhances their own safety as well.

Many Tools, Not Just OneInmates will never stop trying to smuggle in mobile phones and other contraband, which means prisons across the globe have their work cut out for them – and no single solution will help keep phones out.

A multilayered, holistic approach to security that encompasses the entire facility using both technology and traditional methods, bolstered by high-quality training, is the ideal way to keep contraband – including mobile phones – from creating disruption in a prison.

Having many tools in the toolbox is more effective than having a single tool, and a multilayered security solution puts many tools in the hands of correctional professionals, helping them maintain order, security and safety – both inside a prison and outside it.

About the authorNick Jordan is international sales director for Metrasens. Jordan can be reached at njordan@metrasens.com. Mike Hynes is director of key accounts – US Corrections, for Metrasens. Hynes can be reached at mhynes@metrasens.com.

Contraband detection: Effective strategies to stop the influx21

About our sponsor

Metrasens is the world’s leading provider of advanced magnetic detection technologies.

Our innovative products are designed to address deficiencies in conventional screening methods, to make us all safer and more secure. Our mission is to take great science from the laboratory and use it to create revolutionary, award-winning products which meet the real needs of our customers.

Metrasens’ core technologies have an extremely wide range of potential applications. Our growth to date has been

achieved through the ability of our team to clearly identify and prioritize the areas in which our technology can make the most significant impact, solving acute problems. We embody our technology in solutions that are easy to adopt and simple to use.

Innovation is at the core of everything we do – from research and development, through to customer service and training. Metrasens products are already making a real impact in a range of sectors, from medical-imaging departments to correctional facilities, and we’re just at the start of our journey.

Read more about contraband seizures:

Find corrections grants: