The Need For A New Jail
In 1955 a county jail was built that was expected to serve the county’s needs for at least 40 years. Twenty-three years later a county Grand Jury report says overcrowding at the jail must be solved somehow.
By MARK RODIN Times-News Staff Writer
“The overcrowded condition of the jail is a result of county growth, increased crime rates and the result of Sessions Court Judges scheduling those persons convicted of DWI charges to serve time on weekends.
“It is the opinion of the Grand Jury that Sullivan County needs and can afford a modern county jail of ‘sufficient size to retain those persons convicted of felonies and crimes against our tax paying citizens. It seems that our judicial system in Sullivan County is wasting time and taxpayers’ money to go through legal proceedings to convict criminals if we have no place to retain them.”
Sullivan County Grand Jury report,
Feb. 15, 1978.
In the early 1950s Sullivan County was placing persons charged with crimes in a jail that probably was built during the Victorian era.
Howard Poston, who was county judge then, can’t recall when it was built and could only describe it now as being like “an old time county jail back out in the mountain area.
“It was really in a foul condition,” said Hal Carr, who followed Poston as county judge.
“I would have to guess it was built about 1890,” Carr added. “I heard my father talk about some hangings there and some of the notorious people who were in there.”
In 1954 voters approved a $200,000 bond issue to construct the present jail. Sullivan County Commissioner Wilfred Gillenwater of Bristol headed the building committee.
Gillenwater said the $200,000 jail bond issue was the largest ever placed before voters and was second only to school construction projects.
Construction on what is now the county jail began in the spring of 1955. It was of officially dedicated on Jan. 25, 1956.
A newspaper article on the dedication said the new jail was “hailed as the latest word in penal institutions.
“The new jail boasts maximum security construction shown to be needed by three escapes from the old building since Oct. 21, 1955,” the news story continued.
Gillenwater thought the newly opened jail would be adequate for 40 or 45 years.
“I don’t think we officially projected, but that’s what we were thinking,” he added.
However the jail was not adequate for 20 years. ;
“It is felt that a near emergency exists in the Sullivan County Jail,” a grand jury report from November, 1975 says.
“These conditions are further brought to the fore at this time as a result of the Tennessee State Penitentiary refusing to accept prisoners and the resultant dangerous overcrowding of the jail,” the report added.
“This grand jury has been informed of examples of danger to inmates themselves as a result of physical violence, and extreme danger to the officers who must work the jail —a direct result of overcrowding.
“It is evident that the only solution to the overcrowding would be to somehow find additional cell space,’’ it continues. ‘‘We encourage those who are in a position to make a decision to take proper action to alleviate this present overcrowding as soon as possible.”
State law requires each grand jury sworn in for a Criminal Court term to “inquire into the condition and management of the public prisons, and other county buildings and institutions within the county” as a “special duty.”
Overcrowding and a change in judicial temperament toward prisoners’ rights since 1956 are forcing the hand of the county commissioners, who are expected to approve hiring an architect to prepare plans and cost estimates for a major addition to the jail Monday.
Consultants from the County Technical Assistance Service at the University of Tennessee have recommended space for at least 150 more inmates be built onto the jail.
“I’m out of room,” Gardner stated. “At one point a couple of months ago I had 133 inmates and 116 beds.
“My projected figure for the minimum amount Sullivan County will need 30 years from today is space for 300 prisoners,” the sheriff added.
“Look at the population growth and the fact nationally and statewide we’re sort of backing off some of our probation and parole programs and more people are serving time in local jails,” he explained. “You need to plan 25 — at least 30 years in the future.”
Gardner may get his 300 inmate jail.
County Judge Lon Boyd is expected to appoint a special committee to handle architect selection and jail planning.
“If a jail committee is appointed, that’s one of the things we’ll discuss,”’ the sheriff said.
Even persons guilty of minor offenses such as driving while intoxicated (DWI) find their way into the county jail — at least if they are convicted in Kingsport General Sessions Court.
“We have a policy everyone convicted of driving while under the influence will be sent to jail for a minimum of 60 hours on the first offense and fined $200 and costs,” General Sessions Judge George Garrett said.
That policy meant 674 persons convicted on DWI charges were sent to the county jail last year. Another 430 persons were given jail sentences through Oct.4, according to Garrett’s records.
Other problems accompany the overcrowding.
“When you’re talking about population problems, you’re also talking about the problem you cannot segregate the different types of offenders,” Gardner said.
“It is not always possible to separate an 18-year-old misdemeanor offender from hard core criminals serving long felony sentences,” the sheriff added.
Together overcrowding and failure to classify prisoners can lead into a federal or state courtroom, and the results there can be far-reaching as state corrections administrators learned in August.
Ruling on a case filed in September 1975 by three Tennessee State Penitentiary inmates, Chancellor Ben H. Cantrell of Nashville said the state penal system violated prisoners’ rights.
Cantrell said the state prison system and its administrators failed to “identify the vocational, social, mental and physicial needs of prisoners.”
In addition he cited a failure to protect prisoners by ‘neglecting to grade and classify individuals in a manner as shall be most conducive to prison discipline and the moral status of the prisoner.
“At a minimum, overcrowding must be eliminated,” Cantrell added. ‘‘The classification system must enable the Department of Correction to separate the potentially violent from the weaker prisoners and identify the medical, educational and treatment needs of the prisoners entering the system.”
Cantrell placed the prison system under a special master to carry out court-ordered reforms.
Federal courts acted earlier. The landmark decision came in Alabama where U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson placed the state’s prison system under the direction of an experienced administrator who carried out major changes.
More importantly a federal court ordered radical improvements in the Knox County Jail in a 1975 case where Gardner was called in as a consultant to help bring about the changes US. District Judge Robert Taylor ordered.
Among those changes were:
- A 4,000-calorie diet daily for each inmate. The diets are approved by a nutritionist from the University of Tennessee.
- Inmates were provided with shoes. They also are provided with clean uniforms weekly.
- Inmates are given clean linen every week and their underwear is laundered weekly.
- The sheriff was required to add enough guards so one would watch each cell block on each shift. Training must be provided for each guard.
- Inmates must be classified by crime, age and sex.
- Inmates must be given a complete physical examination by a doctor if they are in jail more than 72 hours.
- Black and white television placed in front of each cell block.
- A daily period of exercise must be made available to all inmates.
- High school and college classes, reading material, and recreational equipment such as checkers and playing cards must be available for inmates.
- Telephones must be made available for inmates.
Gardner was employed by the county technical assistance service when he was called in by the Knox County Sheriff’s Department as a consultant to help make the required changes.
He does not wish to see Sullivan County put in a similar position.
Asked for his opinion of what might happen if a federal court mandates reforms in his jail, Gardner replied: “I’d hate to predict.
“I don’t know how to predict, but I would be afraid it would be more severe and more costly than going ahead and acting on our own from my experience in Knox County,” he added.
Is there is any alternative to building an addition to the jail or a new jail?
“None,’’ Gardner replied.
